Trump has virtually no record in politics worth mentioning...

Trump has virtually no record in politics worth mentioning, he doesn't ascribe to any ideological faction in American politics, he has little record of philanthropy, he makes up his policy stance on-the-spot, his campaign is entirely funded by private small-donors,

The only reason he's one of the two major candidates in the general election is because he's a celebrity and he's plainspoken and says all the right things to the right demographics.

This worries me because it appears as though there are apparently no credentials by which one has to be vetted for the highest office in the land. Literally anyone popular enough can gain that power.

Trump may have fucked up one too many times in the past to win this, but what happens when eventually a candidate who is a public name, willing to speak the right way, and say the right things to the right people, comes along without any record of past fuckups?

It's very conceivable that person could achieve the office of presidency, and they could be motivated by the relative success that Trump has had to this point. But there's really no telling what such a person could be capable of.

I've never quite had a sense that the US or the World were in any real danger despite disastrous mistakes that were made in the past during my lifetime. I always had some sense that the systems are all in place to prevent any catastrophic mistake.

But this election has sort of fundamentally changed my mindset. Right now I feel like it's quite conceivable, and if nothing else changes, then probable, that at one point we're eventually going to elect a candidate that will prove to be an apocalyptic-level mistake. And we don't have any fail-safe or bureaucratic mechanisms in place to avert such a failure.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=5cVLUPwrSmU
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Fuck Donald Trump and fuck white people.

>we're eventually going to elect a candidate that will prove to be an apocalyptic-level mistake.

ya and it's name would be Hillary.

>but that's not gonna happen.

MAGA 2016

WHERE'S MY FRIES NIGGER?

This country is set to collapse. We are transitioning into the last days of the age of decadence.

>ya and it's name would be Hillary.
hillary clinton has plenty of fuckups too and the clintons in general display awe-inspiring levels of power-grubbing
but I just don't see nuclear conflict as a possible outcome if only because that's the evil we know and we're not all dead yet.

A vote for $hillary is a vote for endless war.

>Hillary

Fug Doh Truh an fuh why pee poh

>but I.just don't see

Yeah, she's the only one poking a nuclear armed bear. But I feel better because you just don't see that happening.

Trump is love. Trump is life.

>A vote for $hillary is a vote for endless war.
You mean like trump vowing to defend Israel 100%?

Those honest Jews wouldn't false flag themselves so low iq trump shabbos goys like you would die for them, wouldn't they?

Check out 4+Sup Forums and youll see how soon it is expected. Accidently leaked military training video predicts 2030 to be damn near 3rd world country standards of living with 80% unemployment.

Also you seem to forget he runs a massive business that its probably ran similarly to a small country.

Just look at the liberals flip flop when it fits their argument. Who had more experience, Obama or McCain? Oh right, back then experience didn't matter, you wanted HOPE AND CHANGE. What did you get? More wars in the middle east with libya, syria, backroom deals with Iran, and ISIS. So much for the nobel peace prize. How's Obama doing in foreign policy? Still drawing more scary red lines that Putin doesn't care or respect? Instead you want to vote for Hillary just because she has a vagina. That's it. Cause her corruption is out of this world. Lying to Congress, FBI and Americans. Voter fraud and inciting violence. Hillary voters can barely find anything good to say about her.

Muh credentials and experience...when I want it and it fits my candidate. Fuck off faggot.

Hillary "rig Palestine's election" Clinton isn't much better

I'd honestly take Trump over $hillary. I'm not fond of Trump at all, I was a Demo-rat last year, but $hillary isn't even an option for me.

>it appears as though there are apparently no credentials by which one has to be vetted for the highest office in the land
That's the point of your country you stupid burger. We The People. Read your own damn documents. It's all about freedom. For better or for worse.

This.
Also, let's get back to spreading this meme.

Funny how trumplets are falling for the same scheme and sloganeeringo put a guy who has fucked over Americans for several decades by means of outsourcing, h1b visas, building his products in other countries, and even instructed his children to do the same with their businesses.

Some American hero you got there

That's like picking between Ebola and cancer, so you might as well neck yourselves

this was perhaps the wrong time to make this thread because for good reason, tensions regarding the the election are quite hot so it's going to be difficult to have an honest discussion on the topic.

I think at some point we need to talk about the fact that there is no litmus test or credentials or vetting process at all to ensure a candidate is fit for office. And of course it's not a true democracy if people are not allowed to elect the representatives they want. But on the other hand, we surely can't allow anyone to become president, can we? Not when nuclear weapons are a thing. There has to be some creative solution that addresses both matters.

