Trump.... what would turn supporters against him

I am pleased with the reserve since Army and Marine Corps since most Navy with good in my taste.

The Coast Guard is the worst since Marines then Air Force. Nuclear is important. Iran's latest power who want to procure uranium bombs that means we'll bomb their surface with same.

 

I hope one day we will have a strong, recognizable, third party candidate. I think that is the only way we will break the cycle. I also wish third party candidates were allowed to debate the others.

 

An alternative.
Reid nuked the Senate so Obama could stack the courts with Marxists who would let him get away with destroying the country as it was founded. One more Democrat President and the country would be unrecognizable to anyone but Cuban-Americans who grew up under Castro. We saw judges out west ignoring Supreme Court decisions and laws passed by Congress --- there was never any ambiguity about the power of the President to determine who can come into the country. The country is almost unrecognizable already. One more Liberal Supreme Court justice and we would be apologizing to our grandchildren for throwing away the Democratic Republic we were given.

 

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_58aa5dd6e4b0fa149f9ac82f
Read that ! We picked the right man .

 

To the OP author, I think you have some reading to:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_7:5


-

 

This is precisely why I am asking now
Once trump does stuff... people will reflexively defend him... regardless
So the only way to get a serious answer is to ask before he acts

 

It's hard to turn against someone when you know that the opposition party is so much worse. That being said, I think not having the courage to repeal the individual mandate would be a major set back for both Trump and the Republican party.

They could have done that on day one; which would have left them plenty of wiggle room to reconcile out the other factors associated with the ACA. But they didn't, and I suspect they never will.

 

But my answer would be contextual. Let's Trump fulfilled most of his campaign promises, but the border wall ended up costing way more than expected. I might over look depending on how well he does in other areas. It's about overall performance for me, not a single event. Sometimes you don't get every single thing you asked for.

 

Apparently Nothing.

 

What???

 

That is the big thing; the parties control the stage. I didn't realize just how much influence they had until the DNC emails came out. Rigging their own primary was one thing, but getting the media to help, that was more influence that I expected. I'd be curious how much control the RNC has. I think it would take a pretty big media group bucking the trend to let a third party in, and even then the other two parties my not attend in hopes of illegitimizing the debate, which is exactly what would happen if they didn't both show up. No ones going to care if a third party candidate debates one other major party, or just other third party candidates if neither party shows.

 

Says "let's keep it real" right after saying "sent tens of thousands of our men and women off to die based on lies."

But as for the main point of your post, that we spend more then the other major nations, my question is so what? Why does that matter, what exactly does that mean? Is there a legitimate comparison in that?

 

You make a fair point
I was asking if there was any deal breaker

I agree with your comment about the cost if the wall
But he campaigned on his realeste background
If anyone would know the cost of building something, it should be trump
So I personally would feel intentionally deceived
Especially if this happened in the context of many other shortcomings
I.e. Not balancing the budget
Or not solving the balance of trade issue
Or repealing Obamacare with no replacement and consequent chaos
Or failing to deliver meaningful new jobs
Or failing to deliver jobs to the rust belt
Or not significantly addressing the undocumented immigrant problem
Or a resounding failure to defeat isis and or radical Muslim terrorism
.... I guess we already know that clinton will not be locked up

 

Are you kidding? You do know that money is tacked onto unnecessary debt don't you?

As for the lies to go to war, there are many. Even Trump said they were wrong to go; https://www.google.cl/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Hubris+the+documentary

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/the-secret-history-of-isis/

http://www.vox.com/2016/7/9/12123022/george-w-bush-lies-iraq-war

 

Do we?

 

Nothing.

If the smitten cult's fanaticism has clouded their minds to the extent that they have not already been able to rationally assess their messiah, there is no reason to expect an epiphany.

No matter how much he craps upon American values and befouls the nation, they will be frenetically swatting at their imaginary demon "liberals!" swarming around their noggins and blaming them for whatever catastrophe befalls.

As the messiah himself attested to the mindless devotion of his followers, "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters!"

 

and he is right

 

Will his supporters trust Trump when he tweets, "The FAKE NEWS media (failing @nytimes, @NBCNews, @ABC, @CBS, @CNN) is not my enemy, it is the enemy of the American People!" General Mattis said the term, "enemy of the people" is reserved for heinous people like the Iranian government, Putin, and ISIS.

Most of Trump's fans are re-blooded American patriots who would agree with the good general. While they may not always agree with the media, they hardly consider it the "enemy of the people." Such a declaration by their hero would be a downer.

Actually, Trump's tweet is a product of a paranoid, schizophrenic, narcissistic mind. It is hard to believe any American would accept what he said.

 

So, let's assume all this is true as you say. Then, can you imagine that if we spend seven times the amount of those other countries, what sort of shape do you suppose these other countries military readiness would look like? Based on your explanation, and looking at it from a financial point of you, I'm surprised those other countries have much of a military at all, wouldn't you say?

Which brings me back to my original point. If military equipment and personnel are in disarray, yet we spend seven times that of other countries with the same problems, aren't we still spending too much?

I mean, all you've really done here, is compared seven ripe apples against one ripe apple, while the seven ripe apples suddenly became rotten with the other one lone apple. Just saying!

 

And if his administration turns into a kleptocracy - which it is showing every evidence of doing so far - what then?

 

The Americans in 31 states knew what he was when they elected him.

 

You are asking people to make a blanket statement based on things that may or may not happen in the future without knowing WHY it did or didn't happen.

Barring anything illegal, I would simply have to know why. There may be a valid reason for whatever does or doesn't happen. Is it because of another 911 type terrorist attack or some other major event? Did he just flat out not do a good job? I have to reserve judgement until I know the circumstances.

As far as the wall, I didn't vote for him because he said he will build the wall so it isn't a major issue with me. I would like tighter borders and if it means a wall then so be it.

There has never been a president who did everything they campaigned on. I wasn't here but were there similar questions asked about Obama? Or is Trump being held to a different standard simply because it's Trump?

 

You have to ask if the spending is in the right direction. Sometimes less is more. We do not have the population to support a big military force so we are very choosy about our battles (when we are not being dragged into the (*)(*)(*)(*) willynilly by America of course). We do not just throw money and resources at a problem because we do not have money and resources. Example - 9/11 and Bali Bombings. After 9/11 America went to war with 2 different countries neither of which had anything to do with those attacks. After the Bali Bombings Australia sent aide and resources to Indonesia to work with the Indonesian government to bring the perpetrators to justice (which we did) and then built them a hospital.

What is the outcome all these years later?

 

So they were fine with him basically stealing money out of thier pockets?

What am I saying - of course they were!! Look at how many were and are OK with Trump not paying taxes!