CDZ Should Republicans support Trump because, if nothing else, he's the Republican nominee?

[Disir]

I can't think of any reason to vote for Clinton, the Democrats, Trump or the Republicans. The only thing the Democrats have been able to put together is but, Trump.

How is that different from "But, Hillary".

Should that matter?

 

[320 Years of History]

I think he has dementia.

Off Topic:
If you are referring to Trump, I couldn't agree more. I had been suspecting as much anyway. His most recent remark about Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton literally being the founders of ISIS pretty much convinced me that dementia is what the man suffers. That's sad; I don't wish that on him or anyone else.

My mother has dementia and, unfortunately, it's not something that gets better. I remember years ago when she first manifested signs of it. She made exactly the same sorts of nutty remarks as Trump's "founder's" remark. And like him, when pressed and given the opportunity to withdraw from or clarify the remark, she wouldn't, unless it was something so outrageous that Daddy and I had to "take her aside" and "drill some sense into her head." Once we did that, she reacted exactly as Trump did re: "founders" and so many other things..."Oh, I was just kidding," or "That's not what I meant," or something else to that effect.

Also, like Trump, she'd never apologize directly, not for having misled folks nor for the substance of the words she uttered. I asked her doctor about why she never apologized. His answer: she is "together" enough that she understands the social impact of her remarks, so she wants to mitigate the umbrage they caused; My father's and my rebukes make that clear to her. But in her mind, she does actually and still believe what she said to be so.

The range of things on which that can happen is unlimited. Once, she called me halfway around the world to ask me the day of the week. Daddy had told her it was Tuesday, but she refused to believe him and proceeded from there to blame him for all sorts of other things. (Utterly stupid sh*t llike he was wearing her clothes, thus having stretched them out of shape, and that's why they were too big for her now. She had been trying to don a skirt suit she bought back when she wore size 14, some 15+/- years ago; she's now a size 10.) When I told her it was Tuesday, she called me a liar too and accused me of conspiring with Daddy. It wasn't until she'd called her doctor and asked that she accepted that it was indeed Tuesday. (I don't think she believed the doctor's office either, but she did realize then that she wasn't going to get a different answer.) Did she apologize for all her invective and the drama she caused? Not at all.

Does Mother read the paper or listen to the news? Of course. Does she believe anything she encounters there? Not if she doesn't like what they have to say. For example, she read something in a nature-oriented magazine and in talking about it asserted that the people who wrote it are "fools" because the picture showed the temperature of the surface water as being warmer than that in the deep ocean, yet, according to her, the ocean is warmer at the bottom than it is at the top and "anyone knows that." This conversation occurred back in the days when her dementia was just becoming "bad" and we didn't realize just what was going on, so we engaged her in an effort to make some sense with her.

Getting back to Trump...Not too long ago, I learned that men more so than women are often not diagnosed or are misdiagnosed with regard to Alzheimer's disease. Trump is certainly old enough for that to happen. (So are millions of men.) More to the point of dementia, however, upon learning of that study, I wondered whether men might also be less likely to receive accurate diagnoses of dementia, or be less likely to have it recognized before it reaches its more extreme stages. One thing I've learned from my experience with Mother and having to understand what's going on with her is that for any given stage or type of dementia, not every individual manifests all of the traits of that stage, nor do they manifest whatever traits with the same frequency or severity.

 

[Hiryuu]

My mother has dementia and, unfortunately, it's not something that gets better. I remember years ago when she first manifested signs of it. She made exactly the same sorts of nutty remarks as Trump's "founder's" remark. And like him, when pressed and given the opportunity to withdraw from or clarify the remark, she wouldn't, unless it was something so outrageous that Daddy and I had to "take her aside" and "drill some sense into her head." Once we did that, she reacted exactly as Trump did re: "founders" and so many other things..."Oh, I was just kidding," or "That's not what I meant," or something else to that effect.

How can someone who was a jackass to his mother be taken seriously when discussing who should support the efforts of who?

 

[320 Years of History]

My mother has dementia and, unfortunately, it's not something that gets better. I remember years ago when she first manifested signs of it. She made exactly the same sorts of nutty remarks as Trump's "founder's" remark. And like him, when pressed and given the opportunity to withdraw from or clarify the remark, she wouldn't, unless it was something so outrageous that Daddy and I had to "take her aside" and "drill some sense into her head." Once we did that, she reacted exactly as Trump did re: "founders" and so many other things..."Oh, I was just kidding," or "That's not what I meant," or something else to that effect.

How can someone who was a jackass to his mother be taken seriously when discussing who should support the efforts of who?

