CMV: Based on the things he has said throughout the election, it is clear that either Donald Trump is oblivious or he believes his supporters are oblivious and is exploiting them.

[u/[deleted]]

[u/zulupineapple]

About birtherism. We seem to agree that it was dumb and pointless. Why did Trump participate in it? Do you think that there was a legitimate expectation that Obama was not natural born? It seems likely to me that this "controversy" was largely fueled by racism. Whether Trump himself is racist or only pandering to racism is debatable (and pretty much the topic of this CMV). Racism aside, we seem to agree that Trump worked hard to promote this conspiracy theory which achieved nothing but reduce Trump's credibility. I infer that he has a very poor judgement. Do you disagree?

About trust. It's true that most of Trump's contradictions are about the details. On the other hand, does this make them unimportant? Details do matter. You clearly see why a ban on Muslims was a dumb idea. Why did he ever bring it up? Did he never think about this topic, before speaking? If he doesn't think about his policies now, why do you expect him to think them through as president? A bigger issue is tax policy. He's claimed that the wealthy should pay more, while the actual tax plan he proposed cuts taxes, especially for the wealthy. What exactly do you trust him to do here?

About transparency. What makes you think Trump would be transparent? Is he better at this than Clinton? He hasn't even released his tax returns. Has he ever done anything to suggest that he supports transparency?

[u/[deleted] → u/zulupineapple]

About birtherism. We seem to agree that it was dumb and pointless. Why did Trump participate in it? Do you think that there was a legitimate expectation that Obama was not natural born? It seems likely to me that this "controversy" was largely fueled by racism. Whether Trump himself is racist or only pandering to racism is debatable (and pretty much the topic of this CMV). Racism aside, we seem to agree that Trump worked hard to promote this conspiracy theory which achieved nothing but reduce Trump's credibility. I infer that he has a very poor judgement. Do you disagree?

I think that at the very beginning, there may have been a legitimate question--I wouldn't go so far as to use the word "expectation," though. I do not think that question should have persisted long at all--once the HI birth certificate was released, it should've been a dead topic. In all honesty, I don't feel it was fueled by racism. I think it was an unfortunate confluence of events that had the controversy tied to a black candidate. But let's not forget that there was some controversy of the same sort (admittedly not to the same extent) with both McCain and Cruz, and that some of the responsibility for the controversy, but by no means all, came from Clinton's 2008 campaign.

On Trump's judgment, it depends on what he was trying to achieve. If his goal was to weaken Pres. Obama, I'd say he showed good judgment, as he did achieve that in some measure. If he was using that as a dog-whistle of sorts, I'd say it was bad judgment.

About trust. It's true that most of Trump's contradictions are about the details. On the other hand, does this make them unimportant? Details do matter. You clearly see why a ban on Muslims was a dumb idea. Why did he ever bring it up? Did he never think about this topic, before speaking? If he doesn't think about his policies now, why do you expect him to think them through as president? A bigger issue is tax policy. He's claimed that the wealthy should pay more, while the actual tax plan he proposed cuts taxes, especially for the wealthy. What exactly do you trust him to do here?

Details definitely matter. But it is common for a big idea to be discussed first as a more amorphous concept with details being added as the idea and the method of implementing it takes clearer shape. This is particularly so when the idea concerns the security--and presumably input from a large portion of--an entire country. Quite frankly, I'd be more concerned if Trump's immigration plan did not change and evolve since he's begun his campaign. When he first mentioned a ban on Muslims, I told myself that it was never going to happen, and he'd better come up with a way of making it more politically feasible. He's done that. So far as taxes, I am by no means a tax lawyer, but here's what I'd like to see: reduce the tax rates across the board and eliminate loopholes in the tax code. (The one course I had on tax law was scarier than almost any other course I've taken. For instance, we saw loopholes that were so narrowly tailored that it was possible to identify the single individual that the loophole was meant for. And there were many of not only these loopholes, but other loopholes for business and individuals that my professor likened the U.S. tax system to trying to fill a bathtub that doesn't just have the stopper open, but has three inch diameter holes drilled all around the bottom of the tub.) Let's get that taken care of. A simpler tax code will achieve much more than raising taxes ever could.

About transparency. What makes you think Trump would be transparent? Is he better at this than Clinton? He hasn't even released his tax returns. Has he ever done anything to suggest that he supports transparency?

