Classic ignorant Trump hater...

[healthmyths]

What lie was the thread based on?

80 year old didn't know about Japanese internment?

Not a chance unless you found the dumbest 80 year old alive. What else is untrue I wonder

I have no idea if she was the dumbest 80 year old. That would take some doing!
So you are calling me a liar about the rest of the personal anecdotal event that occurred to ME?

But few people know that Executive Order 9066, signed by President Roosevelt, which permitted the roundup of Japanese and their American-born children, also paved the way for the arrest of Germans and Italians whom the FBI considered security risks and labeled as "enemy aliens." Indeed, the day before Roosevelt signed the order FBI agents had arrested 264 Italians, 1,296 Germans, and 2,209 on the East and West Coast. The hunt for perceived enemies was on.
Fact One: The arrests of suspected enemies extended far beyond our national borders. Under provisions of the Enemy Alien Act of 1798, the same act that allowed Presidents George W. Bush and President Obama to intern modern-day suspected terrorists, Roosevelt orchestrated the removal of 4,058 Germans, 2,264 Japanese, and 288 Italians from 13 Latin American countries — and locked them up around the United States, many in a secret government internment camp located in Crystal City, Texas, an isolated desert town located at the southern tip of Texas, only 30 miles from the Mexican border. His reason? Roosevelt feared security threats from Germans and Japanese in Latin America.
5 Surprises About America's Imprisoning People During World War II
So again... what did you know about "internment" especially now with Trump suggesting NO Muslims allowed in the country because DUH>>>

It was shown in Sahih … the Prophet said "Allah wrote everything we need to know about Ihsan(kindness) so if you kill, perfect your killing and if you slaughter, perfect your slaughter and sharpen your blade and comfort your sacrifice" (also see Hadith Muslim 107/13)
Hadith 17 || Prescription of Ihsan (Perfection)

I didn't say you were a liar. I said the story is bogus. Even my children in their twenties know about it.

What story was bogus?

Either hers or yours. I make no judgments on which but that one detail is a HUGE red flag. I have never known you to stretch the truth so I'll have to go with her. She either played you or she's as dumb as a box of rocks. I don't know anyone who doesn't know that fact about the Japanese

The discussion of Japanese internment came about regarding Trump's statements about banning Muslims. She responded as most people do to that by
again the "jerk" epithet. At which time I reminded her that IKE/Truman deported over 1.6 illegal immigrants again she feigned ignorance.
Look the issue is what I was trying make with her, was the MSM biased presentations is why we are in this divisive time. The MSM has supported with money and
with positive stories about Obama and negative stories about GOP. I have shared those studies here before...i.e. 1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama, Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters

The premise of the thread is most Trump haters ONLY read the headlines or see the biased political pundits bashing Trump.
It's only when you get to the facts for example this latest issue about Trump's small hands indicating small other things was started by Rubio. But the MSM has Trump
is news, is left with the meme...inaccurately again due to the MSM.

In 2008 John McCain was selected by the MSM for the GOP during the primaries because McCain thought they were his friends. Hell, McCain had a McCain's 2004 Birthday Party: Brokaw, Jennings, Schieffer, Dowd & Russert because he thought they were his friends.
But those same biased MSM participants encouraging the nomination of McCain once nominated turned on him and through money and support to Obama as the
above article described.

So that's the gist of this thread and my experience with this woman, that the vast majority of Americans who ONLY read the headlines which are generally biased...
for example in my local paper..."A few facts stick out in the mud"... describing the GOP debate Thursday. So naturally anyone reading that headline would have
a biased opinion...i.e. "what a jerk"!
I want people to read closer before they jump to conclusions.

 

[Pogo]

It's not my opinion. It's historical fact. You claimed all the Dixiecrats joined the Republican Party. That claim is clearly false.

I'll bet you didn't know that Harry Truman was a member of the KKK.

You have me confused with someone else. I never said anything about Dixiecrats turning into Republicans.

The Southern Dixiecrats were the segregationists--those who openly discriminated against minorities. They weren't embraced by main-stream Democrats and they splintered away from the party. They migrated over to their new home with the Republican party. They are the Republican party's present-day "tea party" and "bible-banger" factions. And their "state's rights" mantra is code for abusing the power of state government to impose upon the private lives of others and to oppress minorities.

I just posted a long list of racist Democrats, many of whom were "mainstream."

Do you think J. William Fulbright was considered to be a right winger?

They were not mainstream. The Dixiecrats were not left-wing. Their Southern Manifesto proves that beyond any doubt. The racist Democrats and their constituents, the ones who railed against the Supreme Court and its Brown v. Board of Education case, etc., migrated over to the Republican party ... where they reside today.

