Why do More Than 1/3 of Americans Plan to Vote for Trump?

That's all completely irrelevant.

You assume the court actually upholds the constitution - it does not. Kelo was clearly against the Constitution (during the Bush years, but proof the court is severely flawed). Burwell was blatantly flawed, the ACA directly addressed state and federal exchanges, discussing each one in separate sections, it was very clear that the federal subsidies applied only in certain conditions and were not authorized for both state and federal exchanges, but the court ignored what was plainly written. Obergefell is made up out of thin air. Roe was equally political.

The court is as political as Congress. Anyone who even glances at the current election sees that fact. On gun rights, Hilary blames Heller on Scalia, not the court, making it a clear the court is political and the personalities & politics of the justices are the issue, not the constitution. Hilary wants to stock the court with her selections so that the 2nd amendment can be "reinterpreted" to her political liking.

obama uses executive actions & orders and the regulatory branch to circumvent congress and the courts - actually to circumvent the people. You can create any tally sheet you want to, compare obama and Bush, or obama and Lincoln, or obama and the man in the moon, and it does not change the fact that obama circumvents the constitution every chance he can, and the former "supreme" court abandoned its constitutional role many years ago.

 

You would simply prefer your candidate stuff the court with you biased view. If it's politics it's played on both sides and always will be

 

Nah. It demonstrated that the Left is hysterical and out of their minds.

The More The Establishment Freaks Out Over Trump, The More Attractive He Becomes

Trump is attractive precisely because the Establishment fears and loathes him because
1) they didn't pick him and
2) he might upset the neoconservative Empire that the Establishment elites view as their global entitlement.

Donald Trump's candidacy upsets this neofeudal natural order, and thus he (and everyone who supports him) is anathema to the Establishment, heretics who must be silenced, cowed, marginalized, mocked and ultimately put back in their place as subservient debt-serfs.

Dear Establishment pundits, flacks, hacks, sycophants, apparatchiks, toadies, lackeys, functionaries, leeches and apologists: the more you label Trump as "singularly inappropriate," the more attractive he becomes to the 81% who've been left behind by the financialized-globalized-neofeudal order that has so greatly enhanced your own wealth, influence and power.

The utter cluelessness of the professional apologists and punditry would be laughable if it wasn't so pathetic: the more you fume and rage that Trump is unqualified, narcissistic, singularly inappropriate, etc. etc. etc., the more appealing he becomes to everyone who isn't inside the protective walls of your neofeudal castle.

The people outside the cozy walls of the protected elites don't care if he is unqualified (by the standards of those who get to pick our presidents for us) narcissistic, singularly inappropriate, and so on--they are cheering him on because you, the multitudes of water-carriers for the Imperial elites, the teeming hordes of well-paid, I-got-mine-so-shut-the-heck-up pundits, flacks, hacks, sycophants, apparatchiks, toadies, lackeys, functionaries, leeches and apologists, are so visibly afraid that your perks, wealth, influence and power might drain away if the 80% actually get a say.

Dear pundits, flacks, hacks, sycophants, apparatchiks, toadies, lackeys, functionaries, leeches and apologists: we're sick of you, every one of you, and the neofeudal Empire you support. We want you cashiered, pushed outside the walls with the rest of us, scraping by on well-earned and richly deserved unemployment.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...aks-out-over-trump-more-attractive-he-becomes

 

Yes. I would much prefer people on the court who value the constitution and individual liberty rather than political "judges" who promote dictatorial policies.

 

If you vote at all for any candidate IMO you are a whack job or an elite scumbag. Only about 38% of the population votes at all. As long as that number drops or stays at that level I will continue to have faith that most Americans are good people. The other 28% are naive bone heads with the last 10% being the elite scum. Pretending your vote actually counts

 

That is Trumps appeal, but he is full of hot air you will find this to be true if He does get the nod from the rigged elections. IMO this anti trump movement by the establishment is a ruse. When push comes to shove establishment republicans are jumping on his wagon. Paul Ryan is running ads in Wisconsin marching to the anti Muslim anti immigration beat. Trump is just that fascist The establishment is looking for. WWIII has begun it just needs the right fascist to make it explode

 

Only Hillary wants to kill all innocent Iranians to get at 6> bad leaders.The American people don't want that on their conscience,neither does Trump.

Wake up!

 

Trump is not a National Socialist and yes the GOP fracturing is temporarily causing a lull in Trump's polls that will pass during the fall campaign. Hillary is a horrible candidate, you had a good one in Bernie, I may not agree with him, but I respected his refreshing honesty and the very real bond he had with his followers. Hillary is an evil old ugly warmongering shrew who likes no one and folks can feel that. And she is a horrible liar. You will have to live that choice, it's irreversible.