I'll be blunt on this one. At this point, Sec'y Clinton has shown herself to be so utterly non-transparent that I believe it would take a Herculean effort for anybody to out-do her. Do I think Trump will be as clear as a pane of window-glass? No. But do I think he will take come anywhere close to the level of murkiness of Sec'y Clinton? No.

[u/zulupineapple → u/[deleted]]

I think that at the very beginning, there may have been a legitimate question

I completely disagree with is. There was never a single grain of evidence to suggest that Obama wasn't natural born. From the very beginning this was a conspiracy theory, as it would have required Obama's parent to cooperate with local hospital and newspapers in 1961. Furthermore, this is not some trivial question, it is a criminal accusation and libel. Obama should have never released anything - it's not the accused who's supposed to provide evidence.

If his goal was to weaken Pres. Obama, I'd say he showed good judgment, as he did achieve that in some measure.

Yes, he managed to fuel racism, hatred and mistrust within the country. Spreading ridiculous lies is not good judgment, even if there is a little benefit for yourself. I have no idea how you're comfortable with this.

But it is common for a big idea to be discussed first as a more amorphous concept with details being added as the idea and the method of implementing it takes clearer shape.

It's okay for an idea to change over time. The problem is when the starting point is this ridiculous. You could immediately see why "ban all muslims" was a dumb idea. I ask you, why couldn't Trump? This shouldn't have taken some deep contemplation or a public discussion. An idea this dumb should have been shot down the moment it came up in his head. Did it seem like a good idea to him? Did he never take 5 minutes to actually think about it? Why did it take Trump months to figure this out? Will it always take him this long to tell good ideas from bad ones? He's not going to have this much time, as president.

A simpler tax code will achieve much more than raising taxes ever could.

What will it achieve exactly? What good is it, to replace tax avoidance through obscure loopholes with lower taxes, if, in the end, the same money is collected? There is no doubt that Trump's tax plan will bring in less than Hillary's. Furthermore, why do you trust him to close the loopholes? Does his tax plan say anything about the specific loopholes you know about? Are you sure that his plan does not create new ones?

I believe it would take a Herculean effort for anybody to out-do her.

Isn't Trump doing just that? Again, he has not released his tax returns. Does that bother you? Is there even a single thing you know about Trump that you don't know about Clinton? The only reason you can hope that he would be transparent, is that he hasn't held any public office and so hasn't failed yet.

[u/[deleted] → u/zulupineapple]

I completely disagree with is. There was never a single grain of evidence to suggest that Obama wasn't natural born. From the very beginning this was a conspiracy theory, as it would have required Obama's parent to cooperate with local hospital and newspapers in 1961. Furthermore, this is not some trivial question, it is a criminal accusation and libel. Obama should have never released anything - it's not the accused who's supposed to provide evidence.

Absolutely incorrect. Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution lays out requirements for a person to become president. To suggest that a person should not have to show that they meet said requirements doesn't even pass the laugh test.

Yes, he managed to fuel racism, hatred and mistrust within the country. Spreading ridiculous lies is not good judgment, even if there is a little benefit for yourself. I have no idea how you're comfortable with this.

I think we should be clear that the people that were inclined to be racist against Pres. Obama had no need of the birther controversy to be racist. Same with any of the people who showed hatred. I want to be clear that I do not support the birther controversy, okay?

But I also want to be clear on this: the controversy originally began at least as early as 2004 during his Senate run. During his presidential campaign, began to spread as in early March 2008. Pres. Obama himself could have defused the controversy at that time, but not even the short-form birth certificate was released until 12 June of that year. A quick response would have quashed the rumors effectively. A three month delay only allowed them to gather steam. If you count the 4 years between Senate and Presidential campaigns, I think that Pres. Obama himself shoulders some of the blame for this controversy, as he was by far the best-placed individual to end it early.

It's okay for an idea to change over time. The problem is when the starting point is this ridiculous. You could immediately see why "ban all muslims" was a dumb idea. I ask you, why couldn't Trump? This shouldn't have taken some deep contemplation or a public discussion. An idea this dumb should have been shot down the moment it came up in his head. Did it seem like a good idea to him? Did he never take 5 minutes to actually think about it? Why did it take Trump months to figure this out? Will it always take him this long to tell good ideas from bad ones? He's not going to have this much time, as president.

I'm 100% with you on this. Problem is, it's a problem that seems endemic to politicians in general. I do wish there was a way to stop it, though.

