为什么美国人民不能公正地评判特朗普?他们的偏见从何而来?（二）
正文翻译
Why can't the US people judge Trump fairly? Where did their prejudice come from?
为什么美国人民不能公正地评判特朗普?他们的偏见从何而来?
为什么美国人民不能公正地评判特朗普?他们的偏见从何而来?
评论翻译
Michael Anderson
People obeying the head of state at all times is a sure sign of living in a tyrannical regime
人们总是服从国家元首的命令，这是生活在专制政权下的明显迹象
People obeying the head of state at all times is a sure sign of living in a tyrannical regime
人们总是服从国家元首的命令，这是生活在专制政权下的明显迹象
Joyce Wright
A) He’s not the President
B). The President works for the people, not the other way around
C) Except for members of the military, no American is obligated to “obey” a President. And even the military are not bound to obey illegal orders.
A、他不是总统
B、总统为人民工作，而不是相反
C、除了军人，没有美国人有义务“服从”总统。即使是军队也不一定要服从非法命令。
A) He’s not the President
B). The President works for the people, not the other way around
C) Except for members of the military, no American is obligated to “obey” a President. And even the military are not bound to obey illegal orders.
A、他不是总统
B、总统为人民工作，而不是相反
C、除了军人，没有美国人有义务“服从”总统。即使是军队也不一定要服从非法命令。
Gregor Michels
He's no longer President.
To demand blind obedience is a sure way to garner a despot, a dictator.
Our forefathers didn't obey their king either. We wouldn't be here without civil disobedience.
Why do YOU think we need to obey an elected civil servant? They are expected to obey US. And if they don't obey our laws, they are arrested and put in jail to be tried. Trump case in point.
他不再是总统了。
要求盲目服从肯定会造就一个暴君，一个独裁者。
我们的祖先也不服从他们的国王。如果没有非暴力反抗，我们就不会出现在这里。
为什么你认为我们需要服从一个民选的公务员？他们应该服从美国。如果他们不遵守我们的法律，他们就会被逮捕并关进监狱接受审判。特朗普就是一个很好的例子。
He's no longer President.
To demand blind obedience is a sure way to garner a despot, a dictator.
Our forefathers didn't obey their king either. We wouldn't be here without civil disobedience.
Why do YOU think we need to obey an elected civil servant? They are expected to obey US. And if they don't obey our laws, they are arrested and put in jail to be tried. Trump case in point.
他不再是总统了。
要求盲目服从肯定会造就一个暴君，一个独裁者。
我们的祖先也不服从他们的国王。如果没有非暴力反抗，我们就不会出现在这里。
为什么你认为我们需要服从一个民选的公务员？他们应该服从美国。如果他们不遵守我们的法律，他们就会被逮捕并关进监狱接受审判。特朗普就是一个很好的例子。
Dave Slankard
They didn't just fail to call him Mr President, they made a point of not calling him “President” because 1) he isn't and2) it would really behoove him to get used to that - he's just a retired federal employee, not President. The question is why Trump would “fume” about this. The answer to that is mental illness. Which, again, the Judge need not kowtow to.
他们不仅不称他为总统先生，还特意不称他为“总统”。因为：
1、他不是
2、他真的应该习惯这一点——他只是一名退休的联邦雇员，而不是总统。
问题是特朗普为什么会对此感到“愤怒”。
答案：这是一种精神疾病。再说一遍，法官不必卑躬屈膝的。
They didn't just fail to call him Mr President, they made a point of not calling him “President” because 1) he isn't and2) it would really behoove him to get used to that - he's just a retired federal employee, not President. The question is why Trump would “fume” about this. The answer to that is mental illness. Which, again, the Judge need not kowtow to.
他们不仅不称他为总统先生，还特意不称他为“总统”。因为：
1、他不是
2、他真的应该习惯这一点——他只是一名退休的联邦雇员，而不是总统。
问题是特朗普为什么会对此感到“愤怒”。
答案：这是一种精神疾病。再说一遍，法官不必卑躬屈膝的。
John Mcewen
As a Canadian Trump has lied, bullied and cheated to push an unfair trade deal on our country. He has insulted and threatened our country. He even boasted about his lies about our country to republican buddies. He has also badmouthed leaders of our international friends in Germany, Australia and Britain while claiming how nice leaders like Putin, Duarte and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia.
When the rest of the world heavily sanctioned North Korea and many sent ships to monitor contraband, this clown surrendered concessions to vicious thug in charge of NK and the only thing he has accomplished is that NK has now nuclear weapons with missiles capable of delivering them. Total incompetence.
He has sabotaged any attempt to mitigate global warming by withdrawing from treaties and appointed a bunch of ignorant twats from the coal industry to positions of power.
