Obama: Trump ‘woefully unfit’ to be President

[Andaman Al]

This should be watched by everyone in the USA but in particular this is a message to ALL Trump supporters. There is no ranting, no shouting, no aggression, it is a calm considered, logical article that tells Trump supporters to take a look within and why. 8 mins essential viewing. Get this man back on prime TV.

 

 

[beechguy]

2 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

This should be watched by everyone in the USA but in particular this is a message to ALL Trump supporters. There is no ranting, no shouting, no aggression, it is a calm considered, logical article that tells Trump supporters to take a look within and why. 8 mins essential viewing. Get this man back on prime TV.

 

 

 

There is a reason the guy is not on prime time, he is a windbag idiot, that can't hold a decent job. I've seen the guy over the years, he still doesn't have a clue.

 

The topic is, that Obama stated an opinion, which of course is his right. I just say consider the source, just as in the video.

[Scott]

The title is Trump "woefully unfit' to be president.   The next and subsequent posts about Hillary, Obama and whatever other deflections people can come up with will result in suspension.  

 

You have been warned. 

[Andaman Al]

8 minutes ago, beechguy said:

 

There is a reason the guy is not on prime time, he is a windbag idiot, that can't hold a decent job. I've seen the guy over the years, he still doesn't have a clue.

 

The topic is, that Obama stated an opinion, which of course is his right. I just say consider the source, just as in the video.

Sorry BS he is calling it EXACTLY why Trump is not fit to be President. What does he actually say that is untrue? Tell us that!

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

35 minutes ago, beechguy said:

 

There is a reason the guy is not on prime time, he is a windbag idiot, that can't hold a decent job. I've seen the guy over the years, he still doesn't have a clue.

 

The topic is, that Obama stated an opinion, which of course is his right. I just say consider the source, just as in the video.

 

Olbermann says a lot in the 8 minute VDO. He presents a number of instances of how Trump's twitter expressed personality is questionable. You could have chosen to address any one of these. You chose instead to call Olbermann stupid and childish names. Why should anyone pay heed to your pronouncements on this person? You don't seem to have the chops to answer his points.

 

I guess we had better get used to the Trump fanboys telling how they never expected him to deliver anything; that just being elected is enough; and, that he has succeeded in bringing down the system. Even now, some fanboys are saying if he achieves just a quarter of his promises then the anti-establishment wins.

 

Olbermann asked a question. You were incapable of providing an adequate response. Consider that source.

[beechguy]

1 minute ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

Olbermann says a lot in the 8 minute VDO. He presents a number of instances of how Trump's twitter expressed personality is questionable. You could have chosen to address any one of these. You chose instead to call Olbermann stupid and childish names. Why should anyone pay heed to your pronouncements on this person? You don't seem to have the chops to answer his points.

 

I guess we had better get used to the Trump fanboys telling how they never expected him to deliver anything; that just being elected is enough; and, that he has succeeded in bringing down the system. Even now, some fanboys are saying if he achieves just a quarter of his promises then the anti-establishment wins.

 

Olbermann asked a question. You were incapable of providing an adequate response. Consider that source.

 

I stated an opinion based on prior knowledge of Olbermann, and he isn't really the subject of this topic, so not worthy of further comment. If you choose to use him as a source of information, I feel for you.

As to the election, no matter how unqualified you think he is, the Democrats didn't give me a viable option.

[beechguy]

40 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

Sorry BS he is calling it EXACTLY why Trump is not fit to be President. What does he actually say that is untrue? Tell us that!

Again, Olbermann isn't really the topic.

The problem is, I didn't see him discuss anything substantial, or factual, he just voiced an opinion. The fact that he has a poor job record, speaks volumes, as to how little credibility he has.

[Tawan Dok Krating Daeng]

7 minutes ago, beechguy said:

 

I stated an opinion based on prior knowledge of Olbermann, and he isn't really the subject of this topic, so not worthy of further comment. If you choose to use him as a source of information, I feel for you.

As to the election, no matter how unqualified you think he is, the Democrats didn't give me a viable option.

 

Exactly correct. Olbermann is not the topic of this thread. So why are you offering baseless and biased opinions of him and commenting on his career instead of responding to what he says about Trump? Because it is very clear that what he says about Trump is most definitely the topic of this thread.

