8 ms·

No it's not simple to call "he" did this. WH people, half? of the country supporting him for 2nd time, and wealthy people that donated so much too, it's never

No it's not simple to call "he" did this. WH people, half? of the country supporting him for 2nd time, and wealthy people that donated so much too, it's never "he". Nothing big like that is one persons responsibility. Actions have cons. ? All elected and supported, especially AFTER how he and his supports lead the so many extra deaths in covid. I know your media does not bring facts but truth is out there.

andsoitis 15d ago
Voters cannot be held accountable for all the specific things the person they elected do. That much should be self-evident.
- deleted 15d ago
  [deleted]
- dhosek 15d ago
  He’s doing exactly what he said he would do when he ran. People who voted for him can very much be held accountable.
  - AnimalMuppet 15d ago
    When he ran, did he say that he'd make tariff rates bounce around like a kangaroo on speed? No, I don't think he did. Did he say that he'd threaten to annex Canada and Greenland? Not that I recall. Did he say that he'd start a war with Iran? No, I'm pretty sure he said "No new wars." Look, he's a loose cannon. Everyone who voted for him should have known that. But no, he's not doing "exactly what he said he would do when he ran". Some of what he's doing is what he said, and some is completely contradictory to what he said. (Credit where due: I stole the "kangaroo on speed" line from an unpublished short story. Don't remember the author, or I'd give them credit by name.)
    - triceratops 15d ago
      Is this sarcasm?
    - mylies43 15d ago
      So what? None of this is a surprise at all, if his voters fell for his "president of peace" bit then thats on them, at minimum they KNEW they were voting for a loose cannon who had no morals, cared about himself, insulted everyone around him, had terrible monetary and international policy... He bank rupted CASINOS for gods sake. They had every sign the 2nd time around, anyone who voted for him and regrets it now mainly does so because his bad choices are now personally affecting them lets not get it twisted. They were all happy as long as "others" got owned and not them
    - pebble 15d ago
      If you found anything he did surprising you haven’t been paying attention to him at all.
    - haunter 15d ago
      https://www.project2025.observer/en https://www.project2025.observer/en
  - andsoitis 15d ago
    > People who voted for him can very much be held accountable. Can you give an example of how, in practice, it would work to hold millions of voters accountable for what their elected representative does? Worth picking not just Trump, but let's say a few other Presidents around the world, including someone you voted for.
    - Laurel1234 15d ago
      [dead]
  - pton_xd 15d ago
    Technically, he campaigned on not starting new wars... so he's doing the worst combination of what he said he would do, AND what he said he wouldn't do. Amazing!
- tgv 15d ago
  If they could have known or suspected those things, then yes, they bear the responsibility. And Trump's intentions were there for all to see.
  - andsoitis 15d ago
    > If they could have known or suspected those things, then yes, they bear the responsibility. In a situation like this, I like to do a thought experiment where I replace "Trump" with "Republican voter" in a headline or a story to see whether that idea holds up.
    - tgv 14d ago
      That doesn't make sense. People let other people do the dirty work. Your imaginary Republican voter may or may not be capable of some action, but if that person voted for the persons executing that action, he or she cannot disclaim responsibility for it (unless truly misled, of course). You cannot disconnect yourself of consequences you helped set in motion.
- ben_w 15d ago
  Anyone can be held accountable for things they are responsible for, the question is how they'll react to being held thusly.
  - andsoitis 15d ago
    > Anyone can be held accountable for things they are responsible for, the question is how they'll react to being held thusly. Voters are responsible for selecting representatives, but they are not responsible for running things and making the kinds of decisions that elected officials need to and do make.
- exe34 15d ago
  What if they knew what they were voting for?
- maigret 15d ago
  That’s the definition of democracy. Of course voting is significant and has consequences.
  - andsoitis 15d ago
    > That’s the definition of democracy. In a democracy, it is the elected officials, who are meant to represent the voter, that are held accountable. Not the voter. > Of course voting is significant and has consequences. Tautology but also not relevant. How do you propose the voter be held accountable?
    - megagpt3 15d ago
      The elected official is held accountable if he doesn't do what the voters want. This one is doing what his voters want, so there's nothing to hold him accountable for.
