Spread the word- about thin skinned bully with a disqualificatons list

There aren’t any arguments for a Trump presidency that justify his taking the oath of office.

Here is a list of concrete reasons why Donald Trump in totally unqualified to be elected the leader of the free world. Even his infomercials to sell real estate in Scotland are uninteresting and may even be offensive to some Scots. But wait! There's more!

Reasons why Donald Trump is a leadership disaster, besides being a racist, belligerant, bullheaded big mouth.  He's the presumptive Republican nominee for the GOP leadership position because a stupid group of supporters voted for him for all the wrong reasons.

Mario Puzo sort of summed it up when wrote a short narrative in his super-hit classic movie "The Godfather". His advice was, "Don't trust your fate in the hands of men whose only qualification is that they managed to con a block of people to vote for them.”

To erase any misunderstanding, ;et’s not mince words: Donald Trump will, without question, be the absolute worst President America has had to endure in the lifetimes of any living people on this planet.

Here's a few succinct reasons why:

1.  He talks like a third-grader… literally!
America tried that whole “inarticulate President” thing with Bush. It didn’t really work out too well for us, remember? Donald Trump speaks with a third-grade literacy level. That’s not a cheap insult… it’s a scientific fact. Most presidents in the 20th and 21st centuries have spoken, on average, with a 9th grade to 12th grade comprehension level. George H.W. Bush holds the record-low from a speech on January 28th of 1992, with a score of 7.2. It’s a good thing for presidents to use language most Americans can comprehend, but third grade? Trump would be running a country, not a game of Pokémon.

2.  He never really explains how he’s going to do anything
Trump doesn’t really have a treasure trove full of ideas, so much as an old musty pillowcase full of kneejerk assertions. He knows he wants to get rid of Obamacare, but what will he replace it with? “Something Terrific,” he claims. No plans, no ideas, no comprehensive walkthrough of what he dislikes about Obamacare or what, if anything, could be salvaged from the historic legislation… he just wants to get rid of it and replace it. He hasn’t really released comprehensive plans for any facet of his would-be presidency. He did release a “plan” on illegal immigration, if you want to call it that, consisting of just two words: mass deportation. Not the most brilliant thinker around, that Trump.

3. He has no experience
Donald Trump has never once served in a government job of any sort. Some of his supporters think this is a good thing, but trust me here folks… it’s definitely not. If “President Trump” would hope to get anything done, he’d need to fully comprehend the inside-baseball of Capitol Hill, which as far as anyone can tell, he doesn’t. How would Trump negotiate with Congress to see his agenda pushed forward? How would he work with both parties to get things done? You can’t just walk into the room and make arrogant demands. That’s not how it works.

4.  He’s a bully with the media
What Donald Trump said about Megyn Kelly was unforgivably atrocious. He’s a two-bit misogynistic Neanderthal thug. But this isn’t the only time Trump has had it out with the media. In almost every interview He’s ever given, Trump has belligerently accosted his interviewers, slammed their networks, claimed bias where there rightfully wasn’t any, and even sued Bill Maher in 2013 for $5 million, after Maher jokingly compared him to an orangutan. Do we really need a President who bullies and threatens the media when their dialog doesn’t suit their demands?

5.  He doesn’t care that you disagree with him
Probably the most frightening thing about Trump is that he considers himself to be 100% correct about everything (he's specially self righteous about his lies) that crosses his mind, with no wiggle-room for constructive debate. He lives in a headspace of absolutes, where everything is exactly white or exactly black. Politics, meanwhile, is about as gray as gray can get. Progress only happens when some level of compromise is maintained. But for Trump, the word “compromise” isn’t in his vocabulary, either metaphorically or, as we discussed earlier, literally.

6.  He’s gone bankrupt four times
On four separate occasions, Donald Trump has intentionally gone bankrupt, later claiming that those bankruptcies weren’t failures on his part, but strategic business decisions to help him make more money. So at best, he’s lying and bad at business, but at worst, he’s intentionally manipulating the system for personal gain. Either way, what makes you think he knows how to handle an entire economy?

