Posted                       

• Expectations about how a presidential candidate should act
• Expectation of trustworthiness
• Expectation that a presidential candidate should know something about public affairs
• Expectation about a candidate supporting their own party's ideology
• National security concerns
• Belief in tolerance and nondiscrimination
• Tradition that your country is more important than your party

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
(btw, what happened to that idea of banning him from entering the UK? Guys, you should've followed through on that, now look what's gonna happen).

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Expectations about how a presidential candidate should act
1. Expectation of trustworthiness
2. Expectation that a presidential candidate should know something about public affairs
3. Expectation about a candidate supporting their own party's ideology
4. National security concerns
5. Belief in tolerance and nondiscrimination
6. Tradition that your country is more important than your party

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by fausto:
There are cases against him pending in both California and New York (and maybe elsewhere as well), so I think it's going to be trials, plural. But from what I'm hearing on TV they are not likely to begin until after the election. What we are likely to see is a lot of pot-stirring by the press every time a pre-trial motion is heard, though, so that may be even more effective in keeping the smarminess in front of the public.

---

Not sure it will matter. His main demographic is also pretty so will believe his spew that it is the establishment out to get him.

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posted                   

quote:

---

National security concerns

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
This would be a terrible time to disband NATO, with Russia sabre-rattling all over the place! Perhaps in the mid-90s it would have been a good idea. A lot of opportunities were missed in the 90s it seems to me.

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stetson:
Another thing...

quote:

---

National security concerns

---

Reading the article, it seems that "national security concerns" is being used to include stuff like "Trump thinks NATO is obsolete, will possibly pull US troops out of South Korea, and will allow more countries to have nuclear weapons."

To take just one example, I used to belong to a Canadian political party, the socialist NDP, that advocated we withdraw from NATO. And I'm guessing that was a popular view held by many in the British Labour Party during the Michael Foot era as well.

And, while I think the NDP anti-NATO plank might not have been the best policy during the Cold War, I have given some serious thought to the idea that disbanding the alliance would make sense now(I'm always suspicious when organizations stick around past their initial mandate). Does that make me a wild-eyed madman who wants to push the world to the brink of disaster? I don't think so.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Editor’s note: Donald Trump regularly incites political violence and is a serial liar, rampant xenophobe, racist, misogynist and birther who has repeatedly pledged to ban all Muslims — 1.6 billion members of an entire religion — from entering the U.S.

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
I can hardly wait for primary season to be over (please!) and for the real debates between Trump and Hillary to begin. He is so easily bated and has such a short fuse (as witnessed by his response to Hillary's policy speech yesterday) that Hillary should have no trouble exposing him as the empty windbag that he is.

As for Paul Ryan finally endorsing him, he should be thoroughly ashamed of himself. Once Trump is driven out of town tarred and feathered by Hillary, the egg on the faces of Ryan and his cronies will never be washed off.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sober Preacher's Kid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stetson:
Another thing...

quote:

---

National security concerns

---

Reading the article, it seems that "national security concerns" is being used to include stuff like "Trump thinks NATO is obsolete, will possibly pull US troops out of South Korea, and will allow more countries to have nuclear weapons."

To take just one example, I used to belong to a Canadian political party, the socialist NDP, that advocated we withdraw from NATO. And I'm guessing that was a popular view held by many in the British Labour Party during the Michael Foot era as well.

And, while I think the NDP anti-NATO plank might not have been the best policy during the Cold War, I have given some serious thought to the idea that disbanding the alliance would make sense now(I'm always suspicious when organizations stick around past their initial mandate). Does that make me a wild-eyed madman who wants to push the world to the brink of disaster? I don't think so.

---

Nobody listens to the Socialist Caucus.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by romanlion:

She is almost un-watchable, with that abrasive shrieking voice and perma-terse expression, even when she tries to smile.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
Presumably, the Trump staff will also be preparing plenty of stuff about Hillary, including the email stuff, Bill's philandering, and so on. 'Crooked Hillary' may become one of their key slogans.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by romanlion:
Hillary is an awful candidate. Even long time leftist pundits are beginning to admit it.

She is almost un-watchable, with that abrasive shrieking voice and perma-terse expression, even when she tries to smile.

She connects with no one other than those who would vote for her even if she were indicted.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

It's been their slogan for 20 years. And that's their problem-- they've worn it out. Whatever small grain of truth may lie behind the benghazi-gate, email-gate, whitewater-gate, Monicagate it's all just too too tired at this point. The public has long grown tired of it. It's such a worn out record, people have figured out she's ambitious in both the best and worst sorts of ways, they're either OK with that or they're not, but there's nothing new there for the GOP to exploit, and even if they did find some new dirt at this point it's just so much more of the same. Big. Huge. Yawn.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by HCH:
I frankly do not understand why people do not like Hilary Clinton. I do not find her voice irritating; I find it clear and precise, and her statements are informed and reasoned.

I think part of it is that some people are not fond of Bill Clinton. Of course, Hilary is not Bill.

I think another part of it is gender-based bias.

Can someone please explain this (rather than just rant)?

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stetson:
Accroding to the article linked above, in South Korea there is "broad popular support for weaponization [ie. the ROK developing its own nuclear weapons]".

This is apparently supposed to send us into a panic over a President Trump accentuating these tendencies in the ROK. However, it also kinda clashes with the narrative about how "the whole world is watching in horror at the prospects of a Trump presidency".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stetson:
And has anyone else noticed this Democratic rhetoric about how Trump will undo "decades of US foreign-policy consensus"?

