Why Are You Opposed to Trump?

[alpine]

Trump is a rich spoiled kid.

If he wasnt running for president, he would be rolling around central park, having people drink his piss and eat his shit for cash.




Hmm, giving it a second thought, he is already doing so i guess...........

 

[Syriusly]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that the current opposition to Trump is primarily based on style and political incorrectness. It also seems to include a suggestion of racism, even though this inference is derived solely from his positions on immigration and national security.

IF it becomes a Presidential election between Trump and Clinton, what OBJECTIVE standards would you apply in deciding how you would vote?

For me, Trump's direct approaches to immigration, trade, national security, jobs and the economy are favorable factors, as opposed to Clinton's vacillation on these issues. (In other words, he says what he WILL do, whereas she talks about what she WON'T do.)

Please avoid name calling and explain the specific standards you employ in evaluating these candidates.

Objective Standards?

• Trump has absolutely no experience in government- legislative or administrative.
• Trump has absolutely no experience with foreign policy.
• I was and am offended by Trump statements regarding Mexicans and regarding Muslim immigrants..
• Trump's statements regarding international trade- especially when it comes to free trade agreements and tariffs display a profound ignorance of both how free trade agreements and tariffs actually are today- and the historic effect of trade barriers.
  
• Trump's' statements on national security are both bombastic- and unrealistic.
• I think that Trump has shown a tendency towards think skinned defensiveness, and attacking anyone who criticizes him that would be detrimental as a President.
• While I don't particularly trust Clinton- I absolutely distrust Trump.

Obama had no experience in government-legislative or administrative.
Obama had no experience with foreign policy.
Obama has a profound ignorance free trade agreements, and economics in general.
Obama has his lap dog media attacking anyone who dares criticize him.

It doesn't matter if you were an Obama supporter or not, the point is that Trump cannot be worse.

Senator Obama had experience in the legislation both at the State level and at the Federal level.
Senator Obama had no foreign policy experience- just like Trump. Are you a fan of President Obama's foreign policy?
There is no indication that Senator Obama misunderstood any free trade agreements as Trump does- but presuming that he did- do you think that Trump's ignorance of free trade agreements and the economics of world trade is a good thing?
President Obama is somewhat thin skinned- but the comparison between him and Trump is profound- Trump is extremely think skinned and lashes out at any criticism.

I am presuming from your criticism of President Obama that you are firmly against Trump for his lack of experience.

 

[HUGGY]

I looked hard at Trump when all this started, and knew Cruze would be the other choice. Rubio was done when he betrayed those who sent him to washington, and the rest were pretty much retreads and washouts from past primareys. So at this point,I am a Cruz supporter. I can pull up his senate record and see consistency. Not so much with Donald Trump. Donald Trump just bounces around to much for me, and he just doesn't have the temperament for the job. He will also have lots of trouble with Hillery when it comes to who he gave money to in his past as a New York developer. He gave over $600,000.00 to democrats who backed things like gun control as well as unions. I don't hold the union thing against him thoigh. Unions build stuff and he needs them, but m afraid they are Inot him to deeply. I was able to find all that with a simple Google search. Hillery will bring more with her machine. All that and his behavior, all the winning and crying about the rules, unless they are in his favor, he hasn't complained about the Florida deligates.

So in short, go Ted.

As usual the GOP has weak candidates for POTUS. Trump and Cruz are both serial liars. I wonder why the republicans can't manage to get real good people to run for prez. Trump COULD have been the right guy with the right stuff because he seems to be his own man. If he wasn't such a whiny jerk I would vote for him. I just can't see the GOP leadership in Congress giving him any support. He is simply just too abrasive. His "my way or the highway" personality won't work in a position that requires at least some co-operation and compromise.

 

[Crixus]

I looked hard at Trump when all this started, and knew Cruze would be the other choice. Rubio was done when he betrayed those who sent him to washington, and the rest were pretty much retreads and washouts from past primareys. So at this point,I am a Cruz supporter. I can pull up his senate record and see consistency. Not so much with Donald Trump. Donald Trump just bounces around to much for me, and he just doesn't have the temperament for the job. He will also have lots of trouble with Hillery when it comes to who he gave money to in his past as a New York developer. He gave over $600,000.00 to democrats who backed things like gun control as well as unions. I don't hold the union thing against him thoigh. Unions build stuff and he needs them, but m afraid they are Inot him to deeply. I was able to find all that with a simple Google search. Hillery will bring more with her machine. All that and his behavior, all the winning and crying about the rules, unless they are in his favor, he hasn't complained about the Florida deligates.