 

What is this nonsense about 'source of information'? His information is sourced directly from Trump's own words through his incessantly self promoting and vain tweets. Olbermann is not reporting. He is asking a question.

 

You divert because you cannot answer that question.

 

I make no comment on the election. You might want to consider the benefits of moving on from fixating on Trump's win. Once he is sworn in and bound by actual laws, then it is a whole different game with plenty of room for resistance and opposition.

[beechguy]

11 minutes ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said:

 

Exactly correct. Olbermann is not the topic of this thread. So why are you offering baseless and biased opinions of him and commenting on his career instead of responding to what he says about Trump? Because it is very clear that what he says about Trump is most definitely the topic of this thread.

 

What is this nonsense about 'source of information'? His information is sourced directly from Trump's own words through his incessantly self promoting and vain tweets. Olbermann is not reporting. He is asking a question.

 

You divert because you cannot answer that question.

 

I make no comment on the election. You might want to consider the benefits of moving on from fixating on Trump's win. Once he is sworn in and bound by actual laws, then it is a whole different game with plenty of room for resistance and opposition.

 

And apparently you don't understand, that I do not need to answer a question. I do make the comment, that some people seem to be taking this guy seriously, I do not, he is stating his opinion, not facts. Next time you need an operation, call Keith and see what he thinks? He probably has as much credibility giving medical advice.

 

Back to the real topic, Obama is stating an opinion, and based on his track record, I don't give it much credibility.

Edited January 6, 2017 by beechguy

[heybruce]

4 hours ago, beechguy said:

 

I stated an opinion based on prior knowledge of Olbermann, and he isn't really the subject of this topic, so not worthy of further comment. If you choose to use him as a source of information, I feel for you.

As to the election, no matter how unqualified you think he is, the Democrats didn't give me a viable option.

The election was a choice between a qualified candidate and an unqualified candidate.  Regardless of how much you dislike HRC, no thinking person who cares about the future of the US would vote for the woefully unfit candidate.  The fact that a large minority of voters chose Trump is evidence that too many people don't think before they vote.

[beechguy]

17 hours ago, heybruce said:

The election was a choice between a qualified candidate and an unqualified candidate.  Regardless of how much you dislike HRC, no thinking person who cares about the future of the US would vote for the woefully unfit candidate.  The fact that a large minority of voters chose Trump is evidence that too many people don't think before they vote.

 

Heybruce, if you and the other guys want to buy the BS the media puts out, go ahead. I do not, and will not.

Why? I have had a security clearance from 1986 until I let it expire in 2013, they are lying about Hillary's handling of classified material, among other things. I worked with the military for 25 years, included is 15 years in Arab/Muslim countries (Almost 2 years in Iraq/Afghanistan). I've seen the failed policies of the past 8 years, the Democrat candidate was part of that. Just because the candidate for the Democrats occupied the office of Secretary of State, and other positions within the Federal Government, does not make her qualified. So no, based on education, training, and experience, I did not think I had a viable option.

Now, why don't you tell me why you think differently.

 

Now, once again, this topic is about comments made, by an outgoing President, who I think was trying to influence the election. Fair enough, that's his job, but I do not place much credibility on his opinion, based on his and his administration's track record.

Edited January 7, 2017 by beechguy

[heybruce]

57 minutes ago, beechguy said:

 

Heybruce, if you and the other guys want to buy the BS the media puts out, go ahead. I do not, and will not.

Why? I have had a security clearance from 1986 until I let it expire in 2013, they are lying about Hillary's handling of classified material, among other things. I worked with the military for 25 years, included is 15 years in Arab/Muslim countries (Almost 2 years in Iraq/Afghanistan). I've seen the failed policies of the past 8 years, the Democrat candidate was part of that. Just because the candidate for the Democrats occupied the office of Secretary of State, and other positions within the Federal Government, does not make her qualified. So no, based on education, training, and experience, I did not think I had a viable option.

Now, why don't you tell me why you think differently.

 

Now, once again, this topic is about comments made, by an outgoing President, who I think was trying to influence the election. Fair enough, that's his job, but I do not place much credibility on his opinion, based on his and his administration's track record.

"I've seen the failed policies of the past 8 years,,,"

 

Do you think the policies of the eight years preceding Obama were a success?  Can you cite any policies proposed by Trump that will improve the situation in the Arab world or anywhere else?

