Opinion of Donald Trump's convention speech?

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

HS, Telling Cruz you won't accept his endorsement just cost you millions of evangelicals.

Hardly.  Most Evangelicals think Cruz needs to come to his senses. 

Trump needed to stand up to Cruz, and he did.  Cruz handled his situation terribly; he wrote a check with his mouth that he butt can't cash.  Trump set him up for the check to go NSF in full view of America.  Really, I think Cruz has set himself up to where David Dewhurst could beat him in a rematch if he enters the 2018 Texas GOP Senate primary.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Trump's speech got a 75% approval rating from a CNN poll, leading them to discredit their own poll right away.

I agree that folks are more pessimistic than the immediate circumstances may justify, but older folks have seen America go backward over a longer span of time than, say, millennials.  For those folks, even for some folks who aren't Trump partisans, Trump's view of the way things are in America are quite realistic, because while things may have gotten better on the margins over the last few years, things have gotten markedly worse over their adult lifetimes, all things considered.  They have seen their social contract discarded, as if it never existed.  Many of them have lost good jobs due to globalism, and they've lost them late in life.  It's one thing to tell a 25 year old to go out and get another job; they can start at the bottom and go somewhere.  But a 55 year old?  They face age discrimination at every turn.  Many of them are offered employment of a nature where there is no upward mobility, as if their life experiences matter not one whit.  Yes they can go back to school; if they don't deplete their retirement accounts to do so, they can enter their Golden Years with student debt and face age discrimination even in professions where there is a shortage of qualified applicants. 

What Hillary Clinton and Black Lives Matter have in common is disregard for law.  Hillary's disregard is well-documented.  BLM actually believes that folks have the legal right to resist a lawful arrest.  BLM actually believe that they have the right to use intimidation and coercion to interrupt folks at their own rallies and take over the podium, and they don't seem to understand why folks have a problem with Donald Trump assert that he's not going to be rolled at HIS podium.  They get it that black folks have, indeed, been mistreated by police, but they also get it that Michael Brown had committed a strong-arm robbery of a frail woman at a convenience store just prior to his being shot by an officer (for which the officer was not charged), and they get it that Eric Garner, a man with over 30 arrests, was actively resisting a lawful arrest by NYPD, albeit, for a misdemeanor.  They see the attacks on police and they remember 1968, and regardless of how crime rates have dropped over time, they realize that it's in no small measure BECAUSE of the so-called "militarization of police" and tougher sentencing laws that have taken habitual criminals off the streets, and they see "reform" proposals as things that undo what has helped make the public safer.

Older Americans lived through violent attacks and they lived through 9/11, but now they see deadly attacks becoming commonplace, and they don't understand why the enemy can't be named.  We named Communists as our enemy.  We named Nazis as our enemy.  But we can't say "Radical Islamic Jihadism" as our current enemy ideology?  What's the deal here? 

Why, then, would it surprise folks that Trump's negativity would play well?  They have a longer view of the world, and the long-term trends haven't bode well for them. 

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Trump's speech got a 75% approval rating from a CNN poll, leading them to discredit their own poll right away.

I agree that folks are more pessimistic than the immediate circumstances may justify, but older folks have seen America go backward over a longer span of time than, say, millennials.  For those folks, even for some folks who aren't Trump partisans, Trump's view of the way things are in America are quite realistic, because while things may have gotten better on the margins over the last few years, things have gotten markedly worse over their adult lifetimes, all things considered.  They have seen their social contract discarded, as if it never existed.  Many of them have lost good jobs due to globalism, and they've lost them late in life.  It's one thing to tell a 25 year old to go out and get another job; they can start at the bottom and go somewhere.  But a 55 year old?  They face age discrimination at every turn.  Many of them are offered employment of a nature where there is no upward mobility, as if their life experiences matter not one whit.  Yes they can go back to school; if they don't deplete their retirement accounts to do so, they can enter their Golden Years with student debt and face age discrimination even in professions where there is a shortage of qualified applicants. 

