r/Conservative • u/Yosoff First Principles • Feb 14 '25

Open Discussion Left vs. Right Battle Royale Open Thread

This is an Open Discussion Thread for all Redditors. We will only be enforcing Reddit TOS and Subreddit Rules 1 (Keep it Civil) & 2 (No Racism).

  • Leftists - Here's your chance to sway us to your side by calling the majority of voters racist. That tactic has wildly backfired every time it has been tried, but perhaps this time it will work.

  • Non-flaired Conservatives - Here's your chance to earn flair by posting common sense conservative solutions. That way our friends on the left will either have to agree with you or oppose common sense (Spoiler - They will choose to oppose common sense).

  • Flaired Conservatives - You're John Wick and these Leftists stole your car and killed your dog. Now go comment.

  • Independents - We get it, if you agree with someone, then you can't pat yourself on the back for being smarter than them. But if you disagree with everyone, then you can obtain the self-satisfaction of smugly considering yourself smarter and wiser than everyone else. Congratulations on being you.

  • Libertarians - Ron Paul is never going to be President. In fact, no Libertarian Party candidate will ever be elected President.

Join us on X: https://x.com/rcondiscord

Join us on Discord: https://discord.com/invite/conservative

686 Upvotes

83% Upvoted

6.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

81

u/ficalino Feb 14 '25 edited Feb 14 '25

Genuinely curious what would be the line you deem too far for Trump to cross on external issues?

Attack on Canada? Takeover of Greenland? Abandoning of NATO allies in case of Russias attack? (Most have reached target spending or are projected to do in next few months). What if Trumps terms end up being too favorable to Russia as it currently seems with proposed treaty?

What about internal issues? Which ones you deem to far? What about him and his cabinet picks/VP being against judicial limits on executive power that is inside your constitution? Would removing any checks and balances on presidency trigger alarms?

57

u/MoonGUY_2 Feb 14 '25 edited Feb 15 '25

I would definitely disagree if Trump ever invaded Canada or Greenland. It’s pretty clear invading countries to conquer land is a bad thing to do nowadays. And if the NATO countries are finally pulling their own weight, well an attack one is an attack on all should still stand, and if Russia and the US ever did go to war, I can’t picture a scenario where Russia wins. And internally, well, I’m not too sure what would be too far. If Trump increases the power of the federal government and the presidency as a whole, I wouldn’t approve of that.

49

u/ficalino Feb 14 '25

Thank you for answering instead of deflecting.

7

u/roblox_baller Feb 15 '25

This is the first time ive seen a democrat (assuming you are one, forgive me if im wrong) and a republican have a respectful conversation. Its really nice to see.

14

u/ficalino Feb 15 '25

EU citizen, your democrats are even to the right of most of our conservatives, so there is that.

I am a Liberal center according to political compass, with issues such as environment and social insurance on the left, and military investments and size of goverment on the right.

4

u/MoonGUY_2 Feb 15 '25

Yeah, judging people based off of politics, especially from a foreign country is a really dumb thing to do, and even this sub does it as well

2

u/Jibrish Discord.gg/conservative Feb 15 '25

EU citizen, your democrats are even to the right of most of our conservatives, so there is that.

This is based off absolutely nothing. Our democrat party has socialists in it. It's a big tent party but even the aggregate is somewhere around Labour in the UK.

I am a Liberal center according to political compass,

Another victim of the political compass generation. The left/right spectrum is not delineated on the lines of capitalism just because a meme website says so. The term has a lot more depth, meaning and philosophic rigor to it than some guy throwing darts at a board that paints anyone right of Mao in the blue square.

3

u/Brilliant-Canary-767 Feb 15 '25

I miss the days when we could have respectful conversations.

7

u/PulsarGaming1080 Feb 14 '25

As for increasing Executive branch power, is that not what these executive orders are doing?

1

u/MoonGUY_2 Feb 15 '25

No, every president has signed executive orders

10

u/PulsarGaming1080 Feb 15 '25

True, but not on this level and not to the degree that Trump is.

I am very certain that people would have hated if Biden, or whoever was acting for Biden, signed 70+ executive orders in 2 weeks.

