Here's the article which relates George Will's unflattering observations of Trump and his presidency thus far.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900002705/trump-rhetoric-exhausting-the-country-george-will-says.html

Here are the comments from the article in Deseret News. I presume most of the people who read this paper are Mormons. Interestingly, although a significant number of comments are supportive of Trump, many, many condemn him.

https://www.deseretnews.com/user/comments/900002705/trump-rhetoric-exhausting-the-country-george-will-says.html

The liberal media and politicians on both sides have been wrong about Trump since the day he announced he would run for president. Trump has done exactly what I thought he would do, and I was correct that he would win, all the way along. I was right every time about him and what he would do. So here is another prediction. A lot of the democrats will not show up at the polls in the next election because of how badly their party has been run, and the recent emberrasments they've endured because of scandals by their leaders (screwing over Bernie Sanders, the whole fake Trump/Russia scandal, Polocy and Maxine Waters and Hillary's fall from political effectiveness being at the top of the list). Even Jeff Flake knows it's time to get out if you're pro-establishment. Republicans will show up in record numbers and toss out the swamp-type incumbents from both parties. That will give the Republicans a huge majority in both the House and Senate. At that point, there will be no where for our law makers to hide. It'll be 'pass the laws we want and need or next time you'll be tossed out too'. That's when most of Trump's agenda will be put in to law. For the most part, that is what the majority of the people want. It won't matter what the Trump-haters think or say. The momentum will be un-stoppable.

But I don't think most people (including many on the left) will mind most of what happens as a result). We'll get good healthcare, tax reductions, high employment, low regulations on businesses, etc. Even those who hate Trump and who lean to the left will share in the new prosperity that results.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 10/25/2017 07:16AM by azsteve.

Steve, I hope you keep doing your own thing. You don't back down.

I do wonder if anything will happen as clearly and decisively as you so confidently predict. Trump barely won, and if Hillary had won it would have narrow as well. It appears to be various social networks in rural parts of Wisconsin and Pennsylvania that really got people to turn out and vote differently. Was it churches? Extended families? Facebook groups? Even unions where opinions shifted?

I tried my best last year, tried to talk up an old lady I know, but she's just too scattered to care. My buddy lives with her, and he's a convicted felon. It's hard to just connect with people and get them to vote when they usually don't bother. If anything were to happen like you imagine, the networking from 2016 would have to continue and increase manyfold. Better get started now, or Bannon could be proven a blowhard after all.

Trump himself said that Hillary should have won, as he followed by pointing out her errors of how she ran her campaign, thus losing key parts of the country that she could have won, if not for the poor decision making of her campaign. The presidential election results are usually narrow (remember the dangling chads?). But Trump's strategy was obvious to everyone who was paying attention. Many people hated him for it. Right or wrong, it was effective and obvious that it would work.

The higher level of confidence comes from having a better understanding of the players. The traditional Republicans and the classic Republican party are not the good guys, anymore than the Democrats are. Trump hijacked the Republican party from types like John McCain and Paul Ryan, and many others like them (the swamp). That's why even Bush Sr said he would rather see Hillary win the election than Trump. Most of the Trump haters are just piling-on, without understanding what is going on. I think Trump is who he says he is and that when he eventually leaves office, both parties will be changed to what most Americans already believe they are now, real political competitors, as opposed to what they actually are now (both parties conspiring to work against the people, to benefit their own and other private interests).

I think that Utah Mormons are like everyone else in the country. Just enough of them are reasonable people who care about the well-being of the country. They're not necessarioy loyal to Trump. They're just tired of professional politicians in office who don't really represent them or what they care about.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/26/2017 05:24AM by azsteve.

People don't vote because someone talks them in to doing it. They vote because they are personally unhappy or are deeply offended by the likely results of what will happen if they do not vote. I had to laugh when Bill Clinton said that one thing that Trump is good at is getting angry white men out to vote. Although I don't see things quite that way, in some ways Bill Clinton was correct. Bill Clinton forgot to mention that Trump got a lot of angry Women, angry blacks, angry hispanics, and other dis-satisfied people out to vote too. The angry white men stereotype alone is prejudicial and not fully true.

