Trump's nomination is the first time US politics has left me truly afraid

[Torie]

I don't always agree with Mr. Klein (a very smart and informed liberal), e.g., his odes of joy about Obamacare, but I do as to this piece - each and every word. Pity that it was not complete. Hey Ezra, why did you skip over that Trump has little or no respect for the rule of law, and his bellicosity might get us into wars, in particular a trade war, but even more worrisome, wars where blood is spilled (except with respect to his favorite dictators of course)?

[7,052,770]

He didn't even mention the vaccine/autism thing, which is the single worst thing Trump has said this campaign. But yeah, obviously a spot-on article.

[Frozen Sky Ever Why]

I'm more worried about a US civil war, with the racial hatred he's generating/encouraging. I of course don't mean an actual civil war.

[Ljube]

I don't always agree with Mr. Klein (a very smart and informed liberal), e.g., his odes of joy about Obamacare, but I do as to this piece - each and every word. Pity that it was not complete. Hey Ezra, why did you skip over that Trump has little or no respect for the rule of law, and his bellicosity might get us into wars, in particular a trade war, but even more worrisome, wars where blood is spilled (except with respect to his favorite dictators of course)?

Oh, he skipped those two cause they don't apply to Trump. In fact, it is far more likely Hillary will start new wars because of her bellicosity. And it's not even disputed that she has little or no respect for the rule of law.

That's what I don't get. I mean, I understand you don't like Trump. But why do you accuse him of the two things which are actually Hillary trademark?

[Devout Centrist]

I don't always agree with Mr. Klein (a very smart and informed liberal), e.g., his odes of joy about Obamacare, but I do as to this piece - each and every word. Pity that it was not complete. Hey Ezra, why did you skip over that Trump has little or no respect for the rule of law, and his bellicosity might get us into wars, in particular a trade war, but even more worrisome, wars where blood is spilled (except with respect to his favorite dictators of course)?

Oh, he skipped those two cause they don't apply to Trump. In fact, it is far more likely Hillary will start new wars because of her bellicosity. And it's not even disputed that she has little or no respect for the rule of law.

That's what I don't get. I mean, I understand you don't like Trump. But why do you accuse him of the two things which are actually Hillary trademark?

"Not even disputed that she doesn't respect the rule of law."

Maybe so in your echo chamber, but certainly I take issue with that statement.

[Gass3268]

I guess this is how things felt like in 1922 Italy.

[Illiniwek]

Fascism has reached our shores. You have to be a monumental idiot not to see it.

[Bismarck]

You're all a bunch of loons. You're no better than the idiots on the far right who called Obama a Muslim socialist.

[Kingpoleon]

Fascism has reached our shores. You have to be a monumental idiot not to see it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.organicconsumers.org/old_articles/corp/kennedy20405.php

[Xing]

I'm afraid because Trump has absolutely no qualifications to be president. He has no idea what he's doing.

[Bismarck]

I'm afraid because Trump has absolutely no qualifications to be president. He has no idea what he's doing.

That's a legitimate concern. Calling Trump a fascist because you support the other candidate is not its just juvenile and distracting.

[Inmate Trump]

Fascism has reached our shores. You have to be a monumental idiot not to see it.

[Inmate Trump]

I'm afraid because Trump has absolutely no qualifications to be president. He has no idea what he's doing.

That's a legitimate concern. Calling Trump a fascist because you support the other candidate is not its just juvenile and distracting.

No one is calling Trump a fascist simply due to their support for his opponent.

They're calling Trump a fascist because he is literally campaigning as one.

[Attorney General, LGC Speaker, and Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

I'm afraid because Trump has absolutely no qualifications to be president. He has no idea what he's doing.

That's a legitimate concern. Calling Trump a fascist because you support the other candidate is not its just juvenile and distracting.

No one is calling Trump a fascist simply due to their support for his opponent.

They're calling Trump a fascist because he is literally campaigning as one.

Yep. And he also has no control over his temper, his desire to press the nuclear button and start world war 3, and little to no good ideas for america.

[Ban my account ffs!]

I'm afraid because Trump has absolutely no qualifications to be president. He has no idea what he's doing.

That's a legitimate concern. Calling Trump a fascist because you support the other candidate is not its just juvenile and distracting.

