Can hate win an election?

Let them spew. And hold it against them later, which is always the leftist way.

 

If you want to make that leap in logic, that's on you. Are you making that statement ?

As for the description of this administration, it's honest.

 

Keep the blinders on and stay on your imaginary high horse. If Biden wins, we'll see how the RW (including yourself) will be able to contain their hate. If history is a guide, we'll get 10 (to paraphrase) "I hate Biden" threads a day, just like we got 10 "I hate Obama" threads a day when he was in office. But, be sure that you'll be called out when you will say hateful things about Biden/Harris.

 

if Biden wins you will find conservatives are much more mature than liberals. We won't throw temper tantrums and lash out in hate and rage and threaten to leave the country but instead will do as we did with Obama and oppose him on policy.

 

Didn't we have endless discussions here at PF about the vast number of people who voted for Trump because they hated Hillary SO much?

Hatred and fear are two very powerful emotions. Both, if stoked and manipulated properly, have the ability to make people do anything.

 

Ah, you mean hate. Glad you cleared that up.

 

So people have no control over their own actions? Exactly what has Trump done, was he the one kneeling on someone's neck? Did Trump cause a rise in the minority unemployment? Please be specific as to what actual direct actions Trump is personally responsible for in regards to the 'protests', looting and rioting.

 

While it's true many of us on the right despise Hillary ,Trump resonated with his voters and they voted for him as their primary motivation.
Make America great again, put America first, secure the border and appoint constitunalist to the bench. Trump policy won the election.
Biden's platform is "I'm not Trump, vote for me".

 

That's actually YOUR opinion not fact.

 

Trump takes both credit and blame.

 

Not a hater at all. No, couldn't be, you just hat polite "policy disagreements" with her. Let's see how your "policy disagreements" with Biden will flow out as hate next year, should he get elected. The ball may be in your court. Let's see how you will react when everyone calls you a "hater" when you dare to criticize Biden.

 

Actually they should be based on more than one factor, but the underlying basic ingredients in a leader of a democraticly elected nation, need to be character, basic competence, integrity, and especially a loyalty to democratic principles and institutions because without those intrinsic to his nature, the bedrock on which it all stands, may crumble and the policies differences won't matter.

The Jews in Germany and all over Europe, the socialists, the slavs, the victims of his conquests in neighboring countries absolutely hated Hitler, for damn good reason, and that hatred fueled opposition with backbone and absolute tenacity and bitter strength. That give - no - inch hatred in the resistance may have slowed down his juggernaut just enough to buy time and eventually defeat him.

If you are arguing for dispassion, you are only millimeters from arguing for indifference.

Hating dictators or dictator wanna-bes, or white nationalists, or Nazis can be a very very very good thing if it fuels a 'give no inch' mentality and fortitude. We will crush Donald Trump and his followers in the GOP. We will punish them politically for continuing to support a traitor and a cancer on this country and its people. This cannot end when he leaves office. We must find the cockroaches behind him and delete them from relevance in the political power center for at least a generation.

 

Millions of Americans disagree with you. Hence Trumps's win.

 

stqate

We have a great many people who believe they are brilliant, but are grossly naive.

Politics in general has always been a practice of deception. Long ago, JFK's father Joe Kennedy told him that "In politics, what you are doesn't matter- what people think you are does".
In other words, generate an image, and you can still be a wart hog. Fortunately, JFK wasn't- but most politicians are.

When you listen to a politician- and both Obama and Hillary are good examples- you are listening to a speech prepared by professionals, based on studies of what you want to hear, and how to make you think you've heard it. It's being read from a teleprompter- and it doesn't come from the politician's heart or mind at all. But it makes you happy to hear what you want to hear, and often wins your vote. That's how so much trash got elected to congress in the first place. Obama always preferred prepared speeches and teleprompters. When he couldn't do that, he pretty well said nothing of importance.

This is where Trump breaks the mold. He hates teleprompters; he prefers to speak directly to his audience. No grooming, no careful word-by-word choreography designed to please your ears- just the real person.
Some people are grateful for the frankness- others are angry because he's not giving them the facade they are used to. What you don't know is that the real person behind the politicians delivering those carefully crafted speeches that make you feel good are nothing at all like you perceive them to be.

Hillary, for example was the first lady, and as such, had secret service protection. Among those special agents, being assigned to her was seen as punishment. One morning an agent she passed in a hallway said "Good morning, ma'am". Her reply- "Fu*k Off." She told agents that if they saw her coming, they should disappear, duck into a doorway or something so she wouldn't have to look at them. She also objected to the marines and special details around the white house that wore uniforms, wanted them to wear plain clothes so she wouldn't have to look at the uniforms. This is documented by several secret service people, and in books as well as by other white house staff. The real Hillary was worse than Trump by far- when you weren't looking, and that was most of the time. That was the real person.

That abusive and arrogant conduct, while Hillary was worse than most, is not uncommon among politicians. They have to cultivate an image, because the real person is unfit for public consumption. Politics is a dirty game, and usually if you weren't an insider, you couldn't get elected to anything of importance. Trump broke that precedent. The outrage over an outsider winning the presidency has shown us more and more of this ugly truth about the politicians we have put in office thinking they are honorable. It's been ugly- because their facades are breaking down, and the reality of their character is showing. Yet, if you have been fully conditioned, you fail to notice the people you thought were nice are really unscrupulous pond scum. I wonder how long it will take for the people obsessed with the promoted hate campaign to realize that it's directed at them- at keeping them believing the illusions, and destroying their own futures.

 

Trump is incapable of loving anything or anyone other than himself. Just ask Melania.

 

Nope, Hillary got 3,000,000 more votes. The people wanted her

 

How do we know that Hillary saying "Fu*k Off." to a secret service agent is not just another RW smear against her? Just like the reports that the Clintons trashed the WH when they handed it over to GWB?