Do you see how your statements here contradict everything else you have written in this thread?

You note, correctly, that people do not vote FOR a candidate but rather AGAINST another candidate. In other words, Trump didn't need policy expertise, empathy or anything else. What HE needed was to not be HER.

You are correct that Hillary was a terrible candidate. But you cannot simultaneously argue that voting is essentially a "not her" sort of exercise, which is true, and that Trump won because of what he knows and does.

Let's mark this and see how good of a "prophet" you turn out to be.

As for "good health care," however...nothing any conservative (especially Trump, who's put out nothing but vague "it'll be great" promises with zero substance) has proposed comes anywhere near "good." So unless somebody in that group comes out of left field (pun intended) with a radically new idea, that ain't gonna happen.

I love it when people talk about "low regulations on business." People don't seem to appreciate that businesses are in competition with each other. Deregulation of one business harms another business. A simple example, reducing air and water quality regulations on coal for power generation harms people, but it also harms natural gas businesses. Reducing environmental regulations on fracking harms people, but it also harms coal. Deregulating CO2 harms hydropower, which in turn, harms Boeing. A border adjustment tax was proposed to help offset tax cuts, but Tom Cotton the Senator from Walmart, Arkansas, nixed it. It's not as simple as Trumpies think.

Steve, your observations were a breath of fresh air. I was beginning to think if I had doubts about the Mormon Church I had to become a Trump hating liberal. Now I can see there are at least a few people that are like me - love Trump but can still see the major flaws in TSCC.

He's such a disgusting excuse of a human being and it's embarassing and scary. I just really detest the person of Trump. Zero empathy or compassion or social graces or basic humanity. Zero.

But I am not sure that in the long run, the chaos he has brought won't end up being a good thing. Look at what's happening with health care even as we speak. A totally bi-partison group of senators actually trying to come to the middle and do SOMETHING. No, I don't like some of the proposals and conservatives hate some of them. If they took out everything someone hates, they'd have nothing. But they are actually willing to say, what's better than scrapping health care or having more of an unsustainable deficit? I know, how about we at least do SOMETHING. It will NOT be because of any kind of diplomacy, intellect, business savvy, or anything on Trump's part, but I think it will be because of him. In spite of him. Chaos may get something accomplished. That's if he doesn't kill us. But that's a minor point.

Me too. He is reprehensible

You can always tell when a political opinion is based on emotion and not objective reasoning. According to NormaRae, Trump has zero empathy, zero compassion, zero social graces, zero humanity. Really ??? That's an outrageous and obviously prejudicial, and very emotional position to take.

How can Trump have zero humanity, as in none? Isn't that stretching things? at least a little? How can anyone win a national election and not just be missing some humanity? No, NormaRae says he has zero (as in none - zip, as in completely missing) humanity. People with opinions like this are truely just sore losers. They see politics like their favorite sports team. They want to be validated and to have their team win. But they haven't escaped the old mormon habit of tossing their critical thinking skills out the window. These kinds of opinions are scarry. People should have to pass an IQ test before you can vote (ok, not really. Yes, my critical thinking skills work just fine).

Well, I am pretty well informed on US history and current events and I hate Trump for good reasons.

Sore loser me sticks by the number Zero. You ask how he could have won with zero humanity? It’s called America 2016.

You are correct that it is an exaggeration to say that Trump has zero empathy. He has precisely the degree of empathy that one would expect in any other sociopath or malignant narcissist.

No one is hiding the ball here. Trump is exactly who he presents as.

Trump is a patriot, and the majority of American's who voted from him, like myself, can readily see that and still see it.

A majority of Americans did NOT vote for Donald Trump.

You know that, right?

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh, wait, you're serious?

Let me laugh even harder...

Thanks Lurker 1, I tend to be conservative. But I am not loyal to the republican party. If the democrats put up a truely good idea, I'll set aside some of my ideals and be there with them. I hate the mormon church and would like to see it come to an end in my lifetime. You don't need to become a liberal or a democrat, or an athiest, or gay (not disparaging gays here) when you leave the church. All you need to do is wake up some previously unused critical thinking skills and don't pick sides based on who is most likely to win.

