Film, Media & TV6 mins ago
Shots Fired At Trump Rally
254 Answers
On BBC News now.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Dukedelorca. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I've been reading this post... it's very long... and I think a lot of people get their news from a small band of 'trustworthy' outlets. That gives one side of the Trump argument.
I would suggest that if you have read something that seems that (in this case) a US President shouldn't do or gives the impression of being a "wannabe dictator" etc etc and any other bad thing they are accused of, to actually go and find full in context information.
It beggars belief that grown *** adults often can't actually quote something when asked to justify their hate for Trump. Other than the current lawfare cases people are stumped. Or they give OUT OF CONTEXT quotes that shows they don't think they just parrot bullet points fed to them.
But I realise that can also be true of any given political figure in any given country.
It's just interesting to see the misinformation perpetuated by supposed intelligent people.
"There are no surprises at those who wish he had died."
Indeed not.
I'm still waiting for a response to my post where I mentioned the dichotomy faced by some who are disappointed at the failure of the attempt on Mr Trump's life. It seems they are concerned to maintain democracy, but providing that only the candidates who have their seal of approval are permitted to stand (with the death of those of whom they disapprove being part of their democratic process).
I don't think they quite get it.
how exactly might one stop a dictatorship from emerging when the political system has obviously failed to do so? trump should have been disqualified from running on the grounds that he attempted to overthrow US democracy by force. the fact that he was not is a travesty and one that led directly to this.
the reason you are confused newjudge is that you do not perceive donald trump as an aspiring dictator (or perhaps you do and approve of it). if he wins the election- something he may well do despite getting fewer votes than Biden-then the US can expect to live through something like the Pinochet regime in Chile or the Putin regime in Russia. death squads, personal rule, disappearances, oppression of minorities and of women. it isn't about "disapproval", it's about hoping that america might somehow be spared that dismal future.
"...how exactly might one stop a dictatorship from emerging when the political system has obviously failed to do so?"
Gun down anybody who (you think) might be aspiring to it, apparently.
My confusion comes from your apparanet support for democracy but your wish to restrict the candidates who stand for election only to those who concur with your views. I support democracy (for all its faults); I am not disapointed that Mr Trump (a candidate in a democratic election) survived the attempt on his life.
Mr Trump's manifesto is quite clear and open. The US electorate can see it for themselves. If they don' want the changes he is proposing (which you believe will result in a dicatorship) it's for them to decide whether or not to reject it and the way they can do that is my voting for his opponent - not by gunning him down.
You really must move away from this idea that your view must prevail. Your argumen about fewer votes is specious. In the same way as UK General Elections often brink up odd results, the US Presidential election is not decided solely by the number of votes cas for each candidate. But I'm sure you know this and would propose changes to their electoral system in the same way as you have to our own. Because, of course, your view of the world is paramount.
Well, Clone, maybe the answeries here:
"Asked about the role of the Secret Service and the criticism it has received since Saturday, the chairman of the subcommittee on national security says he doesn't understand why the roofs of the buildings around Trump's rally were not being monitored.
He then adds that the current director of the secret service is "unnecessarily woke" and "spends a great deal of time to get so many women, for example, in the secret service as possible rather than spending their time making sure they're doing a good job"."
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.