So in short, go Ted.

As usual the GOP has weak candidates for POTUS. Trump and Cruz are both serial liars. I wonder why the republicans can't manage to get real good people to run for prez. Trump COULD have been the right guy with the right stuff because he seems to be his own man. If he wasn't such a whiny jerk I would vote for him. I just can't see the GOP leadership in Congress giving him any support. He is simply just too abrasive. His "my way or the highway" personality won't work in a position that requires at least some co-operation and compromise.

It's that attitude that Trump supporters think they will get. Wonder if they will make excuses for him when he eats it.

 

[HUGGY]

I looked hard at Trump when all this started, and knew Cruze would be the other choice. Rubio was done when he betrayed those who sent him to washington, and the rest were pretty much retreads and washouts from past primareys. So at this point,I am a Cruz supporter. I can pull up his senate record and see consistency. Not so much with Donald Trump. Donald Trump just bounces around to much for me, and he just doesn't have the temperament for the job. He will also have lots of trouble with Hillery when it comes to who he gave money to in his past as a New York developer. He gave over $600,000.00 to democrats who backed things like gun control as well as unions. I don't hold the union thing against him thoigh. Unions build stuff and he needs them, but m afraid they are Inot him to deeply. I was able to find all that with a simple Google search. Hillery will bring more with her machine. All that and his behavior, all the winning and crying about the rules, unless they are in his favor, he hasn't complained about the Florida deligates.

So in short, go Ted.

As usual the GOP has weak candidates for POTUS. Trump and Cruz are both serial liars. I wonder why the republicans can't manage to get real good people to run for prez. Trump COULD have been the right guy with the right stuff because he seems to be his own man. If he wasn't such a whiny jerk I would vote for him. I just can't see the GOP leadership in Congress giving him any support. He is simply just too abrasive. His "my way or the highway" personality won't work in a position that requires at least some co-operation and compromise.

It's that attitude that Trump supporters think they will get. Wonder if they will make excuses for him when he eats it.

From the way they are talking now I wouldn't be surprised if they started threatening people at Hillary offices. The Donald will no doubt give them their marching orders. He doesn't like losing. The general election will be a HUUUUGE embarrassment for him. HUUUUGE ! If he was smart and not so damned egotistical he would have groomed a guy with a much better presentation that he could control. He would be much better off with a president in his pocket than put himself in the white house and take a HUUUUGE pay cut. He just doesn't get it that most Americans don't want to be represented by a rich buffoon. His appeal is very narrow. His followers are mostly the stupid ex tea baggers that never figured out they got taken for a ride by Bennett and the Kochs.

 

[cereal_killer]

There's a new conservative movement emerging that is filled with men/women who will no longer be pushed around by the PC police and made to stand at the alter of shame and apologize for their opinions/things they say. To the point and no apologies... "Did what I say hurt your feelings? That's unfortunate, now fuck off" Liberals will recoil in abstract fear as they lay waste to their impotent accusations of racism, bigotry, misogyny and all the other nonsense they toss out.

The cucks and betas who identify as conservatives/Republicans can watch in horror as they are stripped of any relevance.

I hope that your prediction will come true!

It's happening 'as we speak'

 

[Boss]

There's a new conservative movement emerging that is filled with men/women who will no longer be pushed around by the PC police and made to stand at the alter of shame and apologize for their opinions/things they say. To the point and no apologies... "Did what I say hurt your feelings? That's unfortunate, now fuck off" Liberals will recoil in abstract fear as they lay waste to their impotent accusations of racism, bigotry, misogyny and all the other nonsense they toss out.

The cucks and betas who identify as conservatives/Republicans can watch in horror as they are stripped of any relevance.

The problem is, Trump is very much PC. He takes the politically best position on all issues. That is what it means when they say he is a populist. The transgender restroom issue is the latest example. Who could have imagined the Republican front-runner saying transgenders can use any restroom they feel like using? That's not even a Conservative or Republican thing, that's a common sense thing. Only wacko PC liberals have that view... we expect that on the Democrat side, they're crazy... but the GOP front-runner?

No, Trump is extremely PC.. and you're going to find out the hard way. What he doesn't believe in is being nice about it.

 

[PredFan]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that the current opposition to Trump is primarily based on style and political incorrectness. It also seems to include a suggestion of racism, even though this inference is derived solely from his positions on immigration and national security.