As the Fusion GPS / Clinton / dossier scandal is beginning to all come out, it is another proof the absolute worst scum of society that the DNC runs. Anyone who voted for that treasonous, criminal, bag of fecal matter isn't much better than her.

The left was completely repudiated in this last election and that is going to continue until such time as they have a coherent message and address the glaring ethical issues in their camp. They aren't going to, of course, and they'll continue to be brushed aside by a nation that has finally had enough of their ilk.

Steve,

I don't think you are facing reality. I think as the Republican party continues on its journey further from the center, Congress is going to swing big to either Democrats or independents. I would not be surprised to see a third party gain traction. Anger is a big driver in elections and a lot of people are angry.

If his performance over the past nine months or so is any indicator Trump will likely accomplish little in the coming months. Who would have expected that conservatives would seemingly follow a policy of the end justifies the means in their complete surrender to the vulgarities and adolescence of the president, overlooking gigantic character flaws that demean the highest office.

As news of the false Russian/Trump collusion scandals, paid for by the DNC are exposed, the tide will change. The next election will be very telling about direction of the country.

Sorry, wrong place :-/



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/26/2017 09:00AM by Soft Machine.

Both sides pay for dossiers on their opponents and there is plenty of evicence that the Russians interferred in the election.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/26/2017 11:57PM by bona dea.

I don't know why you think the Trump/Russia collusion scandal is false. The scandal is very real. Paul Manafort, Trump's former campaign chairman is history. Mike Flynn, Trump's former National Security Adviser, is history. Both have had to register, post hoc, as foreign agents. Manafort's office was searched and computers and materials seized under a very real search warrant. Russian interference in the election is real. Twitter and FB have had to alter their policies to prevent Russian bots and accounts from taking over their platforms again. State election commissions have been victims of Russian hacking and attempted hacking. Even if Clinton paid for the creation of the dossier, it doesn't change the actual issues at all. Robert Mueller, former FBI Director's, investigation continues. Even if no collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russia ultimately is found, there is no doubt that the investigation itself isn't based on a fake premise.

Exactly. 17 government agencies say it is real

The part about Trump colluding with the Russians is false. Yes there is a scandal. But the scandal involves only the shameful activities of Hillary Clinton and the DNC. I am sure the Republicans pay for investigations, looking for dirt on political opponents too. However Hillary and the DNC got so much press attention over what has proven so far to be nothing against Trump, that it's been pure obstruction through dishonest means. That's the biggest scandal.

Let's say that you own a restaurant and that your competitor accross the street hires people to start rumors that there are rats in your kitchen. Then they hire someone to go in to your restaurant, looking for rats. They ask the government to shut you down until you can prove that there are no rats in your kitchen. Although you don't get shut down, the guy on tv looks pretty convincing and credible when he pleads for the health department to shut you down before peolple (especially the children) start dieing. They bring the media in to your dining area and ask your customers what they think about these claims that there are rats in your kitchen. Then, the health inspectors come in and inspect your restaurant. They don't find any rats and the kitchen is very clean. But when they leave, they tell the media that they're pretty sure you're hiding something. At what point do we say "Enough is enough. I have integrity and I don't operate this way. I won't do that to somebody, even if my team doesn't win"?



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2017 12:56AM by azsteve.

Maybe you should get your news anywhere but from Fox.17 government agencies, including the FBI and CIA, say the Russians were involved in our election.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2017 12:38AM by bona dea.

The bigger issue is Steve's certainty. The Trump-Russia collusion story, he states with full confidence, is false.

How could he possibly know that? Flynn was National Security Advisor, for heaven's sake. We know he colluded even while in office. Manafort was campaign manager while he was negotiating with an oligarch over millions of dollars. During that period Manafort's company asked Wikipedia to obtain anti-Hillary material from Russia. That request, moreover, came right after Donald Junior held a meeting with Russian representatives over specifically this topic. There is clear evidence that those people were colluding or, in some cases at least trying to collude, with Russia. In short, the Trump campaign and some Trump administration officials were doing precisely what Trump's enemies claim.