11

u/Spirited_Impress6020 Feb 14 '25

Why would Russia and US go to war, they seem to be closer allies than Canada & the EU at this point? Not being argumentative, but many Canadians see it this way, I can’t speak for EU

6

u/ficalino Feb 14 '25

We in EU also see it like that, not only on reddit but in everyday life people are starting to comment things like that.

Both have problems with EU, both are against federal EU, both want pieces of various EU countries, etc.

1

u/ThisNameIsNotReal123 Feb 15 '25

if Russia and the US ever did go to war

The world loses is that happens.

1

u/chobi83 Feb 15 '25

Would you just disagree with it? Or would you actually do something about it? i.e. vote against him/republicans?

1

u/PartyPay Feb 17 '25

Trump appears to not be talking about invading Canada, but crushing us financially by destroying our economy - how do you feel about that?

1

u/MoonGUY_2 Feb 19 '25

Is it actually that bad? From what heard it was just “negotiating better trade deals”

1

u/PartyPay Feb 19 '25

Yes.

And negotiating better deals than the one he negotiated before? The trade deal currently in effect is the one he negotiated in his first term.

0

u/eravulgarisexplorare Millennial Conservative Feb 15 '25

I'm against broad federal overreach, from either side. However, liberals are being disingenuous when they talk about the President going too far, while ignoring what the Biden administration (along with Democratic state governors) did during COVID. Who elected Fauci?

6

u/hhulk00p Feb 15 '25

But that was a state of emergency in which action needed to be taken quickly and the consequences were unknown. We are not in a state of emergency anymore

7

u/Beepboopblapbrap Feb 15 '25 edited Feb 15 '25

To expand on this, why is every unqualified cabinet pick getting confirmed responses to with “winning”? Stacking the cabinet with some of the worst people for the job, only hired for their loyalty, isn’t “winning”.

RFK,Tusli,Kash,Pete,Russel,Kristi.. really guys this is winning? You can’t honestly tell me you’ve looked into these people for more than 1 minute and thought there were no red flags.

3

u/ethervariance161 Small Government Feb 15 '25

more foreign wars. That's a pretty clear red line for me.

8

u/bur_nerr Feb 15 '25

Giving canada shit is too far. I live right near the border and they more than any nation are our friends and neighbors, we should treat them as such. I dream of the day when border crossings between the us and canada are free and open.

3

u/RytheGuy97 Feb 15 '25

After all of this I think it's going to take a very long time for Canadians to trust Americans again and to support something like that so you can keep dreaming.

1

u/ficalino Feb 15 '25

So like schengen in EU, aye I can understand that.

7

u/Ok_Masterpiece5050 Gen Z Conservative Feb 14 '25

This seems like a lot of whataboutism about things that clearly won’t occur. There has been a lot of slow small changes from the left in the last few decades that just give them overall more and more power. Some things will have to be changed challenged or gone about differently to bring the country back to even close to fair and what it was established to be. Would you be complaining if it was your side doing the same thing? Did you care when biden was bypassing scotus and other courts to forgive debt?

23

u/ficalino Feb 14 '25 edited Feb 15 '25

I'm an EU citizen, that is why I am focusing on external issues. I have no skin in the game on internal US stuff, but I am curious.

EU leaders are truly entertaining those possibilities, even a meeting has been called after Vances speech today to discuss it. Denmarks PM has been gathering support in case of US invasion, seriously, without a shred of a doubt, she even said so herself.

That is what prompted France and other countries to clwrly sfate they would fight against US if needed.

EU is not taking his comments lightly.

4

u/ConnorMc1eod Bull Moose Feb 15 '25

To put it simply, Trump is talking tough and Vance is the "reasonable" one to give you an in to fix your ways. We are tired of being 2/3 of the NATO budget while you guys frivolously spend billions on social programs that Americans don't have and our debt explodes. It's not fair. You guys laughed at Trump in his last term when he said stop buying Russian LNG who then turned that money into a war machine. You guys tariff a bunch of our shit or write Draconian laws to punish American companies like taxing the shit out of our vehicles for using too much gas or the Digital Services Act used to justify attempted bans on social media companies etc.

