Seriously how can anyone support Donald Trump?

[Dalak]

"Both parties are totally just as bad, guys!"

Oh Hai Both Sides!

[Jack Dracula]

Everyday is a good day to dump truisms for actual thinking. Like the fantasy that either party is fighting for the working man. In urban areas replete with Democratic machines the battles for raising the minimum wage has been uphill and even defeated. Initiative 77 was a Washington, D.C. voter-approved ballot initiative to phase out the minimum wage exemption for tipped employees. On June 19, 2018, the measure was passed by a more than 10% margin. YET overturned by a council and Mayor in a safely Democratic city.

You're not telling the whole story here.
Looking at the wiki page for this (which you seem to have "borrowed" the first sentence of for your post btw.) The argument for and against the bill was between the Dem council members, some of whom previously took funding from local restaurant organizations. So, just a bit of some local political scandal with the emphasis being on local. nothing to worry much about...that is until the GOP got involved.

On July 11, 2018, congressmen Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and Gary Palmer (R-Ala.), members of the Republican Freedom Caucus, introduced an amendment to the U.S. government spending bill for 2019 to overturn Initiative 77. Congress has the ability to pass bills that oppose local citizen initiatives or block their funding, but only in Washington, DC.[17] Several D.C. Council members spoke out against the Congress amendment, including several of those supporting the repeal effort. In a written statement, Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District's nonvoting representative in Congress said “Representatives Meadows and Palmer are up to their old tricks again by abusing congressional authority over the District to try to undemocratically impose their views on our residents. Initiative 77 on tipped wages is a local issue that should be decided solely by D.C.”

The whole affair was on track to be resolved in council with some sort of compromise. Instead, the GOP congressmen decided to throw their weight around, despite the fact nobody asked or wanted them to, because they can't stand to have those poors making a decent living wage in their city.

So, your "both sides" argument is false. You plagiarise without citation and withhold facts to suit your argument. That's a pretty bad look for a "professional" Journalist.
Apparently they'll give any hack a Peabody these days.

[GOLGO 13]

Trump has the entire GOP either frightened into dominance or doing double monkey back flips to keep themselves on his good side. His power over an entire party of bed wetting "macho" men would be hilarious if he were not so dangerous a degenerate.

Only the truth and black women frighten him.

[mogwen]

Trump has the entire GOP either frightened into dominance or doing double monkey back flips to keep themselves on his good side. His power over an entire party of bed wetting "macho" men would be hilarious if he were not so dangerous a degenerate.

Only the truth and black women frighten him.

How much of them does he blackmail into supporting him? That looks like him!

[Michael Watkins]

They are only pretending to not be onboard with his agenda. Because they are politicians and will need to pivot once he is out of office. But his bigoted self-serving platform is their platform. That is why Sessions, Christie, Grampa Munster, Ryan, McConnell, and the others have taken their turns decrying and supporting him.

[TriggerWarning]

Yeah, I heard about Bill not getting it. It's not surprising. People are notoriously bad at accepting responsibility for things. Fortunately, Hillary is not Bill but it's fun to watch you do exactly what I said you'd do.

Do you think Bill Clinton would have just sat back as first dude and done nothing in the White House or do you think given his experience as a former president he would have been the most powerful first spouse in history with major influences on policy?

Having a rapist, serial cheater, sexual harasser, liar, and guy with his history in a position of power like that alongside his wife who stuck with him and defended him through all that would be horrific. Hilary attacked his rape victims, Juanita Broaddrick for one, in the media yet is somehow a champion of women's rights? I voted for Bill Clinton both times by the way but knowing what I know now I realize I voted for an evil man supported by his sociopathic wife. Its funny that the left is unhinged over Trumps "grab em by the pussy" comment while wishing that Hilary and rapist Bill were back in power. Trump's comment comes off like the 13 year old virgin kid who brags about all the sluts and hoes he's had sex with when he actually hasn't and while its a sign of his sexist demeanor its not as bad as rape like Bill committed.

Its why I voted 3rd party in 2016. Trump is utterly horrible so I wasn't going to vote for him but his horribleness in no way made my voting for another Clinton an option. My vote for Gary Johnson ultimately didn't matter, I'd hoped he'd get enough of the vote to get the libertarian party a seat at the table in 2020, but I'd do it again with choice like Trump or Clinton.

