Social Question

stanleybmanly's avatar

In what possible way might Trump be an improvement over Clinton?

Asked by stanleybmanly (22361points) June 22nd, 2016 from iPhone

Let’s start with he isn’t “hooked up” as she is.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

24 Answers

Zaku's avatar

He’s not as “hooked up” (corrupted) as you say, and also will probably not have as easy a time being taken seriously and getting bad stuff done. In comparison, Clinton may be able to push the corporate agenda more effectively. So perhaps an ineffective awful president whom Congress may not cooperate with may be preferable to a more effective awful president who is in the pocket of the same corporate string-pullers as Congress is. Trump would also be more entertaining and have the narrative be “OMG this is ridiculously broken” rather than “business as usual oh the R vs. D political contest is so real, Clinton is really liberal, we need to support her” versus all the Clinton hate conversations, meanwhile the corporate agenda gets plowed through.

They’re both really awful. Sanders should be the D candidate, or at least A candidate. There are still possibilities for Sanders to win in the convention, and/or for Clinton or Trump to be eliminated by scandal or legal problems.

kritiper's avatar

Trump would speed up the occurrence of WWIII, if that could be an improvement.

Coloma's avatar

Gawd I would like to see Bernie get the vote. Trump is such a clown and Hilary defies description. I agree with @Zaku wholeheartedly.

Cruiser's avatar

First, Trump is not married to Bill Clinton and any one of Trumps kids is sharper and more skilled in the business world than Chelsea could ever dream to be. Bill was impeached for a reason and honestly, I cannot for the life of me imagining Bill C in the traditional role of First Lady and to have him once again representing the better interests of our country would be a complete embarrassment. Both Hillary and Bill are proven liars and why anyone would think they are what we need to represent and run our country is beyond my comprehension.

On the more constructive side, Trump would provide much better picks for the Supreme Court. Being a builder he will better know how to rebuild our Military and specifically the Navy. And Trump I truly believe will be way better suited to take on China, Russia and Mexico to restructure our trade deals and will also be a much stronger adversary to Putin and Xi Jinping. Trump will also provide the support for Israel that Obama has let dissolve away and that dove tails into the Middle East issues we face and will continue to face and I would much rather have Trump drawing red lines in the sand than Hillary Clinton. Let’s not forget jobs…good jobs and real jobs not just trumped up BOL numbers we get every month. I also believe Trump will make the hard choices that will affect all of us in one way or another to stop the hemorrhaging of our deficit and National debt. And unlike Hillary he will be able to do this all because he is not beholden to Unions, Fortune 500 companies and K Street lobbyists. To me it is a crystal clear choice between the same old crap we have just endured or real change with real opportunities for all.

ibstubro's avatar

Trumps is more likely to die of a hairball?

No, wait. He could still choose Palin as his running mate for insurance.

rojo's avatar

I got nothin’.

rojo's avatar

At the risk of hijacking the thread, I would like to respond to @Cruiser however.