He has sabotaged the most powerful defensive alliance in history, NATO.
He has walked away from a working nuclear treaty with Iran and is jinning up a war using the same criminal neo cons that started the second Iraq war.
He has stated support for Nazi scum saying some are good people while Nazi’s and fascists are the enemies of all countries.
He has provided cover for the Saudis murdering people outside their own country.
Americans have every right to elect any dimwitted lying huckster they want but don’t whine when people from other countries criticize his behaviour on the world stage or criticize your country for electing such a low life.
作为一个加拿大人，特朗普撒谎、欺凌和欺骗，把不公平的贸易协议强加给我们的国家。他侮辱并威胁了我们的国家。他甚至向共和党的朋友吹嘘他对我们国家的谎言。他还诋毁了我们在德国、澳大利亚和英国的国际朋友的领导人，同时声称普京、杜阿尔特和沙特阿拉伯王储等领导人是多么的好。
当世界其他国家严厉制裁朝鲜，许多国家派出船只监视违禁品时，这个小丑向掌管朝鲜的邪恶暴徒投降，他唯一做的就是让朝鲜现在拥有了核武器和能够发射核武器的导弹，他是完全不称职的。
他通过退出条约破坏了缓解全球变暖的努力，并任命了一群来自煤炭行业的无知白痴担任要职。
他破坏了历史上最强大的防御联盟——北约。
他退出了与伊朗的核协议，并正在利用发动第二次伊拉克战争新保守主义者（同一个罪犯）挑起战争。
他表示支持纳粹渣滓，说有些人是好人，而纳粹和法西斯主义者是所有国家的敌人。
他为在国外杀人的沙特人提供掩护。
美国人完全有权选举他们想要的任何一个愚蠢的、撒谎的小贩（来做总统），但是当其他国家的人批评他在世界舞台上的行为或批评你的国家选举了这样一个卑鄙的人时，就不要抱怨。
As a Canadian Trump has lied, bullied and cheated to push an unfair trade deal on our country. He has insulted and threatened our country. He even boasted about his lies about our country to republican buddies. He has also badmouthed leaders of our international friends in Germany, Australia and Britain while claiming how nice leaders like Putin, Duarte and the crown prince of Saudi Arabia.
When the rest of the world heavily sanctioned North Korea and many sent ships to monitor contraband, this clown surrendered concessions to vicious thug in charge of NK and the only thing he has accomplished is that NK has now nuclear weapons with missiles capable of delivering them. Total incompetence.
He has sabotaged any attempt to mitigate global warming by withdrawing from treaties and appointed a bunch of ignorant twats from the coal industry to positions of power.
He has sabotaged the most powerful defensive alliance in history, NATO.
He has walked away from a working nuclear treaty with Iran and is jinning up a war using the same criminal neo cons that started the second Iraq war.
He has stated support for Nazi scum saying some are good people while Nazi’s and fascists are the enemies of all countries.
He has provided cover for the Saudis murdering people outside their own country.
Americans have every right to elect any dimwitted lying huckster they want but don’t whine when people from other countries criticize his behaviour on the world stage or criticize your country for electing such a low life.
作为一个加拿大人，特朗普撒谎、欺凌和欺骗，把不公平的贸易协议强加给我们的国家。他侮辱并威胁了我们的国家。他甚至向共和党的朋友吹嘘他对我们国家的谎言。他还诋毁了我们在德国、澳大利亚和英国的国际朋友的领导人，同时声称普京、杜阿尔特和沙特阿拉伯王储等领导人是多么的好。
当世界其他国家严厉制裁朝鲜，许多国家派出船只监视违禁品时，这个小丑向掌管朝鲜的邪恶暴徒投降，他唯一做的就是让朝鲜现在拥有了核武器和能够发射核武器的导弹，他是完全不称职的。
他通过退出条约破坏了缓解全球变暖的努力，并任命了一群来自煤炭行业的无知白痴担任要职。
他破坏了历史上最强大的防御联盟——北约。
他退出了与伊朗的核协议，并正在利用发动第二次伊拉克战争新保守主义者（同一个罪犯）挑起战争。
他表示支持纳粹渣滓，说有些人是好人，而纳粹和法西斯主义者是所有国家的敌人。
他为在国外杀人的沙特人提供掩护。
美国人完全有权选举他们想要的任何一个愚蠢的、撒谎的小贩（来做总统），但是当其他国家的人批评他在世界舞台上的行为或批评你的国家选举了这样一个卑鄙的人时，就不要抱怨。
Chrysaor Jordan
I was going to ask why right-wing Americans feel the need to judge Other Countries, particularly when their judgements show that they know nothing about the rest of the world.