[Jack Dracula]

Having a rapist, serial cheater, sexual harasser, liar, and guy with his history in a position of power like that alongside his wife who stuck with him and defended him through all that would be horrific.
Its why I voted 3rd party in 2016. Trump is utterly horrible so I wasn't going to vote for him but his horribleness in no way made my voting for another Clinton an option. My vote for Gary Johnson ultimately didn't matter, I'd hoped he'd get enough of the vote to get the libertarian party a seat at the table in 2020, but I'd do it again with choice like Trump or Clinton.

Yes, we can only imagine how horrific that must be. Thank goodness we have good citizens voting for third party candidates with no hope of winning to really send a message to Washington!

[Xheight]

You're not telling the whole story here.

Just the relevant parts you mean as again you confuse conflation with facts.

Looking at the wiki page for this (which you seem to have "borrowed" the first sentence of for your post btw.) The argument for and against the bill was between the Dem council members, some of whom previously took funding from local restaurant organizations. So, just a bit of some local political scandal with the emphasis being on local. nothing to worry much about...that is until the GOP got involved.

I have no problem with fair use in a conversation because I am not pretending to write the first draft of history.

The whole affair was on track to be resolved in council with some sort of compromise. Instead, the GOP congressmen decided to throw their weight around, despite the fact nobody asked or wanted them to, because they can't stand to have those poors making a decent living wage in their city.

So, your "both sides" argument is false. You plagiarise without citation and withhold facts to suit your argument. That's a pretty bad look for a "professional" Journalist.
Apparently they'll give any hack a Peabody these days.

Well that Vox story won't be getting one that is for sure because it is a pile of **** too...gwad and people wonder where the idea of fake news comes from. The Council and The Mayor killed a ballot initiative Republicans meddling or not.

[Xheight]

Yes, we can only imagine how horrific that must be. Thank goodness we have good citizens voting for third party candidates with no hope of winning to really send a message to Washington!

Better to bully people with the whole lesser of two evils thing...yawn.

I should thank though for pointing out that horrid Vox story and make sure that woman does not continue to be a reporter although I'm sure she'll be fine in Washington DC as some flak writer.

[TriggerWarning]

Yes, we can only imagine how horrific that must be. Thank goodness we have good citizens voting for third party candidates with no hope of winning to really send a message to Washington!

Views like yours are why we keep getting stuck with awful candidates from both sides. We need third party candidates and the only way we get them is to vote for them. If you didn't live in a swing state last election then you were wasting your vote by picking either Trump or Clinton when you could have made it matter by voting 3rd party. None of us who voted Johnson thought he'd win, our goal was for him to get 5% of the popular vote because that would then guarantee federal election money to the party next election and make it more likely they'd get a seat at the debate tables. I chose to make my vote matter. My state went so heavily to Trump that you could add every third party vote here to Clinton and she still loses badly. Thus my vote didn't matter unless I was voting with the 5% goal in mind.

[Mister Mets]

To take the question seriously, there are three main parts to address. Why did Trump win the Republican primary? Why did he win the presidency? Why is there more of a push to kick him out?

This is my impression as a Republican, but not a Trump supporter.

The first part of the question is why enough primary voters went for Trump. Part of the reality is that primary voters are a small section of the electorate, so if Trump was able to get new people to the polls he would have a strong chance. And he did. In terms of raw votes, he had less support in the primary than Ross Perot had as a third party candidate, but it made much more of a difference. Trump was helped by a media that gave him more coverage than the other primary candidates combined. Individual Republican candidates probably engaged in poor strategy figuring that someone else will take him out, or that he'll collapse on his own. A crowded field also limited the chance for anyone else to stand out, and for the race to be a binary choice. But it also seems clear that the voters were in the mood for an outsider, as evident by strong showings for Herman Cain in 2012 polls, and Ron Paul in earlier primaries. Polls also showed that voters wanted a general sense of fairness, believing that the candidate who got the most votes should get the nomination, which made it tougher for anyone to get support maneuvering against Trump on technicalities (which would also have pissed off his base who already though the system was rigged.) Trump benefited from previous accusations against Republicans being called bigoted, which meant the claim wasn't taken seriously when applied to him. If McCain is called racist, or Romney is called sexist for having "a binder full of women" (which in context was the exact type of policy initiative liberals and anyone who wants to reduce the gender gap would prefer powerful men to engage in) it becomes tougher to recognize that in Trump. Democratic campaign surrogates had cried wolf too many times in the past.

