CDZ Does Trump really not know how to defend his ideas instead of attacking the people who oppose them?

[OldLady]

Whenever someone opposes Donald Trump's proposals, rather than respond by demonstrating the substantive merit of his proposals, Trump attacks the opposer. It was one thing to do that in the theater of campaigning, but as President the man's "best" responses are still that same childish retort.

Why has our society devolved into one of exchanges of attacks rather than exchanges of substance?

I think what the media is calling the president is worse. I think what Hollywood is saying about him is worse. Calling him a Nazi and a racist. OH, BUT THEY'RE NOT THE PRESIDENT. So what. They're all acting like a bunch of spoiled children pouting and throwing a tantrum about losing an election.

I saw on the news yesterday that some two-bit country called Trump a "fool" yesterday, very disrespectfully, and you know they got their cue from all that's been said about Trump. We can disagree with him, but calling him a moron or Orange Jesus should be reserved for our living rooms. With the computer OFF.

I don't know that I agree with that. Denying the truth of the nature of the man who is the leader of any nation serves little. The U.S. didn't historically elect fools to the Presidency, but now it has. Trump's not a fool in all areas, but in those that involve public policy making that must benefit a whole nation, he is.

The very notion of representative governance means that the individuals in power must nonetheless act on everyone's behalf, not just on behalf of those who support them. It also means one must equally consider the merit of opposing points of view. Not doing that is what makes Trump a fool.

I don't believe the Dems were particularly good at "acting on everyone's behalf" and considering all their points of view for the past 8 years, either, Xelor. When pundits and publications are calling him a moron (in so many words) to the whole of the world, I don't see the point. Yes, we should continue to call him out on policies we don't agree with. We should fact check his abysmal fairy tales, report the facts and move on.
Do you understand the difference between that and calling him a buffoon and mocking him before the world? It's one thing to unload here, in private, but honestly, I have seen this dynamic over and over. Disrespect is contagious. It is at least as much perception as truth. And it is poisonous. That's all. We may reasonably call for the President to "tone it down," but I think some of us, including some famous Democrats, should do the same.

When I read your early remark and replied to it, Korea's leader came first to mind. I thought, is that guy an idiot, for he is without question a national leader. Should I or anyone not call him a fool? I don't think so. Thus, why should Trump be exempt? Sure, Kim Jong Un doesn't countenance any dissention among his countrymen, but that we have the right to do that, and that our political leaders have, so far, respected that right is part of what make the U.S. and its former presidents better than Un. Kim Jong Un deserves to be mocked as does Trump. Given some of the rumblings Trump has made recently and during his campaign, it may come to be that denying voices of opposition to ring loudly comes to be something the Trump administration shares with Un's.

It may come to be that denying voices of opposition to ring loudly comes to be something the Trump administration shares with Un's.
Let's hope it doesn't come to that or anywhere close. We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I'm being far too old fashioned, I'm sure, and it's just the way I FEEL; no arguable reason for it, but I think the mocking and disrespect and calling our President a fool in mixed company is what my mother called airing our dirty laundry in public. Big no no. I didn't ask that we stop opposing him rationally or arguing our points, same as you and I engage with folks IRL that we don't agree with. So you keep on. I'll be embarrassed for us while you do.

 

[oldsoul]

But that isn't what he does

Are you a member of Congress? Trump's Cabinet? If not, how could you possibly know this? Simple, you couldn't, and are therefore guessing. I will give your response the appropriate weight in our discussion.

 

[usmbguest5318]

But that isn't what he does

Are you a member of Congress? Trump's Cabinet? If not, how could you possibly know this? Simple, you couldn't, and are therefore guessing. I will give your response the appropriate weight in our discussion.

Well, if he does do that, why would he ridicule someone else for doing the same? The two actions don't align with one another.

 

[Eloy]

Trump is the most emotionally immature adult I have ever had occasion to listen to. I have not seen such childishness since I was in elementary school. Every negative poll is fake. Ever protester is paid. Every opponent is a loser, and/or weak. Women who are not trophy wife material are ugly and nasty. He is a pathological liar, and has no problem lying about petty things, like fraudulent voters and inauguration attendance. His narcissistic tendencies are overwhelming. His personal vendettas are nothing short of vicious. I am sure that Trump has no friends, only toadies.

