I wash my hands of the GOP

[pismoe]

The rich get richer no matter which party's in charge. Meanwhile, the worst economic disasters over that time came from the hands of the GOP.

------------------------------------------------ what economic disasters Faun ?? Heck , I am older , not rich , I am blue collar and I survived all your claimed economic disasters just fine . What disasters do you speak of . Heck , there are ups and downs In the economy but I as an average guy have never been too affected . Besides that a country like the USA should be more substantial than just constant easy living Faun .

I guess you missed the Great Depression and the Great Recession.

-----------------------------------great depression was before my time but my Mother and her 10 brothers and sisters survived although they were all very very poor . Recessions , I've been working since I first had kids in 1970 and recessions never did anything with us except maybe I didn't buy a new motorcycle or other TOY. I was happy that we always ate and always had a roof over our heads . My opinion is that most Americans are too fat and happy or soft and a little bit of adversity or a smaller paycheck gets them to whining Faun .

Your personal experiences are irrelevant. The country went through both economic disasters even if you weren't alive for one or not severely affected by the other. Both at the hands of the GOP.

--------------------------------------------- unprepared whiners is what they were Faun !!

---------------------------------------- I call them SOFTIES and I hear about millions of them living in their parents basements and on Dads insurance while riding their skateboards Faun .

 

[Faun]

The rich get richer no matter which party's in charge. Meanwhile, the worst economic disasters over that time came from the hands of the GOP.

------------------------------------------------ what economic disasters Faun ?? Heck , I am older , not rich , I am blue collar and I survived all your claimed economic disasters just fine . What disasters do you speak of . Heck , there are ups and downs In the economy but I as an average guy have never been too affected . Besides that a country like the USA should be more substantial than just constant easy living Faun .

I guess you missed the Great Depression and the Great Recession.

-----------------------------------great depression was before my time but my Mother and her 10 brothers and sisters survived although they were all very very poor . Recessions , I've been working since I first had kids in 1970 and recessions never did anything with us except maybe I didn't buy a new motorcycle or other TOY. I was happy that we always ate and always had a roof over our heads . My opinion is that most Americans are too fat and happy or soft and a little bit of adversity or a smaller paycheck gets them to whining Faun .

Your personal experiences are irrelevant. The country went through both economic disasters even if you weren't alive for one or not severely affected by the other. Both at the hands of the GOP.

--------------------------------------------- unprepared whiners is what they were Faun !!

Who knows why you think your personal experience matters? Regardless of what you think of others, the country still went through the Great Depression. Still went through the Great Recession. Again, your personal experience has absolutely no place in this discussion. Just because you and others may not have been all that affected by economic disasters doesn't mean the country didn't endure them.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Why? You actually like one party dictatorships?

Not particularly. But since the GOP has proven to be such a colossal fuck up for about the last century, I for one am not sad to see them finally go down in flames.

Democrats have ruled this country for longer and more continuously than the repubs have. In that time the elite have increased the amount of wealth they control far more under dem rule than repub rule. So I guess you're OK with the middle class being destroyed?

The rich get richer no matter which party's in charge. Meanwhile, the worst economic disasters over that time came from the hands of the GOP.

------------------------------------------------ what economic disasters Faun ?? Heck , I am older , not rich , I am blue collar and I survived all your claimed economic disasters just fine . What disasters do you speak of . Heck , there are ups and downs In the economy but I as an average guy have never been too affected . Besides that a country like the USA should be more substantial than just constant easy living Faun .

I guess you missed the Great Depression and the Great Recession.

Great Recession ?

When did that happen ?

 

[Faun]

Not particularly. But since the GOP has proven to be such a colossal fuck up for about the last century, I for one am not sad to see them finally go down in flames.

Democrats have ruled this country for longer and more continuously than the repubs have. In that time the elite have increased the amount of wealth they control far more under dem rule than repub rule. So I guess you're OK with the middle class being destroyed?

The rich get richer no matter which party's in charge. Meanwhile, the worst economic disasters over that time came from the hands of the GOP.

------------------------------------------------ what economic disasters Faun ?? Heck , I am older , not rich , I am blue collar and I survived all your claimed economic disasters just fine . What disasters do you speak of . Heck , there are ups and downs In the economy but I as an average guy have never been too affected . Besides that a country like the USA should be more substantial than just constant easy living Faun .

