Trump: I ‘destroy careers’ of Republicans who say bad things about me

[Cyber Liberty]

  Got it!  Trumps a babbler.  It all in how you unravel the babble.

I saw the speech, and what I got from it is he "defeats" politicians who have tried to defeat him, and in the GOP that's plenty of people, including the Governor in the state he delivered the speech.

But, as you say, it depends on how the listener unravels it, and he gives plenty of opportunity to unravel it in all sorts of ways.  YMMV.

[musiclady]

Ladies, I'm not going to argue with you but just want to point out that that statement is typical Trumpbabble and you can take it the best way or you can take it the worst way (or, my choice, a sort of middle way, which is a big yawn), and which way you take it is all about the taker and not so much about Mr. Trump Babble.  ...Who babbles.  ...With great regularity.

To which I would respond........ isn't it great that a logical response to legitimate criticism is that Trump just babbles, and that all it requires is boredom and not criticism.....

(Not to be overtly critical of you personally, but just to point out that a lot of people aren't concerned about Trump's threats of retribution because, well, he does that sort of thing all the time and ain't it cute??)

[Chosen Daughter]

It is, isn't it?   

As long as we are rigorously honest, we should be ok.

I try.  There have been times I questioned my own response to Trump.  This time I think it is absolutely correct to criticize.  I have posted honestly because I don't believe this is right.  Trump is dividing his own party because he has thin skin.  Destroying careers is serious.

[Right_in_Virginia]

To which I would respond........ isn't it great that a logical response to legitimate criticism is that Trump just babbles, and that all it requires is boredom and not criticism.....

(Not to be overtly critical of you personally, but just to point out that a lot of people aren't concerned about Trump's threats of retribution because, well, he does that sort of thing all the time and ain't it cute??) 

Here, take a moment and watch what the moralistas are getting so bent out of shape about  -- hopefully this will help you move on.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIGZDYjCLYw

! No longer available

[musiclady]

I try.  There have been times I questioned my own response to Trump.  This time I think it is absolutely correct to criticize.  I have posted honestly because I don't believe this is right.  Trump is dividing his own party because he has thin skin.  Destroying careers is serious.

And when he admits to doing it because "they don't say nice things" about him, he is dividing his own party because he has the maturity of a 6 year old.

[Cyber Liberty]

It's reasonable to criticize the words, but still agree with the sentiment.  Trump gives plenty of opportunities to criticize his words.

[musiclady]

It's reasonable to criticize the words, but still agree with the sentiment.  Trump gives plenty of opportunities to criticize his words.

Do you agree with the sentiment that Trump should try to destroy the careers of people in his own party who dare to criticize him?

I don't agree with that sentiment at all.

Perhaps because Trump doesn't speak for actual conservatives, or many Republicans much of the time anyway.

Why should they not say words that "aren't nice" about him?

[DB]

Here, take a moment and watch what the moralistas are getting so bent out of shape about  -- hopefully this will help you move on.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIGZDYjCLYw

! No longer available

The exact opposite of Reagan.

[Chosen Daughter]

I saw the speech, and what I got from it is he "defeats" politicians who have tried to defeat him, and in the GOP that's plenty of people, including the Governor in the state he delivered the speech.

But, as you say, it depends on how the listener unravels it, and he gives plenty of opportunity to unravel it in all sorts of ways.  YMMV.

Blanket statements like I destroy careers because they say bad thing demand a response.  I find that people who make blanket statements heap coals upon themselves.  Nobody knows what you are talking about and then they assume.  He does that all the time and make no mistake he intends on the audience coming to conclusions based on things they have read or heard.  Trump doesn't have to destroy them.  They are destroyed merely for speaking against him.  With Trump it is everyone who isn't piling praise upon him even when he has done something wrong.

It is an atmosphere of total loyalty or death.

[Right_in_Virginia]

The exact opposite of Reagan.

And? 