 

HRC was actively involved in white house politics as first lady for eight years, was in the Senate, and was Secretary of State for four years.  She knows how government works and she had a hand in preventing the mess left by the Bush administration from getting worse.  Trump has no qualifications at all.

 

You don't believe the media and you claim, without proof, that "they" are lying about Hillary's handling of classified.  Who are they?  What are the lies?  Where do you get your information?  Are you like Trump, only listening to the voices you want to hear and making stuff up to support your beliefs?

[beechguy]

7 minutes ago, heybruce said:

"I've seen the failed policies of the past 8 years,,,"

 

Do you think the policies of the eight years preceding Obama were a success?  Can you cite any policies proposed by Trump that will improve the situation in the Arab world or anywhere else?

 

HRC was actively involved in white house politics as first lady for eight years, was in the Senate, and was Secretary of State for four years.  She knows how government works and she had a hand in preventing the mess left by the Bush administration from getting worse.  Trump has no qualifications at all.

 

You don't believe the media and you claim, without proof, that "they" are lying about Hillary's handling of classified.  Who are they?  What are the lies?  Where do you get your information?  Are you like Trump, only listening to the voices you want to hear and making stuff up to support your beliefs?

Gee, I don't know, I consider information and statements, under oath, before Congress. a little more than rumor. It's unfortunate you weren't paying attention, before coming here to comment. This isn't really the place to bash Obama or Hillary, but as you say, she was in an official position, she should have known and done better.

 

 I explained some of my qualifications and experience, and why I formed my opinions. How about You? You want ot tell me about your security clearance, and experience handling classified materials? Do you want to tell me about living in Arab/Muslim countries? You want to tell me about the Persian Gulf, Iraq, Afghanistan? Do I think President Bush did everything perfectly? Of course, not, but I also saw how things were unraveling, even when Bill Clinton was President. Only an idiot would blame everything wrong, on George Bush.

[heybruce]

33 minutes ago, beechguy said:

Gee, I don't know, I consider information and statements, under oath, before Congress. a little more than rumor. It's unfortunate you weren't paying attention, before coming here to comment. This isn't really the place to bash Obama or Hillary, but as you say, she was in an official position, she should have known and done better.

 

 I explained some of my qualifications and experience, and why I formed my opinions. How about You? You want ot tell me about your security clearance, and experience handling classified materials? Do you want to tell me about living in Arab/Muslim countries? You want to tell me about the Persian Gulf, Iraq, Afghanistan? Do I think President Bush did everything perfectly? Of course, not, but I also saw how things were unraveling, even when Bill Clinton was President. Only an idiot would blame everything wrong, on George Bush.

Twenty years in the AF, top clearance was a TS-BI, my SCI process was canceled when I moved to another job.  I won't go into details about what the clearances were for.

 

You have explained your background, not how you get your information.  Unless you are telling us you actually listen to, or read transcripts of, all congressional testimony.  I get my information from established media sources with a reputation for honest reporting that they are loathe to lose to lose that reputation.  Not from here today, renamed tomorrow internet sources that rely on sensationalism and are light on verified facts.

 

Under Clinton the ugly compromises to maintain stability were made.  Under Bush they weren't, actions were taken with little thought to the consequences, and the results were a disaster that eight years of Obama could not repair.  I expect Trump to be Bush on steroids. 

 

Funny how you duck the questions about Trump's qualifications and what his policies will be.

[LammyTS1]

So Trump will restore piece with Russia & back the UK, as opposed to Obama's threats before Brexit.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[beechguy]

22 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Twenty years in the AF, top clearance was a TS-BI, my SCI process was canceled when I moved to another job.  I won't go into details about what the clearances were for.

 

You have explained your background, not how you get your information.  Unless you are telling us you actually listen to, or read transcripts of, all congressional testimony.  I get my information from established media sources with a reputation for honest reporting that they are loathe to lose to lose that reputation.  Not from here today, renamed tomorrow internet sources that rely on sensationalism and are light on verified facts.

 

Under Clinton the ugly compromises to maintain stability were made.  Under Bush they weren't, actions were taken with little thought to the consequences, and the results were a disaster that eight years of Obama could not repair.  I expect Trump to be Bush on steroids. 

 

Funny how you duck the questions about Trump's qualifications and what his policies will be.