I guess you missed the Great Depression and the Great Recession.

Great Recession ?

When did that happen ?

The Great Recession Definition | Investopedia

 

[Correll]

And it is telling that in your disagreement you don't actually state in what way or how you think that I am wrong.

Trump is the candidate who sees that the Cold War is over and has no desire to keep screwing around with Russia.

Hillary, Cruz, in that are status quo figures who will maintain the current stance of hostility.

Vote Trump. Vote against WWIII.

You may have missed it with your head so far up your ass that you cough up dandruff; the current administration (i.e. the Status Quo) had it’s military challenged by Russia twice in international waters. Neither challenge drew a response. This drew outrage from RWNJ’s.

Again, you are unbelievably daft.

In the context of nato expansion, Western involvement in Georgian and the regime change in the Ukraine, such push back is to be expected.

You will find no examples of me complaining that Obama was not aggressive enough with Russia.

The Cold War is over. Stop screwing around with Russia.

Again, shit brains…what do you think not shooting at the Russian planes is doing? That is an example of not “screwing around” with Russia.

But since you’ve brought it up; the Cold War is over (as Obama (the status quo)) has said for about 20 years now—glad you’ve caught up. Terrorism is the place where we spend blood and Treasure. Trump has said he will spend both blood and treasure over in the middle east.

HRC has not.

Sorry those are the facts. Gentlemen start your spin-gens.

Obama has been supporting the Ukraine in it's conflict with Russia. He has organized sanctions to wage economic warfare against Russia. He has increased military forces in Eastern Europe.

This is hardly "not screwing around with them".


If HIllary has not said she would not spend blood and treasure in the ME, it is only because she has not received anything but soft ball questions from the media.

I note you do not claim that she has a policy position of NOT spending such blood and treasure.

Ahh, the old “blame the media” strategy. It’s literally Drumpf’s only excuse.

If that is “screwing around with Russia"….you’re woefully negligent of world politics. But that was obvious from the beginning.

I see that you dismissed my minor point about the media and made fun of Trump's name.

Other than that you in no way addressed my points, regarding our hostile actions towards Russia, nor what Hilllary's ME policy will be.

 

[Correll]

And it is telling that in your disagreement you don't actually state in what way or how you think that I am wrong.

Trump is the candidate who sees that the Cold War is over and has no desire to keep screwing around with Russia.

Hillary, Cruz, in that are status quo figures who will maintain the current stance of hostility.

Vote Trump. Vote against WWIII.

You may have missed it with your head so far up your ass that you cough up dandruff; the current administration (i.e. the Status Quo) had it’s military challenged by Russia twice in international waters. Neither challenge drew a response. This drew outrage from RWNJ’s.

Again, you are unbelievably daft.

In the context of nato expansion, Western involvement in Georgian and the regime change in the Ukraine, such push back is to be expected.

You will find no examples of me complaining that Obama was not aggressive enough with Russia.

The Cold War is over. Stop screwing around with Russia.

Again, shit brains…what do you think not shooting at the Russian planes is doing? That is an example of not “screwing around” with Russia.

But since you’ve brought it up; the Cold War is over (as Obama (the status quo)) has said for about 20 years now—glad you’ve caught up. Terrorism is the place where we spend blood and Treasure. Trump has said he will spend both blood and treasure over in the middle east.

HRC has not.

Sorry those are the facts. Gentlemen start your spin-gens.

Obama has been supporting the Ukraine in it's conflict with Russia. He has organized sanctions to wage economic warfare against Russia. He has increased military forces in Eastern Europe.

This is hardly "not screwing around with them".


If HIllary has not said she would not spend blood and treasure in the ME, it is only because she has not received anything but soft ball questions from the media.

I note you do not claim that she has a policy position of NOT spending such blood and treasure.

I thought you said before that Obama was a pussy how he was dealing with Russia now you're saying he's being too tough on them? What a bunch of flip floppers

That was unlikely to have been me.

I might have criticized how ineffective he had been in his attempts to be tough on Russia, in the context of his policy of being tough, but I have been against being hostile with Russia since the End of the Cold War.


I thought Bush and Rice were fucking INSANE to send US military forces into the Black Sea to help Georgia.