- c-linkage 15d ago
  Voters can be held accountable; he demonstrated exactly what he was the first time in office and then people voted for him again.
- basisword 15d ago
  If you vote for a man that thinks he can "grab women by the pussy" because he's famous, and then you vote for him AGAIN, you should be held accountable for everything he does. It's patently obvious he's an absolutely awful person and completely untrustworthy.
- buttercraft 15d ago
  You might have a better point if the elected person hadn't made such a big show of following "mandates" from the voters. You can't have it both ways.
wartywhoa23 15d ago
The legend about the sole man in charge has been carefully crafted and cultivated for ages, but it's never the puppet and always puppet masters in this clown show.
gwbas1c 15d ago
Sadly, the way people vote is more complicated than you might believe. Trump is the symptom of malfunctioning system that doesn't give people good options in the ballot box.
- rootusrootus 15d ago
  That explains how he got almost half the votes on election night, but it does not explain the 1/3 that still to this day support him 100%. There is a pretty substantial underlying problem in play and Trump is the symptom, but the problem is deeper than a malfunctioning political system.
  - lokar 15d ago
    It is almost unheard of in the US for an elected politician to poll lower than 30%, it seems to be a floor. This is for both parties, and all sorts of terrible behavior.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 15d ago
      > almost unheard of in the US for an elected politician to poll lower than 30%, it seems to be a floor Alan Keyes apparently set the floor at 27%, which is not far below 30% > Obama vs. Alan Keyes. ... Keyes was plainly, obviously, completely crazy. But 27% of the population of Illinois voted for him. They put party identification, personal prejudice, whatever ahead of rational judgement. https://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2005/10/lunch-discussions-145-crazification.html https://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2005/10/lunch-discussions-145-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_Senate_election_in_Illinois https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_Senate_elec... And lizardman's Constant is 4% https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Lizardman%27s_Constant https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Lizardman%27s_Constant
      - BoggleOhYeah 15d ago
        To drive that home, Alan Keyes got to 27% by - running against a charismatic Obama - being a last minute insert when Jack Ryan was caught in a sex scandal (who was already fighting an uphill battle with sharing a last name with the corrupt former governor) - being a carpetbagger (he didn't live in Illinois at any point until running for senate) - running as a hard-line social conservative in a state where the GOP is torn between appealing to suburban Chicago fiscal conservatives and downstate Illinois social conservatives
appleappleapple 15d ago
Totally valid correction, thanks !
verelo 15d ago
This! I get frustrated when i hear folks in the US claim Trump has failed them. You failed yourselves. The system is falling apart and barely half of people turn up to participate in elections? What are the rest of us expected to take away from this? Apathy is what I take away from it, and that does not earn my trust.
lokar 15d ago
Not half the country. Almost half of the people who voted.
- Laurel1234 15d ago
  [dead]
- _whiteCaps_ 15d ago
  IMO if you don't vote, you're tacitly agreeing with whoever gets voted into office. (Although US voter suppression weakens this argument)
  - toast0 15d ago
    That's reasonable enough, but you have to consider it in the context that we don't vote for president, we vote for state electors to vote for president. If you live in a 'safe' state, tacitly agreeing with your state's electors doesn't mean tacitly agreeing with the electoral college result.
    - lotsofpulp 15d ago
      If you can’t be bothered to make your disapproval seen at least once every 4 years, then I consider it a tacit approval. So that actually makes 2/3 of Americans in support of Trump’s brand of America.
  - rdm_blackhole 15d ago
    I disagree with your take. You have the right to not vote when you disagree with all parties running. In fact, from a moral point of view voting for the lesser evil is highly objectionable because you are voting for someone who you do not even support just so that another person you support even less does not get elected. Its perfectly fine to say, I don't agree with either and I am going to sit this one out otherwise you end up in weird political dynamics that you can see playing out in real time in France for example.
    - 15d ago

andsoitis 15d ago

Voters cannot be held accountable for all the specific things the person they elected do. That much should be self-evident.