 

I suppose the video on the major news channels was doctored? No, I don't do internet wikicrap ect. I did try to give the major networks, the benefit of doubt when I watched Hillary, Comey etc. before Congress. Never mind the words coming out of their mouths during their news conferences.

The disaster didn't start until Obama tried to reverse process. However, I do give high marks for him continuing the drone programs, etc.

Trump's qualifications, apparently to some, debatable business success, strong negotiation skills, not ignorant of the threat from illegal immigrants, radical Islamic threats, etc. I don't think we should abuse our power in the world, and we have made mistakes. But, being a wimp, as in Clinton or Obama isn't the answer. My first suggestion, would be to stop engaging in policies, and agreements that are not in our best interest. Everyone seems to ignore the fact, that Trump can set tone and direction, but unless he goes on an Executive Order spree like Obama, he needs Congress to enact legislation. 

There seems to be a lot of whining and bitching, about someone who hasn't taken office yet.

Edited January 7, 2017 by beechguy

[heybruce]

5 hours ago, beechguy said:

 

I suppose the video on the major news channels was doctored? No, I don't do internet wikicrap ect. I did try to give the major networks, the benefit of doubt when I watched Hillary, Comey etc. before Congress. Never mind the words coming out of their mouths during their news conferences.

The disaster didn't start until Obama tried to reverse process. However, I do give high marks for him continuing the drone programs, etc.

Trump's qualifications, apparently to some, debatable business success, strong negotiation skills, not ignorant of the threat from illegal immigrants, radical Islamic threats, etc. I don't think we should abuse our power in the world, and we have made mistakes. But, being a wimp, as in Clinton or Obama isn't the answer. My first suggestion, would be to stop engaging in policies, and agreements that are not in our best interest. Everyone seems to ignore the fact, that Trump can set tone and direction, but unless he goes on an Executive Order spree like Obama, he needs Congress to enact legislation. 

There seems to be a lot of whining and bitching, about someone who hasn't taken office yet.

HRC chose words to minimize damage.  Not a likeable trait, but to be expected.  If she had lied the Republican congress would have charged her with everything they could think of.

 

Trump routinely lies and invents facts.  Strangely enough, Trumpies expect total, complete honesty from HRC but accept any and all BS that comes from Trumps mouth.

 

The disaster in the Mid-East started when Bush upset the balance with an unnecessary invasion of Iraq without considering the consequences.  The administration of chicken-hawks just assumed that once the bad guy was toppled Iraq would adopt a stable, pro-American democracy.  They had no plan B when this didn't happen.  Reaching some new stability will take at least a generation.  So will undoing the damage that Bush did by combining tax cuts with unfunded wars.  He took the country from record budget surpluses to record budget deficits. 

 

Trumps "qualifications" are the ability to say what some people want to hear.  That's what makes him a good con-man.  He has yet to outline specifics, unless you count the wall BS.  He shows all indications of making the same mistakes as the Bush administration, but making the "yuge".

[iReason]

Trump national security pick Monica Crowley plagiarized multiple sources in 2012 book

 

"Conservative author and television personality Monica Crowley, whom Donald Trump has tapped for a top national security communications role, plagiarized large sections of her 2012 book, a CNN KFile review has found."

 

"Lines in her book also match word-for-word the work of other columnists, including National Review’s Rich Lowry,

Michelle Malkin, conservative economist Stephen Moore, Karl Rove, and Ramesh Ponnuru of Bloomberg View."

 

"Crowley also lifted word-for-word phrases from the Associated Press, the New York Times, Politico,

the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, the BBC, and Yahoo News."

http://money.cnn.com/interactive/news/kfile-trump-monica-crowley-plagiarized-multiple-sources-2012-book/

 

The hits keep on coming from the incompetent Clown Train.

 

A plagiarist hired for a top National Security Communications job. 

 

Nice.

Edited January 8, 2017 by iReason

[iReason]

The man-child is at it again.

This adolescent dimwit is about to become President of the United States?

 

Embarrassingly pathetic.

 

Trump berates his 'Apprentice' replacement Schwarzenegger

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-apprentice-arnold-schwarzenegger-233270

 

[Andaman Al]

1 hour ago, iReason said:

The man-child is at it again.

This adolescent dimwit is about to become President of the United States?

 

Embarrassingly pathetic.