In any case, I doubt you have a problem with Trump knowingly and needlessly endangering the lives of secret service agents by taking a covid-infected joy ride?

Back on topic: Since the Trump voters are all such polite people, discussing mere political disagreements, we can look forward to a great four years, should Biden win. There will be no more name calling, no more character assassinations, no "resistance", just polite pointing out of policy disagreements. We'll also all sing kumbayah, because Biden/Harris will be treated with such utter respect.

 

There are numerous Republicans who hate democrats and democrats who hate republicans. So hate gets spread around. Anger can certainly decide elections. Anger against Obama and the Democratic congress in 2010 for going against the people's will and wishes in passing Obamacare certainly came back to haunt them that November. To a tune of 63 house seats and 6 senate seats. Now anger isn't the same as hate as those same folks turned around and reelected Obama in 2012. Their anger was focused on something done, but not necessarily at individuals.

You certainly have a certain segment of Democrats who hate Trump. Just as you have a certain segment of Republicans who hate Pelosi. If Gallup is to be believed, Democrats make up but 31% of the electorate. So their hate alone isn't enough to defeat Trump. It really doesn't matter as history shows on average that 90% of Republicans and Democrats will vote for their party's candidate regardless of who it is.

You do have a dislike factor, those who dislike what a president has done, who dislike how he behaved, who's over all perception of that individual is negative. But that isn't the same thing as hate. Although it accomplishes the same thing, voting against that president or candidate in the case of Biden or Hillary Clinton. I personally disliked both Trump and Clinton in 2016 and didn't want neither one to become president. So I voted for Johnson, against both. I didn't hate neither one, I just didn't want neither to become our next president. As for Trump this year, I supported somethings he has done, opposed others and there were plenty that were irrelevant to me. Now I certainly dislike Trump's childish behavior and antics. But I don't hate him. If I did, I'd oppose everything he did or tried to do. I'll vote against him again, but no because of hate. I just don't want him to have a second term. But if he wins, no big deal.

It'll mean putting up with someone who's personality is more suited for a WWE wrestler than the occupant of the oval office, but so be it. If he does something I'm in favor of, I'll support that. If it's something I don't like, I'll oppose him. It's issue by issue, stance by stance, policy by policy.

No, hate won't defeat Trump. But dislike of his personality, how he handled his job as president, his behavior as president, even his stances on certain issues very well could. Probably will.

 

We know from the book written by the secret service agent, and the attitude was corroborated by many others.
As far as continued friction... let's take note that the people responsible for setting that as the standard jumped on it the day Trump announced he would run. The press. liberal and dem leaders, were hot o mock and insult. When you make that the game, you shouldn't be complaining when you find yourself subject to the rules you created. It's one thing to have political objections- it's another for someone like congresswoman Maxine Waters to stand at a public microphone and tell people to hunt out Trump supporters wherever the are, tell them they aren't wanted here- like her ilk owned America, and nobody was allowed to disagree.
That's pure hate speech, which the left rails against- when anyone else does it. When they do it, somehow they fail to notice they are doing it..... and so do it every day. I don't think I want anyone who thinks that way in any position of power greater than handling a johnny-mop.

 

Your statement is vague at best. What specific acts has Trump committed? What involvement did Trump have in the protests, riots and looting?

 

So, you don't want to commit to respectful debate only, if Biden wins. Instead, you come back with (to paraphrase) "Dems are haters". Got it.

P.S.: Of course, you believe a book that slams Hillary. yet, the many books that are written about Trump are generally dismissed as "just a disgruntled worker who got fired", or "out to make money". So, I do the same thing, I claim that the person who wrote that book was just out to make money and knew how to get it from Hilary haters. See, you reap what you sow.

 

If you give trump credit for the good you have to give him blame for the bad.

 

On the contrary- I'm all for respectful debate. However that can only take place between respectful people. There is no such thing possible unless both sides support the concept.
If the left ever gets to the point where it can discuss an issue without trashing Trump as a person and insulting his supporters to set the stage, anything is possible.
So far- such a thing is an extreme rarity and very short-lived.

And I'm a lot more likely to believe someone dedicated enough to rise to the level of a secret service agent who literally is pledged to take a bullet to save the person they protect than I am some talking head on CNN. Especially when it's backed up by a wide variety of people. Now I don't think Hillary is representative of all democrats. People who supported her bought the public facade- and thus defend what they think they believed; as in nobody wants to have been that wrong. However, the longer it's denied, the less credible those people become. Way too much evidence in her case; any reasonable open minded person can reach no conclusion other than Hillary has no honorable intents at all.

 

So if he had nothing to do with kneeling on a person's neck, or the protests, riots and looting that have followed, yet did have something to do with the benefits of a good economy, you are trying to tie the two as related??

No, that doesn't work. Apples and oranges.

 

We have traveled this road before, you & I. Clearly, you are an intelligent, strong-willed, successful individual in the Capitalist environment in which you dwelt. You succeeded where many fail. You deserve that success & I congratulate you for it. But economic success often brings an attached failure to fathom the very real reasons others around you fail. Trump suffers from this malady. Conservatives often cite the reasons for this widespread economic failure to stupidity &/or laziness. But it is far more complex than that. Many variables & other factors come into play in each & every individual's attempt for economic success. Not everyone is motivated by economic desires. Many value other successes more, like music, art, acting, science, teaching, medicine, engineering, or a myriad of other interests. Many of these pursuits require the same energy & focus for success as that you gave to economic success. That leaves little for them to dedicate to economics if they hope to succeed in the areas of expertise of their personal choice. The general conservative conclusion that those who aren't rich are stupid or lazy or both, is far too narrow & extreme to be accurate.