Instead I will ask whether you as an American citizen should be able to criticise President....of China? Or Kim Jong-un? Do you deny that you have the right to do so?
Then why do you think the rest of the world should not criticise your dear leader?
After all, Trump has made himself unwelcome in Other Countries. He has given some of us good reason to detest him.
我想问，为什么美国右翼觉得有必要评判其他国家，尤其是当他们的判断表明他们对世界其他地方一无所知的时候。
相反，我会问，作为一个美国公民，你是否应该批评中国的...或者金正恩？你是否认你有这样做的权利吗？
那么，你为什么认为世界其他地方的人不应该批评你亲爱的领导人呢？
毕竟，是特朗普自己让自己在其他国家不受欢迎的，他给了我们一些憎恨他的充分理由。
I was going to ask why right-wing Americans feel the need to judge Other Countries, particularly when their judgements show that they know nothing about the rest of the world.
Instead I will ask whether you as an American citizen should be able to criticise President....of China? Or Kim Jong-un? Do you deny that you have the right to do so?
Then why do you think the rest of the world should not criticise your dear leader?
After all, Trump has made himself unwelcome in Other Countries. He has given some of us good reason to detest him.
我想问，为什么美国右翼觉得有必要评判其他国家，尤其是当他们的判断表明他们对世界其他地方一无所知的时候。
相反，我会问，作为一个美国公民，你是否应该批评中国的...或者金正恩？你是否认你有这样做的权利吗？
那么，你为什么认为世界其他地方的人不应该批评你亲爱的领导人呢？
毕竟，是特朗普自己让自己在其他国家不受欢迎的，他给了我们一些憎恨他的充分理由。
Dirk Sayers
Are there any Americans, who actually don't care on anything, what Donald Trump says and does?
If you mean by your question, they will vote for him no matter what, I think the answer is yes. Based on my own experiences talking with a few who voted for him, his constituency seems to fall into four categories. (Those who didn’t vote for him care, of course, but for entirely different…and predictable…reasons.
The first category (ones who don’t pay much attention) and voted for him because of his “success” in business, are often stunned when they find out he’s really a pretty inept
The second category of those who voted for him fall into the category of the cynically interested parties who felt he would deliver on things that would help them. The tax cuts, gutting environmental oversight, judicial appointments & the Affordable Care Act come to mind. There are a lot of donors who thought Trump would do them a solid and voted not because he would be a good president so much as he would be their president, bought & paid for.
The third category is much like the first, insofar as they’re not, on balance, of particularly inquiring turns of mind. They’ve bought the demonstrably flawed rhetoric of Fox News, Alex Jones & Steve Bannon, et. al. Some have figured it out by now.
The fourth category contains all the diehards, of whom Trump himself was speaking when he said he could shoot someone in the street & it wouldn’t affect his ratings.
There may be a fifth category…we’ll know as the 2024 campaign unfolds. Those are likely to be folks who were honest conservatives who took a look at Ms. Clinton and just couldn’t vote for her.
有没有美国人真的对唐纳德·特朗普的言行漠不关心?
如果你的意思是他们无论如何都会投他的票，我想答案是肯定的。根据我与几个投票给他的人交谈的经验，他的选区似乎分为四类。（当然，那些没有投票给他的人很在乎他的言行，但原因完全不同，而且原因是可以预见的。）
第一类人(不太关注的人)因为他在商业上的“成功”而投票给他，但当他们发现他真的很无能时，他们经常会感到震惊
投票给他的第二类人属于愤世嫉俗的利益党派，他们认为他会实现对他们有帮助的事情。减税、削减环境监管、司法任命和《平价医疗法案》(Affordable Care Act)浮现在我的脑海中。有很多捐赠者认为特朗普会给他们带来好处，他们给他投票并不是因为他会是一个好总统，而是因为他是他们的总统——他们花了钱的。
第三类与第一类非常相似，因为总的来说，他们不是特别好奇的人。他们接受了福克斯新闻、亚历克斯·琼斯和史蒂夫·班农等明显有缺陷的言论，一些人现在已经明白了。
第四类包括所有的顽固分子，当特朗普自己说他可以在街上射杀某人&这不会影响他的收视率时，他就是在指这些人。
可能还有第五类……2024年大选开始后我们就知道了。这些人很可能是诚实的保守派，他们看了克林顿一眼，就是不愿投票给他。
Are there any Americans, who actually don't care on anything, what Donald Trump says and does?
If you mean by your question, they will vote for him no matter what, I think the answer is yes. Based on my own experiences talking with a few who voted for him, his constituency seems to fall into four categories. (Those who didn’t vote for him care, of course, but for entirely different…and predictable…reasons.