[roamer_1]

I try.  There have been times I questioned my own response to Trump.  This time I think it is absolutely correct to criticize.  I have posted honestly because I don't believe this is right.  Trump is dividing his own party because he has thin skin.  Destroying careers is serious.

Destroying careers is not so bad... There are many I would like to see pack up and go home... It is the criteria that should be questioned.

[Chosen Daughter]

Destroying careers is not so bad... There are many I would like to see pack up and go home... It is the criteria that should be questioned.

Isn't that why we vote?

[Cyber Liberty]

Do you agree with the sentiment that Trump should try to destroy the careers of people in his own party who dare to criticize him?

I don't agree with that sentiment at all.

Perhaps because Trump doesn't speak for actual conservatives, or many Republicans much of the time anyway.

Why should they not say words that "aren't nice" about him?

Let's get one thing straight:  Politicians don't have the same "right" to their offices as people who are working Americans have to work and live, free of "destruction."  When he speaks of "destroying" a politician, he's talking about "defeating" them in an election, and it's hyperbole to conflate the two.

They are certainly entitled to say "not nice" things about him, it's what politicians do.  Working to defeat them in turn at the ballot box is what other politicans do.  Politics ain't beanbag.  Again, let me point out he delivered the words in question at a rally in the home state of one of his most vocal political opponents, Governor John Kasich.

Am I happy he said "destroy?"  No.  Does that make him an evil man, like Industrialists who destroy entire cities by shutting down factories to move to India or China?  You decide.

[roamer_1]

Isn't that why we vote?

Let's say it was, oh I don't know... Tom Delay.
He's a knee-breaker, and there is no doubt.
Do I think he wrecked people? Oh hell yeah.
But his intention was party unity around Conservative principles.
That is the correct criteria.

And I don't care about my brethren in their intentions up there in AK.
Murkowski's gotta go.
Same with McCain, Graham, Collins, and etc.

But that's not who is getting the axe.

[Bigun]

Destroying careers is not so bad... There are many I would like to see pack up and go home... It is the criteria that should be questioned.

I can come up with a fairly long list of "republicans" whose careers I would dearly love to destroy!

[musiclady]

Let's get one thing straight:  Politicians don't have the same "right" to their offices as people who are working Americans have to work and live, free of "destruction."  When he speaks of "destroying" a politician, he's talking about "defeating" them in an election, and it's hyperbole to conflate the two.

They are certainly entitled to say "not nice" things about him, it's what politicians do.  Working to defeat them in turn at the ballot box is what other politicans do.  Politics ain't beanbag.  Again, let me point out he delivered the words in question at a rally in the home state of one of his most vocal political opponents, Governor John Kasich.

Am I happy he said "destroy?"  No.  Does that make him an evil man, like Industrialists who destroy entire cities by shutting down factories to move to India or China?  You decide.

I think you missed my point (I'll blame my lack of articulating it correctly).

I do not believe any politician has the "right" to a career.  I do not believe that most Republicans live up to any standard they ran on, nor have the principles that would make them do the right thing.

However, my issue is with using those facts to defend (not you....others), his weak, immature lashing out at them and saying he would destroy them because they were mean to him.

I don't think that kind of childishness deserves any defense, but as long as there are those who keep saying 'no big deal' to these idiocies, they have NO right to criticize any other politician for what he/she says or does.

My problem all along has been and still is, that with Donald Trump, the Republican Party has lost any moral high ground it ever had, and the more defense of this nonsense there is, the more likely it is that "we" will never get it back.

[musiclady]

I can come up with a fairly long list of "republicans" whose careers I would dearly love to destroy!

But all on principles you possess, and not because they hurt your feelings.

BIG difference here.

[INVAR]

Here, take a moment and watch what the moralistas are getting so bent out of shape about  -- hopefully this will help you move on.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIGZDYjCLYw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIGZDYjCLYw

That was like watching a twelve-year-old egocentric bully explain why he acts the way he does in front of his friends.

Pathetic.

