Canadians FEAR Trump...Big Time

[eyeball]

It would be a joke if somebody like Chris Christie, who also ran for nomination, endorsed Donald and then attacked Rubio.

No, it would be impossible.

Apparently not.

Chris Christie Endorses Donald Trump and Calls Marco Rubio ‘Desperate’

Edited February 26, 2016 by eyeball

[On Guard for Thee]

All the gushing these two did over each other today seems more than just a little hypocritical after the blistering insults they hurled during the campaign until Christie bowed out. I guess it's what we have to expect from this gong show. I guess Chris figures a little kiss ass now is worth it now in case the Donald happens to be successful.

[taxme]

Hey, taxme, I agree with u and last night debate was very funny and entertaining! Trump had the clowns on both sides of him out of control! Trump has life experience and business experience which others don't have except, for the governor of Ohio.

Rubio and Cruz are just showing their true political colors. Establishment sucks, plain and simple. Attack-attack and hope that they can win by attacking Trump. It is not working. Trump is winning every primary, and the establishment is running to the bathroom every minute. They are crapping thier pants. The people that go to those primaries like and want as their President, and that says it all. They want the elite cabal establishment gone. The elite cabal had their day, and they did nothing with it except destroy a once great country. I hope Trump can bring America back from what the elite have done to it. Go, Trump, go. Cheers.

[taxme]

All the gushing these two did over each other today seems more than just a little hypocritical after the blistering insults they hurled during the campaign until Christie bowed out. I guess it's what we have to expect from this gong show. I guess Chris figures a little kiss ass now is worth it now in case the Donald happens to be successful.

Politicians, aren't they just such a bunch of wonderful, noble and honest people? Ya right. Maybe Trump can change all of that in America. Maybe one day we can find someone who is not oh so politically correct on everything. Someone who can discuss certain issues without be labelled as a racist or anti-immigration/multiculturalism. It does not seem to be hurting Trump, so what is the problem with debating those issues in Canada also? I despise political correctness. It's there to suppress opinions and points of view of we the people, and it attacks our right to freedom of speech. This needs to be challenged and changed. But who out there will be our saviour?

Edited February 26, 2016 by taxme

[On Guard for Thee]

Politicians, aren't they just such a bunch of wonderful, noble and honest people? Ya right. Maybe Trump can change all of that in America. Maybe one day we can find someone who is not oh so politically correct on everything. Someone who can discuss certain issues without be labelled as a racist or anti-immigration/multiculturalism. It does not seem to be hurting Trump, so what is the problem with debating those issues in Canada also? I despise political correctness. It's there to suppress opinions and points of view of we the people, and it attacks our right to freedom of speech. This needs to be challenged and changed. But who out there will be our saviour?

Discussing issues is one thing, saying you want to stop immigration and building a wall and sending the bill to Mexico is nothing more than bombast and bs. If that's what you have in mind when you talk about freedom of speech, well, all I can say is best of luck to you.

[segnosaur]

I think that even those with the strongest anti-american sentiment probably at least accept the fact that, regardless of how isolated we make ourselves, the U.S. will always have an impact on us and the world.

As do/does many other nations, but their candidates are not FEARED in Canada. The United States has a large impact on Canada because Canada has purposely integrated its economy, military, etc. with the USA.

For example, Canada did not send troops to Iraq, but that doesn't mean that the effects of that war did not affect us (and the middle east) in some way. And bad economic decisions in the U.S. will impact our economy here.

And yet candidate Clinton has/will make identical decisions...but no FEAR ?

I thought I made it clear...

In my initial posting, I pointed to multiple deficiencies in Trump as a candidate and as a businessman. Now, it is true that no candidate is perfect, but the sheer magnitude of Trump's faults dwarf those of his competitors. I may not like many of the policies of (for example) Cruz or Rubio. But, I recognize them as accomplished politicians who are at least partly rational in the way that they present themselves.