Trump doesn’t give a shit and his pick for the SC would be basically a gimme, payback to the conservative faction, someone who will try to set the clock back 70 years, while I think that Clinton will at least nominate someone who will not keep trying to overturn Roe-V-Wade and will at least try to nullify Citizens United (I can dream, but knowing the conservative feelings of those he will need to mollify I know there would not be a chance of that if it is his choice). I think that Clintons SC choices would be much better for us than any conservative choice which favors business over people and money over morality.
I keep hearing how the military needs to be rebuilt but see no need myself. We spend more, have better equipment, more ships, more tanks, more planes, more missiles, more everything than anyone else in the world, we have more overseas bases, more personnel stationed on foreign soil and get involved in more conflicts than any other country yet I keep hearing what a failure our military is. I don’t believe it and so don’t see how Trump would be any better than Clinton in fixing a non-problem.
While Trump likes to act as a petty dictator and has expressed admiration for those who actually are dictators, I don’t see how this makes him better suited to take on other countries. His only concern is making sure that Trump makes money so I fail to see how he will restructure trade deals to favor the country: Trump, yes, the country, no.
As for Israel, it is way past time we stopped propping them up and paying billions to support their military just to keep our own military industrial complex employed so no benefit there. As for the rest of the Middle East, I is just a shame that Obama did not just leave. At least then he would not have to suffer the blame for conservative Republican policies.
On the red line issue, Clinton is much more aggressive than Trump. If she had her way we would use military force much more often and much more aggressively than her boss Obama so if it is red lines and blood you want, she is your man, not Trump who himself says he would rather come to a deal.
Jobs, everyone talks about jobs but no one want to admit that times and circumstances have changed. We have to come up with a new paradigm regarding work, jobs and population not just more of the same and there is no way Trump will bring more jobs “back” to the US. They are gone. We need to get over it and move on.
Deficits, National Debt? Our debts are higher because of all the tax breaks for businesses and the wealthy. We all know that the way to reduce debt is increase income and that mean higher taxes for those who can afford it, those who have had their tax burden reduced over the past 80 plus years. We need to bring back higher tax rates for the wealthy, increase capital gains taxes to match income taxes, eliminate subsidies (read corporate welfare) for all businesses, reintroduce regulations on the banking industry, nationalize the energy industry and Trump is not likely to do any of that. To be fair, Clinton is not likely to do much either but she would be no worse than Trump so no bonus points for him.
I see no opportunity for change with either candidate and no real opportunities for the vast majority of your average Americans.

stanleybmanly's avatar

@Cruiser I’d like to discuss that “support for Israel that Obama has let dissolve away.” Last year Israel received some 3.2 billion dollars in direct aid plus some 10.2 million dollars A DAY in military aid. The combined total counts for ⅔ of the total foreign aid budget of the United States. Israel is one hell of an example of “your tax dollars at work”. THEY seem to find the money for universal single payer health care that we “can’t afford”. In fact the place is absolutely crawling with enlightened socialism, while Americans needlessly die by the tens of thousands yearly to fatten the corporate insurance bottom line.

elbanditoroso's avatar

For the Comedy Channel and HBO, and for comedians around the world, a Trump presidency will provide a non-stop supply of things to ridicule.

Cruiser's avatar

@rojo Can you fill me in on your basis for saying “Trump doesn’t give a shit ” so I can better appreciate the context of your comments…otherwise your answer is nothing more than ad hominem attacks on Trump and my comments that I cannot take seriously in the least.

ibstubro's avatar

We know Trump would never do anything disgusting in the bathroom?

rojo's avatar

Personality Disorder
The Truth about Trump
Psychological Analysis
How Trumps Ego reflects US Culture
Narcissistic Foreign Policy
Bobby Jindal: Trump an Unstable Narcissist

And there are so much more articles @Cruiser that show his total lack of concern for the US. His focus is entirely on Trump and making Trump look good no matter the cost to others.

Unfortunately there are too many folks out there who are willing to overlook Trumps narcissism if there is a chance to trounce Clinton.

Please don’t be one of them.

Do the research.

Cruiser's avatar

@rojo I understand your passion for anything but Trump and it pulls a close second to my passion for anything but Clinton. Small challenge for you this weekend is to show me one politician that you approve of that is not narcissistic…and I am more interested in what your thoughts are outside of your Ad Hominem attacks and cut and past Trump attack links. Put your thoughts in your own words not the lib main stream media as to why Hillary will serve our country any better a 5th grader.

stanleybmanly's avatar

The trick would seem to be to locate articles countering those “ad hominem ” attacks. Anybody seen any?

Cruiser's avatar

@stanleybmanly The real test would be for one to come up with legitimate gripes about Trump or why he would be so much worse for our country than Hillary that were genuinely their own original thoughts…waiting.

ibstubro's avatar

Trump would add a lot of spontaneity to the office of president.
And simplicity of thought.
A narrowly defined vocabulary.

Anyone with even a passing understanding of English can understand when Trump insults them.

rojo's avatar

@Cruiser you ask the impossible. Find a politician who is not narcissistic? Seriously? The only one who would fit that category is one that did not want the job but was forced into it.