 

Trump berates his 'Apprentice' replacement Schwarzenegger

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-apprentice-arnold-schwarzenegger-233270

 

 

 

This is simply beyond pathetic. Trump will never last more than a few weeks as he will work himself up into such a frenzy he will have a heart attack. What is amazing are the people who hit 'love'

[Boon Mee]

On 12/28/2016 at 0:18 AM, Ulysses G. said:

 

I do not have the slightest idea and - frankly - I do not think you do either. We will just have to wait and see.

Believe that is the wisest choice at this stage of the game. 

[Andaman Al]

7 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Believe that is the wisest choice at this stage of the game. 

The wisest choice is to realise your error and make sure this narcissist immature buffoon gets nowhere near swearing the oath of office on inauguration day. Seriously look at the tweets about Schwarzenegger are they the considered rational words of a potential President?

[heybruce]

On 12/27/2016 at 0:18 PM, Ulysses G. said:

 

I do not have the slightest idea and - frankly - I do not think you do either. We will just have to wait and see.

You are aware there are nuclear weapons involved here, right?  Weapons that can be launched by his command and nothing short of a military mutiny/coup can keep from being launched.

 

Not to mention alliances going back decades if not centuries, legally binding international treaties, laws of war, etc.  I am still amazed that so many people voted for such an unqualified narcissist and continue to defend their foolish choice.

[Andaman Al]

1 minute ago, heybruce said:

You are aware there are nuclear weapons involved here, right?  Weapons that can be launched by his command and nothing short of a military mutiny/coup can keep from being launched.

 

Not to mention alliances going back decades if not centuries, legally binding international treaties, laws of war, etc.  I am still amazed that so many people voted for such an unqualified narcissist and continue to defend their foolish choice.

 

 

I think what the Trumpeteers are also missing is that Trump clearly does not understand the Democratic process. You are all entitled to your vote, and to vote for whoever you wish, the ultimate person elected to be President must then care for THE WHOLE nation and ALL it's citizens. People think Trump is not devisive yet here he is saying on a tweet "who cares he supported Kasich and Hillary" about someones performance on a TV show!!! He sees anyone that did not vote for him as the 'enemy'. Think about it, that is why he no longer sees Russia as the enemy, because Putin 'supports him' - but Russia are the enemy. The guy is a sandwich short of a picnic and he is about to be given the keys to the biggest nuclear arsenal in the world!!!

[Opl]

Donald Trump’s worldview: Rules apply to other people, not me :

 

" In Trump’s view, rules are things that apply to other people, whether it comes to paying taxes, respecting women’s bodily integrity or deciding how to defend the nation. When Trump can’t win by the rules, he simply rejects the legitimacy of the system."

 

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/donald-trumps-worldview-rules-apply-to-other-people-not-me-2016-10-20

 

Democracy in America is not guaranteed under Trump :

 

"Businesses must stay on Trump’s good side or else risk the consequence of a negative tweet that sends their stock price plummeting.  Family members occupy the innermost circle of influence, and have the opportunity to use their position to financial advantage."

 

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/democracy-in-america-is-not-guaranteed-2016-12-21

 

 

Edited January 9, 2017 by Opl

[wakeupplease]

Supported him when he first came in but 4 years of nothing then 4 years of crap like his comment above and I will be glad to see the back of him. Trump I hope but am not convinced will move forward but think America first as it should be, but maybe that global business thing that rips off the rest of us

[Lobber]

He's better than Blair or Brown were 

[Ace of Pop]

You won't find many Trump supporters here ,most are Lefty tree huggers who can't find work in the world. Retired folks may like him though[emoji383][emoji383][emoji383][emoji1]


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Boon Mee]

3 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

The wisest choice is to realise your error and make sure this narcissist immature buffoon gets nowhere near swearing the oath of office on inauguration day. Seriously look at the tweets about Schwarzenegger are they the considered rational words of a potential President?

Well, it's a done deal.so we just have to make the best of it don't we? 

[Prbkk]

There is no doubt that Trump will be a disaster. Although he is in pre-inauguration honeymoon now, largely on the basis of some chicken-feed job 'saving' results and posturing about Mexico, it's not going to last. And when the UK foreign minister flies in to meet with the team , it transpires that team means the mega-creepy son-in-law, Kushner ( unelected and he of the tax-avoiding, jail time, fanatical Zionist Kushner family....IE, rip off the tax payer and send some of the proceeds to Israel to fund illegal settlements Kushner). It won't end well.