But it was ONLY during the Democrat backed KKK that lynchings occurred and that was my point!
NOT one lynching since those Democrats have become GOP... says a lot for the GOP right???

Complete Bullshit.

Number one, the KKK wasn't "backed" by any political party at all, and number two, most lynchings took place independent of the KKK, including quite a lot of them when the Klan didn't even exist. In fact that racially charged atmosphere of a century ago, with hundreds of lynchings going on, was part of why the Klan got recreated in 1915.

Lynchings were going on before the first Klan (1865), during it, after it was extinguished (late 1870s) and right up to the second 1915 Klan, and beyond, without a break. There's no doubt the Klan committed some of them when they were around, but they hardly had a monopoly.

In other words --- racism begat the Klan ..... not the other way around.

From my thread on the EJI report on lynchings a year ago:

>> EJI researchers documented 3959 racial terror lynchings of African Americans in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia between 1877 and 1950 <<​

--- that covers a 73-year period, during the first half of which, the Klan didn't even exist.

As for lynching itself, it thankfully dwindled to a trickle after WWII, but yes it still goes on. That of James Byrd is probably the best known recent case.

 

[healthmyths]

You have me confused with someone else. I never said anything about Dixiecrats turning into Republicans.

The Southern Dixiecrats were the segregationists--those who openly discriminated against minorities. They weren't embraced by main-stream Democrats and they splintered away from the party. They migrated over to their new home with the Republican party. They are the Republican party's present-day "tea party" and "bible-banger" factions. And their "state's rights" mantra is code for abusing the power of state government to impose upon the private lives of others and to oppress minorities.

I just posted a long list of racist Democrats, many of whom were "mainstream."

Do you think J. William Fulbright was considered to be a right winger?

They were not mainstream. The Dixiecrats were not left-wing. Their Southern Manifesto proves that beyond any doubt. The racist Democrats and their constituents, the ones who railed against the Supreme Court and its Brown v. Board of Education case, etc., migrated over to the Republican party ... where they reside today.

But it was ONLY during the Democrat backed KKK that lynchings occurred and that was my point!
NOT one lynching since those Democrats have become GOP... says a lot for the GOP right???

Complete Bullshit.

Number one, the KKK wasn't "backed" by any political party at all, and number two, most lynchings took place independent of the KKK, including quite a lot of them when the Klan didn't even exist. In fact that racially charged atmosphere of a century ago, with hundreds of lynchings going on, was part of why the Klan got recreated in 1915.

Lynchings were going on before the first Klan (1865), during it, after it was extinguished (late 1870s) and right up to the second 1915 Klan, and beyond, without a break. There's no doubt the Klan committed some of them when they were around, but they hardly had a monopoly.

In other words --- racism begat the Klan ..... not the other way around.

Very good point! You have correctly identified the gross misperception of the GOP as being KKK supporters. I was pointing out though that during the period that
Senator Byrd (D), Albright (D), Johnson (D) et.al...i.e. Democrat party they were either members or agreed with KKK tenets. Remember the LBJ (D) quote about appointing Marshall to SCOTUS: “when I appoint a ****** to the bench, I want everybody to know he’s a ******.”
Also the last KKK lynching occurred during the Democrat controlled Congress/White House.

 

[BULLDOG]

The Southern Dixiecrats were the segregationists--those who openly discriminated against minorities. They weren't embraced by main-stream Democrats and they splintered away from the party. They migrated over to their new home with the Republican party. They are the Republican party's present-day "tea party" and "bible-banger" factions. And their "state's rights" mantra is code for abusing the power of state government to impose upon the private lives of others and to oppress minorities.

I just posted a long list of racist Democrats, many of whom were "mainstream."

Do you think J. William Fulbright was considered to be a right winger?

They were not mainstream. The Dixiecrats were not left-wing. Their Southern Manifesto proves that beyond any doubt. The racist Democrats and their constituents, the ones who railed against the Supreme Court and its Brown v. Board of Education case, etc., migrated over to the Republican party ... where they reside today.

But it was ONLY during the Democrat backed KKK that lynchings occurred and that was my point!
NOT one lynching since those Democrats have become GOP... says a lot for the GOP right???

Complete Bullshit.

Number one, the KKK wasn't "backed" by any political party at all, and number two, most lynchings took place independent of the KKK, including quite a lot of them when the Klan didn't even exist. In fact that racially charged atmosphere of a century ago, with hundreds of lynchings going on, was part of why the Klan got recreated in 1915.

