To me, the most disturbing thing about Trump is that it seems that he for some reason is under the impression an elected official just has free reign to do whatever they want. He accuses Hillary of not changing things that she had very little control over as a senator or SOS. The way he talks about what he's going to do when he's president make no sense in terms of feasibility. It's always "I will do (blank)" where blank is some outrageously huge unilateral change that is definitely government overreach and for sure not consistent with small government conservative values.
Another of the countless examples proving that he does not have a clue about government nor how to govern. That he has made it this far is an embarrassment to our nation.
Something you may not be clear on, ATW, is that the President sets foreign policy, and the Secretary of State implements it in our system of government. Trump kept accusing Hillary of being responsible for Obama's foreign policy. Again, she isn't responsible. As you might remember, I've been critical of how the President handled Syria early on. Back when he declared chemical weapons a "Red Line" that would bring dire consequences if Assad's regime "crossed it," I said that he had to be prepared to use military force if Assad crossed it, or he would lose credibility, as would our country. They did a year later and he did nothing militarily, leading, ultimately, to Putin assuming that he had free reign to do what he wanted there, and that's what he is doing. In my opinion. Sure, the bulk of Assad's chemical weapons were removed, but the door was opened for Putin to go into Syria in a major way. What is pertinent to Ms. Clinton is that when the "red line" was clearly crossed, she was no longer Secretary of State. John Kerry was, and is. He has admitted to being for military action to stop the obvious war crimes being committed by both Assad and Putin today and has been overruled by the President. Had the United States bombed the hell out of Assad's air force, for example, when the "red line" was crossed, and created a non-fly zone, Putin would have thought twice about becoming deeply involved there, and just might have thought twice about some of the other things he has done, seemingly without worrying about what Obama's response might be. In my humble opinion, Hillary would have acted militarily if she had been President and had declared a "red line" in Syria regarding the use of chemical weapons, something Syria is still apparently using from time to time. Why do you think Putin is so keen on getting Trump, his big fan, elected President? Putin is so intent on preventing Clinton from getting elected that he is interfering with our national elections. That's another risk he thinks he can get away with.
I am starting to believe that Trump and Clinton are working together based on how this election has played out. The sad part is no matter how deplorable Trump tries to be, Clinton is still struggling to get the majority to vote for her.
One poll right after the video release show Clinton ahead by 14 pts, 52 to 38 in a head to head match-up and by 11 pts when including Johnson and Stein. Poll was right after the video, so might be the low point for Trump. However, it does show that the immediate reaction was huge (doubling of the lead for Clinton) and that an overall majority would pick Clinton in a horse race.
You guys are looking at it in hindsight. It took this long for her to get to this point. The fact that the public was willing to let this charade play on for so long shows that she is only being picked bc she is the lesser of two evils. What you three fail to understand is you are choosing between green **** and brown ****. In the end it's still ****. What is even more sad is that you don't even see that it is ****.You then rub that **** on your face and parade around the Clutchfan's like that **** is gold.
But you just made the point for us that see it as a loophole--unchecked sales to people without background checks. Background checks on a person to person sale would flag individuals acting as dealers and would ensure that people who have no business buying a gun due to felony convictions or even incorporating those on an active watch list, don't have unfettered access to firearms. The 100 gun figure is an example, the ATF has to know of an individual's selling pattern to make that determination, Background checks would solve two issues with one stroke in both cases. My brothers both live in CO and while they are a bit butt-hurt about person to person checks on firearm sales through an FFL, the system works.
As an outsider looking in, I can't believe how low the politics of the most powerful country in the world has become. I initially thought Trump was a smart guy using the angry Republican base to his advantage. The prudent thing for him to have done was to turn to the centre once he was the nominee, rather he stuck for the most part to his extreme narrative. Now, based on two debates it is easy to conclude that Trump is not only not smart, but he is dangerously unstable. Trump is not a politician he's just a rich man with little to no knowledge about anything. He's shown the level of smarts of a normal person on the street, that to me is scary, you should expect your president to be more. Hilary for her part couldn't even take down this man with so many flaws. The debate in the eyes of a regular person seemed quite even. Her problem is that she played it safe and stuck to her talking points like a typical politician. I guess her supporters expect that from her, to stick to the game plan. But, again the standard for the president should be more, I thought Obama was smart, I can't say that for either of these two candidates.
why would she want to destroy Trump? So Republicans can replace him with someone that is actually competent? Trump was is her best friend.
Trump's biggest enemy is not Hillary, It's the GOP. If they abandon Trump because Hillary humiliates him the GOP and Trump both lose but the GOP will not let Trump define their party.
