Am i literally the only Trump supporter on NS?

[The Intergalactic Universe Corporation]

i see that NS has a lot of Democrats, i haven't seen a positive post/comment about Trump at all? What gives, why does most of NS want that witch Hilary Clinton in the White House?

i 'd like to debate with anybody on NS to see who they support,etc.

I have been a PROUD Trump Supporter since December, i even have a Trump flag, 2 bumber sticker and a yard sign.

I support Trump too.

[Loftegen]

What is wrong with automation?

Literally nothing, I'm a huge fan of automation and I look forward to the day where nobody has to work for a living, but that has nothing to do with my point that jobs are never coming back so the rest of your post is a nice strawman that's ultimately irrelevant (and partially incorrect. The number of jobs created by automation is always a small fraction of the number lost, otherwise automation wouldn't exist)

Nobody has to work for a living now, dude. What makes you think it'll be any different in the future, when robots can replace all the lazy useless people? Work, and improve yourself, or starve.

[The Intergalactic Universe Corporation]

Literally nothing, I'm a huge fan of automation and I look forward to the day where nobody has to work for a living, but that has nothing to do with my point that jobs are never coming back so the rest of your post is a nice strawman that's ultimately irrelevant (and partially incorrect. The number of jobs created by automation is always a small fraction of the number lost, otherwise automation wouldn't exist)

Nobody has to work for a living now, dude. What makes you think it'll be any different in the future, when robots can replace all the lazy useless people? Work, and improve yourself, or starve.

Well said, good friend!

[Spiffier]

How did you determine this?

Luddites tried it.

Short of destroying mechanization, you can't reverse the process of industry. Technology will keep moving forward, automation will keep increasing, the number of physical 'jobs' will keep decreasing.

Absent some Fallout-type reversal, we're looking at industry being mechanical, supported by a small 'technic' class, very soon.

I think he's talking more about how we aren't much of an exporter of industrial goods compared to how much we import.

[Spiffier]

Literally nothing, I'm a huge fan of automation and I look forward to the day where nobody has to work for a living, but that has nothing to do with my point that jobs are never coming back so the rest of your post is a nice strawman that's ultimately irrelevant (and partially incorrect. The number of jobs created by automation is always a small fraction of the number lost, otherwise automation wouldn't exist)

Does not automation exist because it is either cheaper or superior to human labor? I understand the argument that automation creates new jobs that the current generation cannot think of (industrial revolution) but is incredibly hard to fathom when manufacturing will soon be replaced by robots.

Robots who will need their parts manufactured, designed, improved, maintained, coordinated, and so on. We need an army technical experts to maintain all the automation in factories as it is, now you would have a whole new, massive sector for creating, exporting and marketing robots.

[The Archregimancy]

Hillary will get us into a land war. Trump will not.

There are times you genuinely baffle me.

Your posting record suggests that you're a Pilgeresque anti-imperialist on the left of the American political spectrum; you've publicly shared that you're a Mennonite (and former Methodist) pastor.

And yet here you are offering tacit support for a candidate who embodies the excesses of American economic imperialism, who praises authoritarian leaders of 'managed democracries' as potential role models, who has an established track record of bigotry and sexism, who has the personal morals of an oversexed goat, and who has boasted of his desire to 'bomb the shit' out of large sections of the Middle East.

I don't know you personally, so I could well be misjudging you - and all due apologies if I am - but it strikes me that your repeated statements regarding the unverifiable contention that Hillary Clinton 'will get us into a land war' are leading you to support a candidate who's the absolute antithesis of almost everything you stand for, and who is fundamentally opposed to the values of charity and tolerance that many of us ascribe (correctly or otherwise) to the Mennonites.

This is, of course, a decision for you and your conscience alone, and I'm uncomfortably aware of the extent to which I'm tapdancing along Matthew 7:1-3 with this post.

But all the same, every time you write something along the lines of 'Hillary will get us into a land war. Trump will not', you genuinely leave me stunned.

[Spiffier]

Hillary will get us into a land war. Trump will not.

There are times you genuinely baffle me.