Lynchings were going on before the first Klan (1865), during it, after it was extinguished (late 1870s) and right up to the second 1915 Klan, and beyond, without a break. There's no doubt the Klan committed some of them when they were around, but they hardly had a monopoly.

In other words --- racism begat the Klan ..... not the other way around.

Very good point! You have correctly identified the gross misperception of the GOP as being KKK supporters. I was pointing out though that during the period that
Senator Byrd (D), Albright (D), Johnson (D) et.al...i.e. Democrat party they were either members or agreed with KKK tenets. Remember the LBJ (D) quote exactly : “when I appoint a ****** to the bench, I want everybody to know he’s a ******.”
Also the last KKK lynching occurred during the Democrat controlled Congress/White House.

I'm pretty sure congress, or the white house didn't have much to do with that particular lynching.

 

[healthmyths]

I just posted a long list of racist Democrats, many of whom were "mainstream."

Do you think J. William Fulbright was considered to be a right winger?

They were not mainstream. The Dixiecrats were not left-wing. Their Southern Manifesto proves that beyond any doubt. The racist Democrats and their constituents, the ones who railed against the Supreme Court and its Brown v. Board of Education case, etc., migrated over to the Republican party ... where they reside today.

But it was ONLY during the Democrat backed KKK that lynchings occurred and that was my point!
NOT one lynching since those Democrats have become GOP... says a lot for the GOP right???

Complete Bullshit.

Number one, the KKK wasn't "backed" by any political party at all, and number two, most lynchings took place independent of the KKK, including quite a lot of them when the Klan didn't even exist. In fact that racially charged atmosphere of a century ago, with hundreds of lynchings going on, was part of why the Klan got recreated in 1915.

Lynchings were going on before the first Klan (1865), during it, after it was extinguished (late 1870s) and right up to the second 1915 Klan, and beyond, without a break. There's no doubt the Klan committed some of them when they were around, but they hardly had a monopoly.

In other words --- racism begat the Klan ..... not the other way around.

Very good point! You have correctly identified the gross misperception of the GOP as being KKK supporters. I was pointing out though that during the period that
Senator Byrd (D), Albright (D), Johnson (D) et.al...i.e. Democrat party they were either members or agreed with KKK tenets. Remember the LBJ (D) quote exactly : “when I appoint a ****** to the bench, I want everybody to know he’s a ******.”
Also the last KKK lynching occurred during the Democrat controlled Congress/White House.

I'm pretty sure congress, or the white house didn't have much to do with that particular lynching.

Anymore then Trump has supporting the KKK! Or any other GOP member of Congress.
But who seems to forget that the Democrats were in power the last time the KKK lynched in 1964 a black man?
The general public, you and the MSM... identifying the GOP with the KKK frequently.
Facts are MORE GOPers supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act then Democrats!
A fact most people are unaware especially the biased MSM!

 

[BULLDOG]

They were not mainstream. The Dixiecrats were not left-wing. Their Southern Manifesto proves that beyond any doubt. The racist Democrats and their constituents, the ones who railed against the Supreme Court and its Brown v. Board of Education case, etc., migrated over to the Republican party ... where they reside today.

But it was ONLY during the Democrat backed KKK that lynchings occurred and that was my point!
NOT one lynching since those Democrats have become GOP... says a lot for the GOP right???

Complete Bullshit.

Number one, the KKK wasn't "backed" by any political party at all, and number two, most lynchings took place independent of the KKK, including quite a lot of them when the Klan didn't even exist. In fact that racially charged atmosphere of a century ago, with hundreds of lynchings going on, was part of why the Klan got recreated in 1915.

Lynchings were going on before the first Klan (1865), during it, after it was extinguished (late 1870s) and right up to the second 1915 Klan, and beyond, without a break. There's no doubt the Klan committed some of them when they were around, but they hardly had a monopoly.

In other words --- racism begat the Klan ..... not the other way around.

Very good point! You have correctly identified the gross misperception of the GOP as being KKK supporters. I was pointing out though that during the period that
Senator Byrd (D), Albright (D), Johnson (D) et.al...i.e. Democrat party they were either members or agreed with KKK tenets. Remember the LBJ (D) quote exactly : “when I appoint a ****** to the bench, I want everybody to know he’s a ******.”
Also the last KKK lynching occurred during the Democrat controlled Congress/White House.

I'm pretty sure congress, or the white house didn't have much to do with that particular lynching.

Anymore then Trump has supporting the KKK! Or any other GOP member of Congress.
But who seems to forget that the Democrats were in power the last time the KKK lynched in 1964 a black man?
The general public, you and the MSM... identifying the GOP with the KKK frequently.
Facts are MORE GOPers supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act then Democrats!
A fact most people are unaware especially the biased MSM!