1. I'm not about to directly respond to your asinine and rude question.
2. How dare you have the temerity to presume the nature and context pertaining anything I choose to share with you about the interactions among myself and my family such that you find it in yourself to ask of me a loaded question such as you have. The fact of my having shared anecdotal references does not in any way, shape or form invite you to issue rejoinders that presume a level of familiarity with me that you have not earned. It seems I need to remind you that despite what you might think, we are strangers to one another. You would do well not to forget that, not only with me, but also with others of whom your sole connection to them is words on a webpage.

Do not speak to me again. You will be wasting your time and efforts.

 

[Toro]

No.

 

[Hiryuu]

My mother has dementia and, unfortunately, it's not something that gets better. I remember years ago when she first manifested signs of it. She made exactly the same sorts of nutty remarks as Trump's "founder's" remark. And like him, when pressed and given the opportunity to withdraw from or clarify the remark, she wouldn't, unless it was something so outrageous that Daddy and I had to "take her aside" and "drill some sense into her head." Once we did that, she reacted exactly as Trump did re: "founders" and so many other things..."Oh, I was just kidding," or "That's not what I meant," or something else to that effect.

How can someone who was a jackass to his mother be taken seriously when discussing who should support the efforts of who?

1. I'm not about to directly respond to your asinine and rude question.
2. How dare you have the temerity to presume the nature and context pertaining anything I choose to share with you about the interactions among myself and my family such that you find it in yourself to ask of me a loaded question such as you have. The fact of my having shared anecdotal references does not in any way, shape or form invite you to issue rejoinders that presume a level of familiarity with me that you have not earned. It seems I need to remind you that despite what you might think, we are strangers to one another. You would do well not to forget that, not only with me, but also with others of whom your sole connection to them is words on a webpage.

Do not speak to me again. You will be wasting your time and efforts.

Without straying too far off topic, you are the ass and not me. For Christ's sake what is there to gain from teaming up with your Daddy and making your demented mother admit that you are correct and she is wrong ... What kind of asshole doesn't have the common sense to just let it go?

I didn't ask to be invited ... You offered the comment and I think it sheds a great deal on your absolutely shortsighted stupidity and over the top search for superiority, even if it means arguing with your mother who has and degenerative disease. You don't have an excuse for your behavior, she does you damn dimwitted piece of ... nevermind, you are simply incapable of understanding.

That is an excellent reason no one should pay attention to anything you say about who should support Trump and who shouldn't. You would argue with a sick woman in attempts to prove you are correct and are too stupid to recognize the futility in it. I mean dang, you often provide a wealth of useful knowledge , but have some serious character flaws that bring your overall judgment into question.

You would probably fair better if you stick to external sources of information and interpreting data and leave any personal references out of your responses, because they don't do you any favors.

 

[Anathema]

If you are a Republican Party member you should be voting for the Republican candidate. Likewise with the Democratic Party and all other incorporated political parties. Independent/Unaffiliated voters are the only ones who should have a choice.

 

[320 Years of History]

If you are a Republican Party member you should be voting for the Republican candidate. Likewise with the Democratic Party and all other incorporated political parties. Independent/Unaffiliated voters are the only ones who should have a choice.

Oh my....

 

[Anathema]

Oh my....

If you choose to associate yourself with a party, you should be expected to support that party, no matter what.

That's why I am not a member of any party and honestly don't believe we should have them to begin with.

 

[320 Years of History]

Oh my....

If you choose to associate yourself with a party, you should be expected to support that party, no matter what.

That's why I am not a member of any party and honestly don't believe we should have them to begin with.

I think you really don't understand just how absurd that remark is.

Red:
Were that even remotely the expectation and actual behavior of registered Dems and Reps, we could in each state simply count the quantity of registered Republicans and Democrats, assign one vote for each to the respective candidate from each of those two parties, and then merely allow only non-aligned individuals into voting booths to cast ballots.

 

[Anathema]

Were that even remotely the expectation and actual behavior of registered Dems and Reps, we could in each state simply count the quantity of registered Republicans and Democrats, assign one vote for each to the respective candidate from each of those two parties, and then merely allow only non-aligned individuals into voting booths to cast ballots.

Sounds good to me. Save a whole lot of time and aggravation. Of course we would have to block people from changing their voter registration once the election season begins.

 

[320 Years of History]

Were that even remotely the expectation and actual behavior of registered Dems and Reps, we could in each state simply count the quantity of registered Republicans and Democrats, assign one vote for each to the respective candidate from each of those two parties, and then merely allow only non-aligned individuals into voting booths to cast ballots.

Sounds good to me. Save a whole lot of time and aggravation. Of course we would have to block people from changing their voter registration once the election season begins.

As I wrote before...Oh my....

 

[OldLady]

Okay, so you like the idea of Trump as President or you don't. That is what it is, and what it is isn't the point of this thread. This thread is about how folks, Republicans, can say the scathing things they have, I have in mind Sen. McCain especially but singularly, yet continue to support the nominee.