And was against NATO expansion back when the first Bush was in office.

 

[Correll]

And yet, exit polling has shown he is winning the votes of most self identified conservatives voting in the Republican primaries, so it would sound to me like he is very much representative of conservatives.

Well that's because Trump "self-identifies" as a Conservative! DUH!

What you label yourself as has NOTHING to do with what you ARE!

But if everyone else that is self-identifying as you are, are all for you, doesn't that make them conservative, therefore you conservative?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Words do not define reality.

They just describe it.

Trump's platform is more nationalistic than it is conservative.

And I say that as a conservative.

 

[candycorn]

You may have missed it with your head so far up your ass that you cough up dandruff; the current administration (i.e. the Status Quo) had it’s military challenged by Russia twice in international waters. Neither challenge drew a response. This drew outrage from RWNJ’s.

Again, you are unbelievably daft.

In the context of nato expansion, Western involvement in Georgian and the regime change in the Ukraine, such push back is to be expected.

You will find no examples of me complaining that Obama was not aggressive enough with Russia.

The Cold War is over. Stop screwing around with Russia.

Again, shit brains…what do you think not shooting at the Russian planes is doing? That is an example of not “screwing around” with Russia.

But since you’ve brought it up; the Cold War is over (as Obama (the status quo)) has said for about 20 years now—glad you’ve caught up. Terrorism is the place where we spend blood and Treasure. Trump has said he will spend both blood and treasure over in the middle east.

HRC has not.

Sorry those are the facts. Gentlemen start your spin-gens.

Obama has been supporting the Ukraine in it's conflict with Russia. He has organized sanctions to wage economic warfare against Russia. He has increased military forces in Eastern Europe.

This is hardly "not screwing around with them".


If HIllary has not said she would not spend blood and treasure in the ME, it is only because she has not received anything but soft ball questions from the media.

I note you do not claim that she has a policy position of NOT spending such blood and treasure.

Ahh, the old “blame the media” strategy. It’s literally Drumpf’s only excuse.

If that is “screwing around with Russia"….you’re woefully negligent of world politics. But that was obvious from the beginning.

I see that you dismissed my minor point about the media and made fun of Trump's name.

Drumpf changed his name. Blame him; not me.

Other than that you in no way addressed my points, regarding our hostile actions towards Russia, nor what Hilllary's ME policy will be.

Meanwhile in the real world, economic sanctions are internationally considered the methodology by which executives show muscle without antagonizing the target too much. It’s only been that way for about 50 years turd breath…

HRC wil have a policy of striking when sufficiently provoked and avoiding long commitments to Boots on the ground which, as we have seen from the disastrous Bush years, is a losing strategy.

Trumpfs Strategy was to (at one time) “kick ISIS’s ass”…but today it is something different. Who knows how many more times he’ll flip flop. It’s a long way until November.

 

[candycorn]

And yet, exit polling has shown he is winning the votes of most self identified conservatives voting in the Republican primaries, so it would sound to me like he is very much representative of conservatives.

Well that's because Trump "self-identifies" as a Conservative! DUH!

What you label yourself as has NOTHING to do with what you ARE!

But if everyone else that is self-identifying as you are, are all for you, doesn't that make them conservative, therefore you conservative?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Words do not define reality.

They just describe it.

Trump's platform is more nationalistic than it is conservative.

And I say that as a conservative.

Trump’s platform is designed to do one thing; validate the hate that his supporters have for people not like them (protestant white males)?

Hate Catholics? He mocks the religion.
Hate women? He calls them names.
Hate Mexicans? He calls them names.
Don’t like having to park away from the door at Wal*Mart, he makes fun of the handicapped.
Like making fun of fat people? He’s got you there too.
Enjoy making up childish nicknames for your opponents? Donald is your man.

Want well-thought out governmental policies? Drumpf is woefully ill-equipped. But it doesn’t matter; he’s funny.

 

[Correll]

In the context of nato expansion, Western involvement in Georgian and the regime change in the Ukraine, such push back is to be expected.

You will find no examples of me complaining that Obama was not aggressive enough with Russia.

The Cold War is over. Stop screwing around with Russia.

Again, shit brains…what do you think not shooting at the Russian planes is doing? That is an example of not “screwing around” with Russia.

