You will see that most people will side with him on this one. They don't understand the issue.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Donald Trump Criticizes Apple for Opposing iPhone 'Backdoor' Order: 'Who Do They Think They Are?'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You will see that most people will side with him on this one. They don't understand the issue.
I think that it has been debunked already.
Many coutries are racist, for sure, but that is a typical deflection which generally implies a justification.
We're not talking about other countries. We're talking about the US. And in that context, his/her post is absolutely and unequivocally correct.
That other countries are also racist is irrelevant (again, in this context).
So? Have I ever said that she/he was wrong? I just made a comment on a statement about the sad state of things.
Look at what Germany was doing before Hitler was in power. There are scary similarities here; For one look at how the Trump crowds handle protestors/hecklers? Is that your idea of Free Speech? Say something the other side doesn't like and get the crap beat out of you? What about the ridiculous amounts of edicts and executive orders? Last time I checked the American Systems Manual/Instructions/Rule book (you know that pesky little constitution, bill or rights and such) leaves legislating to the legislature. This isn't anti-Obama/Trump but the precedence that's being set for future presidents, it's all great if you think Trump or Hillary will be benevolent and lead with integrity, but what about the next guy, or the guy after that, after the goal post for presidential powers shifts further and further.
The government has proven to be untrustworthy. I'm surprised this case wasn't locked behind a secret court.
If you weren't sure which side to be on at least Trump has cleared it up for us.
I'm on Apple's side.
I'm on Apple's side.
Bernie Sanders.
You've got no idea what Socialism or Communism is. Socialism is what we use for things like building streets and public parks buildings, fire dept, police and so on. I've lived in Communism, trust me that is not communism. Go ahead vote for Trump you sound right up his alley.
Here, we will use Dictionary.com's definition:
As you can see, there is not a lot of difference between the two. The difference is that socialism should be voluntary (which is not what Sanders wants to see happening), communism is mandatory. Does Sanders currently completely fall into Communism? No, but he doesn't fall into socialism either, as he wants to force people who worked hard to earn things to give it to those that didn't do so. When one starts into socialism, they quickly find themselves in communism, so it is a very dangerous slope to start down and one that needs to be avoided.
Both of them are a form of theft, stealing from those that worked to earn something and giving it to those that didn't.
He could probably shoot you on Fifth Avenue and you would still support him. Not my words, his!
Donald trump is pure entertainment. Unfortunately there is a big possibility of him being elected president of the US.
At that point, God help us all.
He is a popularist and will find it difficult, if not impossible to act upon his "promises". Doesn't his supporters realize he is full of hot air?
At that point, God help us all.
He is a popularist and will find it difficult, if not impossible to act upon his "promises". Doesn't his supporters realize he is full of hot air?
If you really want to get deep, perhaps the boys at Ft. Mead already cracked it. This whole action with Apple is a ruse to avoid public disclosure in Federal Court of a classified operational method.
I know exactly how it works, which is why we are actually having the conversation about leaving. If I felt like we had any power to change the mess of a government we have, I would stay and fight, but Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin - and in reality, what our congressmen and women do is to serve themselves in the best way they can.
Americans don't want health care provided for by the government, even if that is exactly what our elected officials have provided for themselves. Americans don't want to get insider knowledge of Wall Street deals, so that we can make lots of money with little or no risk. Americans don't want lifetime pensions with all sorts of perks (including the noted free healthcare). American don't want to leave one job only to be hired by a company that supported them in their previous job, collecting an additional paycheck even though they keep getting their pension check and benefits.
I mean really, who would want such things...
Last edited:
No, Apple was given an order and the opportunity to argue against it. They are arguing against it. A judge's order is different from a law in many ways; publicly arguing against such an order which specifically includes the opportunity to convince the judge that this is not the appropriate path is obviously very different from breaking a law.
And, Trump is a skilled demagogue but otherwise not very smart nor knowledgable of legal issues.
No, we use taxes to pay for things like buildings or streets, something that is unfortunately necessary, socialism as you can see in my other post is quite different.
And the things, like free education for all, etc. that Sanders want sound great, until you start looking at the only way to pay for this is to go ultimately to communism. How else do you pay trillions of dollars a year that he wants to spend when we are already trillions of dollars in debt?
I think that went away with the destruction of the Old Right and the rise of the neocons. Take a look at when Buckley and his crowd hijacked the party back in the fifties. PNAC sealed that deal.
Nothing was "given" - it was hard fought. I kind of think the women involved with that battle for the right to vote would have something to say about that...
As far as Lincoln.. he was not a very nice guy, from what I've read. Quite autocratic, more than somewhat racist, and a firm believer in national government and executive control of that government.
It won't happen. People are locked into the two party system because its a symptom of how government works: make people think there are only two sides, then force them to pick a side.
I've been enjoying Trump's effect on the "process" so far, as he's stirred the pot considerably. He's refused to drop into duck and cover mode whenever the press calls him out on something. That is very needed. I've been waiting for the backlash to hit the SJWs for a while now, and hopefully this is the beginning. The attack on freedom of speech has been accelerating these past few years.
But as far as vote for him? I don't know. I don't like anyone else in the field, really. I generally don't go near the polls to support a candidate unless the person lines up with my beliefs and at least obey the Constitution, flawed though it is. Rand Paul turned out to be a complete disappointment - he had momentum but then opened his mouth and supported all the military adventurism that his Dad wanted us to stay out of. He lost me there.
If it comes down to Trump vs. the third Clinton presidency, I may step up and pick him, because i loathe her sneering face and that ridiculous nod-while-looking-around thing she does when saying the words "sensible" or "reasonable", as if anything she decides could ever fit either category. Trump vs Sanders? Who cares who wins that one? Sanders is so off the wall, so blatantly kindergarten in his "understanding" of economics that Congress just might reclaim all the power they've ceded to the executive over this past hundred years and do what they're elected to do instead of rubber-stamp royal edicts, and that is something desperately needed.
Trump is a very good businessman who has a knack for picking the right people to run his various circuses. Will that translate to being a good president? Only if he steps back and plays a more originalist role. Be the chief diplomat, the agent to the outside world for the several states. Direct national resources in times of war. Implement the laws passed by the legislature. But if he continues as Obama part two (who in actuality has been nothing more than the third term of the Bush presidency) there will be problems.
He's already made it clear he believes in communication rather than invasion, and has done a remarkable job of managing his businesses, so maybe he could succeed at this. I don't know. Right now I'm feeling pretty displeased with him for speaking out against Apple in this manner.
I doubt it makes much of a difference anymore who holds what office. We're just rearranging the dinner seating on the Titanic, in any case, as I firmly believe this economic system and the world order it supports is about to go toes-up.
i don't think Trump has really thought this through. I think he's wrong on this issue. Or, perhaps he does know better, and like so many of his 'positions' they're for public consumption only, not reflecting his true values.
Is not that he is in television, it's that he's appearing in the wrong channel.