As I've often said, any of those politicians from 64 who still support the KKK and are running for any current office will not get my vote. If you would be so kind as to point them out, I would be appreciative.

 

[Papageorgio]

So you bullied an 80 year old woman. What a perfectly Trump like thing to do.

True, never give your opinion, just let misinformation take root.

The right wing is expert on misinformation.

Yes, second only to the left wing.

 

[Pogo]

The Southern Dixiecrats were the segregationists--those who openly discriminated against minorities. They weren't embraced by main-stream Democrats and they splintered away from the party. They migrated over to their new home with the Republican party. They are the Republican party's present-day "tea party" and "bible-banger" factions. And their "state's rights" mantra is code for abusing the power of state government to impose upon the private lives of others and to oppress minorities.

I just posted a long list of racist Democrats, many of whom were "mainstream."

Do you think J. William Fulbright was considered to be a right winger?

They were not mainstream. The Dixiecrats were not left-wing. Their Southern Manifesto proves that beyond any doubt. The racist Democrats and their constituents, the ones who railed against the Supreme Court and its Brown v. Board of Education case, etc., migrated over to the Republican party ... where they reside today.

But it was ONLY during the Democrat backed KKK that lynchings occurred and that was my point!
NOT one lynching since those Democrats have become GOP... says a lot for the GOP right???

Complete Bullshit.

Number one, the KKK wasn't "backed" by any political party at all, and number two, most lynchings took place independent of the KKK, including quite a lot of them when the Klan didn't even exist. In fact that racially charged atmosphere of a century ago, with hundreds of lynchings going on, was part of why the Klan got recreated in 1915.

Lynchings were going on before the first Klan (1865), during it, after it was extinguished (late 1870s) and right up to the second 1915 Klan, and beyond, without a break. There's no doubt the Klan committed some of them when they were around, but they hardly had a monopoly.

In other words --- racism begat the Klan ..... not the other way around.

From my thread on the EJI report on lynchings a year ago:

>> EJI researchers documented 3959 racial terror lynchings of African Americans in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia between 1877 and 1950 <<

--- that covers a 73-year period, during the first half of which, the Klan didn't even exist.

As for lynching itself, it thankfully dwindled to a trickle after WWII, but yes it still goes on. That of James Byrd is probably the best known recent case.

Very good point! You have correctly identified the gross misperception of the GOP as being KKK supporters. I was pointing out though that during the period that
Senator Byrd (D), Albright (D), Johnson (D) et.al...i.e. Democrat party they were either members or agreed with KKK tenets. Remember the LBJ (D) quote about appointing Marshall to SCOTUS: “when I appoint a ****** to the bench, I want everybody to know he’s a ******.”
Also the last KKK lynching occurred during the Democrat controlled Congress/White House.

BULLSHIT.

And fuck you for trying to climb on the backs of lynching victims to try to score political points. Fuck you. Lynching is not a political act; it's a racism act. Small-minded bigots like you wallow in the same ignorance that begets racism in the first place.

And it shows in your cluelessness of your context above. You know who was the first POTUS to prosecute the Klan after Grant wiped out the first one?
Lyndon Johnson.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Trump needs to get a much better handle on the issues. He was clearly unprepared and unable to answer Chris Wallace's question about how his tax plan would balance the budget. All he had to say was that an across-the-board cut of 15% imposed over three years (5% per year) would balance the budget in three years.

Also, in too many cases he does not do a good job of responding to attacks.

He needs to invest some time with a good debate coach. But first he must brush up on the issues.

Why waste time and money on a debate coach when these so-called "debates" are little more than juvenile name-calling rants? I would welcome a good, old fashioned debate. (i.e. a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.)

 

[gallantwarrior]

Trump needs to get a much better handle on the issues. He was clearly unprepared and unable to answer Chris Wallace's question about how his tax plan would balance the budget. All he had to say was that an across-the-board cut of 15% imposed over three years (5% per year) would balance the budget in three years.

Also, in too many cases he does not do a good job of responding to attacks.

He needs to invest some time with a good debate coach. But first he must brush up on the issues.

Wannabe King Drumph is not interested in "good debate" or being knowledgeable about issues. He's using the "reality tv" playbook wherein the obnoxious jerk with the biggest, loudest foul mouth gets the most air time. He uses one syllable words, with few exceptions. All hype, no substance. He says, "I'll build a wall and it will be huuuuuuuge just like my dick!" And then the poorly educated people cheer.