But since you’ve brought it up; the Cold War is over (as Obama (the status quo)) has said for about 20 years now—glad you’ve caught up. Terrorism is the place where we spend blood and Treasure. Trump has said he will spend both blood and treasure over in the middle east.

HRC has not.

Sorry those are the facts. Gentlemen start your spin-gens.

Obama has been supporting the Ukraine in it's conflict with Russia. He has organized sanctions to wage economic warfare against Russia. He has increased military forces in Eastern Europe.

This is hardly "not screwing around with them".


If HIllary has not said she would not spend blood and treasure in the ME, it is only because she has not received anything but soft ball questions from the media.

I note you do not claim that she has a policy position of NOT spending such blood and treasure.

Ahh, the old “blame the media” strategy. It’s literally Drumpf’s only excuse.

If that is “screwing around with Russia"….you’re woefully negligent of world politics. But that was obvious from the beginning.

I see that you dismissed my minor point about the media and made fun of Trump's name.

Drumpf changed his name. Blame him; not me.

Other than that you in no way addressed my points, regarding our hostile actions towards Russia, nor what Hilllary's ME policy will be.

Meanwhile in the real world, economic sanctions are internationally considered the methodology by which executives show muscle without antagonizing the target too much. It’s only been that way for about 50 years turd breath…

HRC wil have a policy of striking when sufficiently provoked and avoiding long commitments to Boots on the ground which, as we have seen from the disastrous Bush years, is a losing strategy.

Trumpfs Strategy was to (at one time) “kick ISIS’s ass”…but today it is something different. Who knows how many more times he’ll flip flop. It’s a long way until November.

1. Overthrowing a Russia Friendly government on Russia's border with a large russian population was a very hostile act.

2. Yes, Economic Sanctions have been a heavily used tool. It is still a very hostile act. Your assumption that they will not antagonize the target "much" is reckless and irresponsible. Economic Warfare against Japan led to Pearl Harbor, for one good historical example.

3. Increasing military forces near Russia, is a serious threat, and one that we should NOT have made.

 

[candycorn]

Again, shit brains…what do you think not shooting at the Russian planes is doing? That is an example of not “screwing around” with Russia.

But since you’ve brought it up; the Cold War is over (as Obama (the status quo)) has said for about 20 years now—glad you’ve caught up. Terrorism is the place where we spend blood and Treasure. Trump has said he will spend both blood and treasure over in the middle east.

HRC has not.

Sorry those are the facts. Gentlemen start your spin-gens.

Obama has been supporting the Ukraine in it's conflict with Russia. He has organized sanctions to wage economic warfare against Russia. He has increased military forces in Eastern Europe.

This is hardly "not screwing around with them".


If HIllary has not said she would not spend blood and treasure in the ME, it is only because she has not received anything but soft ball questions from the media.

I note you do not claim that she has a policy position of NOT spending such blood and treasure.

Ahh, the old “blame the media” strategy. It’s literally Drumpf’s only excuse.

If that is “screwing around with Russia"….you’re woefully negligent of world politics. But that was obvious from the beginning.

I see that you dismissed my minor point about the media and made fun of Trump's name.

Drumpf changed his name. Blame him; not me.

Other than that you in no way addressed my points, regarding our hostile actions towards Russia, nor what Hilllary's ME policy will be.

Meanwhile in the real world, economic sanctions are internationally considered the methodology by which executives show muscle without antagonizing the target too much. It’s only been that way for about 50 years turd breath…

HRC wil have a policy of striking when sufficiently provoked and avoiding long commitments to Boots on the ground which, as we have seen from the disastrous Bush years, is a losing strategy.

Trumpfs Strategy was to (at one time) “kick ISIS’s ass”…but today it is something different. Who knows how many more times he’ll flip flop. It’s a long way until November.

1. Overthrowing a Russia Friendly government on Russia's border with a large russian population was a very hostile act.

2. Yes, Economic Sanctions have been a heavily used tool. It is still a very hostile act. Your assumption that they will not antagonize the target "much" is reckless and irresponsible. Economic Warfare against Japan led to Pearl Harbor, for one good historical example.