Like many other things in life, certain types of people gravitate toward certain professions and politicians are no different. Ask yourself why it was that the radicals of the 60’s who were advocating change have yet to achieve those changes even though it is their generation who are now in charge. Why have they made no substantial changes to the system. It is because those who were the ones protesting, advocating for change and fighting the status quo were never likely to enter into the political arena and never did so.

I am certain you probably know someone who did venture into politics so think back, was this person one of the flower children or were they, more likely, one of the ones who were not the ones to go out on a limb, take chances or protest (even if they did agree). They were the ones who looked down on those who challenged authority, accepted the rules, they were the hall monitors, got involved in student government, wrote the rules that others needed to follow and were of a mindset they they knew what was best for everyone?

Narcissism, conceit, arrogance, self-worship, egomania, selfishness and the like are the traits that distinguish those who go into politics where these traits serve them well by promoting their own self worth.

I do not personally know Trump. What I know of him is what I have learned from reading, looking and listening. All I can do is show you those things about him that make me uncomfortable. You can, if you like, show me links that show what a saint he is or how the world is a better place because he is alive and I will read them and promise not to denigrate you for providing me information that I both have not found and that may offend my present world view but I cannot promise that I will believe them any more than you can bring yourself to believe anything negative that is printed about him.

And you can believe or not believe the media as you choose but these are the tools we have. You can call them liberal all you want but to my way of thinking these media outlets, the ones owned, for the most part, by conservative leaning owners and managers go too far out of the way to give the conservatives more than equal time in an attempt to show that they are, to quote Fox News. “Fair and Balanced” when what they need to be doing is calling out the conservative movement for the racist, misogynistic hate group that it is.

To quote reporter Neal Gabler: “Today’s GOP is closer to a religious cult than a political institution. It operates on dogma, sees compromise as a moral failing, views enemies as pagans who must be vanquished, and considers every policy skirmish another Götterdämmerung”. and yet this very media that you claim is liberally biased continues to put forth the Republican agenda as just another ideology, an acceptable method to govern and run a country.

As for the positives for Clinton, I cannot give you any reasons she would better serve our country than a 5th grader because I see none. Because of the system we have allowed to be foisted upon us I have been given the choice between two large, steaming piles of fresh dog shit and told that I should be happy I am being allowed to choose which one I am going to have to eat.

And so have you.

The only thing I can tell you is that it is my belief that Trump would be so much worse than Clinton. I know you can understand this because, except for a 180 degree difference in point of view, you feel the same way. So, you tell me why the orange shit is better than the blonde pile.

stanleybmanly's avatar

@Cruiser once more, you’re missing the point. Trump is the case where the opposition arrives at the same conclusion unanimously. We all have the same “original” thought, and there is no more powerful argument to supplant it. THE MAN IS UNFIT FOR PUBLIC OFFICE. He can’t open his mouth without demonstrating this, and he opens his mouth incessantly.


Cruiser's avatar

@stanleybmanly Define fit for office for me so we can continue this conversation.

ibstubro's avatar

So, @Cruiser tell us why Hillary would be so much worse for our country than Trump that are genuinely your own original thoughts.

You’re arguing circles.

Why don’t you define ‘fit for office’ if you’re concerned about a common frame of reference?

Typically Trump, you have nothing to say, no point to make but, rather, base your entire position on insulting and dismissing the opinions of others.
@rojo & @stanleybmanly are making the standard Clinton mistake – trying to be rational and reasonable in the face of platitudes and basic playground rhetoric.
You’re basic argument boils down to, “I know I am but what are you?”

Practice what you preach.
@stanleybmanly can we agree to define “fit for office as…”.
Honestly, you’re contributing nothing to the discussion.

Cruiser's avatar

Fair enough @ibstubro Fit for office to me means to have more to offer the office as President of the United States than you have to hide.

ibstubro's avatar

How do we quantify how much a person offers the office?
And how do we measure what is, by definition, “hidden”, @Cruiser?

Specifically, for this question, how do we measure what each person brings to the office, and how do we know that Trump is hiding less than Clinton?

Cruiser's avatar

@ibstubro I would use the metric that Trump doesn’t even have one year in office as a politician…so politically he has nothing to hide…Hillary on the other hand has a herd of elephants she is trying to hide without much luck and one of them is her husband.

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther