It was a simple question: do you trust a pathological liar, i.e. Trump over any of the other folks I mentioned, who don't have a history of pathological lying.
And what I mentioned are documented facts, not assumptions.
Argument: Under his leadership federal institutions are dismantled, harming Americans and the democratic future of America. The blueprint is clearly laid in the project 2025 plan.
I can't reply directly anymore to your comment, since your comments have been flagged or something.
Anyway, thanks for at least agreeing to some of my points and facts. Can't have a meaningful discussion if everyone has their own facts.
To your other points:
> he explicitly has said he is not going to implement, such as abortion measures.
He is the reason why Roe v Wade was killed. He might not further introduce abortion measure this year, but he might do before 2028, so you can't take his word for it.
> Can you present anything to back the claim that “Trump is a catastrophe for America”, or that American have been harmed in any way, much less the “democratic future” of the country?
Some things so far:
- Cutting medical science funding means harms to patients, e.g. those in the middle of medical trials.
- Cutting VA funding directly harms veterans.
- Letting a bunch of teenagers working for Doge get access to your private information, increases your risk of identity theft and worse. One of the guys working for Musk had a history of providing tech support to a cybercrime ring.
- Ignoring judges' orders and not following due process and the rule of law undermines democracy.
- Pardoning J6ers sends a clear message that political violence is OK - which harms America's democracy.
The bottom line is why wait till 2028 to decide whether his actions harmed America, when the trends are clearly visible now that his actions will be catastrophic if they are not reigned in now. And he has a track record from his first term. That should also count for something. Would you rehire someone who was terrible the first time around?
Another way to think about this: You sit in your room and you notice a small fire near your curtains. Would you want to wait to see what happens or would you not try to put it out as quickly as possible?
Anyway, removing Roe V Wade harmed women more than if it would have been kept in place. Ginsburg is also partly to blame for this, since she should have retired earlier, so the balance in SCOTUS would have been maintained. Women in Texas have died because of this.
> Judges generally are the antithesis of democracy.
Of course it's not a perfect system and there are corrupt judges. But what's an alternative to maintain the rule of law?
> Pardons
Biden pardoned his son because he knew otherwise he'd be a target. This move was understandable, but he shouldn't have done it.
Remember Trump said he will take revenge on those that did him wrong.
But it's not comparable to pardoning criminals. How are J6ers political prisoners? Why pardon people who attacked and injured police men protecting the capitol?
Anyway, I think we arrived at a point where we can only agree to disagree.
I think life will become worse if Trump is not reigned in and you seem to think it will be better than how it was under Biden.
A point of clarification: Biden pardoned his son because he was a three time convicted felon. Certainly not because of fears of Trump: he was convicted of these federal felonies while Biden was in office. He additionally pardoned the entire rest of his family (siblings and their spouses) too, from “anything and everything”, for reasons only he knows.
And unjust judges must be taken down by the people en masse. It is indeed our civic responsibility. But this particular case isn’t requiring anything extreme: the people are simply being encouraged to vote. This is actually among the most democratic of any judicial nomination process. Now, I’m guessing there’s some Iranian “Supreme Leader”-style vetting of the candidates; the ruling elite almost never give the people any actual power, but still. Upper echelons of democracy no doubt, hardly damaging democracy in any way.
Roe v Wade was — along with all the other things he has had a hand in removing — not a good thing. But don’t take my word for it, look to what actual (female) supreme court justices have said about it: It was over-broad and questionably defensible. It was not a good ruling, and it’s nice to have that space opened up for something better to come along.
Medical trials should be financed by the corporations standing to profit from them. Tax payers should not be on the hook to check their work.
Veteran healthcare is severely overfunded. Ask any veteran who will be honest with you and they’ll say the same (Most of my coworkers are veterans, the stories are wild). You have a tiny slice of people who actually need help, and a massive cohort of folks gaming the system to be declared as “disabled” as possible, despite often having next to no actual disability. Or — people intentionally harming themselves to get more disability. Again, ask a veteran.
Can’t say I’m a huge fan of Doge, but I don’t see their efforts putting me any more at risk than Experian, EquiFax, TransUnion et. all who have already leaked all my info to anyone who might care. Oftentimes getting paid to do it!
Judges generally are the antithesis of democracy. They sit above the law and make decisions about what is legal without being subject to any popular support or potential consequences. They are by and large the least democratic aspect of our system. Marbury v Madison is the biggest of all fingers in the face of democracy. To say that an instance of the people rising up to get rid of the unelected arbiter of the law is somehow damaging “democracy” is frankly ridiculous. People en masse working together to decide how they will be governed is democracy.
The presidential pardon is at the core of our constitution and is a vital part of ensuring political prisoners can be freed. This is a case of that, and I generally support it — even in egregious cases like Biden’s entire family being pardoned of “everything everywhere all at one”, or whatever it was.
I think his track record first term was pretty decent. No wars. It was the next guy that got us in two, killing literal millions. And the other option was promising us “more of the same”. No thank you.
> It was a simple question: do you trust a pathological liar, i.e. Trump over any of the other folks I mentioned, who don't have a history of pathological lying.
Are those the same officials that signed the Biden laptop letter?