3. Increasing military forces near Russia, is a serious threat, and one that we should NOT have made.

Seriously, have a doctor evaluate you. You seem to really have dung for brains. Crack open a history book and figure out just how breathtakingly wrong you are fuckstick….

As for Japan. You may note it was 1941. You may note that worldwide markets are much different in 2016. You may note that the availability of products in 2016 is much more diversified than it was in 1941. You may note all of that but if history is any indication, I’m giving you way too much credit. You’re literally as dumb as a pile of shit.

 

[Correll]

And yet, exit polling has shown he is winning the votes of most self identified conservatives voting in the Republican primaries, so it would sound to me like he is very much representative of conservatives.

Well that's because Trump "self-identifies" as a Conservative! DUH!

What you label yourself as has NOTHING to do with what you ARE!

But if everyone else that is self-identifying as you are, are all for you, doesn't that make them conservative, therefore you conservative?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Words do not define reality.

They just describe it.

Trump's platform is more nationalistic than it is conservative.

And I say that as a conservative.

Trump’s platform is designed to do one thing; validate the hate that his supporters have for people not like them (protestant white males)?

Hate Catholics? He mocks the religion.
Hate women? He calls them names.
Hate Mexicans? He calls them names.
Don’t like having to park away from the door at Wal*Mart, he makes fun of the handicapped.
Like making fun of fat people? He’s got you there too.
Enjoy making up childish nicknames for your opponents? Donald is your man.

Want well-thought out governmental policies? Drumpf is woefully ill-equipped. But it doesn’t matter; he’s funny.

I was just thinking how good it had been for you to have gone so many posts without pulling the Race Card.

And then you go and ruin it.

Trump has been very harsh, verbally with all his opponents. That you focus on the couple of times he was harsh with some "protected groups" is all you.

He is an Equal Opportunity Insulter.

Your assumption that his supporters are full of hate is just you trying to marginalize people you don't like.

 

[eagle1462010]

And yet, exit polling has shown he is winning the votes of most self identified conservatives voting in the Republican primaries, so it would sound to me like he is very much representative of conservatives.

Well that's because Trump "self-identifies" as a Conservative! DUH!

What you label yourself as has NOTHING to do with what you ARE!

But if everyone else that is self-identifying as you are, are all for you, doesn't that make them conservative, therefore you conservative?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Words do not define reality.

They just describe it.

Trump's platform is more nationalistic than it is conservative.

And I say that as a conservative.

Trump’s platform is designed to do one thing; validate the hate that his supporters have for people not like them (protestant white males)?

Hate Catholics? He mocks the religion.
Hate women? He calls them names.
Hate Mexicans? He calls them names.
Don’t like having to park away from the door at Wal*Mart, he makes fun of the handicapped.
Like making fun of fat people? He’s got you there too.
Enjoy making up childish nicknames for your opponents? Donald is your man.

Want well-thought out governmental policies? Drumpf is woefully ill-equipped. But it doesn’t matter; he’s funny.

Substitute any other candidates name from the past and you have the standard talking points of the liberals during the election. Same shit different election.

Their candidate is corrupt as hell. So they must attack the other side and keep the ball out of their court. The NEVER HILLARY MOVEMENT is every bit as big as NEVER TRUMP..................Even their normal voters are crossing over because they can't stand the Hildabeast..........

On the other side of the coin, the establishment voters who want a rigged convention are stating they'll never vote for Trump..............Both parties in ashes......which side will have the most defectors.............that will decide the election.

 

[Correll]

Obama has been supporting the Ukraine in it's conflict with Russia. He has organized sanctions to wage economic warfare against Russia. He has increased military forces in Eastern Europe.

This is hardly "not screwing around with them".


If HIllary has not said she would not spend blood and treasure in the ME, it is only because she has not received anything but soft ball questions from the media.

I note you do not claim that she has a policy position of NOT spending such blood and treasure.

Ahh, the old “blame the media” strategy. It’s literally Drumpf’s only excuse.

If that is “screwing around with Russia"….you’re woefully negligent of world politics. But that was obvious from the beginning.

I see that you dismissed my minor point about the media and made fun of Trump's name.

Drumpf changed his name. Blame him; not me.

Other than that you in no way addressed my points, regarding our hostile actions towards Russia, nor what Hilllary's ME policy will be.