I could survive four years of Trump, but I don't want to tolerate even one week of $hillary.

>there is no litmus test or credentials or vetting process at all to ensure a candidate is fit for office
The test is whether or not people want that candidate.

The position of President has no real honorific. It's "Mister President." This from a time of Your Graces and Your Worships and By Your Mercies. It's supposed to represent that the US government is intended to be
>Of the People
He's the first and most powerful citizen, but among legal equals. Ostensibly.

He got to where he is by money and celebrity, yes, and the general populace is generally stupid yes, but the problem isn't that a non-politician was elected
It's that politicians have rigged the system to make it hostile and impenetrable to outsiders.

If he had a better temperament, there'd be no problem.

You aren't paying much attention if you think Hillary's the right choice.

If Trump wins he'll be stonewalled by the House and won't be able to accomplish anything. That's his worst case scenario for damage done; an ineffective, unactioned presidency.

If Hillary wins we get war and we abandon any shred of credibility. What's about to be released will illustrate that not only is this woman not fit to be president, she's quite extraordinarily horrific as a human being.

You aren't wrong that Trump isn't a good choice for president. But he's also the most important choice the American people will ever make. If we don't vote Trump we're saying that it's okay to be corrupt, lie to us, abuse every institution that's meant to preserve our integrity and manipulate our will for personal gain. That's the bitter fucking truth.

Everything you believe about Trump being an end to our country is wrong. There ARE safeguards to protect us from a rogue president who hasn't mastered subverting them, unlike Hillary.

>Think about this. We only get one shot at preserving a democracy. If you vote Hillary, we go full oligarchy and there is no turning back. They won't fuck up like this again.

You're late to the game!

Politicians usually don't have a black mark on their record until AFTER they have taken office, and they have already made promises they don't tend to keep.

You can't fix stupid. If the will of the people is to vote for a catastrophic candidate, then that society is already doomed. No fail safe will fix that. It's just a matter of time. Just let nature take its course.

Nope. They'd walk all over him if he didn't have that temperament.

You can be strong without being a blathering asshole. A cutting remark and refusal to play along can be delivered without unrepentant petulance.

>Hillary voters can barely find anything good to say about her.

They can't name anything she's actually accomplished either.

What is she known for? Corruption and fuck-ups. That's it.

You are all drones.
You have no individual traits or characteristics.
You share the same, malfunctioning brain cell.
You parrot the same simplistic lines.
You copy-paste the same autistic memes.
You align with the same fuck-witted ideologies.
You worship the same moronic messiahs.
You're the very, mindless automatons that you so wish to avoid becoming.
YOU ARE THE IMBECILIC INCARNATION OF IRONY.

You have no opinions of your own.
You only parrot what you've been indoctrinated with.
Your neural pathways are irrevocably fucked in place.
You spurn logic, rationale and reason.
You espouse only that which re-enforces your existing prejudice.
You cannot be taught, edified or redeemed.
You do not want to be saved.
You live in a blissful Twilight Zone of absurdity.
YOU ARE NON COMPUS MENTIS.

You're the very chattels that demagogues rise to power on the kyphotic backs of.
You're the very pismires that are first to be trampled by the tyrannies you unwittingly canonise.
You're self-defeating, self-immolating, martyrs of ignorance.
You're the alcoholic, drug addict, sugar fiend, greed afflicted junkies.
You're the Fox News- / Brietbart- / InfoWars- / Kardashians-reared retardates.
You're the nonentity keyboard jockeys of inaction.
You're the bilious blowhards of impotence.
You're the cogs in the cycle of idiocy that enthrals you.
YOU ARE YOUR OWN WORST ENEMIES.

You're all self-haters.
You're unhappy.
You're discontented.
You're confused.
You're melancholic.
You're in denial.
You seek not solutions, only turmoil.
You want the world to burn, not thrive.
YOU ARE AN ANATHEMA TO THE SPECIES.

You deserve your fate.
You deserve subjugation by despots and dictators.
You deserve to be trodden on.
You deserve your evolutionary retardation
You deserve your imminent extinction.
You are bound to your condign fate.
Your passing will elicit no pathos.
You will not be remembered.
YOU WILL BE FORGOTTEN.

You're effectively brain-dead.
YOU ARE ALREADY DEAD

CTR lost the argument so they want to shift the argument and change their first argument that I destroyed. Let's not change subject here.

