President of the US of A

Trump is nothing more than a Pied Piper leading desperate people who think he's some magician who will turn things around.

He's no different than every other tin plated (fill in the blank) who has savvy about the media and people in general and how to effectively use them.

We live in a capitalistic economic system and you are responsible for how well you do. If folks are unhappy with their station in life it's up to them to do something about it not wait for some political messiah to come and claim he will make things right for them. That may seem harsh and it is but it's the truth.

This country still produces bumper crops of High School Dropouts and Graduates prepared for nothing and that includes many College Grads.

Folks in this country have to sit up and take notice what the future is bringing and they have to prepare themselves for it. There is no going back no matter what any politician says. If folks just sit back and wring their hands..well...they get what they deserve.

Trump scares the old establishment because he can't be bought by superpact funds and special interest groups. I'm looking forward to him coming into office and firing the entire house and senate for being incompetent greedy morons that have ruined our country. He's going to out every one of them for the behind scenes money grabbing and free taxpayer junkets they write off at our expense.

As for Hillary, I've had the chance to talk to her at a function she held at OSU with graduating MDs and RNs when she was running against Obama. When she was 1st Lady her health care initiative was going to cut nursing salaries to $28k a year to cut healthcare costs. So I asked her in front of the group if that was still her goal. She gave me a long winded answer that made no sense. So I told I'm a simple midwestern man and the question was a simple yes or no question. So I asked her to answer it that way. The little usher guy kept trying to take the microphone out of my hand. I wouldn't give it up. She finally said yes. So looked over at the soon to be MDs and told them that if she did that, they would be at the bedside caring for patients because no nurse I know would do that kind of work for poverty wages. The room went dead silent.

At the onset of the meeting all the MDs were worried about was how the government was going to cover thier college costs. My only question on that issue is when did it become the governments responsibility to pick your finances because you and your parents failed to prepare for it? That went over like a tu d in a punch bowl. I went through 6 years of college and paid my own way. I owed no one anything and borrowed nothing. I worked my way through so I know it can be done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Why Trump will win

---

I don't know, right now the betting markets give him only 1:3 odds of winning, and all conventional markers point to the same thing. There's still half an year for things to change, but right now things aren't looking too good for him.

Regardless of anything it most definitely is very interesting to see the coalition he'll be assembling because this isn't anymore the republican primary and he needs to win majority of the electoral college.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suticat

I'm looking forward to him coming into office and firing the entire house and senate for being incompetent greedy morons that have ruined our country.

---

The only problem is that he isn't their employer.
It's the voters in the congressional district, or the state, who can elect a different representative/senator at the end of their term if they aren't happy with how they're doing the job.

Just as an example - this past week the republican voters of Indiana nominated Donald Trump for president and the sitting representative from the 9th congressional district for senator.

The US Constitution is very clear and the Supreme Court has always upheld that the executive branch cannot meddle in the legislative. Trump has to work with Congress, which he understands very well given his recent remarks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hacker7

Well I guess you will be perfectly happy with 4 more years of Osamas policies under clinton. I would much rather go down the unknown path.

---

As far as I can tell Trump is just as much a big-government-is-the-answer-to-all-of-our-problems politician as the other two. The only unknown, I think, is - will he be just as bad, or worse.

Yes, but he is promising to make that big government benefit the honest working Americans instead of foreigners, politicians, and hedge fund managers.

Why don't you think he can be better than those before him?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gugi

Yes, but he is promising to make that big government benefit the honest working Americans instead of foreigners, politicians, and hedge fund managers.

Why don't you think he can be better than those before him?

---

If Trump can convince congress to eliminate the high corporate tax and reduce or eliminate effects of regulatory agencies that drive up the cost of doing business in the US, that would help immensely to create jobs in America. But so far it seems he just wants to create jobs by building infrastructure, which usually means more taxes.

He talks about imposing protective tariffs to essentially force Americans to buy American goods over foreign, but with the high costs of manufacturing in the US, protectionism may backfire, and in turn cost consumers even more, and another "hidden" tax is created by government intervention. Personally, I appreciate that I have the ability to purchase foreign manufactured goods at a lower price, then I have more to spend elsewhere.

He's promising to make big government benefit Americans? The only way government ever benefits anyone (other than those who profit from bloated government) is by first limiting itself to it's legitimate purpose and staying as much as possible out of the lives of individuals, and secondly, by adhering to the first. So far, nothing I've heard Mr. Trump say leads me to believe that he feels the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gugi

This seems to be opposite of your first paragraph:
I do not get your point but democracy and republic are different.

If electing the government results only in self-serving leaders that is the case against the representative democracy, or as you prefer to call it a republic.
I never called a democracy a republic!

Trump is riding a populist wave which is the closest thing to a direct democracy. The idea of the founding fathers was that the people aren't all that good at ruling themselves directly, that's why they need an elite aristocracy to rule. The difference with a monarchy is that it wouldn't be a simple hereditary aristocracy, but elected. I.e. people may not be trusted to rule themselves, but can be trusted to figure out who would be the best in ruling them.

I totally disagree with your opinions of their motives.

And now the people are saying that this isn't working - the leaders they have been electing have been pretty bad, so now they are going to elect somebody who is going to implement 'the will of the people' and not have this elitist attitude of doing 'what is best for the country' that the founding fathers had.

---

I am not getting your point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kmcmichael

I am not getting your point.

---

First, it would be helpful to mark up your responses when you intersperse them among my text.
That being set aside, if you use jargon/shorthand you should define it first, otherwise it gets very confusing as you can see. We have to speak the same language before we can begin understand each other.

So, please, define 'republic', 'democracy', and how the US government system fits with those definitions.

I used the term 'representative democracy', because that's what USA is and I assumed that when you said 'republic' you meant the same, as it generally means government via elected representatives. Representative democracy is a subset of the broader category republic. However, you disagreed, so please clarify the terms you are using.


In any case my point was that in one paragraph you are defending a representative system as the only good choice, while in the other you are making the case that that same system produces terrible results. Is there something you are advocating for?
Perhaps the problem is that you are using too broad of a category and it would be clear if you use the precise term that means what you mean.

Fair enough, a republic is governed by the rule of law i.e. A constitution.
A democracy is governed by the votes of the people.

The term representative democracy is redundant as is constitutional republic.

The US is a democratic republic as it has elements of both.