What Hillary Clinton and Black Lives Matter have in common is disregard for law.  Hillary's disregard is well-documented.  BLM actually believes that folks have the legal right to resist a lawful arrest.  BLM actually believe that they have the right to use intimidation and coercion to interrupt folks at their own rallies and take over the podium, and they don't seem to understand why folks have a problem with Donald Trump assert that he's not going to be rolled at HIS podium.  They get it that black folks have, indeed, been mistreated by police, but they also get it that Michael Brown had committed a strong-arm robbery of a frail woman at a convenience store just prior to his being shot by an officer (for which the officer was not charged), and they get it that Eric Garner, a man with over 30 arrests, was actively resisting a lawful arrest by NYPD, albeit, for a misdemeanor.  They see the attacks on police and they remember 1968, and regardless of how crime rates have dropped over time, they realize that it's in no small measure BECAUSE of the so-called "militarization of police" and tougher sentencing laws that have taken habitual criminals off the streets, and they see "reform" proposals as things that undo what has helped make the public safer.

Older Americans lived through violent attacks and they lived through 9/11, but now they see deadly attacks becoming commonplace, and they don't understand why the enemy can't be named.  We named Communists as our enemy.  We named Nazis as our enemy.  But we can't say "Radical Islamic Jihadism" as our current enemy ideology?  What's the deal here? 

Why, then, would it surprise folks that Trump's negativity would play well?  They have a longer view of the world, and the long-term trends haven't bode well for them. 

Gibberish.

How so?

Oh, by the way:  How old are you, sonny?

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Trump's speech got a 75% approval rating from a CNN poll, leading them to discredit their own poll right away.

I agree that folks are more pessimistic than the immediate circumstances may justify, but older folks have seen America go backward over a longer span of time than, say, millennials.  For those folks, even for some folks who aren't Trump partisans, Trump's view of the way things are in America are quite realistic, because while things may have gotten better on the margins over the last few years, things have gotten markedly worse over their adult lifetimes, all things considered.  They have seen their social contract discarded, as if it never existed.  Many of them have lost good jobs due to globalism, and they've lost them late in life.  It's one thing to tell a 25 year old to go out and get another job; they can start at the bottom and go somewhere.  But a 55 year old?  They face age discrimination at every turn.  Many of them are offered employment of a nature where there is no upward mobility, as if their life experiences matter not one whit.  Yes they can go back to school; if they don't deplete their retirement accounts to do so, they can enter their Golden Years with student debt and face age discrimination even in professions where there is a shortage of qualified applicants. 

What Hillary Clinton and Black Lives Matter have in common is disregard for law.  Hillary's disregard is well-documented.  BLM actually believes that folks have the legal right to resist a lawful arrest.  BLM actually believe that they have the right to use intimidation and coercion to interrupt folks at their own rallies and take over the podium, and they don't seem to understand why folks have a problem with Donald Trump assert that he's not going to be rolled at HIS podium.  They get it that black folks have, indeed, been mistreated by police, but they also get it that Michael Brown had committed a strong-arm robbery of a frail woman at a convenience store just prior to his being shot by an officer (for which the officer was not charged), and they get it that Eric Garner, a man with over 30 arrests, was actively resisting a lawful arrest by NYPD, albeit, for a misdemeanor.  They see the attacks on police and they remember 1968, and regardless of how crime rates have dropped over time, they realize that it's in no small measure BECAUSE of the so-called "militarization of police" and tougher sentencing laws that have taken habitual criminals off the streets, and they see "reform" proposals as things that undo what has helped make the public safer.

Older Americans lived through violent attacks and they lived through 9/11, but now they see deadly attacks becoming commonplace, and they don't understand why the enemy can't be named.  We named Communists as our enemy.  We named Nazis as our enemy.  But we can't say "Radical Islamic Jihadism" as our current enemy ideology?  What's the deal here? 

Why, then, would it surprise folks that Trump's negativity would play well?  They have a longer view of the world, and the long-term trends haven't bode well for them. 

Gibberish.

How so?

Oh, by the way:  How old are you, sonny?

Old enough to have a functioning brain, which you clearly don't have.

I heard that loud and clear. 

When I was your age, I would have reacted the same way to me.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Trump's speech got a 75% approval rating from a CNN poll, leading them to discredit their own poll right away.