If experience was so important to you then why did liberals vote for Obama over McCain? Go ahead. I will await your response and don't bother trying to change the subject.

There's already the age limit that's supposed to ensure a president has adequate life experience, and time on the world to prove their character and worth.

>This worries me because it appears as though there are apparently no credentials by which one has to be vetted for the highest office in the land. Literally anyone popular enough can gain that power.

No shit. It's literally been that way for over 200 years.

It's good
Politicians shouldn't be a modern class of nobles, a separate group of people of different standing than the common man, that's why Trump is such a good candidate, he's outside the oligarchy, he can prove it can be done, the underdog can win and he must win in order to save democracy
Nope, power to the people, the people are never wrong, you should wonder where society went wrong that the people were desperate enough to vote for Trump

Your concern is the use of nuclear weapons?
How about this:

1. Only Congress has the power to declare war.
2. The POTUS may only order nuclear weapons used on a country that Congress has formally declared war with, or in direct response to nuclear attack.

Side Note:
Hillary was a participant in approving the Uranium One deal that allowed Russia to purchase Uranium which can be used to make nuclear weapons.

It certainly says something that our "underdog" is a fucking billionaire.

Doesn't have to be nuclear to be bad though. Another war, getting the world to turn against us, pissing off large military bears while not taking terror groups seriously (playing with a rabid dog really), it doesn't set us up for a good future

Well yes, it shows how hopelessly corrupt and gated the oligarchy already is, it takes a man with that much money to break in

Right but I guess I'm not all for the "people get the government they deserve, and let's leave it at that" logic. I think minimizing the likelihood of nuclear conflict is also a worthwhile consideration.

>we're eventually going to elect a candidate that will prove to be an apocalyptic-level mistake. And we don't have any fail-safe or bureaucratic mechanisms in place to avert such a failure.

There used to be before Ross Perot. For some reason a billionaire who ran for President on a whim without party affiliation and who dropped out for a couple of months before deciding he really did want to run for President without party affiliation convinced everyone that only the Democrats and the Republicans can ever be trusted to hold any office whatsoever.

this sort of rhetoric does nothing to further the conversation.
if we are to have a solution for our country then we're going to need folks in the trump camp to be on board.

>but I just don't see nuclear conflict

She wants a no-fly zone in Syria. That will start nuclear war with Russia. She does not like Russia and has made that clear in the 3 debates.

>2. The POTUS may only order nuclear weapons used on a country that Congress has formally declared war with, or in direct response to nuclear attack.

I'd have to agree that I'm using nuclear conflict to illustrate the degree of danger but that's not the only risk.
Either way, the executive branch's power has been ballooning out of proportion and congress has been hopelessly incompetent for a while now, we'll soon be at the precipice of electing an emperor at this rate.

he's got executive experience, it's all about leadership and picking the right people to delegate to. the white house organization chart lists 13 official lines reporting to the President.

how many people did Dubya take to Crawford? not a lot, it's just the same core people, you can't be effective managing more than twenty or so underlings IMO.

he knows a lot of sharp people to fill his administration, he wouldn't be where he is today if he didn't. if push comes to shove, there's always congress stonewalling him and bureaucrats resigning if given stupid orders.

If he is elected, I really, sincerely hope you're right of course, but just not knowing exactly what we're getting leaves me very uncomfortable when we're talking about the president.

Praise KEK

>the president can just press a button and launch nukes

Do you actually believe this?

Concern trolling. Nothing new OP. Get more creative if you want to be subversive

I'll just leave this here.

Thanks for supporting a LITERAL traitor.

I've read about how the president has to initiate that, and to my knowledge, and unless someone can enlighten me otherwise, there is apparently legally no other input required to initiate military conflict including nuclear other than the blessings of the POTUS.

>what happens when eventually a candidate who is a public name, willing to speak the right way, and say the right things to the right people, comes along without any record of past fuckups?
>without any record of past fuckups?

Lol. You're naive at best, underage at worst. Let me explain why you wrote all that bullshit for no reason: Because that has never happened, nor will it ever, barring the rise of Antichrist. If that happens, panic. But until then, you can hold your breath, kick and scream, whatever you want, all you like, and that person will never come along to run for office. Ever. Everyone has fucked up. Mr. Rogers had a few fuckups under his belt. You're setting highly unrealistic expectations about a scenario where those expectations are possibly the least likely to happen.
Tldr: Snowball's chance in Hell, quit smoking pot, everyone fucks up, no exceptions.

is accusation of trolling the ultimate killing blow to any line of argument?

