Does It Disturb You That the US President Is a Compulsive, Blatant, Unrepentant Liar?

[sun rise]

No, I didn't choose him. The people did. I didn't vote for him.

Thanks for clarifying and correcting my mistaken impression.

 

[DavidFirth]

Thanks for clarifying and correcting my mistaken impression.

I was going to vote for Johnson but I knew he had zero chance so I didn't vote for any of them. I'm glad I didn't, too.

 

[Flame]

Right, so Trumps petty lies are nothing, It's those decievers the Lord despises. Those ones who say they ore on your side but are not trustworthy. I don't believe Trump has turned against us to serve only the rich like I do Hillary and Obama.

Except that is what he did. Look at who he filled his cabinet with.

 

[Kemosloby]

Except that is what he did. Look at who he filled his cabinet with.

Well the media doesn't complains about them being rich people, I only see them complain that they are mostly white males.

 

[dawny0826]

I liked Johnson, too. But no third party candidate has ever won even one state.

That doesn't dissuade me from supporting my party of affiliation.

 

[esmith]

Well to tell you the truth I would have preferred Ross Perot, but since my only real choices were Hillary and Trump there was no choice other than the present President. So, as long as he doesn't get us involved in a nation building conflict and improves the economy I could care less what he says.
Actions speak louder than words.

That's rather dangerous.

Why?

 

[Twilight Hue]

Unless they're liberal, of course. Then you wouldn't hesitate to denounce their dishonest, immoral ways. If you think lying is acceptable then you have no integrity, regardless of how widespread it is. This is just another sad example of someone placing blind partisan loyalty before principles. If Trump was discovered torturing kittens you would still bend over backwards trying to defend, excuse, or justify such behavior.

I never said I like it or approve of lying. Just how collective society does nothing about it

Trying to put words in my mouth? ;0)

 

[Twilight Hue]

Well to tell you the truth I would have preferred Ross Perot, but since my only real choices were Hillary and Trump there was no choice other than the present President. So, as long as he doesn't get us involved in a nation building conflict and improves the economy I could care less what he says.
Actions speak louder than words.

I really liked Perot. Like Rand Paul. Sadly their chances were never very good. They did start to bring awareness at least as to the destructive direction we are heading for as a free country.

 

[metis]

I am disgusted by the hypocrisy of his supporters who have so harshly held others accountable for the same unacceptable behavior, while refraining from acknowledging his wrong doing.

Yep, and if Obama had said he can grab women by the p***y, can't you picture Republican heads exploding?

And the idea mentioned that he was less of a war threat than Hillary shows an utter ignorance or disingenuousness on what Trump said during the campaign, and now we see this being played out with aggressiveness dealing with NK situation, the number of troops and bombings being increased in Afghanistan increases, the number of generals being appointed to his staff, his desire to ramp up military spending, etc. Oh ya, I can just see the love emanating from his pores.

Those who voted for Trump ignored that and so many other utterly despotic things that Trump has said and done even just in the last year, reaching for an all-time low in American political history.

What convinced anyone that he's qualified to be President is beyond me.

And the completely lame argument that he's supposedly a better choice than Hillary is just a smokescreen to justify why they really wanted to vote for the Groper-In-Chief, which undoubtedly varied from one to another. Hillary simply did not and does not have anywhere near the corrupt track record that Trump has (in the last year alone he's been fined three times), nor is there any accusations that she has bragged about going around and groping men by the b***s, or visiting men's changing rooms to catch a freebee peek, or ...

So, the statements that she is somehow worse simply is a disingenuous fabrication that twists honesty into a pretzel.

BTW, I'll post it again so some don't conveniently forget where I've stood vis-a-vis Hillary, but I've never been a fan of hers, voted for Bernie in the primary, and had decided to vote 3rd party until I came to believe that the election was going to be too close for comfort.

 

[metis]

So, as long as he doesn't get us involved in a nation building conflict and improves the economy I could care less what he says.

That's not what you said the other day as you stated that you believe in everything that he's been proposing-- remember?

 

[Revoltingest]

And the completely lame argument that he's supposedly a better choice than Hillary is just a smokescreen to justify why they really wanted to vote for the Groper-In-Chief.....