Does it seem like any of these drones are interested in legitimate debate? Seriously, who cares how small Trmup's hands are? What the fuck does that mean, anyway?

 

[gallantwarrior]

The picture or the sat

I was enjoying an ice cream treat in a fast food place today when this woman sat down a few tables from me and loudly proclaimed after seeing CNN on the TV... "Trump is such a jerk"!
I was really offended because I am a Trump supporter so she by association would think I'm a "Jerk".
So I told her several FACTS about Trump like:
1) Trump like me believes America is exceptional and the main reason Trump like me KNOW that America's exceptionalism comes from "legal immigrants" like my daughter-in-law who became citizens LEGALLY!
2) I also told her that what she was hearing/reading from the MSM was biased and that much of it was not honest.

We discussed further and being 80 years old she said FDR was a great president. To which I advised
her FDR deported illegals and put into internment camps Japanese. She didn't know.

I further went on to try to influence her opinion regarding the bias of the MSM and asked if she'd heard
of the SDS/Weathermen. Of course she didn't! I explained how journalism has been so corrupted by
socialists teaching in schools that Kindergarten students from PS75, a public school in New York City, recently took part in a class project in which the children were made to create an American flag with the flags of other 22 other nations superimposed over the stripes. Below the flag read the words "We pledge allegiance to an International Flag."

Read more: Outrageous! Public School Students Taught To 'Pledge Allegiance To An International Flag' | The Sean Hannity Show

The whole thing can be summed up though by her comment after I told her I spent hours every day
reading material about politics, our country and the massive problems. Her comment..." I don't have time to do that"! Right! She doesn't have the time....YET she calls Trump a Jerk after watching CNN and all the other biased MSM network/newspapers continually tear apart our country with their biased and totally subjective reporting!

What a shame our country is so really based on this ignorant woman's comment the same WAY!

Well, your problem is --Trump isn't going to get within 1000 miles of the White House.

All the Trump bla, bla, bla in the world isn't going to make up for offending 23 million Hispanics right into Hillary Clinton's column. This when the GOP nominee since Reagan, needs at least 40% of this block. This year they need 46%. Trump is polling at a Negative 80% with this block. Univision, the largest Hispanic cable T.V. in this country cut off Trump several months ago. Republican Latino's have already stated they will not support a Trump nominee.
GOP Win Will Need More Than 40 Percent Of Latino 2016 Vote, Says Study
Latino conservatives: If Donald Trump is the nominee, we will not work to elect him
Poll: 75% of Latinos Have Negative View of Donald Trump

What is absolutely fascinating to me about a Trump supporter. Donald Trump knows how important the Latino vote is, but his supporters don't. In 2012 he blasted Republicans for losing citing it was because they were too mean spirited toward illegals. He's right. The last Republican to win was G.W. Bush who won 44% of this block, and Romney lost by only capturing 27% of this block.
2012 FLASHBACK: Donald Trump Said GOP Was Too ‘Mean-Spirited’ Towards Illegal Immigrants
Trump supported path to citizenship, said Romney was "mean-spirited" on immigration | RedState

Maybe one of you Trump supporters can answer this. So what candidate goes into a race that actually wants to win an election, and does the exact opposite of what he said went wrong with an election just 3-1/2 years prior? Is this a candidate that wants to win, or possibly a candidate that wants to drive the election into someone else's lap.

Don't worry you'll have the next 4 to 8 years of Hillary Clinton in the oval office to ponder that question.

[/QUOTE


The picture or that statement is not going to work for you Trump supporters. If they going to lock her up, they need to make room for Condi Rice and Colin Powell also.

State Department: Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice staffers received classified info via personal email - CNNPolitics.com

You're also avoiding my question: Maybe one of you Trump supporters can answer this. So what candidate goes into a race that actually wants to win an election, and does the exact opposite of what he said went wrong with an election just 3-1/2 years prior? Is this a candidate that wants to win, or possibly a candidate that wants to drive the election into someone else's lap.

I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm appalled by the people who are slurping up his tripe. But if I was going to embrace a conspiracy theory, it would be this one: The Drumph and Hillary orchestrating a real life scenario of "Wag the Dog" hoping the sane people in this country will disregard Hillary's skeletons and overwhelmingly vote for her rather than risk the presidency falling into Drumph's hands who plays the hell out of his short-fingered vulgarian persona. There isn't much reality in reality television.

If the incompetent former Sec of State, the enabling spouse of a serial rapist/abuser,, and blatant lying, cheating, stealing crook manages to garner sufficient votes from brain-dead, zealot zombies, there is no hope for the US. I am researching other possibilities, even though I desperately hope Alaska will be of little interest after our oil industry fails.