I'm satisfied with Trump, given the choices. Jeb! who the establishment wanted would have been an apologizing disaster. The Establishment is a little butthurt. They will either get over it or they will be summarily dumped by the base. See Republicans know that The People are sovereign and our Representatives are our Servants. If they don't serve us, we dump them. You folks are cowed lock-stepper establishment types. You actually think these liars in DC are a new manifestation of the monarchy with a divine right to rule.

We Republicans understand the 55 words that formed this nation:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed

Rights first, then government.
Not power, JUST power.

JUST power recognizes the personal sovereignty of each individual and obeys the law that constrains Government, the Constitution, and when the Government obeys that law that constrains it, it retains its legitimacy and compels the Consent of the Governed.

Hillary is a liar that follows no laws and in doing so continually demonstrates her contempt for all of us.

 

I disagree with the OP premise on 2 conditions:

1) Voter turnout is never 100%
2) There are a considerable number of Americans that are not eligible voters

On #1, the last presidential elections have had voter turnout ~55-62%.
On #2, eligible voters compared to US population as of 2012 was ~75%

So in reality if you're talking all Americans, it's more like 12-15%. If you're talking eligible voters, it's more like 15-18%.

 

I must respectfully disagree. While I believe the Supreme Court can do better in it's role it remains a staunch supporter of the US Constitution. I read both the majority and, when there's a split decision, minority opinions and I could and have argued for improvements.

One improvement I've suggested is to eliminate the "majority" rule and require a unanimous decision to uphold any law or action by government as being Constitutional. I've based this upon reading the dissent opinions when a law/action has been upheld and generally found that those arguments were based upon firm Constitutional grounds. At best we have decisions where there remains reason to question the Constitutionality of the law/action that's been upheld. Some believe this wouldn't work but I do because it would change how the Supreme Court deliberates it's decisions.

The other issue I'd address is "standing" because there are laws/actions of government where apparently no one has standing to bring a lawsuit before the Court. The best example is the War Powers Act because apparently no one has standing to challenge it. My proposal would be that if the Court denies standing then, upon request of the plaintiff, the Court would be required to state who does have standing and if it can't then it should hear the case.

You cite a couple of decisions you disagree with but it's not your job to make these determinations on Constitutionality and, at least in the case of the ACA, the Court's decision had nothing to do with the Constitution. It had to do with the intent of the law. The Supreme Court isn't perfect but that doesn't imply it's inherently flawed. It could be improved but it's still a stalwart defender of the US Constitution.

This is not a fact but instead is a right-wing opinion unsupported by the facts.

Perhaps the most contentious executive order by President Obama is his executive order on deferred prosecution of undocumented aliens which is a minor misdemeanor under federal law. This is different than the felony of entering the country illegally which the government has to prove in a court of law (i.e. immigration court). Under federal law the misdemeanor of being undocumented doesn't require deportation. Under the US Constitution any person arrested is entitled to a "speedy trial" and it's estimated that it would take about 27 years to ensure due process of the law for the 11.3 million estimated undocumented aliens to be processed through the immigration courts. The President has to establish priorities for who is and who is not going to be arrested because he doesn't have the funding to arrest, detain, and provide a speedy trial for 11.3 million people. I find not only that President Obama's executive order on deferred prosecution of undocumented aliens is in compliance with our immigration laws but that it's also necessary based upon the US Constitution.

I would actually argue that from a Constitutional standpoint the issue is whether our immigration laws are Constitutional because the US Constitution grants no authority to the federal government to restrict immigration for peaceful purposes to the United States. That Constitutional authority was intentionally excluded because the key architect of the Constitution, James Madison, didn't believe the government should have the authority to restrict immigration. Madison was joined by George Washington and Thomas Jefferson in opposing any restrictions upon peaceful immigration to the United States because these restrictions violate the Natural Right of Liberty of the person.

Be that as it may we can acknowledge that the Supreme Court is not perfect but that doesn't imply it's severely flawed and it is fulfilling it's designed purpose of upholding the US Constitution.

To really see and understand this we must read the actual decisions and the logic upon which they're based as opposed to simply reading the news reporting of Supreme Court decisions. Few people actually read the decisions and instead formulate their own opinions based upon political opinion writers that are highly biased to begin with and they condemn the Supreme Court simply because they disagree with the decision politically.

 

LOL I am not a Democrat. I hate Hilda beast just as much. Bernie is a fraud I don't believe any government officials on a campaign trail. He was exposed for the fraud he is at the DNC.