>Trump has virtually no record in politics worth mentioning, he doesn't ascribe to any ideological faction in American politics, he has little record of philanthropy, he makes up his policy stance on-the-spot, his campaign is entirely funded by private small-donors,

First, Business and Politics are the same. If you can make it in business, you can make it in politics. Like the old saying:
>Those that can, do.
>Those that can not, teach.
>Those that can not teach, go into politics.

Trump does say and do all the right things because he's smart. He's not a pandering politician. He's had a solid policy from the get-go. It's Protectionism and Country first type of shit. so, enough there.

>This worries me because it appears as though there are apparently no credentials by which one has to be vetted for the highest office in the land. Literally anyone popular enough can gain that power.

Go ahead and name your credentials list so we can get back to a dictatorship. Perhaps bloodline and God's chosen are more of your liking?

>...comes along without any record of past fuckups?
you'll never see anything like this in your life, ever. They will fabricate something just to make you go away.

>It's very conceivable that person could achieve the office of presidency, and they could be motivated by the relative success that Trump has had to this point. But there's really no telling what such a person could be capable of.

You are starting to sound like a stoner.

>had some sense that the systems are all in place to prevent any catastrophic mistake

Going off invalid feels. You should be a little too old for that by now. God, are you just a fucking idiot liberal?

>And we don't have any fail-safe or bureaucratic mechanisms in place to avert such a failure.

There you go thinking we aren't a nation of freedom.

Here's a vid short for ya. Maybe it'll learn you something new, faggot:
youtube.com/watch?v=5cVLUPwrSmU

He look, it's another child that thinks turning a million dollar loan into billions and running hundreds of companies requires no discipline or intelligence. Get back to us when you get out of your parents' basement.

Fuck off ctr

But we only have one example to judge by to date. Trump is the only candidate I can recall with no discernible political or financial allegiance or past that would be predictive of his policies.

It's possible what you say is true, that it all sort of comes as a package, but I don't know that we should count on it. I think the stakes are too high to make any such assumption.

>First, Business and Politics are the same. If you can make it in business, you can make it in politics. Like the old saying:
Has he made it in business?
I know he was born wealthy and he maintains wealth and debt. Is he even a billionaire? From what I can tell his business is selling his celebrity by sticking his name on buildings and random goods.
He can surely afford top-line accountants, so at least he's too rich to fail.

>Trump does say and do all the right things because he's smart. He's not a pandering politician. He's had a solid policy from the get-go. It's Protectionism and Country first type of shit. so, enough there.

He has a worldview, his policies sound like they're made up on the spot. He suggested the US default on its debt and that he would "renegotiate" us a better deal. Like hell he will.

>>...comes along without any record of past fuckups?
>you'll never see anything like this in your life, ever. They will fabricate something just to make you go away.

But that applies to every candidate and one is going to have to win. It's very conceivable that Trump minus recorded admission of sexual harassment would win this election, and still be Trump, for better or worse.

>$0.02 has been deposited
Now that I've gotten the hackneyed ctr shill out of the way... I think that you are missing the point of a representative government, which is what we're supposed to have. The President, Congress, and our law enforcement are all supposed to be just regular people. The idea is that a person can be bad but on the whole people are good. So we have a system of checks and balances. The President isn't supposed to be able to act without congressional approval. The Congress doesn't act without people's approval, or if they do then they lose their seat. Law enforcements greatest strength for the people isn't upholding the laws but not upholding laws that hurt the people, this can be seen with federal law enforcement not enforcing marijuana laws in states that have approved it when they would be lawful to do so. I agree that the thought that a president with too much power is a scary thing and we should work with Congress to limit the presidents power. When it's choice between hrc who will continue to expand presidential power and trump who will be blocked at every turn by Congress and the justice department then I choose trump because his nomination will force Congress to rein in presidential powers.

CTR's getting desperate...

Is obama not in this category

...

He was a relative outsider, but even then, obama is pretty solidly a centrist democrat, was a senator, had a history in local politics, and accepted enough campaign contribution large contributors that he had some special interest allegiance. I know that's not necessarily good, but it's important to know what you're getting from a candidate, especially for the presidency.

so basically, we need to fuck up royally this one time as a lesson to all about why consolidating too much power in the office of the presidency is a bad thing.
people didn't learn their lesson with Bush, so we just need bigger and bigger fuckups until we're totally fed up with the executive branch.
Isn't there a more intelligent way?

>Chicago political origins

>Isn't there a more intelligent way?
You'd need a more intelligent, aggressive people.