I never knew American liberals regarded previous US administrations as such paragons of far-sighted geopolitical acumen and virtue.

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by romanlion:
Hillary is an awful candidate. Even long time leftist pundits are beginning to admit it.

She is almost un-watchable, with that abrasive shrieking voice and perma-terse expression, even when she tries to smile.

She connects with no one other than those who would vote for her even if she were indicted.

And Trump hasn't even really started on her yet.

Debate performance can't save her from her flaws as a candidate. She will lose the cross-over vote, and won't draw a single new voter to the polls like Trump will. I believe she is in serious trouble.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Although maybe you're claiming that's how far American foreign policy discussion has deteriorated? Just being able to articulate a view consistent with the past foreign policy consensus is taken as a sign of "far-sighted geopolitical acumen and virtue".

---

quote:

---

That's the problem with nuclear proliferation. Everyone is sure that their own acquisition of nuclear weapons is a virtuous special case, unlike their untrustworthy neighbors they need nukes to protect themselves against. A more interesting case would be asking South Koreans about whether they think Japan should go nuclear.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Let's say the constitution had been amended last year, allowing presidents to seek a third term, and George W. Bush runs again on the GOP ticket. I don't think we'd be hearing a lot from the Democrats about how positive the past few decades of consensus has been, because a lot of their supporters would say "Wait a minute, that includes W., and he was a grade-A asshat!"

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stetson:
Croesos wrote:

quote:

---

Although maybe you're claiming that's how far American foreign policy discussion has deteriorated? Just being able to articulate a view consistent with the past foreign policy consensus is taken as a sign of "far-sighted geopolitical acumen and virtue".

---

Put it this way. Whether or not the anti-Trump liberals are trying to portray previous statecraft as overflowing with acumen and virtue, it seems to me they are trying to paper over previous fault-lines, in order to make it look more like a uniformly positive history, in danger of disruption by the evil Trump.

Let's say the constitution had been amended last year, allowing presidents to seek a third term, and George W. Bush runs again on the GOP ticket. I don't think we'd be hearing a lot from the Democrats about how positive the past few decades of consensus has been, because a lot of their supporters would say "Wait a minute, that includes W., and he was a grade-A asshat!"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stetson:

quote:

---

That's the problem with nuclear proliferation. Everyone is sure that their own acquisition of nuclear weapons is a virtuous special case, unlike their untrustworthy neighbors they need nukes to protect themselves against. A more interesting case would be asking South Koreans about whether they think Japan should go nuclear.

---

Yes, there is indeed a hypocrisy in wanting your own country to go nuclear, while thinking your regional rivals should be kept on a tight-leash by the Peace Constitution or whatever. I'm just saying that, to the extent that there are significant numbers of people in these countries who want to go nuclear (even if they would deny the same right to others), it kinda complicates the idea that the whole world is aghast at the idea of nuclear proliferation.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by romanlion:
She is almost un-watchable, with that abrasive shrieking voice and perma-terse expression, even when she tries to smile.

---

Not everyone thinks that. I think she is eminently watchable. Besides, isn't it Donald Trump who judges women by their appearance and voice? Don't tell me the Donald is actually a Shipmate going under the name of romanlion . . . ?

--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.

Posted                   

quote:

---

Consensus in foreign policy doesn't mean agreeing on every single approach to every single problem, it's a term of art which indicates a general agreement on some very broad-brush, high-altitude questions. Like "the U.S. should oppose more countries joining the nuclear club" or "the U.S. should maintain a series of alliances with other industrialized democracies". Having a "foreign policy consensus" doesn't mean everyone agrees on everything.

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:

quote:

---

Originally posted by romanlion:
She is almost un-watchable, with that abrasive shrieking voice and perma-terse expression, even when she tries to smile.

---

Not everyone thinks that. I think she is eminently watchable. Besides, isn't it Donald Trump who judges women by their appearance and voice?

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by romanlion:
Hillary is an awful candidate. Even long time leftist pundits are beginning to admit it.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by rolyn:
or the man's man whose appeal charms both male and female. .

---

What self-respected woman devoid of a pre-nup is charmed by Trump???

--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stetson:
And has anyone else noticed this Democratic rhetoric about how Trump will undo "decades of US foreign-policy consensus?

I never knew American liberals regarded previous US administrations as such paragons of far-sighted geopolitical acumen and virtue.

HEY HEY LBJ
HOW MANY KIDS DID YOU KILL TODAY?
BUT JUST TO BE CLEAR, YOU'RE NOWHERE NEAR AS BAD AS SOME OTHER PEOPLE WHO COULD BE PRESIDENT!!

BUSH LIED, PEOPLE DIED!!
THOUGH WE DO GIVE HIM CREDIT FOR OPERATING WITHIN THE ACCEPTED PARAMETERS OF FOREIGN POLICY WISDOM!!

---

Love the re-worked chants

--------------------
Human

Posted                

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
There are a few women charmed by Trump, but the sweeping majority of America women are violently repelled by him. Because we are sensible creatures.

---

Posted                    

quote:

---

Originally posted by romanlion:

She is almost un-watchable, with that abrasive shrieking voice and perma-terse expression, even when she tries to smile.

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:
I always vote for people not based on their positions, or their behaving in public like adults, but on how pleasant I find their voices.

---