 

An interesting note on issue #2. Under Article I and the 17th Amendment the Constitution explicitly establishes that members of Congress are to be elected by the "People" and the "People" includes all of the permanent residents, citizens and non-citizens alike, living in the United States and counted by the US census every 10 years. The prohibitions against non-citizen permanent residents voting in US elections directly violates the provisions of Article I and the 17th Amendment both of which explicitly state the "People" and not just "US Citizens" are to elect the members of Congress.

 

Whoosh! the sound of air as it travels over your head. Nazis are not the only people that are fascists. Maybe you should educate yourself on what it means to be fascist. It is very likely you yourself are a fascist. From where I stand the majority of Republican and Democrats are nothing more then fascist. Wake up and educate yourself Fox news is not helping you to better understand politics they are disinforming you. Your are brainwashed to hear Nazis when someone says fascism. Yes those darn natzis where undoubtedly fascist but so was 70% of the world's governments. Look at coinage from the WWII Era see what countries openly minted their coins with the fascist symbol of an ax wrapped in wood. Hint the United States mercury dime... Panama balboas, Italian coins and the obvious natzis mark.

Oops I apologize I totally sent this to the wrong person. This was for Zorro and his was for you. Should have had my coffee first

 

Fascism:

Transcendence: Belief that the state can transcend social conflict and blend all social classes into a harmonious whole. Belief in the power of political ideology to transcend human nature and produce a better world.

· Cleansing (ethnic): Favoring one or more ethnic or racial groups over others, either by granting special privileges or imposing disabilities; deportation of ethnic minorities, or worse.

· Cleansing (political): Silencing the political opposition so that the transcendent aims of fascism can be realized. Restricting the freedom of speech, outlawing opposition parties, imprisoning political opponents (or worse) and indoctrinating youth in fascist principles.

· Statism: Promoting a high degree of state intervention in personal, social, or economic matters. Belief that the state can accomplish anything.

· Nationalism: Belief in the inherent unity of a population with distinct linguistic, physical, or cultural characteristics and its identification with a nation-state. Belief that the nation possesses special attributes that make it superior to other nations in some or all ways.

· Paramilitarism: "Grass roots", populist squadrism aimed at coercing opponents and obtaining popular approbation by acting as a supplementary police force.

http://www.anesi.com/Fascism-TheUltimateDefinition.htm

 

Trump is the only one who stands for Americans.
All other candidates are against them.

 

I don't understand how running a campaign designed to make yourself and your cronies even richer can be interpreted as standing "for Americans." Have you analyzed Trump's economic proposals?

 

The proposals are
to get rid of the international agreements to protect U.S. workers.
Not to spend money to arm radicals like ISIS.
those are good proposals.

 

I agree that there are many like that out there (all of which will vote Trump) but, the majority voting for Trump are just ignorant.

Same can be said of those voting for Hillary though (although it is not quite as blatantly obvious as with Trump)

One thing I found very compelling in the "anti Trump" rhetoric was the fact that he would stiff his contractors - not pay them for the last invoice knowing that to sue takes more time and resources than the invoice was worth.

This is really nasty. There is no redemption for a person like this. It is intentionally fcking people over for a few bucks in the worst kind of way. Intentionally breaking moral and legal contracts because you know you can get away with it.

 

The Democrats nominated Hitlery, that's why. Either party could have nominated anyone else and they would have won in a landslide. Clinton and Trump made their respective campaigns possible.

 

I posted some numbers the other day in relation to what Trump is promising (essentially a candy bar in every stocking).

A rough "conservative" estimate of the cost of his programs (rebuild military, better care for veterans, more police, better healthcare ..... and we can't forget the wall .. and so on) is at least 800 Billion/year.

His Tax Cuts have been estimated at 950 to 1200 Billion/year. Round down and call it 1 Trillion

We are currently running a 500 Billion dollar annual deficit.

500 + 800 + 1000 = A 2.3 Trillion dollar annual deficit.

Trump is promising the world. He is like the Messiah, the tooth fairy and Santa wrapped up into one.

 

Yeah, with that third house, might be a champagne socialist. But he has been darn good on the 2nd amendment. You can't be one of these scummy control freaks and be solid on the 2nd amendment.

 

thats the funniest post ever by you.

 

excellent point.that is why I am not trilled with trump and would be elated if gary johnson got elected but since that wont happen and i dont like either candidate,that is why I prefer Trump.Hillery has already abused it but we dont know if donald will.

- - - Updated - - -

you nailed it.

 

Donald Trump does not stand for anyone except Donald Trump.

Donald Trump's core supporters overwhelmingly stand for White (WASP) Male Supremacy in America.

 

It is kind of funny to say that, since white heterosexual males is most discriminated group in US.
Even U.S. Constitution allows race and sex discrimination against white male.