Meanwhile in the real world, economic sanctions are internationally considered the methodology by which executives show muscle without antagonizing the target too much. It’s only been that way for about 50 years turd breath…

HRC wil have a policy of striking when sufficiently provoked and avoiding long commitments to Boots on the ground which, as we have seen from the disastrous Bush years, is a losing strategy.

Trumpfs Strategy was to (at one time) “kick ISIS’s ass”…but today it is something different. Who knows how many more times he’ll flip flop. It’s a long way until November.

1. Overthrowing a Russia Friendly government on Russia's border with a large russian population was a very hostile act.

2. Yes, Economic Sanctions have been a heavily used tool. It is still a very hostile act. Your assumption that they will not antagonize the target "much" is reckless and irresponsible. Economic Warfare against Japan led to Pearl Harbor, for one good historical example.

3. Increasing military forces near Russia, is a serious threat, and one that we should NOT have made.

Seriously, have a doctor evaluate you. You seem to really have dung for brains. Crack open a history book and figure out just how breathtakingly wrong you are fuckstick….

As for Japan. You may note it was 1941. You may note that worldwide markets are much different in 2016. You may note that the availability of products in 2016 is much more diversified than it was in 1941. You may note all of that but if history is any indication, I’m giving you way too much credit. You’re literally as dumb as a pile of shit.

Save your drama, queenie, for someone who might be impressed by it.

Having more diversified products in 2016 does not make Economic Warfare any less of a hostile act.

My points stand.


Our political class has been stuck in COld War thinking and knee jerk hostility towards Russia.

Trump would be a serious change from that outdated thinking.


A change for the good.

Lets take steps to avoid WWIII.

Vote Trump.

 

[candycorn]

Ahh, the old “blame the media” strategy. It’s literally Drumpf’s only excuse.

If that is “screwing around with Russia"….you’re woefully negligent of world politics. But that was obvious from the beginning.

I see that you dismissed my minor point about the media and made fun of Trump's name.

Drumpf changed his name. Blame him; not me.

Other than that you in no way addressed my points, regarding our hostile actions towards Russia, nor what Hilllary's ME policy will be.

Meanwhile in the real world, economic sanctions are internationally considered the methodology by which executives show muscle without antagonizing the target too much. It’s only been that way for about 50 years turd breath…

HRC wil have a policy of striking when sufficiently provoked and avoiding long commitments to Boots on the ground which, as we have seen from the disastrous Bush years, is a losing strategy.

Trumpfs Strategy was to (at one time) “kick ISIS’s ass”…but today it is something different. Who knows how many more times he’ll flip flop. It’s a long way until November.

1. Overthrowing a Russia Friendly government on Russia's border with a large russian population was a very hostile act.

2. Yes, Economic Sanctions have been a heavily used tool. It is still a very hostile act. Your assumption that they will not antagonize the target "much" is reckless and irresponsible. Economic Warfare against Japan led to Pearl Harbor, for one good historical example.

3. Increasing military forces near Russia, is a serious threat, and one that we should NOT have made.

Seriously, have a doctor evaluate you. You seem to really have dung for brains. Crack open a history book and figure out just how breathtakingly wrong you are fuckstick….

As for Japan. You may note it was 1941. You may note that worldwide markets are much different in 2016. You may note that the availability of products in 2016 is much more diversified than it was in 1941. You may note all of that but if history is any indication, I’m giving you way too much credit. You’re literally as dumb as a pile of shit.

Save your drama, queenie, for someone who might be impressed by it.

Having more diversified products in 2016 does not make Economic Warfare any less of a hostile act.

My points stand.


Our political class has been stuck in COld War thinking and knee jerk hostility towards Russia.

Trump would be a serious change from that outdated thinking.


A change for the good.

Lets take steps to avoid WWIII.

Vote Trump.

You’re the one talking about WWIII and you’re calling someone else a “drama queen”!!!!
Thanks for yet another reason to laugh at you.

 

[candycorn]

And yet, exit polling has shown he is winning the votes of most self identified conservatives voting in the Republican primaries, so it would sound to me like he is very much representative of conservatives.

Well that's because Trump "self-identifies" as a Conservative! DUH!

What you label yourself as has NOTHING to do with what you ARE!

But if everyone else that is self-identifying as you are, are all for you, doesn't that make them conservative, therefore you conservative?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Words do not define reality.