The first category (ones who don’t pay much attention) and voted for him because of his “success” in business, are often stunned when they find out he’s really a pretty inept
The second category of those who voted for him fall into the category of the cynically interested parties who felt he would deliver on things that would help them. The tax cuts, gutting environmental oversight, judicial appointments & the Affordable Care Act come to mind. There are a lot of donors who thought Trump would do them a solid and voted not because he would be a good president so much as he would be their president, bought & paid for.
The third category is much like the first, insofar as they’re not, on balance, of particularly inquiring turns of mind. They’ve bought the demonstrably flawed rhetoric of Fox News, Alex Jones & Steve Bannon, et. al. Some have figured it out by now.
The fourth category contains all the diehards, of whom Trump himself was speaking when he said he could shoot someone in the street & it wouldn’t affect his ratings.
There may be a fifth category…we’ll know as the 2024 campaign unfolds. Those are likely to be folks who were honest conservatives who took a look at Ms. Clinton and just couldn’t vote for her.
有没有美国人真的对唐纳德·特朗普的言行漠不关心?
如果你的意思是他们无论如何都会投他的票，我想答案是肯定的。根据我与几个投票给他的人交谈的经验，他的选区似乎分为四类。（当然，那些没有投票给他的人很在乎他的言行，但原因完全不同，而且原因是可以预见的。）
第一类人(不太关注的人)因为他在商业上的“成功”而投票给他，但当他们发现他真的很无能时，他们经常会感到震惊
投票给他的第二类人属于愤世嫉俗的利益党派，他们认为他会实现对他们有帮助的事情。减税、削减环境监管、司法任命和《平价医疗法案》(Affordable Care Act)浮现在我的脑海中。有很多捐赠者认为特朗普会给他们带来好处，他们给他投票并不是因为他会是一个好总统，而是因为他是他们的总统——他们花了钱的。
第三类与第一类非常相似，因为总的来说，他们不是特别好奇的人。他们接受了福克斯新闻、亚历克斯·琼斯和史蒂夫·班农等明显有缺陷的言论，一些人现在已经明白了。
第四类包括所有的顽固分子，当特朗普自己说他可以在街上射杀某人&这不会影响他的收视率时，他就是在指这些人。
可能还有第五类……2024年大选开始后我们就知道了。这些人很可能是诚实的保守派，他们看了克林顿一眼，就是不愿投票给他。
Brian Overland
I honestly think that is not the case, but it is sometimes the perception.
Let’s look at it in terms of the East and West Coasts vs. the “fly over” states. My state, the State of Washington, was once looked at as “country people,” but due to the improved profile of Seattle and the surrounding high-tech industries (Microsoft, Amazon, Costco, etc.) we are now considered to be like Northern Californians, except it’s cooler and moister. :)
Ironically, the Coasts try hard to cater to the fly-over states. Democratic presidents and Congresses work hard to funnel money to where it would be used in poor and rural areas. And in Hollywood, “country people” are catered to extensively. Hollywood is eager to give people Rambo, war movies, space fantasies, “Dirty Harry” type protagonists, and raunchy comedies.
The truth is, “intellectual” and liberal types from the blue areas spend great amounts of time how to win back the affection of the so-called “country people.”
But I think the fly-over states, and particularly the more rural states, tend to dislike people on the Coasts, because they envy these people and don’t trust them.
老实说，我认为事实并非如此，但有时这是一种看法。
让我们从东海岸和西海岸与“飞越”州的对比来看。我所在的华盛顿州曾被视为“乡下人”，但由于西雅图和周边高科技产业（微软、亚马逊、好市多等）的知名度提高，我们现在被认为像北加州人一样，只是这里更凉爽、更潮湿。
具有讽刺意味的是，沿海地区则努力迎合“飞越”州。民主党总统和国会努力将资金输送到贫困和农村地区。在好莱坞，“乡下人”得到了广泛的照顾。好莱坞渴望给人们带来兰博、战争电影、太空幻想、“肮脏的哈利”式的主角和色情喜剧。
事实是，来自蓝色州的“知识分子”和自由主义者为了赢得所谓“乡下人”的喜爱而花了大量的时间。
但我认为那些飞越州，尤其是农村地区，往往不喜欢沿海地区的人，因为他们嫉妒这些人，不信任他们。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
I honestly think that is not the case, but it is sometimes the perception.