No one is calling Trump a fascist simply due to their support for his opponent.

They're calling Trump a fascist because he is literally campaigning as one.

Indeed.  He is such a narcissist and megalomaniac... with DOnald Trump we either have Mussolini or Nero...

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I'm afraid because Trump has absolutely no qualifications to be president. He has no idea what he's doing.

That's a legitimate concern. Calling Trump a fascist because you support the other candidate is not its just juvenile and distracting.

I call TrumpMiller] a fascist because his ideology (what little of it there is) consists of palingenetic, ultra-nationalist populism, with sidelines in racist scapegoating and advocating violence. That was all on display tonight.

 He is also both unqualified and unfit to be President.

[HisGrace]

That's a legitimate concern. Calling Trump a fascist because you support the other candidate is not its just juvenile and distracting.

I guess he's technically not a fascist since he doesn't talk about their pseudo-nihilist philosophical dogma, but fascist is generally just shorthand for an extreme authoritarian these days, which he certainly is.

[SillyAmerican]

I don't always agree with Mr. Klein (a very smart and informed liberal), e.g., his odes of joy about Obamacare, but I do as to this piece - each and every word. Pity that it was not complete. Hey Ezra, why did you skip over that Trump has little or no respect for the rule of law, and his bellicosity might get us into wars, in particular a trade war, but even more worrisome, wars where blood is spilled (except with respect to his favorite dictators of course)?

Oh, he skipped those two cause they don't apply to Trump. In fact, it is far more likely Hillary will start new wars because of her bellicosity. And it's not even disputed that she has little or no respect for the rule of law.

That's what I don't get. I mean, I understand you don't like Trump. But why do you accuse him of the two things which are actually Hillary trademark?

"Not even disputed that she doesn't respect the rule of law."

Maybe so in your echo chamber, but certainly I take issue with that statement.

So just out of curiosity, which of Director Comey's statements do you take exception to?

I'm afraid because Trump has absolutely no qualifications to be president. He has no idea what he's doing.

As opposed to what we've had for the last 20 years? Frankly, if the people with all the wonderful "qualifications" were doing a halfway decent job, maybe Trump wouldn't have been able to capture the nomination. If voters are ticked off enough to go with a non-politician, there's probably a reason, don't you think? If you need to be afraid of something, why not be afraid that we continue down the wrong path? That's the bigger concern, at least from my perspective...

[Xing]

I'm afraid because Trump has absolutely no qualifications to be president. He has no idea what he's doing.

As opposed to what we've had for the last 20 years? Frankly, if the people with all the wonderful "qualifications" were doing a halfway decent job, maybe Trump wouldn't have been able to capture the nomination. If voters are ticked off enough to go with a non-politician, there's probably a reason, don't you think? If you need to be afraid of something, why not be afraid that we continue down the wrong path? That's the bigger concern, at least from my perspective...

I would argue that Obama is certainly doing a "halfway decent" job. Even if you don't like the current status quo (it could certainly be better,) the argument that "something different/new" is always better is awful, destructive, and needs to be beaten to a bloody pulp. Things could be FAR worse than they are right now, and I strongly believe that electing someone who has no experience or qualifications is just the way to make things worse than they currently are. I would feel the same way even if I believed that America was in as horrible of a position as people at the RNC seem to think.

If a hospital had doctors that weren't doing as good a job as they could, would the solution be to start hiring people with no medical experience or training instead? (real outsiders)

[HisGrace]

As opposed to what we've had for the last 20 years? Frankly, if the people with all the wonderful "qualifications" were doing a halfway decent job, maybe Trump wouldn't have been able to capture the nomination. If voters are ticked off enough to go with a non-politician, there's probably a reason, don't you think? If you need to be afraid of something, why not be afraid that we continue down the wrong path? That's the bigger concern, at least from my perspective...

^^^that's the crux of Trump's campaign and it's complete, unbridled emotionalism. I'm "ticked off" so lets elect an authoritarian reality show host president, because for some reason that would make me feel better.

Doing things for no other reason than to be "different" never ends well. Things can always get worse. Trump's new policy proposals being things like avoiding a default on the debt by "printing more money", wasting billions of dollars on a wall that won't even do what it's supposed to, driving people into poverty with his punitive tariffs, and having protesters "taken out on stretchers" make me think things will get worse in a big way should he be elected.