Is that the same thing as Trump colluding with Russia. No. It is possible that he was not involved. But one cannot today, without even knowing what Mueller has uncovered, state unequivocally that the president was not colluding. To say that the Russia story is false or that the president is innocent at this point is faith-based analysis.

What the hell are you talking about, azsteve? Why don't you try arguing the actual facts of the case rather than the straw-man, extended metaphor you made up in your head?

The reason there's a special counsel is that Trump fired Comey then told TV news--in the face of plausible deniability cooked up by his AG--and told the Russians in the Oval Office, that he'd fired Comey to take pressure off the Russia thing. He brought it on himself by creating an obstruction of justice inquiry. He had two spies in his close circle. His son-in-law failed to put Russia meetings in his security clearance applications (for ordinary--not connected--people, that's a felony). His son got an email offering Russian-government-obtained dirt on Clinton, his response? "I love it!" That the information may not have been delivered is only partially exculpatory. There's still the intent to collude. The Trump campaign's data company tried to get illegally hacked emails from Wikileaks--which were sourced to Russia. It may all turn out that the Trump campaign wanted to collude, and tried to collude, but they were just too incompetent.

That's hardly Fake News!

This circular, cultish thinking about why Trump is bad really boggles my mind. I am surprised that no one has testified to the truthfulness of their conspiracy theories about Trump. These people in the media and career politicians scraping for power are the ones making up all of the stories. Take an innocent mistake or action, attribute a devious motivation to it, and magically, you have new 'facts'.

Of course I could be wrong. But common sense says that the spin-masters are working over time and that there can't be much if any truth to any of what they say. What ever happened to that story about Trump in a Russian hotel with two prostitutes, peeing on eachother because he likes that kind of thing? It was debunked. How many times do we let these con-men make fools of us, before we know how to predict their actions? To make it worse, these 'not so helpful facts' are dropped quickly when the desired narrative is not fed by that information after the truth surfaces. Like a mormon testimony, only information that supports the desired outcome is considered. But what about that information that made a fool of you for supporting it? You don't learn from it. Someone asked how I could be so confident in predicting things here. When you drop the bullshit and apply some common sense and critical thinking skills, a few things are obvious. Although anything is possible, it is extremely unlikely that Trump has taken part in any collusion with the Russians. There is a one hundred percent chance that the liberal left would accuse trump of collusion with the Russians, no matter what he actually did or didn't actually do.

Trump isn't a career politician. He usually doesn't do what career politicians do. He doesn't need the job he has to compete with other politicians because he doesn't want to be a politician. He cares about his country enough to clean up the mess in Washington and then hand the rains over to someone else. That is the only reason he is there..., well ok, and to feed his oversized ego too. But so what? Only an overly ambitious narcissist with a big ego could take-on a war against the leaders of both parties and win the highest office in the world in the process. If he does what his voters want him to do, that's good enough. Anyone who wants to change my opinion better have some damn-convincing evidence, not foolish guesses from biased adversaries who have nothing of substance to offer.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 10/27/2017 11:59PM by azsteve.

Can you provide evidence that the Russian prostitute story has been debunked? I believe the only "evidence" behind that assertion is Trump's own denials, which are worth the electrons they are printed on.

This is absolutely unbelievable. No proof was presented. It might just as well be anyone here on this board that was in the Russian hotel playing potty games with prostitutes and who is guilty by default. Lot's wife asks for proof that it wasn't true. And Trump's own denials are being used against him. If someone accused you of that, would you deny it? Any baseless story is by default, debunked when the accuser has no evidence. The one big link between this political issue and mormonism is the cultish, circular, insane thinking. Why pile-on to these lies and innuendo, when no one can present evidence of any kind?... real evidence, not circular broken logic where all roads lead to the desired outcome is the only thing that counts. There is no smoke/fire here, only people making up stories and using those stories as proof. My 'rats in the kitchen' scenario applies so much here. Come on guys: innocent (really innocent) until real proof reveals guilt, and no disjointed circular logic to prove your point. Those are what critical thinking is all about.