Let’s look at it in terms of the East and West Coasts vs. the “fly over” states. My state, the State of Washington, was once looked at as “country people,” but due to the improved profile of Seattle and the surrounding high-tech industries (Microsoft, Amazon, Costco, etc.) we are now considered to be like Northern Californians, except it’s cooler and moister. :)
Ironically, the Coasts try hard to cater to the fly-over states. Democratic presidents and Congresses work hard to funnel money to where it would be used in poor and rural areas. And in Hollywood, “country people” are catered to extensively. Hollywood is eager to give people Rambo, war movies, space fantasies, “Dirty Harry” type protagonists, and raunchy comedies.
The truth is, “intellectual” and liberal types from the blue areas spend great amounts of time how to win back the affection of the so-called “country people.”
But I think the fly-over states, and particularly the more rural states, tend to dislike people on the Coasts, because they envy these people and don’t trust them.
老实说，我认为事实并非如此，但有时这是一种看法。
让我们从东海岸和西海岸与“飞越”州的对比来看。我所在的华盛顿州曾被视为“乡下人”，但由于西雅图和周边高科技产业（微软、亚马逊、好市多等）的知名度提高，我们现在被认为像北加州人一样，只是这里更凉爽、更潮湿。
具有讽刺意味的是，沿海地区则努力迎合“飞越”州。民主党总统和国会努力将资金输送到贫困和农村地区。在好莱坞，“乡下人”得到了广泛的照顾。好莱坞渴望给人们带来兰博、战争电影、太空幻想、“肮脏的哈利”式的主角和色情喜剧。
事实是，来自蓝色州的“知识分子”和自由主义者为了赢得所谓“乡下人”的喜爱而花了大量的时间。
但我认为那些飞越州，尤其是农村地区，往往不喜欢沿海地区的人，因为他们嫉妒这些人，不信任他们。
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
In some cases — depending on the state — I honestly believe that there still remains a resentment from losing the Civil War. (Although that’s really ironic in the case of West Virginia!)
In states that are more purely white, there is a resentment against the future prospect of non-Hispanic white people eventually constituting less than 50% of the population. White people might continue as the largest single group, but will no longer have an outright majority.
These changing are not easily accepted by everyone, and the counties and areas with the “country people” sometimes look for people to blame in the “city folks,” even to the point of favoring conspiracy theories.
The “country people” often perceive the so-called intellectual elite as catering too much to non-whites, LGBT, and immigrants, and so the country people resent them for that.
在某些情况下(取决于各州)，我真诚地认为，内战失败的怨恨仍然存在。（尽管这对西弗吉尼亚州来说真的很讽刺！）
在那些白人人口更多的州，人们对非西班牙裔白人最终占总人口比例不到50%的未来前景感到不满。白人可能会继续作为最大的单一群体，但将不再占绝对多数。
这些变化不是每个人都能轻易接受的，“乡巴佬”所在的县和地区有时会在指责“城里人”，甚至倾向于阴谋论。
“乡下人”通常认为所谓的知识精英过于迎合非白人、LGBT和移民，因此乡下人对他们感到不满。
In states that are more purely white, there is a resentment against the future prospect of non-Hispanic white people eventually constituting less than 50% of the population. White people might continue as the largest single group, but will no longer have an outright majority.
These changing are not easily accepted by everyone, and the counties and areas with the “country people” sometimes look for people to blame in the “city folks,” even to the point of favoring conspiracy theories.
The “country people” often perceive the so-called intellectual elite as catering too much to non-whites, LGBT, and immigrants, and so the country people resent them for that.
在某些情况下(取决于各州)，我真诚地认为，内战失败的怨恨仍然存在。（尽管这对西弗吉尼亚州来说真的很讽刺！）
在那些白人人口更多的州，人们对非西班牙裔白人最终占总人口比例不到50%的未来前景感到不满。白人可能会继续作为最大的单一群体，但将不再占绝对多数。
这些变化不是每个人都能轻易接受的，“乡巴佬”所在的县和地区有时会在指责“城里人”，甚至倾向于阴谋论。
“乡下人”通常认为所谓的知识精英过于迎合非白人、LGBT和移民，因此乡下人对他们感到不满。
Michael Adams
His nomination for the EPA has come out publicly trying to push the notion that there is a scientific disagreement or controversy over climate change. That is a lie! There is controversy, but not among scientists. The controversy is between scientists and special interests, who will profit enormously from lax or non-existent environmental standards.
His nomination for education is someone who is a life-long opponent of public education, who had no educational experience, and no qualifications for the position for which she has been nominated (and confirmed).
Like GW, he is ignoring his intelligence briefings, and when GW did that, it resulted in the 9/11 attacks. President Clinton had tried to warn him of the al Quaeda threat, but he ignored that.