You cannot accept that many of us really did think that she was the worse choice?
I thought anthropologists were supposed to have a rudimentary understanding of culture.
And you were once an educator. We're doomed.

 

[metis]

There's a difference between accepting the choice, which I do, versus accepting disingenuous excuses from some who made that choice.

As an anthropologist, since it obviously has a people-orientation, we generally tend to probably care more about the well-being of people than many a business owner, the latter of which probably being more concerned about the "art of the deal" versus how that deal would maybe negatively affect people.

For that latter group, profits for all too many of them is undoubtedly their main focus, which is probably why the the FBI estimated that there is probably about four times more money ripped off in white-collar crime each year than all the street crime combined. Of course, I'm sure that there are at least some who put people ahead of profits, but in today's day and age, I have to wonder if they're become an endangered species as some of them seem to be as dishonest as the day is long.

 

[Revoltingest]

There's a difference between accepting the choice, which I do, versus accepting disingenuous excuses from some who made that choice.

As an anthropologist, since it obviously has a people-orientation, we generally tend to probably care more about the well-being of people than many a business owner, the latter of which probably being more concerned about the "art of the deal" versus how that deal would maybe negatively affect people.

For that latter group, profits for all too many of them is undoubtedly their main focus, which is probably why the the FBI estimated that there is probably about four times more money ripped off in white-collar crime each year than all the street crime combined. Of course, I'm sure that there are at least some who put people ahead of profits, but in today's day and age, I have to wonder if they're become an endangered species as some of them seem to be as dishonest as the day is long.

I'd expect an anthropologist to seek something more than a superficial rationalization
intended to demonize those who disagree. Come on....admit it.....you're not an
anthropologist....you're really a lawyer, ie, trained to avoid all balance in argumentation.

Seriously now......
I can see multiple reasons that people voted for Hillary, some even rational.
If you try really hard, you might understand the diversity of Trump voters.
It's the tolerant, thoughtful, & progressive approach.

 

[LuisDantas]

It's more disturbing that he was the best candidate that the 2 biggest political parties could present.

I would agree, if I could agree.

Even taking for granted the very questionable judgement that somehow Hillary would be worse, there was Bernie. I guess there was even Jeb Bush, who seemed to be at least passably sane if nothing else.

Better candidates did exist. Somehow they failed to have enough support, even from the grassroots. That scares me.

 

[Revoltingest]

I would agree, if I could agree.

Even taking for granted the very questionable judgement that somehow Hillary would be worse, there was Bernie. I guess there was even Jeb Bush, who seemed to be at least passably sane if nothing else.

Better candidates did exist. Somehow they failed to have enough support, even from the grassroots. That scares me.

Note that my expressed preferences were...
1) Johnson - a great candidate
2) Bernie - a good candidate
3) Trump - a loose cannon on deck
4) Hillary - a war mongering inept cog in a corrupt system

 

[LuisDantas]

Presenting Hillary, regardless of her personal merits or even lack of same, is not a justification either.

What exactly stopped Hillary's critics from voicing out their disapproval of Trump as well?

 

[Revoltingest]

Presenting Hillary, regardless of her personal merits or even lack of same, is not a justification either.

When presented with only 2 viable candidates, one must compare them.
This means looking at both Hillary & Donald, & guestimating the effects
which each would have in office. Trump does not exist in a vacuum.
Thus, she could not have been ignored.

 

[Mister Silver]

It disturbs me that otherwise rational people are supporting a man based merely on the concept that "at least he has the balls to say what's on his mind".

 

[Revoltingest]

It disturbs me that otherwise rational people are supporting a man based merely on the concept that "at least he has the balls to say what's on his mind".

I wonder how many support him because of that, vs how many simply find that trait a breath of fresh air.
Any idea?

 

[LuisDantas]

When presented with only 2 viable candidates, one must compare them.
This means looking at both Hillary & Donald, & guestimating the effects
which each would have in office. Trump does not exist in a vacuum.
Thus, she could not have been ignored.

Fair enough, I guess. I can't claim to understand your choice, and I suppose I should assume you campaigned for a better GOP candidate to some extent.