deleted 15d ago
[deleted]
dhosek 15d ago
He’s doing exactly what he said he would do when he ran. People who voted for him can very much be held accountable.
- AnimalMuppet 15d ago
  When he ran, did he say that he'd make tariff rates bounce around like a kangaroo on speed? No, I don't think he did. Did he say that he'd threaten to annex Canada and Greenland? Not that I recall. Did he say that he'd start a war with Iran? No, I'm pretty sure he said "No new wars." Look, he's a loose cannon. Everyone who voted for him should have known that. But no, he's not doing "exactly what he said he would do when he ran". Some of what he's doing is what he said, and some is completely contradictory to what he said. (Credit where due: I stole the "kangaroo on speed" line from an unpublished short story. Don't remember the author, or I'd give them credit by name.)
  - triceratops 15d ago
    Is this sarcasm?
  - mylies43 15d ago
    So what? None of this is a surprise at all, if his voters fell for his "president of peace" bit then thats on them, at minimum they KNEW they were voting for a loose cannon who had no morals, cared about himself, insulted everyone around him, had terrible monetary and international policy... He bank rupted CASINOS for gods sake. They had every sign the 2nd time around, anyone who voted for him and regrets it now mainly does so because his bad choices are now personally affecting them lets not get it twisted. They were all happy as long as "others" got owned and not them
  - pebble 15d ago
    If you found anything he did surprising you haven’t been paying attention to him at all.
  - haunter 15d ago
    https://www.project2025.observer/en https://www.project2025.observer/en
- andsoitis 15d ago
  > People who voted for him can very much be held accountable. Can you give an example of how, in practice, it would work to hold millions of voters accountable for what their elected representative does? Worth picking not just Trump, but let's say a few other Presidents around the world, including someone you voted for.
  - Laurel1234 15d ago
    [dead]
- pton_xd 15d ago
  Technically, he campaigned on not starting new wars... so he's doing the worst combination of what he said he would do, AND what he said he wouldn't do. Amazing!
tgv 15d ago
If they could have known or suspected those things, then yes, they bear the responsibility. And Trump's intentions were there for all to see.
- andsoitis 15d ago
  > If they could have known or suspected those things, then yes, they bear the responsibility. In a situation like this, I like to do a thought experiment where I replace "Trump" with "Republican voter" in a headline or a story to see whether that idea holds up.
  - tgv 14d ago
    That doesn't make sense. People let other people do the dirty work. Your imaginary Republican voter may or may not be capable of some action, but if that person voted for the persons executing that action, he or she cannot disclaim responsibility for it (unless truly misled, of course). You cannot disconnect yourself of consequences you helped set in motion.
ben_w 15d ago
Anyone can be held accountable for things they are responsible for, the question is how they'll react to being held thusly.
- andsoitis 15d ago
  > Anyone can be held accountable for things they are responsible for, the question is how they'll react to being held thusly. Voters are responsible for selecting representatives, but they are not responsible for running things and making the kinds of decisions that elected officials need to and do make.
exe34 15d ago
What if they knew what they were voting for?
maigret 15d ago
That’s the definition of democracy. Of course voting is significant and has consequences.
- andsoitis 15d ago
  > That’s the definition of democracy. In a democracy, it is the elected officials, who are meant to represent the voter, that are held accountable. Not the voter. > Of course voting is significant and has consequences. Tautology but also not relevant. How do you propose the voter be held accountable?
  - megagpt3 15d ago
    The elected official is held accountable if he doesn't do what the voters want. This one is doing what his voters want, so there's nothing to hold him accountable for.
c-linkage 15d ago
Voters can be held accountable; he demonstrated exactly what he was the first time in office and then people voted for him again.
basisword 15d ago
If you vote for a man that thinks he can "grab women by the pussy" because he's famous, and then you vote for him AGAIN, you should be held accountable for everything he does. It's patently obvious he's an absolutely awful person and completely untrustworthy.
buttercraft 15d ago
You might have a better point if the elected person hadn't made such a big show of following "mandates" from the voters. You can't have it both ways.