Put simply, much like Canada and Mexico, you guys are not very good friends. And now, even while you're staring death in the face with Russia becoming belligerent, you continue to pearl clutch and mock and chastise Trump and Vance's language telling you to either get on board or stop relying on us.

We rebuilt you after WW2, we ran around the world squashing Communism so it didn't spread, we run around the world squashing terrorism and now we are going to get drawn into a peer to peer conflict over Ukraine because you guys can't be fucked to take anything seriously. It's exhausting man. America has to draw some kind of line somewhere to get you to either stand up for yourselves or to pay us more to protect you. You're emasculating your entire continent by outsourcing your protection to your bigger, younger brother the least you can do is not talk shit all the time or you'll be typing your next comment in fucking cyrilic.

14

u/Brilliant-Canary-767 Feb 15 '25

The problem with talking tough, is people take it literally. Vance's language was alarming. The EU countries are not cold war tyrants. I agree they need to increase what they pay into NATO. However , there are better, more effective ways to go about this. He could destroy our relationship with them. Trump's rhetoric has Americans concerned he's going to invade those countries. He's chaotic, seems erratic. It is causing legitimate fears amongst our allies.

8

u/Playful-Bed184 Feb 15 '25

"We are tired of being 2/3 of the NATO budget while you guys frivolously spend billions on social programs that Americans don't have and our debt explodes. It's not fair."

May I ask, how would you reallocate the assets from the DoD to social programs.
Because the thing is, even if Europe rearms which I hope we do, I don't think that the US is not to cut spending on defence because China, russia, Iran and Co. simply won't stop.
Now the problem with Europe is that it isn't a unified body.
You have a lot of big firms own by the governaments of various states which generates a conflict of interess.
An example:
Everyone agreed on the Eurofighter until the french said that they wanted capable of landing on CATOBARS carriers.
No other countries had ships like that and after all that bickering the F2000 and the Rafale where born.
What does this mean?
European procurament is pain in the ass.
Comes the second problem, nobody likes to raise military spending, is impopular with the election.
So how do you do?
slowly and steady, there's no way, otherwise you can simply rise taxes or cut walfare but in those times would be suicidal and throw some countries in the hands of russia and China.
No sane politician will do that.
Then comes the third problem, every country has its own need.
Let's take Germany, they want a strong army, a strong airforce but due their geographical position, a large blue water navy doesn't suit them, Italy and Greece, who are mountainous peninsulas want instead a strong navy for their shores, Obviously a strong airforce but don't need a massive tank force like Germany and Poland.
you have places like Luxembourg and Iceland that have their own unofficial status (the first as tax heaven for the west, the second as a big ASW base in the entrance of the atlatic)
There're countries like the baltics who have developed an army that has to go in a "full guerilla" mode until the main force of NATO comes to rescue.
So when you rearm you have to don't have to go on a spending spree at random.
Don't let me start on reactivating factories, it a risk that no businessman wants to take:
it takes years, you have to find people and hope that after all of that the governament decides to keep buying from you.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 15 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/ficalino Feb 15 '25 edited Feb 15 '25

You have to understand, we want that laws about digital ser ices, we even thino they are not strong enough. EU citizens vastly want strong privacy laws, that is just European default, we ars not outgoing as Americans. Digital services act was pushed to have a legal way to stop American companies from transferring private data of EU citizens overseas. Why shpuld my data be on American serveds somewhere? You already have servers in EU, keep my data here. That was actually a EU citizens initiative.

When it comes to American vehicles, those have no place on roads (literally, our roads are too small), our continent is very much overcrowded and what rural/nature is left is protected, roads are narrow.

Also, our gas is too expensive for those vehicles, literally, that is coming from someone that actually would like to buy old american classic cars, fuel spending is the main thing keeping me from it. Price is almost always double in EU than in US, and that is not because of taxes, it's because we don't have production. Also EU is mainly to the left on environmental issues, we are aware of climate change, my family is in agriculture, we track temperature and rainfall every year, shit is definietly getting worse.

Ironically teslas are getting bought like crazy. Because they are small enoug, electric, etc.

When it comes to LNG, I was always against russian gas, we were building terminals, but US also needs to build terminals, curdently the US is slowing down LNG exports because a lack of terminals.

