3 ms·

I'm just responding to what was quoted here saying he agrees with the courts. Was there something in this interview or another that contradicts that?

by ewzimm 10y ago

burkaman 10y ago
Trump doesn't generally take concrete positions, so I can't find any other meaningful quote from him on surveillance or encryption or anything like that. If you're just asking in general, he has disagreed with the courts many times, such as on Roe v. Wade or his own lawsuits. This quote in isolation is still not great, what does "I think security overall — we have to open it up" mean? But looking at it in isolation is obviously not very useful. Combine it with his lack of a position on many other important issues, and his cabinet picks so far.
- ewzimm 10y ago
  He was obviously talking about agreeing with the courts in this case, not every matter, which wouldn't even be a rational statement since courts disagree. He does speak in generalities, but so does every politician. He's often especially vague, for sure. That doesn't seem to be a legitimate reason for so many people to project their worst fears onto every generality, to the point of hysteria.
  - burkaman 10y ago
    Well, the only really concrete actions he's been able to take so far have been announcing cabinet appointments, and so far they're confirming those hysterical peoples' fears. So maybe they have a point. All politicians speak in vague generalities, but most have a record. When a president has no record and no position, I think it is reasonable to prepare for the worst, just in case.
    - makomk 10y ago
      When he appointed someone who was apparently under serious consideration for Clinton's cabinet too, that still confirmed those hysterical people's fears. It's almost like they're not actually falsifiable in any way.
      - burkaman 10y ago
        Which pick are you talking about? I couldn't find much with google. But regardless, Clinton isn't the president, so it doesn't really matter who she was considering. Trump is appointing people who don't understand climate change, want to abolish the departments they're in charge of, oppose minimum wage rises, don't understand what Planned Parenthood is for, have no government experience, etc. Obviously lots of people like these things, that's why he's making the appointments, but don't tell me you didn't hear these fears before the election. People were hysterical about these exact possibilities, and now they're happening.

I'm just responding to what was quoted here saying he agrees with the courts. Was there something in this interview or another that contradicts that?

by ewzimm 10y ago

I'm just responding to what was quoted here saying he agrees with the courts. Was there something in this interview or another that contradicts that?

burkaman 10y ago

Trump doesn't generally take concrete positions, so I can't find any other meaningful quote from him on surveillance or encryption or anything like that. If you're just asking in general, he has disagreed with the courts many times, such as on Roe v. Wade or his own lawsuits. This quote in isolation is still not great, what does "I think security overall — we have to open it up" mean? But looking at it in isolation is obviously not very useful. Combine it with his lack of a position on many other important issues, and his cabinet picks so far.

ewzimm 10y ago
He was obviously talking about agreeing with the courts in this case, not every matter, which wouldn't even be a rational statement since courts disagree. He does speak in generalities, but so does every politician. He's often especially vague, for sure. That doesn't seem to be a legitimate reason for so many people to project their worst fears onto every generality, to the point of hysteria.
- burkaman 10y ago
  Well, the only really concrete actions he's been able to take so far have been announcing cabinet appointments, and so far they're confirming those hysterical peoples' fears. So maybe they have a point. All politicians speak in vague generalities, but most have a record. When a president has no record and no position, I think it is reasonable to prepare for the worst, just in case.
  - makomk 10y ago
    When he appointed someone who was apparently under serious consideration for Clinton's cabinet too, that still confirmed those hysterical people's fears. It's almost like they're not actually falsifiable in any way.
    - burkaman 10y ago
      Which pick are you talking about? I couldn't find much with google. But regardless, Clinton isn't the president, so it doesn't really matter who she was considering. Trump is appointing people who don't understand climate change, want to abolish the departments they're in charge of, oppose minimum wage rises, don't understand what Planned Parenthood is for, have no government experience, etc. Obviously lots of people like these things, that's why he's making the appointments, but don't tell me you didn't hear these fears before the election. People were hysterical about these exact possibilities, and now they're happening.