His administration has not only failed to acknowledge the problems in Putin’s Russia, but have gone so far as to equate Putin’s political assassinations with American failings, when President trump said to Bill O’Reilly, “We’ve got killers too…” While I admit that America has its failings, I am clear that we are not a country where political opponents are assassinated by our leader. This President won’t even stand up for America there.
He has made no effort to reach out to his political opponents, he seems to believe he is the President for conservatives only, and can/should completely ignore the other side.
How much more of a chance should we give him?
他提名的环境保护署署长，公开试图推动这样一种观念，即在气候变化问题上存在科学分歧或争议。那是谎言!有争议，但不是在科学家之间。争论发生在科学家和特殊利益集团之间，后者将从宽松或根本不存在的环境标准中获得巨大利益。
他提名的教育部长是一个终身反对公共教育的人，她没有教育经验，也没有资格担任她被提名(并得到确认)的职位。
和乔治·布什一样，他也忽视了他的情报简报，而乔治·布什这样做，导致了9/11袭击。克林顿总统曾试图给予他警告：基地组织具备威胁，但他没有理会。
他的政府不仅没有承认普京领导下的俄罗斯存在的问题，甚至将普京的政治暗杀与美国的失败相提并论，当时特朗普总统对比尔·奥莱利说：“我们也有杀手……”虽然我承认美国有它的缺点，但我很清楚，我们不是一个政治对手被我们的领导人暗杀的国家。这位总统甚至没有站出来力挺美国。
他没有努力去接触他的政治对手，他似乎认为他只是保守派的总统，可以/应该完全忽视另一方。
我们应该再给他多少机会?
His nomination for the EPA has come out publicly trying to push the notion that there is a scientific disagreement or controversy over climate change. That is a lie! There is controversy, but not among scientists. The controversy is between scientists and special interests, who will profit enormously from lax or non-existent environmental standards.
His nomination for education is someone who is a life-long opponent of public education, who had no educational experience, and no qualifications for the position for which she has been nominated (and confirmed).
Like GW, he is ignoring his intelligence briefings, and when GW did that, it resulted in the 9/11 attacks. President Clinton had tried to warn him of the al Quaeda threat, but he ignored that.
His administration has not only failed to acknowledge the problems in Putin’s Russia, but have gone so far as to equate Putin’s political assassinations with American failings, when President trump said to Bill O’Reilly, “We’ve got killers too…” While I admit that America has its failings, I am clear that we are not a country where political opponents are assassinated by our leader. This President won’t even stand up for America there.
He has made no effort to reach out to his political opponents, he seems to believe he is the President for conservatives only, and can/should completely ignore the other side.
How much more of a chance should we give him?
他提名的环境保护署署长，公开试图推动这样一种观念，即在气候变化问题上存在科学分歧或争议。那是谎言!有争议，但不是在科学家之间。争论发生在科学家和特殊利益集团之间，后者将从宽松或根本不存在的环境标准中获得巨大利益。
他提名的教育部长是一个终身反对公共教育的人，她没有教育经验，也没有资格担任她被提名(并得到确认)的职位。
和乔治·布什一样，他也忽视了他的情报简报，而乔治·布什这样做，导致了9/11袭击。克林顿总统曾试图给予他警告：基地组织具备威胁，但他没有理会。
他的政府不仅没有承认普京领导下的俄罗斯存在的问题，甚至将普京的政治暗杀与美国的失败相提并论，当时特朗普总统对比尔·奥莱利说：“我们也有杀手……”虽然我承认美国有它的缺点，但我很清楚，我们不是一个政治对手被我们的领导人暗杀的国家。这位总统甚至没有站出来力挺美国。
他没有努力去接触他的政治对手，他似乎认为他只是保守派的总统，可以/应该完全忽视另一方。
我们应该再给他多少机会?
Chrysaor Jordan
How soon we forget our history.
The President of the USA used to have a honeymoon period. For the first month, the media gave him a break. That was true of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
That was not true with Bill Clinton. His opponents began attacking him almost from the moment he took office.
George W. Bush and Barack Obama were both subject to criticism, fair or unfair, during their first month.
The President doesn’t get a honeymoon period anymore. There have been no more such honeymoon periods for a US President since 1992.
If Hillary Clinton were now President, the criticism, fair or unfair, would be directed at her.
So it is to be expected, no matter who is in the White House.
Because it is Donald Trump, the point is that no previous transition was as chaotic as Trump’s. No previous President surrounded himself with such incompetent fools. And no previous candidate was so unprepared (and unqualified) for the office as Donald Trump.
The criticism of him is richly deserved.
Trump has had a bad start, and unless by some miracle he can change his ways, the criticism will continue.