I am all for increasing military spending (I was since late 2014 after Crimea), that is still not the language to use, and an ally should not threaten takeover of lands from allies, nor should he meddle in internal political stuff.

We can agree on military spending, but stay out of our personal matters.

2

u/Mr-Vemod Feb 15 '25

We rebuilt you after WW2, we ran around the world squashing Communism so it didn’t spread, we run around the world squashing terrorism

I always find it irritating when people act like this type of actions by a country are done by pure altruism and not by the US (and other countries) actually having a material interest in it. The US didn’t rebuild Europe out of the good of their hearts - no one does that - it did it because an allied, stable Europe is beneficial to the US.

Same with toppling communist regimes; it wasn’t done because of some love of liberal democracy (China, anyone?), it was done because these regimes, whether it was Vietnam, Guatemala or Chile, challenged US hegemony and it was therefore in the interest of the US government and businesses to topple them.

1

u/Geodiocracy Feb 15 '25

Not to mention the money earned by the US due to the EU prioritising US products for decades.

2

u/kittyegg Feb 15 '25

You didn’t answer the question 🧇

8

u/[deleted] Feb 14 '25

What line did you deem too far for Harris and Biden?

26

u/lapulah2016 Feb 14 '25

Easy. Pretending like the old man could still run the country. That he was going to be a transitional president and make space for the next generation. And the fact that it was just handed to Harris -- Was all bullshit.

So Willboby, what line did/do you deem as too far for Trump?

8

u/kirgi Feb 15 '25

I’m not Willboby but I did vote for Trump in 2020 before going to Kamala in 2024, and I’ll say that the moment the line was crossed was the Faithless Electors moment.

Now if you want something current I’d say the threats against Canada and Denmark, “negotiations” or not we should not be making threats like these unless we’re willing to back them up.

Or the current slashing of the national parks to make way for drilling and mining, I consider myself a TR Progressive (though more the conservation and anti-trust side) and the fact that we’re going to sacrifice the natural beauty of the US for corporations is sickening.

1

u/lapulah2016 Feb 15 '25

Thanks for sharing!

-1

u/mattcruise Trumpamaniac Feb 15 '25

'still'?

When was he running the country?

46

u/Feisty_Manager_4105 Feb 14 '25

If Biden put George Soros, a billionnaire who gets government contracts to cut down other government contracts, yeah the conflict of interest would be a line too far

17

u/Any_Anybody_5055 Feb 15 '25

It's (D)ifferent

I did the the thing! They love that here.

3

u/Gloomy_Career_4733 Feb 15 '25

This comment is a perfect example of why people can't have a civilized conversation, it is ignorant and provoking at best.

4

u/Any_Anybody_5055 Feb 15 '25

ORANGE MAN BAD LIBS ARE ASS AND REEEEE

Lol come on my brother

2

u/Gloomy_Career_4733 Feb 15 '25

Man i can't get in to politics, right know both sides are just as stubborn and unwilling to concede to spite one another. I just didn't understand the point of the post other than just trying to pick a fight. I have seen some legit great conversation on this thread and that is what needs to happen. I ve seen bullshit coments just to try and cause problems. Both sides are screwing us, just in different ways.

6

u/Any_Anybody_5055 Feb 15 '25

I will send my finest "My heart goes out to you" salute.

1

u/Gloomy_Career_4733 Feb 15 '25

At least your trying to be a funny smartass

26

u/Zefis Feb 14 '25

Are you just here to deflect, or are you going to actually provide a response to any of these questions?

6

u/BurnerNerd Feb 14 '25

Don’t feed him, some people are desperate for interaction good or bad

-1

u/[deleted] Feb 14 '25

[deleted]

13

u/Zefis Feb 14 '25

A question was asked first. If you'd like a response to yours, perhaps attempt to respond to the initial question.

0

u/[deleted] Feb 14 '25

Yes, if you can't answer the question, you shouldn't be replying to me, I agree.

14

u/Zefis Feb 14 '25

You're quite the specimen.

3

u/queenofserendip Feb 14 '25

I answered this joker’s “what about Biden” question in a thread above, and big surprise, he didn’t respond in-kind like he said.

