Fellow Democrats, Your Effort to Destroy the President Is Abnormal

Blaming your father for lack of success?

 

Uneducated, low-information, voters (in 3 states) elected the clown-in-chief.

Trump apologists are blinded by Trump Snowflake Stockholm Syndrome TS3.

It is literally impossible to take anyone afflicted with TS3 seriously.

It is impossible to take pro-Trump apologists seriously.

Comic Relief seems to be what they aspire to.

 

Of course the corporate PR outlets Trump named are in a tizzy. Polls show more people believe President Trump than them. Can you image how low those outlets have gone - to be LESS believable than a politician!

 

We understand how much many Democrats hate blue collar workers - and that is why blue collar workers in those 3 states voted for President Trump.

You need to post more messages insulting as many voters as possible to follow the guidelines for how to politik from the DNC.

Tell us again how Hilary Clinton is going to win by a landslide for the 1000th+ plus time given how seriously we take your messages.

 

What do you claim to be, and how is that now not so? Please be very specific.

 

That contempt was their undoing.

The Left ... once the solid buttress against abject poverty for the disenfranchised - now the posturing dandies spitting on the disenfranchised from their ivory towers.

 

Yes, it is the Muslim countries who have to truly deal with this in the long run. But in the short term, this threat, this insult to humanity, should be killed and disenfranchised of their territory and their lives to the best of our ability. I hate sending our kids to war, but I could reluctantly agree to a quick, brutal annihilation mission in Syria and Iraq followed by a just as quick withdrawal. I am not interested in nation building; I am not interested in an occupation; I am not interested in deciding the Syrian civil war. I am only interested in destroying ISIS to the best of our ability.

We'll see. It's too bad they all don't just turn the whole health care issue over to me.

There is hypocrisy on the Republican side, and a lot of wrong thinking about taxation and paying for federal programs. The budget is another issue they should all just turn over to me.

Using common sense, I could solve the budget, health care, and immigration without a hitch. To me, they're all pretty easy problems. The problem for Washington is that politics and self-interest always outweighs common sense.

 

Success is subjective. Duping rubes into thinking you'e self made when you floated off daddy's money and business contacts only works at trump rallies.

 

Come on, you're a smart guy. Thinking there is a quick and easy military solution is nothing but a fallacy. We certainly could escalate, but then get ready to see body bags of American kids again. Thanks to trump, we can forget any type of desert storm 1 coalition style blitz. That, and any large scale military operation would result in ISIS simply fading into the population like 2004-ish Iraq.

I'd be willing to bet you're more versed on the subject that our current white house occupant. That isn't saying much, though.

This might be the understatement of the century. I'd love to hear your solutions.

 

I've written about them many times, but of course, I am just one poster, and my thoughts are scattered all over the place. When I write, I tend to be wordy. I can fully explain everything with longwinded explanations. Here is an attempt to not do that.

On immigration ...

- Secure the border using all means - barriers, surveillance, manpower.
- Institute nationwide e-verify to work, with stiff penalties to employers if they don't use e-verify, and they end up hiring illegals.
- Induce illegals to self-report. If they are not criminals, they receive green cards, a tax ID #, and they go about their law-abiding business in our country, out of the shadows, without fear of deportation.
- Criminals or those who fail to self-report (probably one in the same) are deported.

On health care ...

- 49% of people with medical insurance get it through an employer. I would seek to get 100% of working people insured through their employers. There are 3 legs of medical care - hospitalization, services, and pharmaceuticals.
- We could provide Medicare Part A (hospitalization), Part B (services), and Part D (pharma) to all working age employees, their dependents, and seniors for about 12 cents on the dollar. I would suggest that be split between employer and employee - 6% each.
- This insurance would cover the employee's dependents.
- Private insurance could offer products to cover deductibles and co-pays that are a part of the medicare program. They could also pay the balance of charges that Medicare won't pay. These insurance products would be strictly voluntary.
- The unemployed and unemployable can be given health care through Medicaid as they are now.

If we did this, we would save the federal government about $300 billion a year, putting a big dent in the annual deficit.

- An alternative to this plan would be a blending of a mandate (6% contribution each by the employer and employee) with a free market approach to the rest, with the employee making the insurance choices, with private insurers as an option.

This plan gets virtually 100% of our people insured.

On the federal budget ...