Its also true that Clinton (and pretty much every politician) will make decisions that are unpopular or even unwise. We have no way of judging how Trump will handle various issues if he should ever get into power; the best we can do is make guesses based on his campaigning and his pre-election history, and that suggests that he will make poor decisions more often than the other candidates.

As I pointed out, it probably has little to do with Trump "targeting" Canada; probably more in the "he's going to drive the U.S. into trouble and we'll be dragged along with them".

This is a very old Canadian refrain, regardless of U.S. elections or presidents.

It is true that there is usually a certain amount of anti-American sentiment. Usually though such opinions are in in the minority.

Trump is different. Instead of such "bad U.S." thoughts being limited to a small minority, he is different enough from other candidates (people from both in this election and in the past) that it is causing people to worry who might not have cared otherwise.

Even if the president doesn't singularly control the U.S. nuclear arsenal, they do have some authority in deploying conventional military forces. And some people might question whether we want to give that authority to someone who's plan to stop Isis is to use bullets coated in pigs blood.

Again, previous presidents have routinely deployed conventional forces. Obama sure did. No Canadian FEAR then....why now ?

Not sure why you're being so obtuse about that.

Yes, Obama deployed conventional forces. So did Clinton. So did Regan. And probably every president ever.

But as I've already pointed out... Trump has made statements that definitely make him appear irrational. (Things like stopping Isis with bullets coated in pigs blood). If a politician appears rational during the campaign, then its at least possible that they will attempt to use military force wisely. If the politician appears like a nutcase during the campaign, why should we assume that they will even attempt to use force wisely?

As for his apologies... maybe he actually should consider issuing a few. Many of his statements have been outright falsehoods and quite insulting to many.

This is by design....Trump is banking on backlash sentiment(s) to drive his candidacy. He can always apologize later.

First of all, you are assuming that it is by design, a ploy/tactic to get elected, and will somehow start acting more contritely should he be elected. Its also possible that he plans to stick with his current bluster. I see no reason to assume he will suddenly become "Donald the apologetic" after the election.

Secondly, even if he does decide to apologize later... do you really think that will do much good? If you were a world leader, would you really want to maintain friendly relations with the U.S. after his borderline racist statements, even if he did say sorry afterwords? If you were a congressman or senator, would you really go out of your way to support a president who's made such statements? Many wouldn't trust that his apology was sincere (and why would they, if he was using lies and insults to drive his candidacy.)

[segnosaur]

Politicians, aren't they just such a bunch of wonderful, noble and honest people? Ya right. Maybe Trump can change all of that in America.

Not sure if you seriously think Trump is honest in any way. A few seconds of google can find plenty of examples of hypocritical attitudes and outright lies made by trump.

I'm still waiting for Trump's proof that Obama is not a natural-born citizen, as he promised years ago.

Maybe one day we can find someone who is not oh so politically correct on everything. Someone who can discuss certain issues without be labelled as a racist or anti-immigration/multiculturalism.

Keep in mind that being politically incorrect does not necessarily make you right on the issues. You can claim all you want that complaints against Trump's Mexican Wall are just "political correctness run amok", but fact is it is a stupid plan.

[bush_cheney2004]

...It is true that there is usually a certain amount of anti-American sentiment. Usually though such opinions are in in the minority.

It is easily found during election season in Canada, or when any other major policy decision is being debated. "Americanizing" anything appeals to a base fear in many Canadians and Canadian politics. Having absolutely no control over the perceived fear of Trump or process that may make him president is even scarier to some Canadians.

Not sure why you're being so obtuse about that.

My responses only draw parallels to the existing and previous president actions that do/did not invite fear, hence fear of Trump is inconsistent and irrational.

Yes, Obama deployed conventional forces. So did Clinton. So did Regan. And probably every president ever.

But as I've already pointed out... Trump has made statements that definitely make him appear irrational. (Things like stopping Isis with bullets coated in pigs blood). If a politician appears rational during the campaign, then its at least possible that they will attempt to use military force wisely. If the politician appears like a nutcase during the campaign, why should we assume that they will even attempt to use force wisely?