Your posting record suggests that you're a Pilgeresque anti-imperialist on the left of the American political spectrum; you've publicly shared that you're a Mennonite (and former Methodist) pastor.

And yet here you are offering tacit support for a candidate who embodies the excesses of American economic imperialism, who praises authoritarian leaders of 'managed democracries' as potential role models, who has an established track record of bigotry and sexism, who has the personal morals of an oversexed goat, and who has boasted of his desire to 'bomb the shit' out of large sections of the Middle East.

I don't know you personally, so I could well be misjudging you - and all due apologies if I am - but it strikes me that your repeated statements regarding the unverifiable contention that Hillary Clinton 'will get us into a land war' are leading you to support a candidate who's the absolute antithesis of almost everything you stand for, and who is fundamentally opposed to the values of charity and tolerance that many of us ascribe (correctly or otherwise) to the Mennonites.

This is, of course, a decision for you and your conscience alone, and I'm uncomfortably aware of the extent to which I'm tapdancing along Matthew 7:1-3 with this post.

But all the same, every time you write something along the lines of 'Hillary will get us into a land war. Trump will not', you genuinely leave me stunned.

There are a lot Christians who support Clinton and she backs abortion, so I'm not really sure why Christians who back Trump get so much flak. Yes, he's the absolute opposite of a Christian, but so is Clinton.

[The Archregimancy]

There are a lot Christians who support Clinton and she backs abortion, so I'm not really sure why Christians who back Trump get so much flak. Yes, he's the absolute opposite of a Christian, but so is Clinton.

General Christian attitudes aren't really the point here; it's Pope Joan's personal strong anti-imperialist ethics and the specific values of the Mennonites that strike me as antithetical to support for Trump.

A staunch anti-imperialist supporting Trump because Clinton 'will get us into a land war' strikes me as analogous to showing your disapproval for a candidate who supports legalising prostitution by instead voting for the local madam.

[Big Jim P]

There are a lot Christians who support Clinton and she backs abortion, so I'm not really sure why Christians who back Trump get so much flak. Yes, he's the absolute opposite of a Christian, but so is Clinton.

General Christian attitudes aren't really the point here; it's Pope Joan's personal strong anti-imperialist ethics and the specific values of the Mennonites that strike me as antithetical to support for Trump.

A staunch anti-imperialist supporting Trump because Clinton 'will get us into a land war' strikes me as analogous to showing your disapproval for a candidate who supports legalising prostitution by instead voting for the local madam.

Well, if the democrats had nominated a less odious (read: anybody else), then people wouldn't be forced to choose the lesser of two evils. Pope Joan would have rather seen Bernie nominated.

[Ashmoria]

why would you even say that?

trump is an empty suit who will do whatever his republican handlers suggest will bring him the most glory. he would get us into ANY war that Clinton would get us into only faster and with far less planning.

There are countless issues with Trump, but doing whatever his Republican handlers say isn't one of them. He says and tweet things that would never get past established Republican vetting (or even any sensible political vetting), that's why Paul Ryan is practically hostile toward him.

I suppose he might do what his Russian connected campaign manager tells him to do

BUT

its already out there that he doesn't want to do the hard parts of being president--domestic and foreign policy. that means that someone else would make those decisions and he would rubbers stamp them. that is most likely to be mike pence but....it could be whoever is warming him up to putin. and it would especially be true in issues of war because he has zero understanding of the complexity of the world.

[The Intergalactic Universe Corporation]

Trump is better for America and will bring change needed to take on an increasingly belligerent China

[Isyrannaea]

Trump is better for America and will bring change needed to take on an increasingly belligerent China

Murica.

[Lamadia III]

An interesting fact; my father spoke at one or two 'lectures' (not really the right word) for students in the Trump University. Met the man himself a a few times, too; very charismatic, certainly not the sort of careless bafoon he is made out to be, regardless of some dubious policy promises.

[Ashmoria]

Trump is better for America and will bring change needed to take on an increasingly belligerent China

lol

under what theory? he knows nothing about diplomacy.