IF it becomes a Presidential election between Trump and Clinton, what OBJECTIVE standards would you apply in deciding how you would vote?

For me, Trump's direct approaches to immigration, trade, national security, jobs and the economy are favorable factors, as opposed to Clinton's vacillation on these issues. (In other words, he says what he WILL do, whereas she talks about what she WON'T do.)

Please avoid name calling and explain the specific standards you employ in evaluating these candidates.

Objective Standards?

• Trump has absolutely no experience in government- legislative or administrative.
• Trump has absolutely no experience with foreign policy.
• I was and am offended by Trump statements regarding Mexicans and regarding Muslim immigrants..
• Trump's statements regarding international trade- especially when it comes to free trade agreements and tariffs display a profound ignorance of both how free trade agreements and tariffs actually are today- and the historic effect of trade barriers.
  
• Trump's' statements on national security are both bombastic- and unrealistic.
• I think that Trump has shown a tendency towards think skinned defensiveness, and attacking anyone who criticizes him that would be detrimental as a President.
• While I don't particularly trust Clinton- I absolutely distrust Trump.

Obama had no experience in government-legislative or administrative.
Obama had no experience with foreign policy.
Obama has a profound ignorance free trade agreements, and economics in general.
Obama has his lap dog media attacking anyone who dares criticize him.

It doesn't matter if you were an Obama supporter or not, the point is that Trump cannot be worse.

Senator Obama had experience in the legislation both at the State level and at the Federal level.
Senator Obama had no foreign policy experience- just like Trump. Are you a fan of President Obama's foreign policy?
There is no indication that Senator Obama misunderstood any free trade agreements as Trump does- but presuming that he did- do you think that Trump's ignorance of free trade agreements and the economics of world trade is a good thing?
President Obama is somewhat thin skinned- but the comparison between him and Trump is profound- Trump is extremely think skinned and lashes out at any criticism.

I am presuming from your criticism of President Obama that you are firmly against Trump for his lack of experience.

Obama's record in the senate is of no shows. He had no experience at all and it shows.

My point remains, we survived Obama, we will survive Trump.

 

[candycorn]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that the current opposition to Trump is primarily based on style and political incorrectness. It also seems to include a suggestion of racism, even though this inference is derived solely from his positions on immigration and national security.

IF it becomes a Presidential election between Trump and Clinton, what OBJECTIVE standards would you apply in deciding how you would vote?

For me, Trump's direct approaches to immigration, trade, national security, jobs and the economy are favorable factors, as opposed to Clinton's vacillation on these issues. (In other words, he says what he WILL do, whereas she talks about what she WON'T do.)

Please avoid name calling and explain the specific standards you employ in evaluating these candidates.

Let me ask you this. I apologize in advance if what I’m about to say has any semblance to your real life as I do not know you or your situation.

Lets say that you and your wife/husband (I don’t know your gender) are looking at a house in your neighborhood you’re considering purchasing and you start the tour of the house. The female in your duo, asks the homeowner “I’ve lived in this neighborhood for 20 years, and I recall seeing a foundation leveling company out here a few weeks before it went on the market. Is the foundation sound?”

The owner refuses to answer directly but another couple is touring the house and asks him “What was that about the foundation?” since they were in proximity when you/your wife asked the question. He looks at them and says that you/your wife is on her period since she is asking such a question based on a unsubstantiated recollection.

Lets say that one of you walks with a pronounced limp and when the other couple enters, he mocks your limp when he walks over to them

Would you do business with him? Would you trust anything else this person of extremely low character has to say? I wouldn’t. Much less would I vote for him to run the HOA or school board or whatever.

Any voter who thinks the President can implement their agenda unfettered is kidding themselves. Especially when the agenda is flat out ridiculous such as building a wall and telling the humorous lie that Mexico will pay for it, you’re going to ban Muslims from entering the nation by asking if they are Muslim, that you’ll deport 11,000,000 people, that you’ll make the already-strongest military apparatus stronger, etc… The only thing you can do, in my opinion when voting for President, is vote for someone who will share your values and vote single-party to try to get a Congress on the same page.

Clinton largely shares my values. So she gets my vote.