7.  He’s a terrible Christian (Indeed, Trump should write and practice saying the name "Corinthians" 100 times, like a third grader who is punished for misbehaving in class.)
I genuinely couldn’t care any less what religion a person belongs to. I don’t think religion has any place in politics, and certainly should not play any important role in government or politics. But America’s conservatives are obsessed with religion, with these GOP candidates perpetually attempting to “out-Christian” each other. It’s quite common to hear conservatives rant about Obama not being “Christian enough” for their liking. Why, then, are they all clamoring to get Trump elected? Trump has been divorced twice and married three times, and recently made some controversial remarks about his Church visits. (Let's not forget to include his admitted philandering.) It’s probably difficult for Donald Trump to talk about God, though, at least when not speaking from a first-person perspective.

We could go on here, but there isn’t much of a point. The simple, undeniable fact is that Donald Trump has proven consistently that he would make a terrible President. There aren’t any arguments for a Trump presidency that justify his taking the oath of office. And if you still think Donald Trump would make a good President, do everyone in America a favor: stay home on election day. You simply aren’t mature enough to be making these sorts of decisions.

And, to end..... hold the thought trumped by Senator Elizabeth Warren:  Donald Trump is a thin skinned racist bully!

America can't elect an unqualified person to be the leader of the free world. Trump is especially dangerously incoherent, considering all that's at stake with international economies and the delicate balance with terrorism and the despot Vladimir Putin looming.  In fact, the Republcian party is inept by even allowing Donald Trump's candidacy to move forward.

Hillary Clinton is ready and qualified to be a magnificent Madam President

Thank you Senator Elizabeth Warren for your energetic endorsement of Secretary Hillary Clinton to be elected the first qualified woman President of the United States.

Elizabeth Warren endorses Hillary Clinton- by Annie Linskey

WASHINGTON -- Senator Elizabeth Warren ended months of neutrality in the Democratic primary Thursday and endorsed Hillary Clinton, urging supporters of Bernie Sanders to get behind the presumptive nominee and help defeat Donald Trump.

Warren’s endorsement followed President Obama’s by just a few hours, but it could be equally as important in rallying a liberal base that is suspicious of Clinton because of her warm relations with Wall Street and a track record of supporting international free trade deals.


“I’m ready,” said Warren in an interview with The Globe Thursday evening. “I’m ready to jump in this fight and make sure that Hillary Clinton is the next president of the United States and be sure that Donald Trump gets nowhere near the White House.”
Asked whether Clinton should release the transcripts of paid speeches she gave to Goldman Sachs, Warren said: “That’s for her to decide — there will be a whole lot of issues to talk about over the next several months.” Sanders frequently calls on Clinton to release them.

“I’m supporting Hillary Clinton because she’s a fighter, a fighter with guts,” Warren said.

                           Warren labels Trump ‘nasty, thin-skinned fraud’ 
The senator from Mass. delivered the remarks in Washington on Thursday.She praised Sanders saying that he’s run an “incredible campaign” -- and said that she didn’t want to “get into” speculation about whether she might serve as Clinton’s vice president.

Warren discussed the endorsement in an appearance on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show, on June 9th.

She moved up her timeline to endorse Clinton — she had initially planned to do it next week — soon after President Obama gave his nod to Clinton Thursday. Warren was one of the highest profile Democrats still on the sidelines in the Democratic contest.

Warren will be speaking to a liberal audience when she makes her first pitch on behalf of Clinton on MSNBC.

Maddow has been a Sanders booster over the course of the year-long campaign, though has more recently cooled on him as it’s become clear that he could not win.

Ideologically, Warren is much closer to Sanders than Clinton, who has been much cozier with Wall Street bankers during her career.

The Massachusetts Senator said repeatedly that she would endorse a candidate during the primary, but her nod is coming after Clinton has claimed the nomination.

By sitting out during the primary contests, liberal activists were left to make up their minds about what Warren was intending. At rallies across the country her silence was typically perceived as support for Sanders.

 The endorsement of Clinton doesn’t seem to be immediately affecting the relationship between the two New England senators.

“Warren and Sanders are friendly, they are fighting for the same issues,” said Symone Sanders, a Sanders spokeswoman after news broke that Warren would back Clinton.

As of 1 p.m. Thursday, Sanders of Vermont had no plans to meet with Warren, according to Sanders spokesman Michael Briggs.

In the past few days Warren has sent signals that she was preparing to back Clinton. Over the weekend at the Massachusetts Democratic Convention Warren undercut the only path Sanders now has to the Democratic nomination.

Sanders and his top aides have at times said that they would not concede the Democratic primary until July, and use that time to convince the superdelegates to switch their vote away from Clinton — even though Clinton won the popular vote, won the majority of pledged delegates, and the larger share of states and territories.