I guess you've never actually seen one of Hillary's famous meltdowns.....mainly because she doesn't allow cellphones around her when she's off-camera....

Stop changing the subject. This thread is about the madman Trump not his opponent for the presidency.

 

[oldsoul]

After reading the first 21 posts I am convinced (again) of one thing. That is that we are a deeply divided and highly partisan country. Trump is no different, sure he lashes out at people instead of defending his position. Who among us doesn't? Why would we expect our leader to do any different? Heck, what other recent "leader" hasn't done the same thing, if a little more eloquently? Cases in point:

• The science is settled. Implying that if you disagree you are a "science denier" and therefore dumb, ignorant, or otherwise unfit to discuss this further.
• Rightwingnutjobs
• Leftards

I mean really, is anyone surprised? You really shouldn't be. When was the last time you had a civil disagreement, on a political topic/issue, with someone and no insults, or personalisation occurred?

Ummmm, on a daily basis, at the local diner and with students. You did mean face to face, didn't you?

If this includes people from a wide variety of political views, that is one special diner. I don't mean people who just disagree, I'm talking about communists discussing economics with capitalists, socialists discussing domestic policy with a libertarian. If that is the case, I would love to know where this mythical unicorn of a diner is, so I know where I need to move to.

 

[oldsoul]

I happened to have just completed reading an article, that fits pretty well into this thread. It's a good read.
Bracing for Trump's Revenge
Conservative Critics Are Bracing for Trump's Revenge/

It strikes me as yet another manifestation of the anti-intellectualism that's taking over the Republican party. It didn't used to be that way. The GOP used to have really keen thinkers like William F. Buckley, Jr. who actually had substantive comments to contribute to the public policy debate. These days, conservative intellectuals have little but academic abstractions to offer, most especially about the Trump trend.

I wouldn't stop at just the RNC, it's the DNC as well. Sad but true.

 

[oldsoul]

But that isn't what he does

Are you a member of Congress? Trump's Cabinet? If not, how could you possibly know this? Simple, you couldn't, and are therefore guessing. I will give your response the appropriate weight in our discussion.

Well, if he does do that, why would he ridicule someone else for doing the same? The two actions don't align with one another.

Simple, perception. Every leader knows that perception is everything, reality is secondary. If he is perceived as someone who doesn't do things "the way they always have been done," then it really doesn't matter (in the court of public opinion) what the reality is. This is the idea that he is cultivating, that he is an "outsider" who will "just get it done". That's the persona that got him elected, and that is the persona that he will stick with, until, and unless, something changes in the public's opinion. Then he will re-evaluate. I'm not saying that he will "flip-flop necessarily, just that he may change his public persona to fit the times.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Every leader knows that perception is everything, reality is secondary.

Reality in political stumping is secondary, for the governed, reality is primary. The only thing that may happen is that the situational reality of things isn't necessarily seen or understood by the people who are governed. That said, when the governed cast a vote on something, that something must be enacted and endured, for better or worse.

This is the idea that he is cultivating, that he is an "outsider" who will "just get it done".

Whatever "outsider" cachet he had has come to an end. He's every bit an insider now and he was the instant he won the RNC nomination.

he may change his public persona to fit the times

There's another dimension of deception. This notion of having a public persona. I don't know about you, but I want the President to be the person whom s/he appears to be. Personas belong on the stage and television and movie screens; integrity is what belongs in elected office. An actor may hold elected office, but I don't want them to be acting when they present themselves and their ideas to the American people.

 

[mudwhistle]

Trump is going to get worse. Much worse. As his initiative backfire, like it has so far on the Muslim ban, he strikes out. For one thing, it diverts the public from his failures. For another, he so insecure that he can not recognize that he made a mistake in claiming he can do something he can't. His war with the media is just beginning. He will also end up at war with most of his own party.

I don't think Trump is going to get worse......I think the whining will get worse.