 

[Vigilante]

My first vote was Goldwater in 1964, and I haven't been satisfied with any of them since then. Even Reagan was taken over the coals by the Socialist/DemoRATS on immigration. Face it, this is NOT 1980 and the subversives have had 35 YEARS to manipulate and mold those college kids into millions of Leftist zombies, or, at least most that go to college. The voting block that brought Reagan into power is DEAD! So what do we do now...go for MORE POLITICIANS that we KNOW LIE, just look at what Congresshas done since Jan. 2015, or some fresh face that can't be bought, BUT hasn't the deep social values that many of us have.

A hard rightest as Cruz has purported to be, will NEVER draw in middle of the road Independents which according to latest estimates are 40% of the public. Yes, Trump is an UNKNOWN quantity, BUT again, according to polls and according to the VOTING in most of the states so far, has the support of 35-40% of the Republicans and he just went over 60% in N.Y. and looks like over 50% in other N.E. states, and California. Cruz is now OUT mathematically. But will stay in, along with "Kasick" to try and kill Trumps chance of winning the required delegates. We see Cruz told "Kasick" to GET OUT after he was mathematically eliminated, BUT the HYPOCRISY of this man when he is OUT HIMSELF, is stunning...I was a big Cruz supporter and had many spirited fights in here about it. Sorry to say, it appears I was wrong and others was right.

Now since Trump is the only one left, don't you think it's time to stand behind him, as his views on many things are similar to Cruz, except for some Social issues...and they can be addressed once he is in office by Cruz and other strong conservatives talking to him. The one thing most don't think of is that Trump has the FINANCIAL ability to KILL any of the Republican or DemoRAT politicians that get in his way.... He simply forms a $20-$40 million OR MORE SuperPac, and has a guy like Roger Stone, go to each person in Congress that is standing in his way and let them know in no uncertain terms that when THEY come up for re-election,Trump's SuperPac will spend a Million OR MORE to help that Congressperson's opponent (that opponent will certainly OWE TRUMP a BIG ONE) in his ouster from his current political position. You KNOW that the only thing Politicians FEAR is LOSING their positions! Just let that sink in for a moment.

I can address all those social issue problems , such as abortion which Trump continually says he supports PRO LIFE but will make the 3 exceptions viable.... Live with it, he will still try to change the law.

I don't need to address them all, unless people really want me to, but consider the ramifications of a Hildebeast presidency. With Chubby Chelsea already saying her mother wants to CHANGE the 2nd. Amendment, and the SCOTUS judges the douchebag will appoint, and get confirmed because ALL THE REST OF THE SENATE are FECKLESS, scumbags Republicans, it's SURE to make this a third rate Socialist country much like most European countries! I know I won't change your, and others in here minds, but if you honestly look at it, it's the BEST CHANCE WE HAVE!

 

[HUGGY]

Woman (Trump supporter) and man were lying in bed when this happened :

Man: Honey I support Cruz but I'm leaning towards Kasich now
Woman: I think we both need to start seeing other men

When you mention Trump and bedding down a partner...

“How could you sleep next to that flabby, fat piece of s--t and get your rocks off? ... The actor called Melania Trump a "gold digger." He said "I know, I was married to one." - Mickey Rourke - one tough frigging Alpha male​

Micky Rourke was pissed off at him long before he announced he was going to run. Rourke's anger has nothing to do with his run for the nomination

Rourke is a cocaine addled pervert. I know a friend of his very well. Mickey's opinion is worthless. He is much more interested in when and where he can participate in his next cocaine/alcohol binge than the good of America.

 

[Syriusly]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that the current opposition to Trump is primarily based on style and political incorrectness. It also seems to include a suggestion of racism, even though this inference is derived solely from his positions on immigration and national security.

IF it becomes a Presidential election between Trump and Clinton, what OBJECTIVE standards would you apply in deciding how you would vote?

For me, Trump's direct approaches to immigration, trade, national security, jobs and the economy are favorable factors, as opposed to Clinton's vacillation on these issues. (In other words, he says what he WILL do, whereas she talks about what she WON'T do.)

Please avoid name calling and explain the specific standards you employ in evaluating these candidates.

Objective Standards?

• Trump has absolutely no experience in government- legislative or administrative.
• Trump has absolutely no experience with foreign policy.
• I was and am offended by Trump statements regarding Mexicans and regarding Muslim immigrants..
• Trump's statements regarding international trade- especially when it comes to free trade agreements and tariffs display a profound ignorance of both how free trade agreements and tariffs actually are today- and the historic effect of trade barriers.
  