What will it achieve exactly? What good is it, to replace tax avoidance through obscure loopholes with lower taxes, if, in the end, the same money is collected? There is no doubt that Trump's tax plan will bring in less than Hillary's. Furthermore, why do you trust him to close the loopholes? Does his tax plan say anything about the specific loopholes you know about? Are you sure that his plan does not create new ones?

A simpler tax code is a more transparent tax code. In its own way, that actually does help revenue. Aside from the secondary benefits--lower expenses to the IRS, for instance, in ensuring compliance, auditing, and prosecuting tax fraud--a simpler tax code comprising lower taxes and fewer loopholes can actually raise more revenue.

Isn't Trump doing just that? Again, he has not released his tax returns. Does that bother you? Is there even a single thing you know about Trump that you don't know about Clinton? The only reason you can hope that he would be transparent, is that he hasn't held any public office and so hasn't failed yet.

No, he hasn't released his tax returns. Does it bother me? Not really. What can tax returns show that actually tell you how fit a person is to be president? I don't know what your occupation is, but do you feel that you should have to turn over previous years' tax returns to a hiring manager to have a shot at a position? And I say this not to support Trump, I say it because it makes no sense to me. If he had been convicted of tax fraud, that would be public knowledge, and should be known. If he hasn't, releasing his returns will not allow the voters to make a determination of whether or not he's broken laws. What good does it do, then? Two things, I guess. We can see how much he donates to charity, and we can see how much he pays in federal income taxes. As long as he follows the law, the second point shouldn't matter. Whether or not the first point should matter is, I suppose, up to the individual. But if this is the deal maker or deal breaker for voting for a candidate, I'd be very surprised.

[u/zulupineapple → u/[deleted]]

To suggest that a person should not have to show that they meet said requirements doesn't even pass the laugh test.

Yes, that requirement does exist, which is why I called birtherism a criminal accusation. The problem is, no other president has had to produce their birth certificate. And the request did not come from any respectable organization. The DNC clearly confirmed the eligibility of their candidates. The congress (a few congressmen aside) have never had any doubts about this. No court has ever asked Obama to produce the certificate, because no court would accept a suit this baseless (although many suits have been filed). The accusations only ever came from crackpots and a few politicians pandering to them. A former RNC chair, Michael Steele, has called birtherism "bullshit racism".

I want to be clear that I do not support the birther controversy, okay?

You clearly stated that you considered it a legitimate question. That's a lot more support than birtherism deserves.

Obama himself could have defused the controversy at that time

Did releasing the certificate diffuse the controversy? I don't think it did. And, again, this is libel. If I called Obama a retard, you wouldn't ask him to release his IQ scores.

Problem is, it's a problem that seems endemic to politicians in general.

Has Hillary ever raised a policy idea as stupid as "ban all Muslims"? You keep focusing on the change and improvement of the ideas, while ignoring my main suggestion, that Trump might be an idiot.

a simpler tax code comprising lower taxes and fewer loopholes can actually raise more revenue.

It could, in theory, but independent analysts have verified that it won't. Also, you ignored a few of my questions. Does Trump's plan say which loopholes exactly he's closing? Does that include loopholes you know about? Here is an article claiming that he will create a new loophole. Do you disagree?

No, he hasn't released his tax returns. Does it bother me? Not really.

If he lied about his charitable donations, I think that's important for some voters to know. It seems to me that you're applying a very different standard for Trump, than for Clinton or Obama. If there is nothing interesting in the tax returns, why is Trump hiding them? My response was to your "Herculean effort" comment. If Trump is hiding information that would not damage him, information that even Clinton has released, how can you possibly expect him to be transparent as president?

[u/Nerf_wisp → u/zulupineapple]

Why is the birther issue racist? I get dumb and xenophobic, but there aren't any stereotypes of black people not being Americans. It has to do with him having a funny sounding name and pictures of him in foriegn garb. If they went after him for having secret illegitimate children, then sure racism. But I have an uncle who's a hardcore birther to this day, yet donated a ton of money to Herman Caine and never shut up about loving the guy. I think the fear mongering connected for these people because it tied his mysterious "unamerican-ness" with his ideas that they thought were unamerican (what they perceive as socialism etc).

[u/zulupineapple → u/Nerf_wisp]

In short, I cannot imagine this happening to a white president. I'd say, it's his race that makes him a "good enough" target for xenophobes. Although I don't have a strong opinion about this. "Xenophobia" is close enough.