 

[gallantwarrior]

Ignorant? All you need to know about Trump.is you can't believe a word he says because he might say the opposite tomorrow. How can you fools trust this guy?

Not man do. Many trust Hillary less.

Ah, yes, for whom would they vote?

 

[gallantwarrior]

I was never a Republican, and I am a lapsed Democrat. (With age comes wisdom.) I do not even live in the USA anymore, I live down under, (truth in advertising)
but as an American who served in the US military I understand the support for Trump.

I am not saying I agree with many of the statements he makes (I often wonder if he believes half of what he is saying?) but I get it.

Washington has failed the USA.

Both Dems and Republicans have failed.

They do not seem to get what happened during the GFC, they keep engaging in wars with no thought about how to win them, what victory really requires and means and they seem to have no clue how the American dream is down, not out, but down and being counted out by the referee of time, fate and history..

Both parties have failed the great American working and middle class, in different ways, but both are failing.

And so the Trump vote is a vote for anything other than the same old same old tired, elite, failing shit.

And I get that.

It is saying let's try anything else but the same old same old.

Because it just can't get any worse than what established politics, both left and right, have on offer.

I reckon in office, the guy might astonish.

He is not the tired political hack, and I reckon as Putin did for Russia, he might restore American confidence in itself. (Hopefully sans the Putin authoritarianism. But then Americans are far more immune to a "strong man" than most cultures in history, they will follow great leadership but they will not bend, bow or obey.)

I would not have said this even two months ago, but I think Trump would beat Hilary Clinton in a general election. And I think he is the only Republican (even if he is a Trumplican) who can.

He would turn it into a race of new ideas against a tired political hack who is owned and on the leash of established power.

And he would win.

Wow, maybe one has to leave the US to gain a sense of perspective. On this forum I've often noted that those that are supporting trump don't necessarily agree with his loudmouth bravado. He's just not the same old canned idiots.

It should be an interesting election, I've continually noted that people that I know who would never consider voting for trump will look you in the eye and say "unless he runs against Hillary". I have to admit I personally would never vote for Hillary, I'd vote for Stalin first. 6 months ago I'd have told you that between Hillary and Trump I would throw my vote away and vote third party or write in my own name. Now I don't know I still will never vote for Hillary but I might vote for Trump just to throw a wrench into the insanity that this country has become.

A vote for Trump is a vote to increase the insanity.A vote for the party whose hateful and fear filled rhetoric , along with right wing radio,created Trump, is the same.[/QUOTE]
So, given a choice, the Hildabeest or Trump, whose hateful and fear-filled rhetoric would you prefer?

 

[bripat9643]

I was never a Republican, and I am a lapsed Democrat. (With age comes wisdom.) I do not even live in the USA anymore, I live down under, (truth in advertising)
but as an American who served in the US military I understand the support for Trump.

I am not saying I agree with many of the statements he makes (I often wonder if he believes half of what he is saying?) but I get it.

Washington has failed the USA.

Both Dems and Republicans have failed.

They do not seem to get what happened during the GFC, they keep engaging in wars with no thought about how to win them, what victory really requires and means and they seem to have no clue how the American dream is down, not out, but down and being counted out by the referee of time, fate and history..

Both parties have failed the great American working and middle class, in different ways, but both are failing.

And so the Trump vote is a vote for anything other than the same old same old tired, elite, failing shit.

And I get that.

It is saying let's try anything else but the same old same old.

Because it just can't get any worse than what established politics, both left and right, have on offer.

I reckon in office, the guy might astonish.

He is not the tired political hack, and I reckon as Putin did for Russia, he might restore American confidence in itself. (Hopefully sans the Putin authoritarianism. But then Americans are far more immune to a "strong man" than most cultures in history, they will follow great leadership but they will not bend, bow or obey.)

I would not have said this even two months ago, but I think Trump would beat Hilary Clinton in a general election. And I think he is the only Republican (even if he is a Trumplican) who can.

He would turn it into a race of new ideas against a tired political hack who is owned and on the leash of established power.

And he would win.

Wow, maybe one has to leave the US to gain a sense of perspective. On this forum I've often noted that those that are supporting trump don't necessarily agree with his loudmouth bravado. He's just not the same old canned idiots.

It should be an interesting election, I've continually noted that people that I know who would never consider voting for trump will look you in the eye and say "unless he runs against Hillary". I have to admit I personally would never vote for Hillary, I'd vote for Stalin first. 6 months ago I'd have told you that between Hillary and Trump I would throw my vote away and vote third party or write in my own name. Now I don't know I still will never vote for Hillary but I might vote for Trump just to throw a wrench into the insanity that this country has become.