• Trump's' statements on national security are both bombastic- and unrealistic.
• I think that Trump has shown a tendency towards think skinned defensiveness, and attacking anyone who criticizes him that would be detrimental as a President.
• While I don't particularly trust Clinton- I absolutely distrust Trump.

Obama had no experience in government-legislative or administrative.
Obama had no experience with foreign policy.
Obama has a profound ignorance free trade agreements, and economics in general.
Obama has his lap dog media attacking anyone who dares criticize him.

It doesn't matter if you were an Obama supporter or not, the point is that Trump cannot be worse.

Senator Obama had experience in the legislation both at the State level and at the Federal level.
Senator Obama had no foreign policy experience- just like Trump. Are you a fan of President Obama's foreign policy?
There is no indication that Senator Obama misunderstood any free trade agreements as Trump does- but presuming that he did- do you think that Trump's ignorance of free trade agreements and the economics of world trade is a good thing?
President Obama is somewhat thin skinned- but the comparison between him and Trump is profound- Trump is extremely think skinned and lashes out at any criticism.

I am presuming from your criticism of President Obama that you are firmly against Trump for his lack of experience.

Obama's record in the senate is of no shows. He had no experience at all and it shows.

My point remains, we survived Obama, we will survive Trump.

Oh we can certainly survive Trump- our country is stronger than any one President.

The question is why am I opposed to Trump. I gave my reasons.

 

[browsing deer]

You support gay marriage... vote trump
you support abortion till the kid is on the way out vot trump
you support single payer vote trump
you support freedom and liberty vote cruz

 

[candycorn]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that the current opposition to Trump is primarily based on style and political incorrectness. It also seems to include a suggestion of racism, even though this inference is derived solely from his positions on immigration and national security.

IF it becomes a Presidential election between Trump and Clinton, what OBJECTIVE standards would you apply in deciding how you would vote?

For me, Trump's direct approaches to immigration, trade, national security, jobs and the economy are favorable factors, as opposed to Clinton's vacillation on these issues. (In other words, he says what he WILL do, whereas she talks about what she WON'T do.)

Please avoid name calling and explain the specific standards you employ in evaluating these candidates.

Objective Standards?

• Trump has absolutely no experience in government- legislative or administrative.
• Trump has absolutely no experience with foreign policy.
• I was and am offended by Trump statements regarding Mexicans and regarding Muslim immigrants..
• Trump's statements regarding international trade- especially when it comes to free trade agreements and tariffs display a profound ignorance of both how free trade agreements and tariffs actually are today- and the historic effect of trade barriers.
  
• Trump's' statements on national security are both bombastic- and unrealistic.
• I think that Trump has shown a tendency towards think skinned defensiveness, and attacking anyone who criticizes him that would be detrimental as a President.
• While I don't particularly trust Clinton- I absolutely distrust Trump.

Obama had no experience in government-legislative or administrative.
Obama had no experience with foreign policy.
Obama has a profound ignorance free trade agreements, and economics in general.
Obama has his lap dog media attacking anyone who dares criticize him.

It doesn't matter if you were an Obama supporter or not, the point is that Trump cannot be worse.

Senator Obama had experience in the legislation both at the State level and at the Federal level.
Senator Obama had no foreign policy experience- just like Trump. Are you a fan of President Obama's foreign policy?
There is no indication that Senator Obama misunderstood any free trade agreements as Trump does- but presuming that he did- do you think that Trump's ignorance of free trade agreements and the economics of world trade is a good thing?
President Obama is somewhat thin skinned- but the comparison between him and Trump is profound- Trump is extremely think skinned and lashes out at any criticism.

I am presuming from your criticism of President Obama that you are firmly against Trump for his lack of experience.

Obama's record in the senate is of no shows. He had no experience at all and it shows.

My point remains, we survived Obama, we will survive Trump.

Oh we can certainly survive Trump- our country is stronger than any one President.

The question is why am I opposed to Trump. I gave my reasons.

On that, I agree. The republic will survive. Our mute Constitution is more a threat than any President

 

[candycorn]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that the current opposition to Trump is primarily based on....

Trum is really independent, he does not need the money of the banksters, that is the reason why he is so hated by the establishment that is selling America, and that is the reason why Americans see in Trum the last chance to save the country which is going down the drain.

So, let me see if I follow your logic:

You actually think there is a large group of bankers somewhere (i.e. this "establishment") that sits around and "sells" America. And they don't like Donald Trump based solely on his having enough money to not need theirs in what is almost always a losing proposition (ask those who supported Jeb!)?