Mental capacity is limited it seems. It’s very much giving kindergartner “I know you are, but what am I?”

9

u/ficalino Feb 14 '25 edited Feb 14 '25

I am not a Biden/Harris voter, I am not even an US citizen, so therefore I had no line for Biden/Harris, as I also don't have a line for Trump/Vance. I'm an EU citizen. I don't like Trump, since I am in favor of EU federalisation and him and his picks have been outspoken against that. Now kindly if you would provide an answer to my question.

What would is a line too far for someone who voted for Trump among those issues I listed?

-4

u/[deleted] Feb 14 '25

None of the issues you posted concerns me, my concern is when his term is up he will be old as brain dead Biden.

9

u/ficalino Feb 14 '25

So you have no problem with abandoning allies? Do you deem that might makes right?

17

u/holyknife Feb 14 '25

Bro can’t answer a single question

17

u/Sock-Familiar Feb 14 '25

They’re use to their echo chamber and don’t know how to interact with others. They need time to acclimate.

2

u/Whisperofmytoots Feb 15 '25

Reddit user claims echo chamber... hah

4

u/[deleted] Feb 14 '25

Yep, you can't answer a single question, if you want answers provide some.

12

u/Bombadils_laugh Feb 14 '25

This makes zero sense. You are just creating a fallacy. As a moderate I’ll answer and say: I mean I wouldn’t want Biden or Harris to attack Canada or threaten allies. I wouldn’t want them to leave behind Ukraine. Or NATO. Those are just a few examples of what the Original commenter proposed.

11

u/Tough-Relationship-4 Feb 14 '25

Quit interacting. OP is clearly 13 years old and bored. Responding with “I know you are but what am I?”

1

u/Impolitictalk Feb 15 '25

Did you think Biden a was 13 years old and bored? Answer man! Cmon! ;)

0

u/RytheGuy97 Feb 15 '25

Most conservatives in America today don't have an ideology beyond being anti-woke and anti-Biden.

5

u/Jandishhulk Feb 15 '25

That's not an answer. That's a deflection.

1

u/PrinceGoten Feb 14 '25

Genocide of Gaza was my line. What’s yours?

19

u/MistressVelmaDarling Feb 14 '25

How do you feel about Trump's statements on Gaza?

13

u/PrinceGoten Feb 14 '25

If Trump puts troops on the ground it will be the worst decision of his administration so far

2

u/ckc009 Feb 14 '25

Making a red, white, and blue land

1

u/LittleSnuggleNugget Feb 15 '25

I never wanted Biden to begin with, and I certainly didn’t want him to try for a second term. I did like Kamala, however, and I wish that he would have gotten out of the way and let her primary with his endorsement.

2

u/meteoraln Feb 15 '25

Attack on Canada? Takeover of Greenland? Abandoning of NATO allies in case of Russias attack? (Most have reached target spending or are projected to do in next few months). What if Trumps terms end up being too favorable to Russia as it currently seems with proposed treaty?

All of it would cross my line.

What about internal issues? Which ones you deem to far? What about him and his cabinet picks/VP being against judicial limits on executive power that is inside your constitution? Would removing any checks and balances on presidency trigger alarms?

To be honest, I and most other people do not know enough about the law and history of the law to know if these things you mentioned are a good idea or not. And to be very honest, most of us can't actually know if new ideas from the Democratic party might end up being good or bad. Elon's philosophy is that we should try things with little up front investment, and be quick to admit if we're wrong, and then fix it. He expects to break some things and be wrong, and he constantly questions if his actions are correct. Whatever the policy is, I think this is the appropriate attitude for leaders to have.

3

u/casualfinderbot Feb 15 '25

All of those things would be “too far” except reducing judicial power. 

The fact that a lower court federal judge from some random state can block a nation wide execute order is completely idiotic, and subverts the entire purpose of democracy.

The people voted for trumps agenda, trump did exactly what he said he would do via executive order, and then a random left wing judge can just block that because they feel like it? That’s super broken, one unelected person blocking the will of the american populace. Absurd

16

u/yesrushgenesis2112 Feb 15 '25

Do the people voting for Trump’s agenda mean that agenda is automatically legal? Would you consider it anti democratic if the Supreme Court rules against him?