A vote for Trump is a vote to increase the insanity.A vote for the party whose hateful and fear filled rhetoric , along with right wing radio,created Trump, is the same.

So, given a choice, the Hildabeest or Trump, whose hateful and fear-filled rhetoric would you prefer?

How can anyone seriously believe a vote for Hillary is a vote for sanity?

 

[JimBowie1958]

So you bullied an 80 year old woman. What a perfectly Trump like thing to do.

Hope he got to call her a "loser" or a "pig" or a "rapist" or at least a "pussy" while he was at it.

She's a big girl, you dont have to pretend to be all offended on her behalf I'm sure, dude.

 

[BULLDOG]

Trump needs to get a much better handle on the issues. He was clearly unprepared and unable to answer Chris Wallace's question about how his tax plan would balance the budget. All he had to say was that an across-the-board cut of 15% imposed over three years (5% per year) would balance the budget in three years.

Also, in too many cases he does not do a good job of responding to attacks.

He needs to invest some time with a good debate coach. But first he must brush up on the issues.

Why waste time and money on a debate coach when these so-called "debates" are little more than juvenile name-calling rants? I would welcome a good, old fashioned debate. (i.e. a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.)

Watch the next Democratic debate. You'll see how reasonable adults do it..

 

[healthmyths]

Trump needs to get a much better handle on the issues. He was clearly unprepared and unable to answer Chris Wallace's question about how his tax plan would balance the budget. All he had to say was that an across-the-board cut of 15% imposed over three years (5% per year) would balance the budget in three years.

Also, in too many cases he does not do a good job of responding to attacks.

He needs to invest some time with a good debate coach. But first he must brush up on the issues.

Why waste time and money on a debate coach when these so-called "debates" are little more than juvenile name-calling rants? I would welcome a good, old fashioned debate. (i.e. a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.)

Watch the next Democratic debate. You'll see how reasonable adults do it..

Right.... A potential felon and a bum. Great choices.
Criminal charges for Hillary.....
18 U.S.C. § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material — provides, in part:

(a)Whoever, being an officer… of the United States, and by virtue of his office… becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
Yes, Hillary Clinton Did Commit a Crime … and She Should be Charged

A "Bum" in Bernie..
Bernie Sanders, The Bum Who Wants Your Money
Sanders failed to earn a living, even as an adult. It took him 40 years to collect his first steady paycheck — and it was a government check.
“I never had any money my entire life,” Sanders told Vermont public TV in 1985, after settling into his first real job as mayor of Burlington.

One of his first jobs was registering people for food stamps, and it was all downhill from there.

Sanders took his first bride to live in a maple sugar shack with a dirt floor, and she soon left him. Penniless, he went on unemployment. Then he had a child out of wedlock. Desperate, he tried carpentry but could barely sink a nail. “He was a shi**y carpenter,” a friend told Politico Magazine. “His carpentry was not going to support him, and didn’t.”

Then he tried his hand freelancing for leftist rags, writing about “masturbation and rape” and other crudities for $50 a story. He drove around in a rusted-out, Bondo-covered VW bug with no working windshield wipers. Friends said he was “always poor” and his “electricity was turned off a lot.” They described him as a slob who kept a messy apartment — and this is what his friends had to say about him.

The only thing he was good at was talking … non-stop … about socialism and how the rich were ripping everybody off. “The whole quality of life in America is based on greed,” the bitter layabout said. “I believe in the redistribution of wealth in this nation.”

Bernie Sanders, The Bum Who Wants Your Money

Great choices!

 

[Pogo]

Trump needs to get a much better handle on the issues. He was clearly unprepared and unable to answer Chris Wallace's question about how his tax plan would balance the budget. All he had to say was that an across-the-board cut of 15% imposed over three years (5% per year) would balance the budget in three years.

Also, in too many cases he does not do a good job of responding to attacks.

He needs to invest some time with a good debate coach. But first he must brush up on the issues.

Why waste time and money on a debate coach when these so-called "debates" are little more than juvenile name-calling rants? I would welcome a good, old fashioned debate. (i.e. a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.)

Watch the next Democratic debate. You'll see how reasonable adults do it..

Right.... A potential felon and a bum. Great choices.
Criminal charges for Hillary.....
18 U.S.C. § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material — provides, in part:

(a)Whoever, being an officer… of the United States, and by virtue of his office… becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
Yes, Hillary Clinton Did Commit a Crime … and She Should be Charged

A "Bum" in Bernie..
Bernie Sanders, The Bum Who Wants Your Money
Sanders failed to earn a living, even as an adult. It took him 40 years to collect his first steady paycheck — and it was a government check.
“I never had any money my entire life,” Sanders told Vermont public TV in 1985, after settling into his first real job as mayor of Burlington.