We have a looming problem - all of us. The interest on the national debt must be paid every year and that expense is growing. It is at about 6-7% of the federal budget now, but it is expected to be at about 17% of the budget by 2021. That is the equivalent of the entire defense budget, and it is projected to continue growing exponentially. If the trend isn't stopped, we will eventually be swamped, and we could have a very major financial collapse. This is not "someday" but very soon.

- We should return personal income tax rates to post WW2 levels until the deficit is eliminated. In the 1950s the very rich paid a 90% rate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States
- Ending Obamacare and going to a health care system that I suggested would be a big help.
- We could institute a "one cent" program. That is, reduce discretionary spending by 1% a year (adjusted for inflation), excluding defense, until we reach a balanced budget.
- We can shorten the period of time of higher tax rates by getting people to work. Anything Trump or the Congress can do to get America working at good jobs will help mitigate this problem. I advocate for a 0% tax on business income that is derived in the U.S. That is not personal income; that is the company income. I believe in taxing personal income, not the company's income.
- Social Security should remain fully funded. We can do that by lifting the income cap for the tax.

On ISIS ...

- We must destroy ISIS in Syria and Iraq. The question is, shall we do it slowly, over years? Or, shall we do it quickly? If we do it quickly, that means an assault force and casualties.

- Our military has the ability to sweep through ISIS-held territory and destroy any resistance. The question is, then what? In Iraq, governance and control is possible. In Syria, there is a civil war going on, and the U.S. position has been anti-Assad and pro-rebel. In my opinion, this was a mistake. Not because Assad is good, but because it was none of our business. And the anti-Assad forces are ISIS and rebel groups that have incorporated Al Qaeda and hard-core Sunni jihadists into their ranks. So if it were up to me, we'd change course. We don't have to like Assad, but common sense and self-interest dictates that he is better than the alternative.

- I think we should destroy ISIS in Syria because it is in our interest to destroy them. Then, we'd pull out, and we would not prevent the Syrian government from retaking control of those areas. And then we'd wash our hands of the Syrian civil war. If ISIS tried to reconstitute, we'd destroy them or help others destroy them. We would see to it that they never again held territory. We couldn't kill every last one of them, but they would not be permitted to hold territory. And every time that black flag popped up, our aim would be to hit whoever was holding it with a hellfire missile.

- That organization is an insult to humanity. It adopted murder, genocide, torture, and mass rape as official policy. Wiping them out is like irradiating a cancer. It is doing good.

 

Yes, Americans are supposed to sit back passively, while Trump creates chaos in America. We should give him carte blanche and do whatever he wants, right? Like any king or despot.

 

you should have come up with a better article.

 

I agree with many of these in principle. These are not very conservative ideas and are not shared by the majority of republicans in government. Good luck with those.

Again, your assertion that a quick war to overwhelm ISIS is simply not a possibility. If we escalated on a massive scale, the majority of ISIS would simply blend into the population like the after the 2003 invasion. When we reduce troop levels, they'd come out of hiding. We're not fighting a nation-state who's defeat is simply a military matter. Trying to fight terrorism like some cold war opponent, or conventional military power is one of the reasons we are in our current mess.

I mean this with all due respect, because I enjoy reading your posts but your knowledge of military affairs seems lacking. We would be able to destroy those who offer resistance. Most ISIS fighters I think would be hesitant to stand up to a US Army mechanized battalion with full support assets. What prevents them from waiting it out, pretending to be a simple goat herder, and planting an IED or two at night along commonly traveled routes? They're not just going to throw their hands up and say, "ok, you win." Maintaining a large occupation force for years on the expense of the taxpayer simply isn't feasible at this point. We've been stuck in this quagmire for 14 years. There's no appetite for this type of military operation. It worked in 2003 because of the need for revenge post 9/11. That sentiment is gone.

Is it? The only thing that held that fractious country together was a despotic tyrant. These people do not understand civility and cooperation outside of their own tribal interests. They have no sense of the common good or nationalism.

I think this is a gross oversimplification of our capabilities and commitment of the resources required to pursue such a venture. How many troops to we leave there after we sweep through? For how long? At what cost? What is going to stop them from doing as they've always done when fighting us? That is, blend into the population and wait us out?

 

Like you did with Obama?

 

The phony Russian issue was manufactured to try to counter Clausewitz..
Corey Lewandowski is to be commended for bringing Clausewitz into the campaign in the first place. Trump used the Clausewitz playbook to perfection.

Perhaps the liberal elite shouldn't have burned all of Clausewitz's works, and in doing so,
extinguished his brilliance from the academic arena.