 

[mudwhistle]

Trump is the most emotionally immature adult I have ever had occasion to listen to. I have not seen such childishness since I was in elementary school. Every negative poll is fake. Ever protester is paid. Every opponent is a loser, and/or weak. Women who are not trophy wife material are ugly and nasty. He is a pathological liar, and has no problem lying about petty things, like fraudulent voters and inauguration attendance. His narcissistic tendencies are overwhelming. His personal vendettas are nothing short of vicious. I am sure that Trump has no friends, only toadies.

I guess you've never actually seen one of Hillary's famous meltdowns.....mainly because she doesn't allow cellphones around her when she's off-camera....

Stop changing the subject. This thread is about the madman Trump not his opponent for the presidency.

Oh sorry. I'll stop making sense and just play along with the histerical left.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Did anyone else watch the Trump interview before the Superbowl yesterday? He didn't sound very presidential, and was all over the place.

What especially bothered me was when O'Reilly asked Trump if he respected Putin. Trump said that he did, and when asked if he really meant that because Putin was a killer and had offed lots of journalists.

Trumps reply? America has had some bad people who have killed too.

If he was as smart as he constantly tells us he is, instead of saying what he did, when asked if he respected Putin, he could have simply said that he's a world leader, and as such, deserves a certain amount of respect. End of question, and no follow up gaffes.

 

[mudwhistle]

Did anyone else watch the Trump interview before the Superbowl yesterday? He didn't sound very presidential, and was all over the place.

What especially bothered me was when O'Reilly asked Trump if he respected Putin. Trump said that he did, and when asked if he really meant that because Putin was a killer and had offed lots of journalists.

Trumps reply? America has had some bad people who have killed too.

If he was as smart as he constantly tells us he is, instead of saying what he did, when asked if he respected Putin, he could have simply said that he's a world leader, and as such, deserves a certain amount of respect. End of question, and no follow up gaffes.

So you want Trump to talk a bunch of crap and piss Putin off before he has a chance to meet him.

Not exactly presidential if you ask me.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Did anyone else watch the Trump interview before the Superbowl yesterday? He didn't sound very presidential, and was all over the place.

What especially bothered me was when O'Reilly asked Trump if he respected Putin. Trump said that he did, and when asked if he really meant that because Putin was a killer and had offed lots of journalists.

Trumps reply? America has had some bad people who have killed too.

If he was as smart as he constantly tells us he is, instead of saying what he did, when asked if he respected Putin, he could have simply said that he's a world leader, and as such, deserves a certain amount of respect. End of question, and no follow up gaffes.

So you want Trump to talk a bunch of crap and piss Putin off before he has a chance to meet him.

Not exactly presidential if you ask me.

Apparently, reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. I said instead of saying what he said and denigrating America, he should have said the following............

Q: Do you respect Putin?
A: Putin is the leader of Russia, and as such, deserves a certain level of respect.

How is that talking a bunch of crap?

 

[Bonzi]

We elected him President. He does not have to defend his every move. Even if he did, people that don't like him would not believe him etc. His only other option would be to ignore. That would be mine personally. It's just as immature to expect a reason for everything, like a petualnt child ....Eg "but WHY do I have to eat my liver?'.....

 

[mudwhistle]

Did anyone else watch the Trump interview before the Superbowl yesterday? He didn't sound very presidential, and was all over the place.

What especially bothered me was when O'Reilly asked Trump if he respected Putin. Trump said that he did, and when asked if he really meant that because Putin was a killer and had offed lots of journalists.

Trumps reply? America has had some bad people who have killed too.

If he was as smart as he constantly tells us he is, instead of saying what he did, when asked if he respected Putin, he could have simply said that he's a world leader, and as such, deserves a certain amount of respect. End of question, and no follow up gaffes.

So you want Trump to talk a bunch of crap and piss Putin off before he has a chance to meet him.

Not exactly presidential if you ask me.

Apparently, reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. I said instead of saying what he said and denigrating America, he should have said the following............

Q: Do you respect Putin?
A: Putin is the leader of Russia, and as such, deserves a certain level of respect.

How is that talking a bunch of crap?

Sorry, but it's not up to a dirtbag like you to tell our president what he is supposed to say word for word.

 

[oldsoul]

Every leader knows that perception is everything, reality is secondary.

Reality in political stumping is secondary, for the governed, reality is primary. The only thing that may happen is that the situational reality of things isn't necessarily seen or understood by the people who are governed. That said, when the governed cast a vote on something, that something must be enacted and endured, for better or worse.