One of his first jobs was registering people for food stamps, and it was all downhill from there.

Sanders took his first bride to live in a maple sugar shack with a dirt floor, and she soon left him. Penniless, he went on unemployment. Then he had a child out of wedlock. Desperate, he tried carpentry but could barely sink a nail. “He was a shi**y carpenter,” a friend told Politico Magazine. “His carpentry was not going to support him, and didn’t.”

Then he tried his hand freelancing for leftist rags, writing about “masturbation and rape” and other crudities for $50 a story. He drove around in a rusted-out, Bondo-covered VW bug with no working windshield wipers. Friends said he was “always poor” and his “electricity was turned off a lot.” They described him as a slob who kept a messy apartment — and this is what his friends had to say about him.

The only thing he was good at was talking … non-stop … about socialism and how the rich were ripping everybody off. “The whole quality of life in America is based on greed,” the bitter layabout said. “I believe in the redistribution of wealth in this nation.”

Bernie Sanders, The Bum Who Wants Your Money

Great choices!

35 years as Burlington's Mayor, Vermont's Congressman and Senator, getting high marks in all three, defeating Democrats, Republicans, and even a joint candidate ---- highest approval rating of anyone in the Senate.

However --- no info found on which hand he wipes his ass with, so perhaps your services are still required.

 

[BULLDOG]

Trump needs to get a much better handle on the issues. He was clearly unprepared and unable to answer Chris Wallace's question about how his tax plan would balance the budget. All he had to say was that an across-the-board cut of 15% imposed over three years (5% per year) would balance the budget in three years.

Also, in too many cases he does not do a good job of responding to attacks.

He needs to invest some time with a good debate coach. But first he must brush up on the issues.

Why waste time and money on a debate coach when these so-called "debates" are little more than juvenile name-calling rants? I would welcome a good, old fashioned debate. (i.e. a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.)

Watch the next Democratic debate. You'll see how reasonable adults do it..

Right.... A potential felon and a bum. Great choices.
Criminal charges for Hillary.....
18 U.S.C. § 1924 – Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material — provides, in part:

(a)Whoever, being an officer… of the United States, and by virtue of his office… becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
Yes, Hillary Clinton Did Commit a Crime … and She Should be Charged

A "Bum" in Bernie..
Bernie Sanders, The Bum Who Wants Your Money
Sanders failed to earn a living, even as an adult. It took him 40 years to collect his first steady paycheck — and it was a government check.
“I never had any money my entire life,” Sanders told Vermont public TV in 1985, after settling into his first real job as mayor of Burlington.

One of his first jobs was registering people for food stamps, and it was all downhill from there.

Sanders took his first bride to live in a maple sugar shack with a dirt floor, and she soon left him. Penniless, he went on unemployment. Then he had a child out of wedlock. Desperate, he tried carpentry but could barely sink a nail. “He was a shi**y carpenter,” a friend told Politico Magazine. “His carpentry was not going to support him, and didn’t.”

Then he tried his hand freelancing for leftist rags, writing about “masturbation and rape” and other crudities for $50 a story. He drove around in a rusted-out, Bondo-covered VW bug with no working windshield wipers. Friends said he was “always poor” and his “electricity was turned off a lot.” They described him as a slob who kept a messy apartment — and this is what his friends had to say about him.

The only thing he was good at was talking … non-stop … about socialism and how the rich were ripping everybody off. “The whole quality of life in America is based on greed,” the bitter layabout said. “I believe in the redistribution of wealth in this nation.”

Bernie Sanders, The Bum Who Wants Your Money

Great choices!

You could be right if you prefer debates focusing on penis size.

 

[bripat9643]

Trump needs to get a much better handle on the issues. He was clearly unprepared and unable to answer Chris Wallace's question about how his tax plan would balance the budget. All he had to say was that an across-the-board cut of 15% imposed over three years (5% per year) would balance the budget in three years.

Also, in too many cases he does not do a good job of responding to attacks.

He needs to invest some time with a good debate coach. But first he must brush up on the issues.

Why waste time and money on a debate coach when these so-called "debates" are little more than juvenile name-calling rants? I would welcome a good, old fashioned debate. (i.e. a formal discussion on a particular topic in a public meeting or legislative assembly, in which opposing arguments are put forward.)

Watch the next Democratic debate. You'll see how reasonable adults do it..

Only if those adults are frauds and con artists.