Not a statesman or national executive at all.

Just a juvenile bragging about the people he 'destroyed' to get the student body to cheer him on because they didn't say nice things about him.  Then he goes on to explain why he no longer names the names of those he destroys because 'he's much more diplomatic now than a year or two ago'.

And here I thought Obama was a petulant child.  Sheesh!  I can't stand hearing him speak anymore than I could Obama.

[DB]

Let's get one thing straight:  Politicians don't have the same "right" to their offices as people who are working Americans have to work and live, free of "destruction."  When he speaks of "destroying" a politician, he's talking about "defeating" them in an election, and it's hyperbole to conflate the two.

They are certainly entitled to say "not nice" things about him, it's what politicians do.  Working to defeat them in turn at the ballot box is what other politicans do.  Politics ain't beanbag.  Again, let me point out he delivered the words in question at a rally in the home state of one of his most vocal political opponents, Governor John Kasich.

Am I happy he said "destroy?"  No.  Does that make him an evil man, like Industrialists who destroy entire cities by shutting down factories to move to India or China?  You decide.

The issue is Trump has very thin skin revealing a very insecure person. Where the slightest slight against him has to be returned at the nuclear level. There's no persuasion. There's no gathering of common ground. There's my way or the highway.

No matter how you slice that it is destructive. The GOP is being fractured into many pieces where many share common ground but you have to choose his way or your out.

[DB]

And?

And - you told us repeatedly he was the next Reagan that's outdoing Reagan.

[endicom]

Oh the irony...

Oh, the nipples.

[Cyber Liberty]

I think you missed my point (I'll blame my lack of articulating it correctly).

I do not believe any politician has the "right" to a career.  I do not believe that most Republicans live up to any standard they ran on, nor have the principles that would make them do the right thing.

However, my issue is with using those facts to defend (not you....others), his weak, immature lashing out at them and saying he would destroy them because they were mean to him.

I don't think that kind of childishness deserves any defense, but as long as there are those who keep saying 'no big deal' to these idiocies, they have NO right to criticize any other politician for what he/she says or does.

My problem all along has been and still is, that with Donald Trump, the Republican Party has lost any moral high ground it ever had, and the more defense of this nonsense there is, the more likely it is that "we" will never get it back.

You're correct, I missed your point, and I would chalk that up more to my being inattentive, not the language at your end.

I agree, if he and others are trying to improve the level of debate in the public square, this isn't the way.  As an aside, I would mention I don't think he and others are trying to do that. 

[INVAR]

Let's get one thing straight:  Politicians don't have the same "right" to their offices as people who are working Americans have to work and live, free of "destruction."  When he speaks of "destroying" a politician, he's talking about "defeating" them in an election, and it's hyperbole to conflate the two.

He said 'destroy their careers'.  He did not say 'defeat them in an election'.  Big difference.

While the public has the power to destroy careers via our votes or patronage of businesses, officials elected to office bragging about destroying the careers of those who do not 'say nice things about me' - the 'hyperbole' if Obama had said that would be discarded in a nano-second by those now excusing it because Trump said it.

I do not want a president bragging about 'destroying' other Americans, period.  Totalitarians speak that way.  Not Presidents.

[DB]

Oh, the nipples.

Wait, what?

[Cyber Liberty]

The issue is Trump has very thin skin revealing a very insecure person. Where the slightest slight against him has to be returned at the nuclear level. There's no persuasion. There's no gathering of common ground. There's my way or the highway.

No matter how you slice that it is destructive. The GOP is being fractured into many pieces where many share common ground but you have to choose his way or your out.

Sure, OK.  I did say YMMV. 

I think there are a lot of politicians who would love to "destroy" Trump, and I mean the word in the most strict of ways (they want him out, and also impoverished financially).  Governor John Kasich, is but one example, and has done nothing but try to "destroy" Trump since before the election.  They are not likely to succeed, but rather they are driving neutral people into the Trump camp.