Mormons are hardcore conservatives who already buy into the obvious bullshit from the church. Then, having invested their money, time, and indeed their very lives in it, they dig in their heels and deny all the demonstrable evidence that shows the church is a fraud. I think that the Trump comments are are an extension of that, for those who have voted for Trump. They have to dig in their heels and deny the obvious, or risk appearing more ridiculous. Most people are quite incapable of facing fact and saying, "You're right. I done bad." Plus, I would wager that most of them felt they were voting the way the LDS church had wanted them to vote, which makes them even more resistant.

Exactly. There is plenty of smoke and an ongoing investigation,but Steve knows he wasn't involved?

The investigation is the result of made up stories that were created for the purpose to start the investigation. Use your critical thinking skills. Your logic is like that used to prove that the church is true. The only thing missing is that you know these (facts?) are true, beyond a shadow of a doubt.

azsteve:

I think the consensus is that far from unifying, the Republican party is in the process of splitting.

It's trying to split... as the establishment republicans squirm and try to find a way around Trump, and then eventually give up and either go with him or resign. In a way, the Republican party did split, the moment that Trump won the election. Now, it's actually in the process now of re-defining itself, and unifying. As people like Jeff Flake resign and others are voted in, the party will pull together over time. The liklihood of a real and credible split is next to zero.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/26/2017 05:34AM by azsteve.

I wouldn't allow myself to comment on what Trump says about the US - I've never been there, but if I can confirm that EVERY TIME Trump has spoken about Europe (which I do know) and the Middle East (which I'm also quite familiar with), it has been UTTER NONSENSE.

If I were American, I'd be worried about having a president who is so disconnected from reality...

An opinion from the UK:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/donald-trump-insults-britain-theresa-may-terrorism-radical-islamism-threat-a8011216.html

Tom in Paris

1.0x10^9

He is uninformed and incompetent

Trump doesnt know what he is talking about and he is too ignorant to recognise his ignorance.

How can someone win the most powerful position on the planet full of billions of people, millions of who voted for him, and be ignorant about what is important to his position? You may disagree with him, hate him, want him to be something he is not. But on the long list of what he could be, ignorant is near the bottom of the list.

Listen to him talk sometime. My 7th grade civics students know more about how the government works than he does. He didnt know he had to staff the West Wing, he seems unable to tell the difference between a bill,law and executive order for starts.There are rumors that he didnt know Puerto Rico is US territiry and he claims he met wth the president of the Virgin Islans. News flash! That would be Donald Trump.

Yeah but what do you know, bona dea?

I doubt you could even find "Nambia" on a map.

lol.

In Utah when I was 'politically active' we were able to get rid of one RINO (Bennett), however, more recently we were unable to replace Hatch. He got smart fast after he saw Bennett go down in 'flames and tears'!

Rinos do cry what appeared to be 'real tears' on tv!

Now the 'rules' have changed, for the incumbents, so getting rid of the 'rinos' is next to impossible in Utah!

So who gets to decide who is and isn't a true "Republican"? Sounds like arguing over who is a true Scotsman.

Bannon is working hard to unite the GOP.

I have to assume this last comment is meant as irony.

I vote because it is my duty as a citizen.

I vote because it is the best way to make my voice heard in the election process.

Also, on a less serious note, if I don't vote, I don't have any business bitching about the way things turned out. At least, I did my fair share to contribute.

Yes you do. Your 1st Amendment right to freedom of expression is not contingent upon you voting or paying taxes or serving on a jury--thank goodness!

Re: The symbiosis of right-wing evangelical religion and the political persuasion of the electorate


Why are both of the main parties so far right wing, and why are so many Americans way out there? Has a 100 years of propaganda against the left (for example against a universal health care system) worked so thoroughly? Has a population of predominantly right-wing voters enabled the popularity and ubiquity of right-wing evangelical religion, or has the religious predominance of the population enabled the rise of the far right?