They are now officially clueless.

 

By all means, that's a wise, moderate comment.

What were Democrats expecting, anyway, another four years? Trump got it fair and square. They should rather concentrate putting their sht together so they might hope to limit him to one term.

 

Exercize moral superiority, then. You are not forced to return an adversary's cheap shot.

The vicious circle's gotta break somewhere.

 

You right wingers are a joke. Trump is trying to destroy himself. Everything is based on facts, that more and more evidence keeps coming out. deny and call fake all you want, doesn't make it true

YOu were the ones that tried to destroy Obama based on complete lies. It was republicans who openly stated their goal was to make Obama a 1 term president, voted down pretty much all bills, did absolutely nothing, held the budget hostage, spent billions using dead americans as political pawns. And it failed. AGain, you guys have zero credibility.

Deflect all you want, Trump is a trainwreck and there is some serious dirt on him already. Bend over and take it, because we have facts on our side and the fact all we get are these deflections from the Trump supporters proves you can't even defend him

It's nuts isn't it? Republicans did that, and what happened? They won the presidency with a nutbag and hold both houses, sounds like the Democrats should keep it up.

Unlike Trump, Obama was clean and awesome. Trump is crumbling Hysterical how delusional these people are

 

I don't claim moral superiority. I claim to be based in facts and reason. Trump should not, and will not be cut any slack.

 

See, here's what you don't get: There was a Liberal America, and a United States of America. I swore my allegiance to the USA, not to Liberal America. Liberal America is the abomination.

 

I'm glad you liked some of my ideas. I agree that a number of my ideas are not supported by Republicans. That's probably why I am an Independent. I don't expect my ideas to ever really gain any traction or anything, but I still like trying them out on people. I like trying to solve problems with solutions that are "out of the box".

On Iraq ... I said governance was possible. But the governance of Maliki failed miserably. If the present government of Iraq is no better, peace is doomed. Trust me, I have no illusions about Iraq.

On Syria ... I understand your concerns. But this is one of those situations where we have no "good" option. They are all bad, and we can try to rate how bad they each are in relation with the others. Look at this list of bad options ...

- Our present course. A long-term air war, very gradually grinding down ISIS, as we hope rebel forces will fight them on the ground for us. Even if we succeed at that, and ISIS is vanquished, it will take years, the civil war in Syria continues, the country becomes even more demolished, and potentially millions more refugees flee the country. And, those rebel forces we would be helping are salted with AQ units. And if you need an example, Aleppo was defended by a combination of rebel fighters we support along side AQ units.
- A coalition of Muslim countries. Most of them all have a dog in the fight, namely to remove Assad. And none of them have shown any appetite for sending their armies anywhere. And if they did, the potential for a wider war, involving the Russians and Iranians, is a distinct outcome. And who would lead them? The old saying about "herding cats" comes to mind.
- A U.S. invasion and lengthy occupation. Nobody in the U.S. (except maybe John McCain and his sidekick Lindsey) would agree to that, including Trump. I am quite certain that Trump would have nothing to do with that idea, nor would the American people.
- A U.S. invasion and quick withdrawal, turning over captured ISIS territory to the rebels. Problem: Those rebels have AQ units in them. And how many ISIS fighters would just blend into those units? And, of course, the civil war would continue.
- A U.S. invasion and quick withdrawal, turning over captured ISIS territory to the Syrian government. This would help Assad and require a reversal of past policy. The rebels would see this as a betrayal. Domestically, there would be screaming and wailing that Trump was siding with the Russians.

Pick your poison.

My position is that ISIS must be destroyed, and the Syrian civil war must end. We don't have to like Assad, but we should destroy our enemies, end our support for the civil war, let the Syrian government regain control of its territory. It is in the interest of the Syrian people for the war to end, even if it means giving up the armed struggle against Assad. It is in the interest of America as well. The Assad government is allied with the governments of Iran and Russia. The Syrian rebels are allied with AQ. My preference would be to see AQ and ISIS wiped out, and we can deal with Syria, the Russians, and the Iranians. We've been doing it for a long time already, and we can continue to. The absence of ISIS and AQ in Syria is in our interest. The absence of war in Syria is in Syria's interest. This solution is not perfect. But none of them are. I find this one to be the least worst.

Seth

 

A quote from the article in the OP.

Yeah. I was willing to give him a chance.

A chance to stay away from immature Twitter rants and actually treat the Office of POTUS with some dignity.