[HisGrace]

Things could be FAR worse than they are right now, and I strongly believe that electing someone who has no experience or qualifications is just the way to make things worse than they currently are. I would feel the same way even if I believed that America was in as horrible of a position as people at the RNC seem to think.

If a hospital had doctors that weren't doing as good a job as they could, would the solution be to start hiring people with no medical experience or training instead? (real outsiders)

^100% agree. I've made the doctor analogy myself. People only want "elitist" doctors, nobody wants an "anti-establishment" surgeon to cut them open. Politicians are in such a public role that them being overtly intellectual intimidates people sometimes (whereas it doesn't with doctors) and so they go for a candidate that spouts platitudes and doesn't appeal to the intellect at all because it makes them feel good about themselves.

[Sbane]

I'm afraid because Trump has absolutely no qualifications to be president. He has no idea what he's doing.

That's a legitimate concern. Calling Trump a fascist because you support the other candidate is not its just juvenile and distracting.

I'm calling Trump a fascist because he is one, not because I support the other candidate. I don't know if I "support" Hillary but I will certainly be voting for her as she won't utterly destroy this country or this world (nuclear war is possible with Trump). I voted for Kasich in the primaries BTW.

[Oak Hills]

I would argue that Obama is certainly doing a "halfway decent" job. Even if you don't like the current status quo (it could certainly be better,) the argument that "something different/new" is always better is awful, destructive, and needs to be beaten to a bloody pulp. Things could be FAR worse than they are right now, and I strongly believe that electing someone who has no experience or qualifications is just the way to make things worse than they currently are. I would feel the same way even if I believed that America was in as horrible of a position as people at the RNC seem to think.

Well said. This sums up my thoughts about this election so well.

[Badger]

I don't always agree with Mr. Klein (a very smart and informed liberal), e.g., his odes of joy about Obamacare, but I do as to this piece - each and every word. Pity that it was not complete. Hey Ezra, why did you skip over that Trump has little or no respect for the rule of law, and his bellicosity might get us into wars, in particular a trade war, but even more worrisome, wars where blood is spilled (except with respect to his favorite dictators of course)?

Oh, he skipped those two cause they don't apply to Trump. In fact, it is far more likely Hillary will start new wars because of her bellicosity. And it's not even disputed that she has little or no respect for the rule of law.

That's what I don't get. I mean, I understand you don't like Trump. But why do you accuse him of the two things which are actually Hillary trademark?

No, fool.

http://www.vox.com/2016/2/18/11057968/donald-trump-iraq-war-2002

[SillyAmerican]

Things could be FAR worse than they are right now, and I strongly believe that electing someone who has no experience or qualifications is just the way to make things worse than they currently are. I would feel the same way even if I believed that America was in as horrible of a position as people at the RNC seem to think.

If a hospital had doctors that weren't doing as good a job as they could, would the solution be to start hiring people with no medical experience or training instead? (real outsiders)

^100% agree. I've made the doctor analogy myself. People only want "elitist" doctors, nobody wants an "anti-establishment" surgeon to cut them open. Politicians are in such a public role that them being overtly intellectual intimidates people sometimes (whereas it doesn't with doctors) and so they go for a candidate that spouts platitudes and doesn't appeal to the intellect at all because it makes them feel good about themselves.

The doctor analogy is completely inappropriate. The main job of the chief executive of the country is to act as an executive. The President doesn't create laws, and the President doesn't interpret laws. The President will sign or veto legislation sent to him, will put together a cabinet that will handle the nitty gritty of governance, will appoint federal judges, and will provide direction via the bully pulpit. That's it. So the main question that people will be answering in the next several weeks is this: which candidate do you think will pursue the policies that will result in the United States being made safer, stronger, and more secure (economically, socially, and militarily), Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump? Hillary Clinton has shown what she's about. So it will be up to the electorate to decide whether we want to go with an establishment candidate who wants to continue with the status quo, someone who feels she's above the petty concerns of national security and being honest with the American people, or if we would prefer to try taking a new approach and give a non-politician "outsider" a crack at solving some of the nation's problems. It ain't brain surgery or rocket science, but it is management and judgement.