I agree that folks are more pessimistic than the immediate circumstances may justify, but older folks have seen America go backward over a longer span of time than, say, millennials.  For those folks, even for some folks who aren't Trump partisans, Trump's view of the way things are in America are quite realistic, because while things may have gotten better on the margins over the last few years, things have gotten markedly worse over their adult lifetimes, all things considered.  They have seen their social contract discarded, as if it never existed.  Many of them have lost good jobs due to globalism, and they've lost them late in life.  It's one thing to tell a 25 year old to go out and get another job; they can start at the bottom and go somewhere.  But a 55 year old?  They face age discrimination at every turn.  Many of them are offered employment of a nature where there is no upward mobility, as if their life experiences matter not one whit.  Yes they can go back to school; if they don't deplete their retirement accounts to do so, they can enter their Golden Years with student debt and face age discrimination even in professions where there is a shortage of qualified applicants.  

What Hillary Clinton and Black Lives Matter have in common is disregard for law.  Hillary's disregard is well-documented.  BLM actually believes that folks have the legal right to resist a lawful arrest.  BLM actually believe that they have the right to use intimidation and coercion to interrupt folks at their own rallies and take over the podium, and they don't seem to understand why folks have a problem with Donald Trump assert that he's not going to be rolled at HIS podium.  They get it that black folks have, indeed, been mistreated by police, but they also get it that Michael Brown had committed a strong-arm robbery of a frail woman at a convenience store just prior to his being shot by an officer (for which the officer was not charged), and they get it that Eric Garner, a man with over 30 arrests, was actively resisting a lawful arrest by NYPD, albeit, for a misdemeanor.  They see the attacks on police and they remember 1968, and regardless of how crime rates have dropped over time, they realize that it's in no small measure BECAUSE of the so-called "militarization of police" and tougher sentencing laws that have taken habitual criminals off the streets, and they see "reform" proposals as things that undo what has helped make the public safer.

Older Americans lived through violent attacks and they lived through 9/11, but now they see deadly attacks becoming commonplace, and they don't understand why the enemy can't be named.  We named Communists as our enemy.  We named Nazis as our enemy.  But we can't say "Radical Islamic Jihadism" as our current enemy ideology?  What's the deal here?  

Why, then, would it surprise folks that Trump's negativity would play well?  They have a longer view of the world, and the long-term trends haven't bode well for them.  

Gibberish.

How so?

Oh, by the way:  How old are you, sonny?

Old enough to have a functioning brain, which you clearly don't have.

I heard that loud and clear.  

When I was your age, I would have reacted the same way to me.

Now you'd just say "get off my lawn, sonny."

I feel a great deal of sympathy for those who have lost due to globalization, but when they look to a strongman with no plan to be their savior, I have nothing but contempt for them.

Sympathy doesn't lead to solutions.  Bill Clinton and Barack Obama (and, of course, both Bushes) did nothing to reverse Globalism.  They are more concerned with discrimination against foreigners wanting to enter the US than against loyal, taxpaying Americans who have been screwed and tattooed by Globalism. 

"America First" gets a bad rap, but why shouldn't Americans come first in their own country?  Why should immigration policies increase the competition for jobs for them?  Why should trade agreements make it profitable for companies to relocate to Mexico or China?  Why should taxpaying Americans have to accept poorly vetted Syrian refugees in their country if THEY don't want to?

Globalism has brought about a more Cosmopolitan America, but it has come at a cost of working class jobs, lessened opportunity for American citizens, and the labeling of American citizens as bigots and Xenophobes because they are not happy about THEIR lives being diminished and THEIR futures trashed.  Whether Trump has solutions to this remains to be seen, but Trump, and Trump alone, has EFFECTIVELY changed the conversation.  Indeed, Trump has been more effective in this than Bernie Sanders; the Democrats are nominating the FLOG (First Lady of Globalism) who's position on NAFTA is "My bad!  Let's move on!".

Trump's changed the trajectory of the conversation.  That's a key first step.  If you have sympathy for folks impacted by Globalism, what do you offer besides sympathy?  I'm challenging you to give some evidence that you give a crap, because I'm not convinced yet that you really do.

[Fuzzy Bear Loves Christian Missionaries]

Trump's speech got a 75% approval rating from a CNN poll, leading them to discredit their own poll right away.

