So Sup Forums, there are some people here who don't support Trump..
For those of you who don't support him I want to ask you: WHY?
Isn't it obvious he is the best candidate available? Explain to me why you don't support Trump.
I think he is the best choice so if you can explain to me why you don't support him I'd want to know why.
Other urls found in this thread:
hollywoodreporter.com
theguardian.com
usatoday.com
usatoday.com
en.wikipedia.org
youtube.com
twitter.com
Because I value collectivism over individualism. It's as simple as that. That is why I am a leftist.
>For those of you who don't support him I want to ask you: WHY?
hands too small
>I think he is the best choice
can't trust german opinions while you have fucking woman ruling cunt tree
Why the fuck are you even here?
This is a good place to test my beliefs.
>I value collectivism over individualism
I don't really see how Hillary is any more collectivist?
this board is 18+
leave! now!
>hands too small
How are his hands too small? They are normal-sized, they're actually kinda big. They're big, normal man hands. That's such a stupid insult against him.
America is based on individualism but Trump is actually the most collectivistic and communitarian candidate that Republicans had in history
He will make America one big, loving family that takes care of each other, it is a concept rooted in Japanese fascism, you saw that on display in Louisiana recently where he visited devestated people after massive flooding
Hillary will just care about corporations and financial speculators and other economic parasites on Wall Street who do nothing for America. Trump is for the blue-collar people.
>HOW CAN YOU NOT SUPPORT TRUMP?
I'm intelligent
how can you have a german flag when you are in america? doesn't make sense?????????????
I'm sure you're familiar with the globalism/America first debate going on. Globalism is the more collectivist choice and I know a lot of Sup Forums considers her to be a globalist. That's just one example but there's a lot more like when you look at her healthcare plan as opposed to Trump's and so on.
His America First policy is more about putting the "in group" over the "out group". That's still pitting us against them. I don't consider that collectivist because this is relating to groups instead of individuals, so his plan is more like individualism on a group level whereas globalism is more like collectivism on a group level.
hands too small?
hands too small.
hollywoodreporter.com
implying he'll vote for hillary
he'll just ignore election day like an edgy teenager
oh wait he can't vote probably because of his age
>They're big, normal man hands. That's such a stupid insult against him.
all right mr Trump if you say so
...
haha, you're just trolling.
i used to be a marxist commie, but after Sup Forums, i found home.
I was kind of against Trump because of all the shit I heard on TV but when I actually listened to him and decided to not let someone else think for me then I found that I liked him a lot. Big Trump fan now.
"woman"
>Rio gay ass
go back to your orgy, the boys are waiting
Nationalism is not any less collectivist than globalism. Nationalism vs globalism just doesn't cut along the collectivist va globalist axis. A nation is still a collective. There is no such thing as individualism on a group level, that doesn't make sense.
Why do you want to altruistically care for the out group when it is unlikely to be reciprocated? I don't understand the logic behind that.
>Protectionist Economic policy was one of the causes of The Great Depression of the 1930's.
>The man has been a liberal a majority of his life
>Clearly define "a better deal" on trade policy (to which he hasn't given clear goes other than vague answers)
>Why did he reform his original proposed tax plan?
>Other than the wall he has claimed "everything is negotiable."
He is obviously the better choice than Clinton but I cannot support a candidate that is extremely vague and contrary to my economic ideals on trade as well as market policy when it comes to the economy.
Does not cut along the individualist vs collectivist axis*
you've always been a failure in life, having to lean on others for help, never accepting responsibility, and needing others to guide you.
You've never started a business, followed through with an idea, and never really helped your fellow man by teaching him self-reliance. Instead, you live off of other's hard work because you don't know what it's like to be an adult.
You are mentally weak, and have never truly faced any kind of hardship that tested your resiliency, as you are used to relying on others for any kind of hardship.
You don't accept collectivism, you accept mediocrity because that is all you are used to. Better to bring everyone down to your level, instead of you to rise to others.
>There is no such thing as individualism on a group level, that doesn't make sense.
How does it not make sense? on an individual level you put the needs of the individual above the needs of everyone else. on a group level you put the needs of your group above the needs of everyone else
It may not translate -exactly- but I'm sure you can see the logic behind what I'm going for. Those both seem individualist to me but on different levels. The collectivist approach would put everyone else ahead of the individual and the group, wouldn't it?
>Why do you want to altruistically care for the out group when it is unlikely to be reciprocated? I don't understand the logic behind that.
I assume you'd apply this to things like standing up against whale hunting or clubbing seals. In those two examples and all other examples of caring for the out group I think the underlying theme is that leftists want to fight in support of caring for people/things/etc, especially if there is an oppression angle that can be seen. For example, with clubbing seals the mean powerful human are oppressing the cute defenceless seals. That's a typical argument for that kind of thing. I think that line of thinking that can be spread far and wide along a lot of other topics.
You're looking at this from the perspective of what you value and are assuming that because I value different things that I am deficient in some other areas of life or have different motives than you. I think that line of thinking is wrong. I don't think you have different motives than me, I think we're all after the same thing. But they just mean different things to us because we value different things.