Not sure how azsteve comes to the conclusion that the GOP will be winning the 2018 congressional elections by landslides. The party not in the White House almost always gains congressional seats . Trump is now losing support with his base.His favorability numbers are on the decrease with every segment of American society. It's not as if Donald Trump won the election by some landslide. He won because Hillary Clinton was the absolutly the worst candidate the Democratic Party could have nominated .I will agree the the Democrats are in bad shape and need new leadership. Nancy Pelosi is great at raising money and very poor at helping her party win elections,so it is possible that the House will not turn to the Democrats but this idea that the GOP will gain seats is a near imposibility

Currently, there are big log-jams in American politics. I voted for Trump because someone had to drop a bomb on these log-jams, to break things up, before anything could move forward politically. If congressional republicans won't work with Democrats themselves, Trump will, and he doesn't care who he angers in the process. No one owns him. Other politicians are owned by their respective special interests and self-serving political alliances.

At some point, the gridlock will get unstuck. If he has to, Trump will publicly call-out and publicly shame the offending politicians the same way he did 'low energy Bush', 'little Marco', and 'criminal Hillary'. People will laugh. But they'll also get what is going on and why they need to get rid of their incumbent senators and House members who aren't good team players. Nothing peaceful is off the table with Trump. He knows how to get billions of dollars in free media attention and how to disable his detractors. He will go right to the people and impose his will, backed by the people who are increasingly sick of the gridlock. That is why many people hate and fear him. He doesn't need the job. The job needs him.

Trump doesn't constrain himself to conventional rules that other politicians impose on themselves. So he has a huge advantage and the whole establishment knows it, which is why they are all attacking him with baseless claims to try to take him out. Right now, Trump is being nice and letting all of the career politicians prove their own incompetance/unwillingness, to do their jobs before he puts the hammer down on them. He can't/won't fire them. He will get the people to do it that, as they should.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/28/2017 06:59AM by azsteve.

Trump knows two relevant things, and he knows them well. First, he knows how to get ratings as the central character of socially dominant, "Big Man," in his reality TV show, "The President." Trump supporters talk about Trump's agenda. But they can't tell you what his agenda is, because he's got no agenda. He simply reflects back to his supporters their own status anxieties as revealed by Fox and other cable news shows. That's it. He doesn't care about governance or policy or even legality. The other thing he knows is leverage. Don't spend your own money, and always promise to divide the spoils. Launder money for the power-brokers. He ties their fortunes so closely to his that even though he's skimming a ton, they can't afford to cut him loose.

I'll give an example of each thing. Socially-dominant-Big-Man, relieving the anxieties of his supporters: the promise that if he's president he'd "shut down all Muslims coming into this country until we can figure out what what's going on." AKA, the Muslim Ban. A Muslim Ban is unconstitutional on its face. Period. Trump never told his supporters that. Because his Christian-as-social-dominance followers love to hate Islam and they want a ban, he promises them a ban, even though in America, it's not possible. All three of his attempts at a ban have been blocked by the courts. The only way any of the bans can be made legal is if they can convincingly be shown not to ban Muslims. But his followers don't want a constitutional law, they want a Muslim Ban, so Trump and his AG criticize the courts for failing to "keep America safe." It's pathetic theater, which would be funny in a satirical play, but it's dismaying when it's the citizens of your own country being played for fools.

Dividing the spoils: how about the latest. There is a power company that's been in business for two years and which has employed two people, full time. The company's out of Whitefish, MT, Zimke, the Interior Secretary's, hometown. One of the principal's is Zimke's childhood friend. The company's connected to a major Trump supporter. This two-person firm's largest contract to-date was $1.7M from the state of AZ to restore about 4 miles of powerline along a highway. The company was just awarded a $300M contract to rebuild the power grid in PR. Since the contract was awarded, they've hired more than 300 new people. They aren't a company to rebuild a grid. They're a company to skim money off the top of the company(s) that either will build a grid or will burn through $300 M. Either way, it's a farce.

This thread is yet another example of useless political discussion with no substantive value. Might as well be watching Entertainment Tonight.

Why don't we discuss how nearly every government program and war is fraudulent and rife with fraud, waste and abuse? And leads to unintended consequences.

