Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Some people may hate trump but they also know in a few years people will have the option of voting for someone else. This is the thing where I am not sure of, and this is the problem. You remember "Lock her up"? Who can guarantee that Trump is not going to follow through on this promise? Who can guarantee that Trump will not again cooperate with the Russians in order to get reelected? Or for what its worth who can…
>You remember "Lock her up"? Who can guarantee that Trump is not going to follow through on this promise? 1) He hasn't in over a year of office. 2) He can't do anything that overrides the judicial and legislative branches. Which is why ALL of his major plans go no where. No Muslim ban. No reproductive rights changes. Nothing. 3) If she commits crimes, why should she be above jail time? Shouldn't everyone who major co…
For now, they hold. Trump has (more or less) silently nominated huge numbers of federal judges (http://www.businessinsider.de/trump-judges-attorneys-nominat...). Once these go through, or a SC judge dies/retires, these are lifetime positions and will shape US justice for decades.
> 3) If she commits crimes, why should she be above jail time? Shoudln't everyone who major commits crimes be in jail? Trump, Hillary, what's the difference? A crime is a crime--regardless of whether you like that candidate.
"Three felonies a day" and "selective enforcement" are the key points here. Of course it's fine if Hillary really did commit a crime by mishandling her emails - but if his inner circle gets off free for the same offense (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/25/us/politics/private-email...), it's not fair any more.
> Even when you have a "Bad president" the rest of the country keeps ticking along fine because the other branches are designed from the ground up to prevent dictators of all types.
The Electoral College was designed to keep a unfit person from office, and Trump with his many failures (from bankruptcies over countless accusations of sexual misconduct, some even confessed by himself, to being in collusion with the Russians and the simple fact that many professionals regard him as mentally unfit) still passed. I do not place trust in a system that has been rotting since decades.
> So you basically just want to burn the country to the ground because "your candidate" didn't win.
Burning the country to the ground is what Trump and his destructionist friends (the Bannon circle) are right in the middle of doing! By defunding critical parts of the state, they're eroding public service and thus the trust of the population in the government!
> You think when you destabilize the most powerful country in the world, that nobody else in the world is going to try and swoop into that power vacuum?
This is the thing that scares me: A President obviously unfit for office and chaos across the world - including, to come back to the original topic, Romania and many other Eastern European countries. A competent president would be literally doing everything to keep the US in influence and the Russians in check - Trump is embroiled in so many scandals that Putin, Xi and Kim Jong-Un have free rein.
And, maybe a bit funny because I identify as far-left, but what Putin has been doing in (Eastern) Europe (not just invading Ukraine, but also supporting right-wing and pro-Russian parties in France, Germany, Poland or Hungary) is really scaring me. Putin is dangerous, Europe is way too far split to be any kind of opposition and the US cannot be relied upon any more. Not really nice prospects.