Because the fear is not what the U.S. may do, but what Canada's role may/would be in any such military intervention. This is actually a fear of Canada's own foreign policy, not Trump.

First of all, you are assuming that it is by design, a ploy/tactic to get elected, and will somehow start acting more contritely should he be elected. Its also possible that he plans to stick with his current bluster. I see no reason to assume he will suddenly become "Donald the apologetic" after the election.

It's standard procedure for a GOP or Democrat party nomination....get far right/left during primary season and get centered for the general. If Trump really wants to win, he will have to dial it back after July.

Secondly, even if he does decide to apologize later... do you really think that will do much good? If you were a world leader, would you really want to maintain friendly relations with the U.S. after his borderline racist statements, even if he did say sorry afterwords? If you were a congressman or senator, would you really go out of your way to support a president who's made such statements? Many wouldn't trust that his apology was sincere (and why would they, if he was using lies and insults to drive his candidacy.)

I don't care what they say...I only care what they do. The border issue with Mexico and millions of illegals from many nations is not a Trump fabrication, nor is the idea of a fence on the border, which enjoyed wide political support across two administrations...from Wiki:

H.R. 6061, the "Secure Fence Act of 2006", was introduced on September 13, 2006. It passed through the U.S. House of Representatives on September 14, 2006 with a vote of 283–138.

On September 29, 2006, by a vote of 80–19 the U.S. Senate confirmed H.R. 6061 authorizing, and partially funding the "possible" construction of 700 miles (1,125 km) of physical fence/barriers along the border.

The Real ID Act (2005) actually waives all laws that would interfere with physical border barriers.

Edited February 26, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[GostHacked]

All the gushing these two did over each other today seems more than just a little hypocritical after the blistering insults they hurled during the campaign until Christie bowed out. I guess it's what we have to expect from this gong show. I guess Chris figures a little kiss ass now is worth it now in case the Donald happens to be successful.

Politicians are opportunists without much integrity if any.

[Bonam]

I thought I made it clear...

In my initial posting, I pointed to multiple deficiencies in Trump as a candidate and as a businessman. Now, it is true that no candidate is perfect, but the sheer magnitude of Trump's faults dwarf those of his competitors. I may not like many of the policies of (for example) Cruz or Rubio. But, I recognize them as accomplished politicians who are at least partly rational in the way that they present themselves.

Have you looked into Cruz's positions? He scares me far more than Trump. Trump is all bombast but there is no indication that he wants to turn America into a theocracy. Cruz, on the other hand...

Also, the fact that Trump is leading in the Republican polls suggests he quite likely is rational in the way he presents himself. The way he presents himself is working for him, so why would he do it differently?

[taxme]

Not sure if you seriously think Trump is honest in any way. A few seconds of google can find plenty of examples of hypocritical attitudes and outright lies made by trump.

I'm still waiting for Trump's proof that Obama is not a natural-born citizen, as he promised years ago.

Keep in mind that being politically incorrect does not necessarily make you right on the issues. You can claim all you want that complaints against Trump's Mexican Wall are just "political correctness run amok", but fact is it is a stupid plan.

At this point I do seriously believe that Trump is being honest in what he says. He has not said anything that would appear to be a lie. Look, everybody at sometime in their life as told a lie or two. And I am pretty sure that you have told a fib or two in your life also. I will admit it, I have. I am only human.

If Trump says that he has proof that Obama is not an American citizen than I can believe him. Why would he put his neck in the noose if he didn't believe so? But Obama being the President it would be an exercise in futility to try and continue on with it. He knows it will go nowhere with the media. The media don't like Trump, and they would only fight him over it. Obama has the mainstream media support. They are hard to convince. A waste.

Whether Trump will build a wall is up for grabs but I do believe that he will do something about all the illegal immigration that is going on which he wants stopped. He is not anti-immigrant as the media will have people believe he is just anti-illegal immigration. I just wish that here in Canada our politically correct politicians would work harder to try and eliminate all the illegal immigration that is going on in Canada.