They just describe it.

Trump's platform is more nationalistic than it is conservative.

And I say that as a conservative.

Trump’s platform is designed to do one thing; validate the hate that his supporters have for people not like them (protestant white males)?

Hate Catholics? He mocks the religion.
Hate women? He calls them names.
Hate Mexicans? He calls them names.
Don’t like having to park away from the door at Wal*Mart, he makes fun of the handicapped.
Like making fun of fat people? He’s got you there too.
Enjoy making up childish nicknames for your opponents? Donald is your man.

Want well-thought out governmental policies? Drumpf is woefully ill-equipped. But it doesn’t matter; he’s funny.

Substitute any other candidates name from the past and you have the standard talking points of the liberals during the election. Same shit different election.

Their candidate is corrupt as hell. So they must attack the other side and keep the ball out of their court. The NEVER HILLARY MOVEMENT is every bit as big as NEVER TRUMP..................Even their normal voters are crossing over because they can't stand the Hildabeast..........

On the other side of the coin, the establishment voters who want a rigged convention are stating they'll never vote for Trump..............Both parties in ashes......which side will have the most defectors.............that will decide the election.

Okay, lets unpack your post.

On the GOP side, we have seen the last two POTUS nominees come out against this year’s nominee. On the DNC side, the last two nominees are pretty much on record stating they will support HRC.

On the GOP side, the vanquished opponents have, with the exception of a few, dismissed the nominee. The vanquished opponents have largely been silent or supportive of the nominee.

On the GOP side, members of their own party (on this board) have lampooned the nominee of their party as a complete dud. And while I’m sure that has happened on the DNC side as well, many (if not most) are going to vote for HRC.

You are either lying to yourself or are woefully mis informed.

 

[eagle1462010]

Well that's because Trump "self-identifies" as a Conservative! DUH!

What you label yourself as has NOTHING to do with what you ARE!

But if everyone else that is self-identifying as you are, are all for you, doesn't that make them conservative, therefore you conservative?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Words do not define reality.

They just describe it.

Trump's platform is more nationalistic than it is conservative.

And I say that as a conservative.

Trump’s platform is designed to do one thing; validate the hate that his supporters have for people not like them (protestant white males)?

Hate Catholics? He mocks the religion.
Hate women? He calls them names.
Hate Mexicans? He calls them names.
Don’t like having to park away from the door at Wal*Mart, he makes fun of the handicapped.
Like making fun of fat people? He’s got you there too.
Enjoy making up childish nicknames for your opponents? Donald is your man.

Want well-thought out governmental policies? Drumpf is woefully ill-equipped. But it doesn’t matter; he’s funny.

Substitute any other candidates name from the past and you have the standard talking points of the liberals during the election. Same shit different election.

Their candidate is corrupt as hell. So they must attack the other side and keep the ball out of their court. The NEVER HILLARY MOVEMENT is every bit as big as NEVER TRUMP..................Even their normal voters are crossing over because they can't stand the Hildabeast..........

On the other side of the coin, the establishment voters who want a rigged convention are stating they'll never vote for Trump..............Both parties in ashes......which side will have the most defectors.............that will decide the election.

Okay, lets unpack your post.

On the GOP side, we have seen the last two POTUS nominees come out against this year’s nominee. On the DNC side, the last two nominees are pretty much on record stating they will support HRC.

On the GOP side, the vanquished opponents have, with the exception of a few, dismissed the nominee. The vanquished opponents have largely been silent or supportive of the nominee.

On the GOP side, members of their own party (on this board) have lampooned the nominee of their party as a complete dud. And while I’m sure that has happened on the DNC side as well, many (if not most) are going to vote for HRC.

You are either lying to yourself or are woefully mis informed.

Nice pravda...............You are deflecting from my statement trying to get the ball out of your court.

Your side uses these tactics regardless of who the candidate is................you always have...........We are used to it.............and many of your so called protesters have to be paid to show up.....................

If you have to pay them to protest.......then you don't have shit.

 

[candycorn]

But if everyone else that is self-identifying as you are, are all for you, doesn't that make them conservative, therefore you conservative?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

Words do not define reality.

They just describe it.

Trump's platform is more nationalistic than it is conservative.