[Ashmoria]

An interesting fact; my father actually did one of two 'lectures' (not really the right word) for students in the Trump University. Met the man himself a a few times, too; very charismatic, certainly not the sort of careless bafoon he is made out to be, regardless of some dubious policy promises.

did your dad pay thousands of dollars for a trump u course?

[Lamadia III]

An interesting fact; my father actually did one of two 'lectures' (not really the right word) for students in the Trump University. Met the man himself a a few times, too; very charismatic, certainly not the sort of careless bafoon he is made out to be, regardless of some dubious policy promises.

did your dad pay thousands of dollars for a trump u course?

He was asked to speak, not learn. I didn't make that quite clear!

[Ashmoria]

did your dad pay thousands of dollars for a trump u course?

He was asked to speak, not learn. I didn't make that quite clear!

ohhhh cool

well then the question is: was he paid in full and on time?

[Lamadia III]

He was asked to speak, not learn. I didn't make that quite clear!

ohhhh cool

well then the question is: was he paid in full and on time?

I believe so, yes. I think he did it as a favour for a friend. Long time ago now; 2007?

[Big Jim P]

Trump is better for America and will bring change needed to take on an increasingly belligerent China

lol

under what theory? he knows nothing about diplomacy.

Under the fact that hillary would be far worse.

[Ashmoria]

lol

under what theory? he knows nothing about diplomacy.

Under the fact that hillary would be far worse.

yeah she has far too much experience in diplomacy to do a good job.

[Big Jim P]

Under the fact that hillary would be far worse.

yeah she has far too much experience in diplomacy to do a good job.

Plenty of experience being a dishonest hag, true. Her criminal activity alone disqualifies her.

[Ashmoria]

yeah she has far too much experience in diplomacy to do a good job.

Plenty of experience being a dishonest hag, true. Her criminal activity alone disqualifies her.

those things are both false AND irrelevant.

[Big Jim P]

Plenty of experience being a dishonest hag, true. Her criminal activity alone disqualifies her.

those things are both false AND irrelevant.

Bullshit. They are very relevant. As for being false, just because you essentially investigate and then exonerate yourself, doesn't mean you are NOT a criminal. Hell, she even admitted to destroying (deleting) evidence under a subpoena, a crime in and of itself.

[Spiffier]

There are a lot Christians who support Clinton and she backs abortion, so I'm not really sure why Christians who back Trump get so much flak. Yes, he's the absolute opposite of a Christian, but so is Clinton.

General Christian attitudes aren't really the point here; it's Pope Joan's personal strong anti-imperialist ethics and the specific values of the Mennonites that strike me as antithetical to support for Trump.

A staunch anti-imperialist supporting Trump because Clinton 'will get us into a land war' strikes me as analogous to showing your disapproval for a candidate who supports legalising prostitution by instead voting for the local madam.

If it's just about war, why you are bringing up things like Trump being an "oversexed goat"? The only thing you've said that even relates to Trump starting wars is his desire to "bomb the shit out of [ISIS oil wells]", which is something we're already doing.

[The Archregimancy]

General Christian attitudes aren't really the point here; it's Pope Joan's personal strong anti-imperialist ethics and the specific values of the Mennonites that strike me as antithetical to support for Trump.

A staunch anti-imperialist supporting Trump because Clinton 'will get us into a land war' strikes me as analogous to showing your disapproval for a candidate who supports legalising prostitution by instead voting for the local madam.

If it's just about war, why you are bringing up things like Trump being an "oversexed goat"? The only thing you've said that even relates to Trump starting wars is his desire to "bomb the shit out of [ISIS oil wells]", which is something we're already doing.

It clearly isn't just about war, which is why I intentionally brought up a range of other issues relating to broader ethics; the war issue is simply one component of the broader issue of apparent incompatibility between Trump's ethics and Mennonite ethics - neither of which, I stress, are necessarily my ethics.

For the record, I also think Trump's ethics are wholly incompatible with Orthodox Christian ethics, but I doubt I'll get much traction with you there, so I shan't bother making the effort.