Now why would I think that or expect that?

We have always been a nation of illegals, and I don't think that is going to change, especially now with the liberals back in power. With the liberals in power now, I believe that it will only get bigger and better, for the illegals, that is. Get in shout refugee and you are a shoe in. Sad indeed.

[taxme]

Discussing issues is one thing, saying you want to stop immigration and building a wall and sending the bill to Mexico is nothing more than bombast and bs. If that's what you have in mind when you talk about freedom of speech, well, all I can say is best of luck to you.

Maybe it doesn't make sense to you, but to many Americans, it makes lot a sense to them as to what Trump says he is going to do. If he says he will make Mexico build and pay for the wall, he means it. And if Mexico says no, well Mexico may be in deep doo-doo for not listening to the Donald.

We all know that if Canada were to want to build a wall across Mexico, to stop illegal immigration, our politicians would build the wall and make Canadian taxpayer's pay for it. Probably hire Mexican illegals to help build the wall, and pay them to do the job. But coming back to reality that wall would never get built. After all, that would not be Canadian, denying illegals to enter the country illegally. We have become experts at that these days.

But does America need Mexico? I don't think so. Mexico needs America and if you want to stay friends with America than Mexico better get it's labor force out there and get ready to build and pay for that wall. I don't believe that Trump is fooling around. Why would he say such a thing and than back down after he becomes President, if he becomes President? You have to admit that Trump is not as wishy-washy like most of our politicians are.

[capricorn]

You have to admit that Trump is not as wishy-washy like most of our politicians are.

These days, the euphemism for wishy-washy is "nuanced". The Liberals excel at taking a "nuanced" position on issues.

[WestCoastRunner]

But does America need Mexico? I don't think so. Mexico needs America and if you want to stay friends with America than Mexico better get it's labor force out there and get ready to build and pay for that wall. I don't believe that Trump is fooling around.

Better check your facts. Mexico is America's 2nd or 3rd largest trading partner.

[Shady]

Better check your facts. Mexico is America's 2nd or 3rd largest trading partner.

It's mostly a one way trade with Mexico.

[WestCoastRunner]

It's mostly a one way trade with Mexico.

Tell that to the U.S. companies who export on average 226 billion a year. Trump's disparaging comments won't help in the least.

Edited February 28, 2016 by WestCoastRunner

[Wilber]

The US trade deficit with Mexico isn't that huge and has been steadily declining for the past six years. If Trump is going to tear up trade agreements, maybe he should tell the people he wants to vote for him in advance.

[WestCoastRunner]

The US trade deficit with Mexico isn't that huge and has been steadily declining for the past six years. If Trump is going to tear up trade agreements, maybe he should tell the people he wants to vote for him in advance.

And a deficit doesn't take away the jobs in the u.s. that produce those exports.

[Shady]

The US trade deficit with Mexico isn't that huge and has been steadily declining for the past six years. If Trump is going to tear up trade agreements, maybe he should tell the people he wants to vote for him in advance.

I agree. Mexico isn't the problem that China is.

[WestCoastRunner]

I agree. Mexico isn't the problem that China is.

It's the companies in North America who move their companies to China or Mexico that is the problem.

[Shady]

Tell that to the U.S. companies who export on average 226 billion a year. Trump's disparaging comments won't help in the least.

I agree.

[Wilber]

I agree. Mexico isn't the problem that China is.

Yet China doesn't force US companies to outsource, including Trump's

[Shady]

It's the companies in North America who move their companies to China or Mexico that is the problem.

No, the problem is countries like China that cheat on trade and manipulate their currency.

[WestCoastRunner]

No, the problem is countries like China that cheat on trade and manipulate their currency.

North American companies no longer feel a loyalty to their respective countries. This has to change even if it eats into their profits.

[WestCoastRunner]

No, the problem is countries like China that cheat on trade and manipulate their currency.

North American companies no longer feel a loyalty to their respective countries. This has to change even if it eats into their profits.