 

[browsing deer]

They are tired of voting republican, but democratic propositions win. They are tired of sell outs, so they are willing to burn down the house and destroy the republic because they are tired of loosing

 

[Crixus]

There's a new conservative movement emerging that is filled with men/women who will no longer be pushed around by the PC police and made to stand at the alter of shame and apologize for their opinions/things they say. To the point and no apologies... "Did what I say hurt your feelings? That's unfortunate, now fuck off" Liberals will recoil in abstract fear as they lay waste to their impotent accusations of racism, bigotry, misogyny and all the other nonsense they toss out.

The cucks and betas who identify as conservatives/Republicans can watch in horror as they are stripped of any relevance.

The problem is, Trump is very much PC. He takes the politically best position on all issues. That is what it means when they say he is a populist. The transgender restroom issue is the latest example. Who could have imagined the Republican front-runner saying transgenders can use any restroom they feel like using? That's not even a Conservative or Republican thing, that's a common sense thing. Only wacko PC liberals have that view... we expect that on the Democrat side, they're crazy... but the GOP front-runner?

No, Trump is extremely PC.. and you're going to find out the hard way. What he doesn't believe in is being nice about it.

And that's the thkng. Only tiny segment of the American population give cross dressers any thought, and most of those that do are cross dressers. Trump has shown a great willingness to change his stance to the most politically expedient opinion when needed. So if he will change his opinion on something as stupid as this, why wouldn't he change his opinion on say,, a wall on the border? Or his promises to prosicute Hillery or try if he wins? Maybe those great deals with China, Japan, Mexico, Taiwan? Bush was also a populist after he got into office. A slave to the polls. Dont understand why after 16 years of populist screwing up the country we would send another one up there.

 

[PredFan]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems that the current opposition to Trump is primarily based on style and political incorrectness. It also seems to include a suggestion of racism, even though this inference is derived solely from his positions on immigration and national security.

IF it becomes a Presidential election between Trump and Clinton, what OBJECTIVE standards would you apply in deciding how you would vote?

For me, Trump's direct approaches to immigration, trade, national security, jobs and the economy are favorable factors, as opposed to Clinton's vacillation on these issues. (In other words, he says what he WILL do, whereas she talks about what she WON'T do.)

Please avoid name calling and explain the specific standards you employ in evaluating these candidates.

Objective Standards?

• Trump has absolutely no experience in government- legislative or administrative.
• Trump has absolutely no experience with foreign policy.
• I was and am offended by Trump statements regarding Mexicans and regarding Muslim immigrants..
• Trump's statements regarding international trade- especially when it comes to free trade agreements and tariffs display a profound ignorance of both how free trade agreements and tariffs actually are today- and the historic effect of trade barriers.
  
• Trump's' statements on national security are both bombastic- and unrealistic.
• I think that Trump has shown a tendency towards think skinned defensiveness, and attacking anyone who criticizes him that would be detrimental as a President.
• While I don't particularly trust Clinton- I absolutely distrust Trump.

Obama had no experience in government-legislative or administrative.
Obama had no experience with foreign policy.
Obama has a profound ignorance free trade agreements, and economics in general.
Obama has his lap dog media attacking anyone who dares criticize him.

It doesn't matter if you were an Obama supporter or not, the point is that Trump cannot be worse.

Senator Obama had experience in the legislation both at the State level and at the Federal level.
Senator Obama had no foreign policy experience- just like Trump. Are you a fan of President Obama's foreign policy?
There is no indication that Senator Obama misunderstood any free trade agreements as Trump does- but presuming that he did- do you think that Trump's ignorance of free trade agreements and the economics of world trade is a good thing?
President Obama is somewhat thin skinned- but the comparison between him and Trump is profound- Trump is extremely think skinned and lashes out at any criticism.

I am presuming from your criticism of President Obama that you are firmly against Trump for his lack of experience.

Obama's record in the senate is of no shows. He had no experience at all and it shows.

My point remains, we survived Obama, we will survive Trump.

Oh we can certainly survive Trump- our country is stronger than any one President.

The question is why am I opposed to Trump. I gave my reasons.

You did.

 

[jwoodie]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I have not seen a single post opposing Trump on substance (in comparison with Hillary). Are you really going to sit on your hands in November and watch America commit national suicide?

 

[browsing deer]

I know how he feels