Clearly some Republicans have decided Trump has gone too far and they won't support him. That makes sense to me. I certainly wouldn't support someone whom I think is an utter mess, regardless of whether I belong to the same party or not.

At some point, mustn't one put country ahead of party and politics? I mean really...No matter how bad one thinks Hillary Clinton may be for the U.S., even if her Presidency would mean another four years of "Obama-ism," at the very least, there is no chance she is going to accidentally piss off someone and thereby create the kind of turmoil that could lead to global conflict on the scale of WWI. Regardless of all else, the simple fact is that the U.S. needs a relatively peaceful world and Donald Trump isn't the sort of character to foment much peace....

"Psychic's" Sidebar :

It's not as though the "timing" isn't about right for another major U.S. war...War of 1812, "Banana Wars" and WWI...just saying...​

End of sidebar.

​

Chris Shays: Why I'm voting for Hillary Clinton

During the 34 years I served as a Republican elected official in Connecticut, 13 years in the State House of Representatives, and 21 years in Congress, I always voted for our Republican candidate for governor and our Republican candidate for president.

Always, but not this time. Donald Trump lost me a long time ago.

I know some want to stick it to the so-called establishment, reject the status quo, and they see Trump as their vehicle. And I know some Republicans dislike President Obama, and have such a strong dislike for Hillary Clinton, they are willing to vote for a man they know does not have the temperament, knowledge or experience to be president.

In fact, I think many Republicans know Donald Trump could cause great damage to our country and the world at large, and still plan to vote for him. But not me. He represents practically everything I was taught not to be, and everything my wife and I taught our daughter not to be.

Clinton, the Democratic candidate for president, will be getting my vote, not reluctantly, but with a strong conviction that she will be a good president.

She has made some mistakes and I would love it if she had done some things differently. But this I know: Clinton does her homework, and she learns from her mistakes. She is smart, tough, highly knowledgeable and has shown she is genuinely willing to work with Republicans and anyone else to address the countless problems that confront our nation.

Clinton proved her worth in the Senate -- and her willingness to reach out to others. I saw this firsthand as a Republican congressman from New England, and more personally as chairman of the National Security Committee of the Government Oversight Committee.

My committee held one of the first hearings on the illnesses afflicting those who worked tirelessly at the twin towers site to find 9/11 survivors and clean it up. At the time, Republicans were in charge of the White House and Congress, and Clinton, who participated in our House hearing as the Democratic senator from New York, could have taken a very partisan position. Instead she chose to be an important part of the solution, which she definitely was.

As first lady, and more so as senator, being part of the solution was the kind of role she continually fulfilled.

To be completely candid, I have expressed my share of criticism over the years for the very person I intend to vote for. Some of that criticism was deserved, but again, being completely candid, some criticism was expressed more harshly than I wished, or knew was deserved. I have a sense I am not alone in this regard.

When I think of the numerous challenges confronting our nation, I want a president who is knowledgeable, experienced, articulate and tough. I want a president who knows the world and its leaders, the Congress and the White House, and has an innate understanding of the challenges facing everyday Americans.

And I want a president who will attract thoughtful and talented people to work in her administration, and who will continually seek the support of both Democrats and Republicans. By working with all Americans, Clinton will ensure the inspired efforts of our Founding Fathers -- who toiled unceasingly to create a Constitution designed to enable a diverse people, through the art of compromise, to find common ground -- were not in vain.

While no candidate is perfect and while nothing is certain, I am convinced that Hillary Clinton has what it takes to make our government truly work as our Founding Fathers intended. That is why as a Republican she has my strong support, and my vote this November.
​

Now I don't necessarily expect the Republicans who despise Trump's methods and themes to take to Mrs. Clinton as adamantly and with as glowingly complimentary language as has Chris Shays. I don't expect more than a simple statement saying that they can no longer in good conscience support Trump. But when folks make remarks as John McCain did last week and then say, "but I'm still supporting him," they fall a rung or three. That's really a shame for folks like Sen. McCain who, for all else, I heretofore perceived as a man of reasonably decent levels of integrity and as a man of somewhat strong principles. I didn't until recently have to wonder just how strong those principles are in light of Trump's remarks and methods apparently not transcending them. It's hard now to look at Mr. McCain as a man of principle, a man who cares about his country more than about his party's advancement.

Most, if not all, career politicians will put party ahead of country. To them, there is too much personal power to be lost. It's a sad testament to the current political climate we find ourselves in today. However, this is but a symptom of the greater problem, that being that a large portion of voters, ehem citizens, are simply "too busy" or "just don't care anymore" or are simply too lazy to hold these people accountable. They (the politicians) will continue to pander to demographics, and we will continue to buy their lies, then complain that they lied, only to re-elect them yet again. It's a vicious cycle with no real end in sight. I just hope I can check out of society (go off grid, way, way off. Somewhere far beyond the end of the road) before it gets too crazy.