The next part is why the party stuck behind Trump as the nominee. There the answer is simple. He had a better chance of offering the policy initiatives they wanted than Hillary Clinton, who made no serious effort to assuage conservatives. I've heard the argument that she needed to be more explicit in her policy proposals than Obama who was able to get better turnout among progressives based on his background (they knew they could trust a younger African American community organizer/ law professor.) The message that Donald Trump posed an existential threat to the republic was undercut by the lack of any concessions from Democrats to get nervous Republicans on their side, to convince them that it wouldn't represent a significant change in policy should the party get control of three branches of government, at a time when the culture was changing. Maybe it was a gamble that would've worked in most cases, and that was worth trying to avoid tying the hands of a Clinton administration. Except in this case, enough Republicans thought the devil they didn't know was better than the devil they did. Trump also had incredible support among white voters without college educations, a major constituency in some swing states, and one factor was that they'd get the impression that he legitimately likes them.

Now that he's President, elected Republicans generally don't want the fight that would come with forcing him out, even if I'm guessing they would prefer Pence in the White House overwhelmingly. Trump's shameless, so he wouldn't go down easily. He does have a base of support, who are worried the system's rigged, and would see an effort to remove him as part of that. Some of Trump's excesses have been reined in (he didn't fire Mueller or order an end to the investigation), the strongest allegations haven't been demonstrated (No Collusion), and the party still agrees with him on a lot of stuff (recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, judges) while the economy is doing okay.

[FarmBoy]

Trump is getting re-elected. Unemployment and crime rates are at 50-year lows. Inflation does not exist. Wages are rising. Companies are making record profits. Minorities are employed. ISIS is defeated. We are talking to North Korea.

I agree. And, I hope so. I really don't think our nation can afford ($$$$$) the ideas of the other party's hopefuls. I also believe that when making a decision in 2020, we have to keep our future in mind. I am, of course, speaking of today's youth. I realize that the FREE, FREE, FRRE promises sound wonderful, and this can appeal to younger people. But, I am concerned that when we accept something that sounds to good to be true, our nation will discover it is just that.

I want to note, that I believe that there are good leadership in both major parties, However, to maintain a strong productive nation, we have to not only notice the present, but review the past & plan the future. With, all the factors considered, I feel Donald Trump is our better chance.

[jetengine]

I agree. And, I hope so. I really don't think our nation can afford ($$$$$) the ideas of the other party's hopefuls. I also believe that when making a decision in 2020, we have to keep our future in mind. I am, of course, speaking of today's youth. I realize that the FREE, FREE, FRRE promises sound wonderful, and this can appeal to younger people. But, I am concerned that when we accept something that sounds to good to be true, our nation will discover it is just that.

I want to note, that I believe that there are good leadership in both major parties, However, to maintain a strong productive nation, we have to not only notice the present, but review the past & plan the future. With, all the factors considered, I feel Donald Trump is our better chance.

A man that cant even figure out what his stance on things are without Fox News telling him is 'the future'.

Fucking hell.

[TriggerWarning]

With, all the factors considered, I feel Donald Trump is our better chance.

Bill Weld, former governor of Massechusets, has announced he's going to run against Trump in the primaries. Wouldn't surprise me if Jeff Flake, former senator from Arizona, does as well.

I'm hopeful they can unseat Trump since they are decent sane republicans. Plus the added bonus that it would force the democrats to run on something besides "Trump sucks" and fairy tale ideas that sound great but are financially impossible (free college, complete student loan forgiveness, etc).

[FarmBoy]

Unnecessary. Fox News may lean in his direction, but review the past & one will find the MSNBC & CNN would favor other Presidents. I really don't think President's Trump is ever appreciated. He is a business man, who surrounds him with experience. As large & complicated as our nation has gotten, our leadership must hear other ideas.