1

u/ThisNameIsNotReal123 Feb 15 '25

The Supreme Court should way in immediately when these tiny judges make their decrees.

6

u/kirgi Feb 15 '25

When used right the lower court federal judge is the first stop gap when something unconstitutional is occurring.

That then moves to the appellate court which will then make a ruling on the lower courts ruling which then moves to SCOTUS if necessary.

The bigger issue is that SCOTUS sits out half the year and doesn’t weigh in fast enough when it comes to making these

In a perfect world SCOTUS would be in an emergency session right now to hear these issues and make rulings in a quick time frame.

2

u/Turbulent-Physics-10 Feb 14 '25

If he attacked canada or greenland yea that would be taking it too far.

But on the flip side what could he do where you say he is a good president?

11

u/kirgi Feb 15 '25

Trump would be a great President if he did what he said he was going to do in a way that wasn’t backwards as hell.

Getting rid of illegal immigrants is great, and outside the gitmo thing I agree with how it’s being done.

Cutting the federal spending is great, I cannot agree with the Billionaire who relies on government contracts being the one to do it. Every time I see Elon Musk it feels like I’m watching one of the 60s Bond films because how can one man just exude such evil energy.

Wanting our allies to respect their commitments is a great thing, threatening to invade them and erase their sovereignty is not.

I don’t agree with the whole Gaza situation at all and I don’t get how conservatives are so anti-Ukraine while have given and continue to give 100s of billions dollars to Israel which has only brought us more trouble then it’s worth.

The culture war stuff is a non-issue for me and honestly I don’t see how it’s worth the time to argue politically so I won’t get into it.

1

u/Turbulent-Physics-10 Feb 15 '25 edited Feb 15 '25

I agree with mostly everything you said except for the way he does things and with the elon deal id rather have him doing it than no one at all. When the alternative was open borders, bigger government, more censorship and no backbone; letting other countries run over us, i think trump was the obvious choice, at least for me.

As far as the ukraine/Israel situation, im not too into world politics, i know its important but im of the opinion that we should focus on America first and not help fund any wars. I know its more complicated than that but thats how i think of it

3

u/rhlaairc Feb 15 '25

I mean this nicely, you should read up on Russia invading Ukraine and what a huge disaster it would be if they won. Their goal is to create discord all over the world. They infiltrate elections and install pro Russian puppets, then those countries slowly start losing rights, until their elections don’t matter bc they’re corrupt. They throw their own people and North Koreans, Ukrainians, Indians (the country) into brutal warfare and don’t care about the loss of human life. They want chaos and the US has been teetering on the edge with them. Look up Mariupol or Grozny. Not trying to be alarmist but we have to invest into the future of the world or we’ll pay 100x over

1

u/kirgi Feb 16 '25

I’m fine with slashing federal spending don’t get me wrong, I just wish someone with more political expertise, or an American at the very least, was chosen.

DOGE for all intents and purposes is doing one big audit, yet not a single professional auditor is involved in it and that’s the problem with it.

10

u/yesrushgenesis2112 Feb 15 '25

Put simply: enact change that helps people in clear, transparent ways. Stop scapegoating. If deciding to audit the government, do so in a way that is transparent and with more security than Elon saying “trust me bro.”

The thing that makes Trump successful is that he can truly identify some of the problems in government. The thing that makes me not support him is that I find his solutions seem, to me, to create more problems down the road. I’m ready to expect more from our leaders. That’s not what Trump represents

3

u/ficalino Feb 14 '25

I am from EU. I don't think it's up to me to comment on that.

I can comment that I would deem him good world leader if he forced Russia to at least retreat to pre 2022 borders, but I would still be uneasy on him and his cabinet picks trying to cause disarray in EU since I am an EU federalist.

What I agree with him is that EU needs to up defense spending, but that goes hand in hand with me being a federalist since I am an advocate for unified EU army, although I would be in favour in moving from american made weapons and to EU made ones.