我们很快就会忘记我们的历史。
美国总统过去有一段“蜜月期”。第一个月，媒体让他休息了一下。罗纳德?里根(Ronald Reagan)和乔治?h?w?布什(George H.W. Bush)就是如此。
比尔·克林顿(Bill Clinton)却不是这样。几乎从他上任的那一刻起，他的对手就开始攻击他。
乔治?w?布什(George W. Bush)和巴拉克?奥巴马(Barack Obama)在上任第一个月都受到了公平或不公平的批评。
总统再也没有蜜月期了。自1992年以来，美国总统再也没有经历过这样的蜜月期。
如果希拉里·克林顿现在是总统，那么这些批评，无论公平与否，都会指向她。
因此，无论谁入主白宫，这都是意料之中的事。
因为是唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)，所以重点是，之前没有哪届过渡像特朗普的那样混乱。以前没有哪位总统身边围着这么无能的傻瓜。此前没有哪位候选人像唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)那样毫无准备(也没有资格)。
他受到的这些批评是理所当然的。
特朗普有一个糟糕的开端，除非他能奇迹般地改变自己的方式，否则批评将继续下去。
How soon we forget our history.
The President of the USA used to have a honeymoon period. For the first month, the media gave him a break. That was true of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.
That was not true with Bill Clinton. His opponents began attacking him almost from the moment he took office.
George W. Bush and Barack Obama were both subject to criticism, fair or unfair, during their first month.
The President doesn’t get a honeymoon period anymore. There have been no more such honeymoon periods for a US President since 1992.
If Hillary Clinton were now President, the criticism, fair or unfair, would be directed at her.
So it is to be expected, no matter who is in the White House.
Because it is Donald Trump, the point is that no previous transition was as chaotic as Trump’s. No previous President surrounded himself with such incompetent fools. And no previous candidate was so unprepared (and unqualified) for the office as Donald Trump.
The criticism of him is richly deserved.
Trump has had a bad start, and unless by some miracle he can change his ways, the criticism will continue.
我们很快就会忘记我们的历史。
美国总统过去有一段“蜜月期”。第一个月，媒体让他休息了一下。罗纳德?里根(Ronald Reagan)和乔治?h?w?布什(George H.W. Bush)就是如此。
比尔·克林顿(Bill Clinton)却不是这样。几乎从他上任的那一刻起，他的对手就开始攻击他。
乔治?w?布什(George W. Bush)和巴拉克?奥巴马(Barack Obama)在上任第一个月都受到了公平或不公平的批评。
总统再也没有蜜月期了。自1992年以来，美国总统再也没有经历过这样的蜜月期。
如果希拉里·克林顿现在是总统，那么这些批评，无论公平与否，都会指向她。
因此，无论谁入主白宫，这都是意料之中的事。
因为是唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)，所以重点是，之前没有哪届过渡像特朗普的那样混乱。以前没有哪位总统身边围着这么无能的傻瓜。此前没有哪位候选人像唐纳德·特朗普(Donald Trump)那样毫无准备(也没有资格)。
他受到的这些批评是理所当然的。
特朗普有一个糟糕的开端，除非他能奇迹般地改变自己的方式，否则批评将继续下去。
Rick Kinsella
Judges are supposed to refrain from taking political positions and entering into partisan politics. Judges speak through their rulings on the cases in front of them. In this regard judges have been making decisions against Trump for a long time. Consider Trump University, Trump's Charity Foundation, NY State's criminal conviction of the Trump Organization for tax fraud, Carroll v Trump, Georgia election tampering, Mar A Lago documents, NY's $250 million fraud case and, by extension, 61 cases related to how the 2020 election was conducted.
Historically, Trump often had success by using the courts to bully individuals and small contractors. He could use his money to delay, extend and appeal cases until his opponents ran out of time and money. This is much harder to do against governments.
In a few cases, judges have spoken out critically of Trump for ignoring their prior orders and for bringing frivolous claims before them.
法官应该避免政治立场和党派政治。法官对他们面前的案件作出裁决。在这方面，法官们长期以来一直在做出不利于特朗普的裁决。想想特朗普大学、特朗普慈善基金会、纽约州对特朗普集团税务欺诈的刑事定罪、卡罗尔诉特朗普案、乔治亚州选举舞弊案、海湖庄园(Mar-a-Lago)存储机密文件案、纽约州2.5亿美元诈骗案，再延伸一下，还有61起与2020年大选如何进行有关的案件。
从历史上看，特朗普经常通过利用法院欺负个人和小承包商来取得成功。他可以用自己的钱拖延、延长和上诉，直到他的对手耗尽时间和金钱，这一招要对付政府的话，要困难得多。
在一些案件中，法官公开批评特朗普无视他们之前的命令，并向他们提出无聊的索赔。
Judges are supposed to refrain from taking political positions and entering into partisan politics. Judges speak through their rulings on the cases in front of them. In this regard judges have been making decisions against Trump for a long time. Consider Trump University, Trump's Charity Foundation, NY State's criminal conviction of the Trump Organization for tax fraud, Carroll v Trump, Georgia election tampering, Mar A Lago documents, NY's $250 million fraud case and, by extension, 61 cases related to how the 2020 election was conducted.