“I don’t think that superdelegates ought to sway the election,” said Warren, referring to the Democratic party leaders who are allowed to vote in the nomination process. “I’m a superdelegate, and I don’t believe in superdelegates,” Warren said.

Republican sedition and Supreme Court nominations

Republicans are preposterously assuming they can block any nomination President Obama puts forth to fill the US Surpreme Court vacancy created by the untimely death of Justice Antonin Scalia (1936-2016). This presumed political power exceeds the intentions of the authors of the US Constitution when they created three independent branches of government- the Executive, the Judicial and the Legislative branches. 

Each branch of government is separate and checks on the powers of each other. In other words, the US Constituton was written with the intention of preventing any one political party or governmental branch from controlling the nation. Except, the Republicans don't see it that way, anymore. Rather, the Republican party has been on a systematic process of dismantling the government they pretend to honor and, moreover, take an oath to protect.

Senator Mitch McConnell R-KY, didn't even wait until the family of Justic Scalia had acknowledged the departed man's death, before he leaped to the media with the outrageous announcement that President Obama should not nominate a replacement to fill the Supreme Court vacancy.  It's assumed, of course, that President Obama will nominate nominate a liberal and thereby ruin the Republicans' plan to dominate the court with right wing conservative justices.  

In fact, Senator McConnell should be censured for his mistatement about the judicial nomination to fill Scalia's seat.  What he said was clearly unconstitutional.  In fact, Article II of the US Constitution authorizes the President of the United States to make judicial appoinntments to fill court vacancies.  It's totally irresponsible for a US Senator to tell a President what to do, because doing so violates the separate but equal branches of government and therefore breeds the seeds of sedition, in my opinion.

Now Republicans who often seem to preach as though the US Constitution is a sequel to the Bible, are trying to rewrite what Justice Scaia would himself have upheld.  Indeed, without a doubt, the President is authorized to nominate a successor to the Surpeme Court. Even more important, Preisident Obama was elected to be our nation's leader by a margin of 5 million votes, thereby giving him the authority to make a Supreme Court nomination at any time during his presidency.  

Thankfully, Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusettes, an academic politician, has politically humiliated Senator McConnell for his disrespectful leap to usurp the Executive decision by President Obama to nominate a successor to Justice Scalia.

Senator Elizabeth Warren D-MA

Senator Warren is reported in Politicususa.com
By Sarah Jones
After Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) announced that he would lead Republicans in obstructing President Obama yet again, this time by leading his party to abdicate their Constitutional duties, (Wait!!!  Isn't this seditious behavior?) Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) reminded McConnell that President Obama’s will is the will of the people and that he won by five million votes.

Senator Warren said in a statement, “Senator McConnell is right that the American people should have a voice in the selection of the next Supreme Court justice. In fact, they did – when President Obama won the 2012 election by five million votes.”

Then Warren proceeded to remind McConnell about that thing Republicans are always claiming to worship – the Constitution, specifically Article II, “Article II Section 2 of the Constitution says the President of the United States nominates justices to the Supreme Court, with the advice and consent of the Senate.”

Wait for it… “I can’t find a clause that says ‘…except when there’s a year left in the term of a Democratic President.'”

Warren reminded McConnell that Republicans took an oath just like Democrats did and if they fail to do their duty, their talk about loving the Constitution is empty, “Senate Republicans took an oath just like Senate Democrats did. Abandoning the duties they swore to uphold would threaten both the Constitution and our democracy itself. It would also prove that all the Republican talk about loving the Constitution is just that – empty talk.”

Senator Warren is absolutely correct. The idea that Republicans get to obstruct the power of the presidency invested in Obama by the people in not one but two elections is outrageous.

Republicans think that obstructing President Obama’s nominee is good politics and will help them in the 2016 election. 

However, 2016 was already set to be a tough year for Republicans in the Senate. Mitch McConnell must be suffering from Fox induced epistemic closure if he doesn’t see that these tactics will not sell in blue or moderate states.

Furthermore, if Republicans want to run against President Obama again....they have never come close to beating him...

The next time a Republican waves their pocket version of the Constitution around as they drone on about the debt as an excuse for why they have not shown up to work for weeks, someone ought to remind them that they can’t pick and choose what works for them from the Constitution, like they do from the Bible.

(In other words, for Republicans violate the specific instructions given to our governmental leaders as adopted in the US Constitution, when they take oaths to support the law, is sedition, in my opinion.).