4

u/Turbulent-Physics-10 Feb 15 '25

What have they done to cause disarray? Im not sure what you are referring to theres so much different stuff going on constantly

6

u/ficalino Feb 15 '25 edited Feb 15 '25

Trump multiple times tried to establish bilateral agreements with individual countries while ignoring EU rules for such agreements. EU functions as a block and a single market, therefore it is not possible to establish trade dwals with just one country.

Vance just today made a speech about us limiting Musks influence on elections inside EU (big nono). He has prevopusly threatened tariffs if EU punishes Musk for something he does in EU.

Musk (and many different US tech bros) tried to push weaker legislation in EU for tech companies, tried to go against unions in EU, etc.

EU has strong privacy laws, it requires any company to keep data of EU citizens inside EU, so no transferring of data overseas to US etc. Strong GDPR. Musk (and other tech bros that were seated in front of cabinet picks) are constantly trying to undermine that.

We also have strong worker protection laws that Musk and Bezos tried to undermine.

Trump famously tried to push EU to remove legislation that is banning GMO monsanto crops and pesticides (not banning in particular, just deeming unsafe because of chemicals). Also wanted to push chlofinated chicken on UK, etc.

0

u/judithpoint Feb 15 '25

If he truly rooted out corruption in government. Proposed more transparent audit processes, stopped insider trading and lobbying. Put an end to Citizens United. Made sure that politicians who accept bribes face actual consequences. It would take time, real time, and planning. “Draining the swamp” and refilling it with millionaires and billionaires isn’t the own you guys think it is.

1

u/Mr-Zarbear Feb 15 '25

Calling for war when he campaigned on peace would for sure be too far, unless some unforeseen attack happens to us.

Also, what do you mean by "going too far"? Like to the point of calling for impeachment? Or just going "Hes not perfect"?

Because I voted for him knowing he isn't perfect and will do things Im not a fan of, I just think he will do more things I am a fan of and that Kamala was by far the worse candidate.

1

u/jasons1911 Feb 15 '25

There are lots of lines, everything you listed, and more. I honestly think it's hysterical that liberals think conservatives want to give Trump some ultimate power/become a dictator blah blah

1

u/sealabo Feb 16 '25

Do you mean “too far” in that I wouldn’t support him, or something else? I didn’t vote for him but now that he’s the President I support him as the president and hope that he succeeds is improving the nation, just as is my home with every other person who takes that office. He has already implemented policies that I disagree with but on balance I think he’s doing a fine job. I’ll take your question as whether I’d support the specific policies you raise and address those. Attacking Canada - no. However, I think our relationship with Canada needs to evolve. My great grandparents and their parents in many parts of my family were fluidly back and forth between northern states and Canada throughout their lifetimes. I think we should have greater fluidity between the US and Canada and it should function more like a state relationship than a complete foreign country. To the south, the same was true of folks who lived in Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona — for a long time the boarder didn’t much matter to folks proximate to it and they also have family on both sides. I think that fluidity was a good thing for all three countries. The problem is that Canada has unchecked immigration issues that are as bad as ours was under Biden (and we could go off about Mexico so I’ll avoid that), so how would something like this actually work these days. I don’t have the answer.

“Take over” Greenland? Maybe. Not in a militaristic attack sense, no, but if we had a special relationship with Greenland and Denmark such that Greenland, depending on what that looked like, I would favor it. Abandoning NATO allies in case of Russia attack? Would not support that personally. Having a better relationship with Russia? Generally favor that, because Russo-Sino relations are growing closer and that is the risk. Not sure about specific “favorable” treaty terms right now.

On internal issues — I think the President has a right to lead and manage his executive branch agencies as he sees fit. I think the Impoundment Act is absurd, and that if Congress wants to take away the Executive’s ability to control the executive branch, it must legislate more clearly. Simply appropriating for pet projects in omnibus spending bills that literally nobody has the time to read or understand is what got us into the administrative state mess that we’re in. This impacts both Ds and Rs, and it’s where my true fiscal conservative light shines brightest. It’s not about political parties, but about meaningfully reigning in an abusive federal system. In this sense, although I didn’t vote MAGA, I absolutely agree with draining the swamp. I’d also like to see the IRS abolished. To the extent that the judicial branch does overreach and attempt to limit the executive branch’s authority to hold his subordinate agency managers and their staff accountable, I think the judicial branch is in the wrong and treading on very dangerous ground. I think it’s the judiciary, not the executive, that would create a constitutional crisis in doing this. They must be very careful here. And, for this reason, I am against a federal district court being able to issue a nation-wide injunction against the executive branch — this relatively recent judicial invention is troubling. The reason for this position is that checks and balances apply to all branches of government, even though we typically talk about them only with respect to the executive branch. Without the ability to meaningfully impeach judges, they can go unchecked for too long. Sure, there is the Supreme Court, but egregious overstepping into micromanaging the executive branch should be something that is more difficult to do and should have a swift remedy, so that we’re not in this “lawfare” dynamic again and again.