I gave him 6 weeks.

And he has turned the U.S. Government into a laughing stock

Some of his predecessors had a few rough spots early, but none of them had a National Security Advisor resign in the first month.

None of his predecessors had an AG in major ethical trouble before the Administration was 6 weeks old.

I was willing to give Trump a chance, if had shown he possessed a clue.

He has already completely blown any chance he had to attempt to prove his worth to the 54.1% of the people who voted against.

He has turned the USA into an international laughing stock, he is totally unprepared to be POTUS, and has proven nothing--EXCEPT the fact that he has no idea what he is doing.

The ship has sailed on anybody who voted against him "giving him a chance".

Twitter rants and narcissistic immaturity sealed that deal.

He will always have his hard-core base, the 40% (or so) of the country that will stand with him no matter what.

But, he has done nothing to reach out to the majority of the electorate that voted against him.

6 weeks in, and his Administration is already completely beyond redemption.

 

being a sour grape LOSER is entirely up to you,

making mountains out of mole hills to try and hide that sour grape childish anger is pathetic.

So do yourself a favor and stop

 

You guys need to look in the mirror? I'm not in the GOP, I'm not Republican, I never supported Trump getting elected, but the above article is correct (the anti-Trump movement is hurting nothing but itself). Liberal media has lost all credibility, everything Democrat-supporting is turning into propaganda soap-boxes. I was on another forum site for 5 years as a respected Pundit, Independent but far left-leaning, I voted for Bernie in the Primaries and "wrote-him-in" during the General. The election wasn't even a competition, I covered the entire thing without missing a beat. And I did my best to cover it fairly which wasn't easy because on the Right it looked like a circus and on the Left it looked like a hijacking. I wasn't at all concerned about the Republicans winning the White House because Kasich was their strongest candidate but Trump over-shadowed everything. One-by-one Trump weeded out the Republican's strongest General Election competitors on his way to the Convention because all the media talked about was how Howard-Stern-like Trump was, so it was all all-eyes on Trump, everyone else became invisible. It didn't matter if people loved Trump or hatted Trump, what mattered is that all anyone saw was Trump (thanks to MSM). And the Democrats were doing it too.

The Democrats didn't fill the stage with too many options to spread their voter thin. They had Hillary, Bernie, and two fillers. They kept it real simple. But Bernie was the only one on stage that had something to say about the issues. She didn't want to debate Bernie, she didn't want to debate at all, she was just waiting for the clock to run-out and accept her coronation. Every time Hillary was asked a difficult question, she pointed at Trump to scare voters. Hillary didn't even want Bernie on Her soapbox (and niether did the media). She knew she already had it in the bag as far as the DNC and the Democratic Party was concerned. But between Hillary and Bernie in a General Election Hillary was the weakest-link. Out of all of the Republicans running the polls showed that only Kasich had a chance of beating Bernie. But all the media wanted to talk about was Hillary vs Trump (what a dumb, dumb move).

I could help but to be amazed how much the media focused on votes-cast during the Primary to suggest Hillary was pulling stronger than Bernie when they were talking about States that always go Red in the General or were Closed and the Independents get to have their votes heard. Independents make up 46% of the voting population, they are the largest voting-block out there yet the Media was ignoring them so people would think Bernie didn't stand a chance. I had loyalist-Republicans slamming me as a "Democrat" because I wasn't supporting anyone on their side at the same time I had loyalist-Democrats slamming me because I wasn't supporting Hillary. I told 'em "sorry but I don't vote against, I only vote for, and this year I found someone worthy of voting for and that's who I'm going to vote for." But it was the media getting the voters all upset between Hillary and Trump. And you know what happened? Independents got pissed-off with the media, Independents got pissed-off with the DNC, they got pissed-off with the Democrats that ignored them the entire election cycle and then had the gull to expect their support in the General. But Independent Conservatives weren't getting pissed-off with the RNC or the Republicans and Trump was the one standing there for them in November. That's why Trump won the entire Rust-Belt and Hillary lost because Two States in the US don't out-trump the other 48 in the way our elections work.

So go on, continue your anti-Trump campaign for the next four years and it'll be another Democrat-lose. After the election was over and and Trump took office the site I was on decided to change their mission statement and make the whole site anti-Trump, and the purged everyone that wouldn't get with that North Korean style program. Most of those people ended up over here by the way.

P.S. for anyone reading this and it sounds familiar, you might know me as Ziggy. Happy hunting.