Fashback - Donald Trump supporters will ‘hold his feet to the fire’ if promises broken

[ABX]

November 11, 2016

....“We expect him to move forward on all the items he has promised to move forward on,” said Stellmack, 69, a retiree in West Palm Beach, Florida.
“And if he doesn’t, we will hold his feet to the fire.”.....

....“I totally trust him,” said Laura Czarniak, 56, of Manistee, Michigan, a Rust Belt state that leans Democrat in presidential elections but which flipped to Trump on Tuesday.
“I know he’ll build the wall. I know he’ll take care of the Syrian refugee problem. I know he’ll get rid of Obamacare. There is not a chance in hell he won’t do those things,” she said.......


....Morris warned Trump should not count on his followers to stay with him if he did not produce results.......

https://globalnews.ca/news/3062628/donald-trump-supporters-will-hold-his-feet-to-the-fire-if-promises-broken/

[endicom]

Fashback, Meshach and Abednego.

Rome was not rebuilt in a day.

Who the hell is John Whitesides?

[dfwgator]

The problem is, how do you hold their feet to the fire when the only alternative is voting for someone even worse?

[roamer_1]

The problem is, how do you hold their feet to the fire when the only alternative is voting for someone even worse?

All your vote can be, by definition, is an endorsement. An approval.
Stop approving what you don't approve of - That's a fine start.

[dfwgator]

All your vote can be, by definition, is an endorsement. An approval.
Stop approving what you don't approve of - That's a fine start.

So if I lived in Germany in 1932, I would have been better off staying at home rather than casting a vote against the Nazis?

[jpsb]

The problem is, how do you hold their feet to the fire when the only alternative is voting for someone even worse?

They have egos, and most of them are on Twitter, so give them hell on twitter. Right now Trump is
catching absolute hell there.

[roamer_1]

So if I lived in Germany in 1932, I would have been better off staying at home rather than casting a vote against the Nazis?

Your example is false. A vote cannot be 'against'.

[ABX]

So if I lived in Germany in 1932, I would have been better off staying at home rather than casting a vote against the Nazis?

Many, not enough, stood up and opposed both the Nazis and Communists. They were Weimar loyalists (closest thing to a democratic Republic available at the time). Look up resistance groups like the White Rose. I actually had a great-great uncle who was killed in Dachau for joining these groups.

They didn't say "I have to support the Nazis to stop the Communists.." (or vice versa). They stood for what they believed. Yes, it cost them their lives, but they stood for what was right.

The stakes aren't as high now so it shouldn't take as much boldness to do so instead of giving into group think.

[dfwgator]

Your example is false. A vote cannot be 'against'.

Sure it can.  If I stay home and another person votes for the Nazi Party,  the Nazis win.  If I see a party as being so evil as to having to be defeated at all costs, then I'm going to vote for the party with the best chance of defeating them, even if I don't necessarily agree with them.

[dfwgator]

Many, not enough, stood up and opposed both the Nazis and Communists. They were Weimar loyalists (closest thing to a democratic Republic available at the time). Look up resistance groups like the White Rose. I actually had a great-great uncle who was killed in Dachau for joining these groups.

They didn't say "I have to support the Nazis to stop the Communists.." (or vice versa). They stood for what they believed. Yes, it cost them their lives, but they stood for what was right.

The stakes aren't as high now so it shouldn't take as much boldness to do so instead of giving into group think.

Was the White Rose around in 1932?

[Sanguine]

Thanks for posting this, @AbaraXas. 

[roamer_1]

Sure it can.  If I stay home and another person votes for the Nazi Party,  the Nazis win.  If I see a party as being so evil as to having to be defeated at all costs, then I'm going to vote for the party with the best chance of defeating them, even if I don't necessarily agree with them.

And thus you get what we have now - A Republican party as liberal as the democrats... fully approved. By votes.

[Sanguine]

And thus you get what we have now - A Republican party as liberal as the democrats... fully approved. By votes.

I disagree, the Rs are far left, but nowhere near as far as the Dems.

[dfwgator]

And thus you get what we have now - A Republican party as liberal as the democrats... fully approved. By votes.

Ok, so what's the alternative?  And yes, I get it about voting in the primaries,  but what happens when your candidate doesn't win the primary, then what?

[XenaLee]

So if I lived in Germany in 1932, I would have been better off staying at home rather than casting a vote against the Nazis?

That depends.  Who would you have been voting "for"?

[roamer_1]

Ok, so what's the alternative?  And yes, I get it about voting in the primaries,  but what happens when your candidate doesn't win the primary, then what?

Since I have been afield, there has never been a lack of a conservative to vote for. My endorsement is well laid upon them which think as I do.

[roamer_1]

I disagree, the Rs are far left, but nowhere near as far as the Dems.

A distinction without a difference. The Republicans may take longer to get there, but where they lead is inevitably the very same place.

[dfwgator]

That depends.  Who would you have been voting "for"?

Probably von Hindenburg.  And yes Hitler did lose to von Hinderburg, but the Nazis got enough votes where it made it easy for Hitler to pull off the coup.

[Sanguine]

A distinction without a difference. The Republicans may take longer to get there, but where they lead is inevitably the very same place.

No, slower, in this case is slightly preferable.

[roamer_1]

No, slower, in this case is slightly preferable.

Nope. Because your slightly preferred case is at the expense of Conservatism... without a principle thing to stand upon.

[Sanguine]

Nope. Because your slightly preferred case is at the expense of Conservatism... without a principle thing to stand upon.

No, it's not.   Another thing we disagree on.