>authoritarian leanings
>wants libel laws to basically make it illegal to talk shit about him
>wants more "law and order" despite increasing police militarization and overall decreasing crime rates
>hasn't said shit about perceived policing issues or justice system reform (didn't even comment on Justice Dept announcements one way or the other)
>hasn't said shit about the oncoming wave of automation that's going to make low-skilled jobs increasingly scarce
>seems to be technologically illiterate overall even compared to Obama, which is just not good in 2016
>pro-NSA
>anti net neutrality
>his Presidency will increase or decrease the worth of his brand which seems like a conflict of interest and makes the "he really cares!" narrative questionable
>wants to deport illegals but also allowing them easy citizenship which is like granting them all citizenship right now but with more steps and spending more money
>would appoint someone like Scalia, who I always despised
>wants to cut instead of raise taxes on the wealthy (while they continue to automate and cut more workers out of their production chains with zero downsides)
He's still a better option than Hillary but he's not a legitimately good option in my view. I have to add that but I'll probably get called CTR anyway. I have to ask myself if I'm OK with drinking a glass of piss because the other glass is full of cyanide water. I'm not going to drink the cyanide but I'm also not going to down a cup of piss just because it's sterile and moderately hydrating and not deadly.
tl;dr; better =/= good
traitor
>you saw that on display in Louisiana recently where he visited devestated people after massive flooding
How exactly is that novel behavior for someone in his position?
>He will make America one big, loving family that takes care of each other
That sounds a bit like Marxism to me. The problem is you can't force people to like each other. And a lot of division in the country is based on class and race, which is something he can't magically eliminate.
White people won't think of black people as part of their big loving family when black people move into their neighborhoods. I don't see how Trump can fix that.
Trump changes his opinion at least once a minute.
Trump is unpredictable and therefore unsuitable.
He's a salesman and I don't like what he is selling.
I resisted Scott Adams' assessment of him initially, but now I see that Adams was spot on. Trump plays upon the insecurities of his base, which is smart, but not ethical. I also think Trump has run the dirtiest, most negative campaign of any political race that I have seen. I don't appreciate the negativity and I think it sets a poor precedent and a bad example that will be followed in the future.
>Trump plays upon the insecurities of his base, which is smart, but not ethical.
just like every candidate for anything ever btw
YES GOYIM! I am completely perfect, keep believing it!
Keep being OBLIVIOUS to the fact i have:
> over 3,500 lawsuits in his past, more than any previous presidential candidate
> one of them is a woman who sued him over a sexual assault, and he made a deal with her to drop the case. theguardian.com
> Many of the lawsuits are due to him not paying in time to his workers
> Scammed people for tens of thousands of dollars in trump university
Btw in case you are too lazy to google sources:
usatoday.com
theguardian.com
en.wikipedia.org
30 pieces of silver deposited to your account...
Not an argument.
I'm arguing that trump playing the role of a politician does not make him any worse of a politician. It's a requirement to play upon the insecurities of the voters.
...
How does it feel knowing that your candidate is literally a manchild who cannot focus in a 1 on 1 convo for more than 5 minutes when he isnt talking
If what I said isn't an argument then what you originally said isn't an argument either. but you know that's not true
You've made a generalization. There is no argument present.
You sound like a numale faggot to me. Or a woman.
Coming from a sub-human such as yourself, I'll consider that a compliment.
youtube.com
this is how you talk in my head
Because he is a legitimately stupid person with no policies or interest in policies. His entire appeal rests on the idea that he is a strongman who cares about the united states and american workers when it is beyond clear that he is unable to care about anything but himself. (Some of it lies in the idea that he is good at business--he is not. He does have a feel for showmanship, but that isn't at all a relevant quality.) I also don't trust him not to get us involved in a nuclear war. Oh, and he's a climate change denier (but not really--his businesses are already preparing for it and insuring themselves, it's just to his retarded base that he pretends not to believe in climate change), which is probably the single most important issue of our time.
He talks about MAGA while outsourcing whenever he can.
He makes shit up whenever he can and tries to weasel himself out of it, like with the ISIS founder bullshit.
His tax plans are full on retarded and only for the rich to become even richer.
His other economic plans are retarded, unworkable and not supported by any economists who aren't complete retards with their heads up some conservative's ass.
His campaign team is fully retarded, his spokeswoman doesn't know her shit and now the campaign is headed by a Breitfart moron and the shady Manafort got BTFO.
He has changed his positions on everything to appeal to racist morons, only to turn around again after his campaign tanked going full >muh blacks only to get a retarded jab in at Hillary.
He behaves like a 5 year old when something doesn't go his way as he is used to and insulting his political opponent is his MO.
He insulted a holy American cow, a dead veteran's family and especially his mother.
He goes to Lousiana while being asked not to come to not obstruct relief efforts just to make a retarded tweet about Hillary "sleeping".
He has a literal >who? for running mate who is also ass backwards in his policies.
He looks like an orange muppet.
He has no understanding of politics, let alone international politics.
So why, all memeing aside and yes he is great material, but not more than a laughing stock outside your MAGA echo chamber, why do you root for the orange muppet?