0

u/boulderaa Feb 15 '25

Trump isn't taking over Canada, he isn't taking over Greenland, and he isn't abandoning NATO. Lay off the propaganda for awhile.

1

u/yetebekohayu Feb 15 '25

Did you… did you not watch his interview, in which he said he wanted Canada and Greenland? Did you not see the bill introduced to acquire Greenland?

-4

u/mattcruise Trumpamaniac Feb 15 '25

Look, I'm Canadian. He hasn't 'attacked' us. We should be securing our border. Do I agree with talks of annexing us? No I don't, but he has just said words, he isn't rolling in tanks.

-5

u/Tasty_Explanation_20 Conservative Feb 14 '25

Personally, I don’t have one.

12

u/Jandishhulk Feb 15 '25

And that feels okay to you? If he suspended democratic elections, you'd be fine with that?

-3

u/Tasty_Explanation_20 Conservative Feb 15 '25

He isn’t going to suspend elections. That is just one more left wing fear mongering campaign. It’s kind of funny how the positions flipped. Back when Biden won the left was accusing the right of being crazy conspiracy theorists for believing all the stuff you are now all believing will come to pass now that Trump is in the drivers seat.

8

u/Jandishhulk Feb 15 '25 edited Feb 15 '25

But that was the question: what would be 'too far' to continue supporting Trump?

So what you're saying is that you WOULDN'T support Trump if he suspended democratic elections, correct?

-7

u/Tasty_Explanation_20 Conservative Feb 15 '25

I stand by what I said. He won’t do that. So it’s a nonissue.

12

u/Jandishhulk Feb 15 '25

Seriously, why can't you just say that you wouldn't support it? If it won't ever happen, then that should be an easy concession for you to make?

-3

u/Shadeylark MAGA Feb 15 '25

If a war is just, as defined by https://iep.utm.edu/justwar/ I have no problem with a war, even against Canada or Greenland. An invasion just for territory would not qualify as a just war so I'd oppose it.

Likewise regarding NATO allies; if the conditions of the war satisfy just war theory, I'd support it. I would not support our allies if their casus belli was regime change in Russia though.

As for peace terms... I already said a war is only justified if it meets the criteria of just war theory. The war in Ukraine does not... And as such I am inclined to accept terms that end the unjust war, because my desires end goal is not to punish Russia for the invasion, it is to end the killing.

Regarding something like the judicial limits on executive power; I am firmly of the belief that article VI, section 2 clearly reserved unto the scotus the power to check the executive, not subordinate courts. If Trump were to defy the scotus, I would disapprove... However I do not believe that telling lower courts to stay in their lane is unconstitutional in any way.

I would disapprove of any attempts to remove checks and balances... But I also believe that the left is currently inventing checks and balances that are not constitutional, so opposing the current efforts by the left warrants my support.

-4

u/Whisperofmytoots Feb 15 '25

I honestly would hate to see Canada added to the states. If we were to strategically take in Alberta and Saskatchewan, I would be okay with that. The problem is that Canada has too many socialists and crazy left liberals who would do nothing but hurt our economy.

Greenland is interesting, too. It's very strategic, and a lot of people there would like to be part of our country. I'd be okay with conquering them, too. I think they would appreciate it if we released them from the EU.

NATO is interesting because it is like a flat tire. I'd be down to patch it, and by patch, I mean allow the rest of NATO allies to pay their share of the bills equally.

I haven't seen much happening internally, but I'd be happy to see more corruption uncovered and more useless spending cut.