wartywhoa23 15d ago

The legend about the sole man in charge has been carefully crafted and cultivated for ages, but it's never the puppet and always puppet masters in this clown show.

gwbas1c 15d ago

Sadly, the way people vote is more complicated than you might believe. Trump is the symptom of malfunctioning system that doesn't give people good options in the ballot box.

rootusrootus 15d ago
That explains how he got almost half the votes on election night, but it does not explain the 1/3 that still to this day support him 100%. There is a pretty substantial underlying problem in play and Trump is the symptom, but the problem is deeper than a malfunctioning political system.
- lokar 15d ago
  It is almost unheard of in the US for an elected politician to poll lower than 30%, it seems to be a floor. This is for both parties, and all sorts of terrible behavior.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 15d ago
    > almost unheard of in the US for an elected politician to poll lower than 30%, it seems to be a floor Alan Keyes apparently set the floor at 27%, which is not far below 30% > Obama vs. Alan Keyes. ... Keyes was plainly, obviously, completely crazy. But 27% of the population of Illinois voted for him. They put party identification, personal prejudice, whatever ahead of rational judgement. https://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2005/10/lunch-discussions-145-crazification.html https://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2005/10/lunch-discussions-145-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_Senate_election_in_Illinois https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_Senate_elec... And lizardman's Constant is 4% https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Lizardman%27s_Constant https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Lizardman%27s_Constant
    - BoggleOhYeah 15d ago
      To drive that home, Alan Keyes got to 27% by - running against a charismatic Obama - being a last minute insert when Jack Ryan was caught in a sex scandal (who was already fighting an uphill battle with sharing a last name with the corrupt former governor) - being a carpetbagger (he didn't live in Illinois at any point until running for senate) - running as a hard-line social conservative in a state where the GOP is torn between appealing to suburban Chicago fiscal conservatives and downstate Illinois social conservatives

appleappleapple 15d ago

Totally valid correction, thanks !

verelo 15d ago

This! I get frustrated when i hear folks in the US claim Trump has failed them. You failed yourselves. The system is falling apart and barely half of people turn up to participate in elections? What are the rest of us expected to take away from this? Apathy is what I take away from it, and that does not earn my trust.

lokar 15d ago

Not half the country. Almost half of the people who voted.

Laurel1234 15d ago
[dead]
_whiteCaps_ 15d ago
IMO if you don't vote, you're tacitly agreeing with whoever gets voted into office. (Although US voter suppression weakens this argument)
- toast0 15d ago
  That's reasonable enough, but you have to consider it in the context that we don't vote for president, we vote for state electors to vote for president. If you live in a 'safe' state, tacitly agreeing with your state's electors doesn't mean tacitly agreeing with the electoral college result.
  - lotsofpulp 15d ago
    If you can’t be bothered to make your disapproval seen at least once every 4 years, then I consider it a tacit approval. So that actually makes 2/3 of Americans in support of Trump’s brand of America.
- rdm_blackhole 15d ago
  I disagree with your take. You have the right to not vote when you disagree with all parties running. In fact, from a moral point of view voting for the lesser evil is highly objectionable because you are voting for someone who you do not even support just so that another person you support even less does not get elected. Its perfectly fine to say, I don't agree with either and I am going to sit this one out otherwise you end up in weird political dynamics that you can see playing out in real time in France for example.
  - 15d ago