I agree that folks are more pessimistic than the immediate circumstances may justify, but older folks have seen America go backward over a longer span of time than, say, millennials.  For those folks, even for some folks who aren't Trump partisans, Trump's view of the way things are in America are quite realistic, because while things may have gotten better on the margins over the last few years, things have gotten markedly worse over their adult lifetimes, all things considered.  They have seen their social contract discarded, as if it never existed.  Many of them have lost good jobs due to globalism, and they've lost them late in life.  It's one thing to tell a 25 year old to go out and get another job; they can start at the bottom and go somewhere.  But a 55 year old?  They face age discrimination at every turn.  Many of them are offered employment of a nature where there is no upward mobility, as if their life experiences matter not one whit.  Yes they can go back to school; if they don't deplete their retirement accounts to do so, they can enter their Golden Years with student debt and face age discrimination even in professions where there is a shortage of qualified applicants.  

What Hillary Clinton and Black Lives Matter have in common is disregard for law.  Hillary's disregard is well-documented.  BLM actually believes that folks have the legal right to resist a lawful arrest.  BLM actually believe that they have the right to use intimidation and coercion to interrupt folks at their own rallies and take over the podium, and they don't seem to understand why folks have a problem with Donald Trump assert that he's not going to be rolled at HIS podium.  They get it that black folks have, indeed, been mistreated by police, but they also get it that Michael Brown had committed a strong-arm robbery of a frail woman at a convenience store just prior to his being shot by an officer (for which the officer was not charged), and they get it that Eric Garner, a man with over 30 arrests, was actively resisting a lawful arrest by NYPD, albeit, for a misdemeanor.  They see the attacks on police and they remember 1968, and regardless of how crime rates have dropped over time, they realize that it's in no small measure BECAUSE of the so-called "militarization of police" and tougher sentencing laws that have taken habitual criminals off the streets, and they see "reform" proposals as things that undo what has helped make the public safer.

Older Americans lived through violent attacks and they lived through 9/11, but now they see deadly attacks becoming commonplace, and they don't understand why the enemy can't be named.  We named Communists as our enemy.  We named Nazis as our enemy.  But we can't say "Radical Islamic Jihadism" as our current enemy ideology?  What's the deal here?  

Why, then, would it surprise folks that Trump's negativity would play well?  They have a longer view of the world, and the long-term trends haven't bode well for them.  

Gibberish.

How so?

Oh, by the way:  How old are you, sonny?

Old enough to have a functioning brain, which you clearly don't have.

I heard that loud and clear.  

When I was your age, I would have reacted the same way to me.

Now you'd just say "get off my lawn, sonny."

I feel a great deal of sympathy for those who have lost due to globalization, but when they look to a strongman with no plan to be their savior, I have nothing but contempt for them.

Sympathy doesn't lead to solutions.  Bill Clinton and Barack Obama (and, of course, both Bushes) did nothing to reverse Globalism.  They are more concerned with discrimination against foreigners wanting to enter the US than against loyal, taxpaying Americans who have been screwed and tattooed by Globalism.  

"America First" gets a bad rap, but why shouldn't Americans come first in their own country?  Why should immigration policies increase the competition for jobs for them?  Why should trade agreements make it profitable for companies to relocate to Mexico or China?  Why should taxpaying Americans have to accept poorly vetted Syrian refugees in their country if THEY don't want to?

Globalism has brought about a more Cosmopolitan America, but it has come at a cost of working class jobs, lessened opportunity for American citizens, and the labeling of American citizens as bigots and Xenophobes because they are not happy about THEIR lives being diminished and THEIR futures trashed.  Whether Trump has solutions to this remains to be seen, but Trump, and Trump alone, has EFFECTIVELY changed the conversation.  Indeed, Trump has been more effective in this than Bernie Sanders; the Democrats are nominating the FLOG (First Lady of Globalism) who's position on NAFTA is "My bad!  Let's move on!".

Trump's changed the trajectory of the conversation.  That's a key first step.  If you have sympathy for folks impacted by Globalism, what do you offer besides sympathy?  I'm challenging you to give some evidence that you give a crap, because I'm not convinced yet that you really do.

2."Why shouldn't Americans come first in their own country?"  American employees don't won't foreign competition, but American consumers (the same people, btw) do.

So which of those two categories of the same person should come first?

American workers.  Without hesitation.