Historically, Trump often had success by using the courts to bully individuals and small contractors. He could use his money to delay, extend and appeal cases until his opponents ran out of time and money. This is much harder to do against governments.
In a few cases, judges have spoken out critically of Trump for ignoring their prior orders and for bringing frivolous claims before them.
法官应该避免政治立场和党派政治。法官对他们面前的案件作出裁决。在这方面，法官们长期以来一直在做出不利于特朗普的裁决。想想特朗普大学、特朗普慈善基金会、纽约州对特朗普集团税务欺诈的刑事定罪、卡罗尔诉特朗普案、乔治亚州选举舞弊案、海湖庄园(Mar-a-Lago)存储机密文件案、纽约州2.5亿美元诈骗案，再延伸一下，还有61起与2020年大选如何进行有关的案件。
从历史上看，特朗普经常通过利用法院欺负个人和小承包商来取得成功。他可以用自己的钱拖延、延长和上诉，直到他的对手耗尽时间和金钱，这一招要对付政府的话，要困难得多。
在一些案件中，法官公开批评特朗普无视他们之前的命令，并向他们提出无聊的索赔。
Steve Grocott
All presidents have a public service record either in governing, lawmaking or military service. This is usually enough of a record to warrant a honeymoon period. Donald has no public service record he has no experience in being on a school board let alone understand the constitution, besides he has had enough honeymoons in his life.
All we have to judge Donald on or not is his words, actions and his private records due to the lack of public records. His words although have spoken to his core supporters, to the majority of voters and Americans they are divisive, and his policies are consider d economic suicide, his private record shows a man who avoids taxes, dodges the draft, leaves a long line of unpaid creditors and investors. A man who is a serial womaniser and a man who boasts of how married women don't say anything when he kisses them because he is famous. All this seriously reduces any honeymoon period he could have had.
所有总统都有执政、立法或服兵役的公共服务记录。这份记录通常值得其享受蜜月期。唐纳德没有公共服务记录，他没有在学校董事会任职的经验，更不用说了解宪法了，而且他一生中已经度过了足够多的蜜月了。
由于缺乏公开记录，我们只能通过他的言行和私人记录来判断唐纳德。他的话虽然已经打动了他的核心支持者、对大多数选民和美国人来说，他的话是引起分化的，他的政策被认为是经济自杀，他的私人记录显示，他逃税，逃避兵役，未偿还债务的债权人和投资者的名单有一长串。他是一个惯于玩弄女人的男人，他还就已婚女人在他吻她们的时候为什么什么也不说一事进行吹嘘——因为他很有名。这一切严重减少了他本可以拥有的蜜月期。
All presidents have a public service record either in governing, lawmaking or military service. This is usually enough of a record to warrant a honeymoon period. Donald has no public service record he has no experience in being on a school board let alone understand the constitution, besides he has had enough honeymoons in his life.
All we have to judge Donald on or not is his words, actions and his private records due to the lack of public records. His words although have spoken to his core supporters, to the majority of voters and Americans they are divisive, and his policies are consider d economic suicide, his private record shows a man who avoids taxes, dodges the draft, leaves a long line of unpaid creditors and investors. A man who is a serial womaniser and a man who boasts of how married women don't say anything when he kisses them because he is famous. All this seriously reduces any honeymoon period he could have had.
所有总统都有执政、立法或服兵役的公共服务记录。这份记录通常值得其享受蜜月期。唐纳德没有公共服务记录，他没有在学校董事会任职的经验，更不用说了解宪法了，而且他一生中已经度过了足够多的蜜月了。
由于缺乏公开记录，我们只能通过他的言行和私人记录来判断唐纳德。他的话虽然已经打动了他的核心支持者、对大多数选民和美国人来说，他的话是引起分化的，他的政策被认为是经济自杀，他的私人记录显示，他逃税，逃避兵役，未偿还债务的债权人和投资者的名单有一长串。他是一个惯于玩弄女人的男人，他还就已婚女人在他吻她们的时候为什么什么也不说一事进行吹嘘——因为他很有名。这一切严重减少了他本可以拥有的蜜月期。
很赞 1
收藏