Most, if not all, career politicians will put party ahead of country. To them, there is too much personal power to be lost. It's a sad testament to the current political climate we find ourselves in today.
As 320 rightly points out, there are some career politicians who put their own personal power before country. I have to disagree with you, though, that most if not all politicians have only personal interests in mind or that they are calculatingly dishonest as a matter of routine.
In order to get legislation passed that improves things for your voting bloc, you need to be in the game. In order to be/remain in the game, you need to be elected/re-elected. Politicians are quite aware that they need to please their constituency but their real "end game" is to push for policies and laws that they believe will improve life for everyone they represent. This is the truth of it. They aren't all monsters. I think you're beginning to believe some of the silliness being spewed by off-news sites and the tireless posters here.

I just hope I can check out of society (go off grid, way, way off. Somewhere far beyond the end of the road) before it gets too crazy.[/QUOTE]
They made a movie about that; it's called The Wizard of Oz
Remember the ending? "If I ever go looking for my heart's desire again, I won't look any further than my own backyard; because if it isn't there, I never really lost it to begin with...There's no place like home."
Our country, our 'backyard,' still invites us to participate in democracy in a loud and active sense. I know this Presidential election is a REALLY bad example, since both candidates are so disappointing, but over the next four years we will have the chance to set that right for the next election. In the meantime, we have the opportunity to make a choice about who represents us in the rest of government. Look at the about-to-be-elected Pres as a not-so-good looking figurehead on the Ship of State, but in 4 years we can replace it.

Too many people say the sky is falling. Too many people are believing it. Remember who you are, who we are. We are a good people and we have a form of government that can bend to our will. It is there already, in our own backyard. Don't give up looking for it.

 

[Anathema]

As I wrote before...Oh my....

What do you find so shocking about REALITY?

 

[320 Years of History]

there are some career politicians who put their own personal power before country.....most if not all politicians have only personal interests in mind or that they are calculatingly dishonest as a matter of routine.

Power is addictive, but I don't know if I can say "all;" certainly it's not all of them who are motivated by personal power. I think many of them are, but more often I think that most of them truly think their policy ideas are truly in the nation's best interest. The bigger and more specific problem is that too few of them are objective enough about the facts, their own views and those of others to discern what policies offer the greatest opportunity for indeed being "the best" choice ("the best" policy) they could make at the time.

There's also the reality that the nature and scope of information that is today available to inform sage policy making is so vast that it's all but impossible for elected leaders to learn it all, apply it all and arrive at what is indeed "the best" choice at the time. That the world isn't as simple as it was some 100+ years ago presents a very real challenge to any individual or group's ability to govern well.

Combine that reality with human nature and, well, here we are. What we need are elected leaders who can separate themselves from the decisions they must make. How does one reliably find folks capable of doing that? Frankly, I don't know. Short of being personally and closely associated with an individual, I don't think it's possible to tell whether s/he is such a person and I'm certain that individuals are able to make themselves seem to be such a person. At the end of the day, one can only judge retroactively and commit to "tossing out" the ones who don't live up to that ideal.

 

[320 Years of History]

As I wrote before...Oh my....

What do you find so shocking about REALITY?

One thing I find shocking is the reality that you have not figured out that asking me a loaded (non-neutrally presented) question like the one above isn't going to get you a direct answer because I won't answer questions that either (1) necessarily put words in my mouth merely by my providing a direct answer or (2) open the door for a lot of inane "back and forth," or, worse, both.

 

[Anathema]

One thing I find shocking is the reality that you have not figured out that asking me a loaded (non-neutrally presented) question like the one above isn't going to get you a direct answer because I won't answer questions that either (1) necessarily put words in my mouth merely by my providing a direct answer or (2) open the door for a lot of inane "back and forth," or, worse, both.

If you're not willing to provide direct answers to questions, then there is no point in having a conversation with you ever, on any topic. Bye.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Republicans should support Trump because if nothing else, he isn't Clinton.

 

[MarathonMike]

Look at it the choice this way. Trump represents the "risk" of an unproven political leader who puts American priorities first. Hillary represents the "safety" of a proven failed leader who puts the priorities of her cronies and Clinton donors first. I'll take Trump any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you.

 

[320 Years of History]

Look at it the choice this way. Trump represents the "risk" of an unproven political leader who puts American priorities first. Hillary represents the "safety" of a proven failed leader who puts the priorities of her cronies and Clinton donors first. I'll take Trump any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you.

That's quite a jaundiced way to look at each of the two candidates. To be sure, however, with a jaundiced eye is a way to look at not only the candidates, but pretty much anything.