This is the idea that he is cultivating, that he is an "outsider" who will "just get it done".

Whatever "outsider" cachet he had has come to an end. He's every bit an insider now and he was the instant he won the RNC nomination.

he may change his public persona to fit the times

There's another dimension of deception. This notion of having a public persona. I don't know about you, but I want the President to be the person whom s/he appears to be. Personas belong on the stage and television and movie screens; integrity is what belongs in elected office. An actor may hold elected office, but I don't want them to be acting when they present themselves and their ideas to the American people.

Now it just seems as though you are arguing to argue. Point one is not disputed, point two is all about perception/opinion, and point three is just silliness. Very few people act the same way in the privacy of their own home and in public. People most certainly behave differently in front of a camera. We all have different personas that we use in different situations. One would not behave/interact the same with their work superior as they would with a neighbor's child. So, to say that personas do not belong in politics is either naive, or silly.

 

[Divine Wind]

Did anyone else watch the Trump interview before the Superbowl yesterday? He didn't sound very presidential, and was all over the place.

What especially bothered me was when O'Reilly asked Trump if he respected Putin. Trump said that he did, and when asked if he really meant that because Putin was a killer and had offed lots of journalists.

Trumps reply? America has had some bad people who have killed too.

If he was as smart as he constantly tells us he is, instead of saying what he did, when asked if he respected Putin, he could have simply said that he's a world leader, and as such, deserves a certain amount of respect. End of question, and no follow up gaffes.

Yep. So why do you think most Americans voted against Hillary?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Did anyone else watch the Trump interview before the Superbowl yesterday? He didn't sound very presidential, and was all over the place.

What especially bothered me was when O'Reilly asked Trump if he respected Putin. Trump said that he did, and when asked if he really meant that because Putin was a killer and had offed lots of journalists.

Trumps reply? America has had some bad people who have killed too.

If he was as smart as he constantly tells us he is, instead of saying what he did, when asked if he respected Putin, he could have simply said that he's a world leader, and as such, deserves a certain amount of respect. End of question, and no follow up gaffes.

Yep. So why do you think most Americans voted against Hillary?

Why? Because we had been hearing from the GOP as to how bad Obama's policies have been over the past 8 years, and one of the things that Trump did during the election was to link Hillary to both Bill and Obama. Hillary wasn't just running against Trump, but she was also running against how people felt about Obama and her husband.

That, combined with the fake news stories (Pizzagate), as well as her emails constantly being called into question is what did it.

Trump only had to run against Hillary.

 

[mudwhistle]

Did anyone else watch the Trump interview before the Superbowl yesterday? He didn't sound very presidential, and was all over the place.

What especially bothered me was when O'Reilly asked Trump if he respected Putin. Trump said that he did, and when asked if he really meant that because Putin was a killer and had offed lots of journalists.

Trumps reply? America has had some bad people who have killed too.

If he was as smart as he constantly tells us he is, instead of saying what he did, when asked if he respected Putin, he could have simply said that he's a world leader, and as such, deserves a certain amount of respect. End of question, and no follow up gaffes.

Yep. So why do you think most Americans voted against Hillary?

Why? Because we had been hearing from the GOP as to how bad Obama's policies have been over the past 8 years, and one of the things that Trump did during the election was to link Hillary to both Bill and Obama. Hillary wasn't just running against Trump, but she was also running against how people felt about Obama and her husband.

That, combined with the fake news stories (Pizzagate), as well as her emails constantly being called into question is what did it.

Trump only had to run against Hillary.

Yeah......but Hillary was a shoe-in.

 

[Divine Wind]

Why? Because we had been hearing from the GOP as to how bad Obama's policies have been over the past 8 years, and one of the things that Trump did during the election was to link Hillary to both Bill and Obama. Hillary wasn't just running against Trump, but she was also running against how people felt about Obama and her husband.

That, combined with the fake news stories (Pizzagate), as well as her emails constantly being called into question is what did it.

Trump only had to run against Hillary.

So tit-for-tat? You're going to do the same for 4-8 years then the RNCers will use your same excuse to do it for another 4-8 years? How many decades to you expect this to last?