Politics Can Sanders beat Trump?

You "try to be" what?

 

Vague. Heh, but only with you.

Seriously, though, I don't have to defend myself to you, nor anyone else, as to why I'll vote for Trump. It's already been well documented in these parts. That said, at this point, I'd suggest that you just go the way of Cup and put me on ignore status. You'd then have more time on your hands.

 

I'm sure you'd like that, but no thanks, if nothing else, I still think you're good for batting practice every now and then.

And I never asked you who you'd be voting for. I ask you if you were "selling all your assets and moving to the Azores, why would you care about Trump/GOP, one way or another?"

 

You're focusing on the literal words "quid pro quo" rather than what was actually problematic in Trump's case. No one is saying that every "quid pro quo" is impeachable. "This for that" is pretty typical legislative maneuvering in Congress, for instance (including the President's influencing of legislation). Selective enforcement of regulations (which is basically what your FDR article is talking about) is a tool that just about every President has utilized including Trump. While it's shady ethically, no one's been impeached for that, including Trump.

The issue with Trump is that he was using foreign policy (a tool that's supposed to be wielded for the good of nation) to try to get something specifically for himself. And not just anything for himself--an attack on a political rival. Placing his own personal good ahead of the country's in dealing with a foreign nation was the problem. The "quid pro quo" was simply the meat of that deal--help me find dirt on Biden and I'll release to you the foreign aid that Congress already approved.

So if you can provide an example that FDR was using US foreign policy to enrich himself or attack political rivals, then you'd have a clean comparison with Trump.

 

That's certainly the assumption, yes. Or, perhaps, he really didn't give a rip about the risk of Biden beating him in the upcoming election, and simply wanted to deal with the high conflict of interest, potential corruption, and the like, pertaining to Joe and his son/family. Trump has no problem going after people every which way. At any rate, nobody's really proven anything here.

 

I mean, it's great (well, not great, but you know what I mean) if you're determined to always vote Republican purely due to being against abortion, but you're certainly smart enough to know that Trump doesn't "give a rip" about corruption, considering the high level of corruption in his own administration. You're smart enough to realize that it's not mere coincidence that where he claims to have taken a stand against corruption happened to connect to someone who seemed (at the time) like the front-runner to run against him for re-election.

You don't need me to tell you these things. If you want to vote for Trump due to to abortion, you should, but don't pretend to yourself that he's a great guy who did nothing wrong. Own that you're voting for a corrupt dude because he'll do the one thing you want.

 

I appreciate your candor, Sir.

By the way, I've mentioned many times in here that John Kasich is actually my guy. Would've voted for him, and would vote for him if it were between him and Trump.

That said, we have to have a President, so I'll vote accordingly.

 

Trump comes with costs, too. He's an idiot and could tank the economy at any moment. He's fine for coal billionaires or Mark Zuckerberg, but he makes a lot of old-school free trade billionaires very nervous. Granted he's better than Bernie for the obscenely wealthy, but I don't think he's clearly better than a "moderate" "Democrat"

 

Since Minstrel brought up abortion: I don't really understand what religious types have against abortion. Isn't it hurrying the little ones into Jesus's embrace all the faster? Shouldn't we pity the ones NOT aborted, as they have spend some time in this corrupt vale of tears, and risk being drawn from the true path and ending up damned for all eternity?

 

Theres only like 400 other threads where ABM talks about his views on abortion and all that, lets make this one into another.

 

Only because you blame and fear me.

 

As you've read them and I don't want to, what's his answer to the whole "straight to heaven is obviously better" thing?

 

If Biden somehow loses SC, then it effectively becomes a 2-person democratic race - Bernie vs. Bloomberg. It'll then be a very interesting equation: A far-left-leaning Socialist (some even call Communist) vs. someone with absolutely no relevant platform who is reduced to simple Trump-bashing, while dumping hundreds of millions into advertising.