Ideally we'd be discussion how the feds can rack up 20 trillion in debt. What does that mean? Why are no government checks bouncing? Why do we do a budget?

Why do local governments beg for money from the feds? Why is federal money considered to be unlimited and free?

Why do we allow the Federal Reserve to print money out of thin air to pay for unlimited spending? Why do we tolerate the resulting inflation which robs the poor disproportionately?

Why can local neighborhoods no longer educate their children, but must have the federal government involved? Why are parents now so stupid?

Why does government hand out loans to farmers, who then overproduce, and then we subsidize prices or pay them to not farm?

Why have the costs of healthcare and education skyrocketed since government got involved? Seems if gov't throws money at stuff, prices get jacked up.


Why have rates of illegitimacy skyrocketed since the welfare programs started in the 1960's? Seems when dads are replace by government checks, they disappear, resulting in poverty that needs more checks.

Why do we spend countless trillions policing the world and stirring up trouble? Why doesn't Brazil do the same to keep themselves safe?

Why are we against any restriction on government growth as the Constitution once provided?

Why do we elect leaders to take an oath to the Constitution, but we no longer believe in it?

https://www.hoover.org/research/unconstitutional-congress

"In a famous incident in 1854, President Franklin Pierce was pilloried for vetoing an extremely popular bill intended to help the mentally ill. The act was championed by the renowned 19th-century social reformer Dorothea Dix. In the face of heavy criticism, Pierce countered: "I cannot find any authority in the Constitution for public charity." To approve such spending, argued Pierce, "would be contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Constitution and subversive to the whole theory upon which the Union of these States is founded."

Grover Cleveland, the king of the veto, rejected hundreds of congressional spending bills during his two terms as President in the late 1800s, because, as he often wrote: "I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution."

Were Jefferson, Madison, Crockett, Pierce, Cleveland, and the countless other lawmakers during that age merely hardhearted and uncaring penny pinchers, as the federalists often charged? Did they not have within them sympathy for fire victims? Or the mentally ill? Or widows? Or impoverished refugees?

The answer is of course they were not uncharitable scrooges. They simply felt honorbound to uphold the Constitution. They perceived--we now know correctly--that once the genie was out of the bottle, it would be impossible to get it back in. Any unwarranted government interference, no matter how righteous or well-intended, would be, as Madison put it, "but the first link of a long chain of repetitions." Of course, we now know just how remarkably prescient Madison and his colleagues were."

It seems odd to me that pretty much everyone here has been able to "wake up" and see the cult for what it is but still believe in what our politicians say.

No party is helping out the poor or middle class. None. My taxes are 1/4 of everything I make and I would expect people who make more than me to pay at least as much as I do...but they don't. Did any politician from either party try to fix the giant loopholes in our tax code? Our laws are skewed to favor people with lots of money. Rich mormons have figured out (and invented) ways of not paying taxes. Google CRUD or CRUT accounts. The cult gets theirs but the government doesn't and all the while the rich mormons are the "good guys" giving away money to charities. This makes me sick.

Another thing, in order to be elected, one has to be nominated by a major political party. In order to be nominated one has to be (a) Rich enough to spend the money on their own campaign or(b) already have pull with rich and powerful entities or (c) be trustworthy enough to the rich and powerful elements as to garner support. The illusion of "grass roots" support is just that. Who among us can start a grass roots campaign and pull in the kind of money needed to win a nomination of a major political party? I'm a computer nerd and I know I would not be able to pull it off without significant help from a thousand people. Who among us is connected enough to do such a thing? Perhaps this is why our political process tends to favor celebrities.

Bottom line here - our democracy is broken. No one who wins a nomination for a major political party would ever care enough for the people who have nothing to contribute to them. The two-party system is a scam and keeps us divided and not focused on the fact that the rich are getting richer, the middle class is shrinking, and millions of Americans right now have no running water. This process seems to happen faster with Republican leadership but Democrats are not much better.

BTW - I'm a former Republican and a 20-year USAF vet. I would like to think I didn't spend 20 years in the military to see our beloved country turn into a failed state.