And I say that as a conservative.

Trump’s platform is designed to do one thing; validate the hate that his supporters have for people not like them (protestant white males)?

Hate Catholics? He mocks the religion.
Hate women? He calls them names.
Hate Mexicans? He calls them names.
Don’t like having to park away from the door at Wal*Mart, he makes fun of the handicapped.
Like making fun of fat people? He’s got you there too.
Enjoy making up childish nicknames for your opponents? Donald is your man.

Want well-thought out governmental policies? Drumpf is woefully ill-equipped. But it doesn’t matter; he’s funny.

Substitute any other candidates name from the past and you have the standard talking points of the liberals during the election. Same shit different election.

Their candidate is corrupt as hell. So they must attack the other side and keep the ball out of their court. The NEVER HILLARY MOVEMENT is every bit as big as NEVER TRUMP..................Even their normal voters are crossing over because they can't stand the Hildabeast..........

On the other side of the coin, the establishment voters who want a rigged convention are stating they'll never vote for Trump..............Both parties in ashes......which side will have the most defectors.............that will decide the election.

Okay, lets unpack your post.

On the GOP side, we have seen the last two POTUS nominees come out against this year’s nominee. On the DNC side, the last two nominees are pretty much on record stating they will support HRC.

On the GOP side, the vanquished opponents have, with the exception of a few, dismissed the nominee. The vanquished opponents have largely been silent or supportive of the nominee.

On the GOP side, members of their own party (on this board) have lampooned the nominee of their party as a complete dud. And while I’m sure that has happened on the DNC side as well, many (if not most) are going to vote for HRC.

You are either lying to yourself or are woefully mis informed.

Nice pravda...............You are deflecting from my statement trying to get the ball out of your court.

Your side uses these tactics regardless of who the candidate is................you always have...........We are used to it.............and many of your so called protesters have to be paid to show up.....................

If you have to pay them to protest.......then you don't have shit.

Not sure what any of that means. Don’t really care.
HRC will not be abandoned by her Party members. Drumpf will.

See ya!

 

[eagle1462010]

Words do not define reality.

They just describe it.

Trump's platform is more nationalistic than it is conservative.

And I say that as a conservative.

Trump’s platform is designed to do one thing; validate the hate that his supporters have for people not like them (protestant white males)?

Hate Catholics? He mocks the religion.
Hate women? He calls them names.
Hate Mexicans? He calls them names.
Don’t like having to park away from the door at Wal*Mart, he makes fun of the handicapped.
Like making fun of fat people? He’s got you there too.
Enjoy making up childish nicknames for your opponents? Donald is your man.

Want well-thought out governmental policies? Drumpf is woefully ill-equipped. But it doesn’t matter; he’s funny.

Substitute any other candidates name from the past and you have the standard talking points of the liberals during the election. Same shit different election.

Their candidate is corrupt as hell. So they must attack the other side and keep the ball out of their court. The NEVER HILLARY MOVEMENT is every bit as big as NEVER TRUMP..................Even their normal voters are crossing over because they can't stand the Hildabeast..........

On the other side of the coin, the establishment voters who want a rigged convention are stating they'll never vote for Trump..............Both parties in ashes......which side will have the most defectors.............that will decide the election.

Okay, lets unpack your post.

On the GOP side, we have seen the last two POTUS nominees come out against this year’s nominee. On the DNC side, the last two nominees are pretty much on record stating they will support HRC.

On the GOP side, the vanquished opponents have, with the exception of a few, dismissed the nominee. The vanquished opponents have largely been silent or supportive of the nominee.

On the GOP side, members of their own party (on this board) have lampooned the nominee of their party as a complete dud. And while I’m sure that has happened on the DNC side as well, many (if not most) are going to vote for HRC.

You are either lying to yourself or are woefully mis informed.

Nice pravda...............You are deflecting from my statement trying to get the ball out of your court.

Your side uses these tactics regardless of who the candidate is................you always have...........We are used to it.............and many of your so called protesters have to be paid to show up.....................

If you have to pay them to protest.......then you don't have shit.

Not sure what any of that means. Don’t really care.
HRC will not be abandoned by her Party members. Drumpf will.

See ya!

Liberals have always been in a herd.........Nothing new there.........Is Hillary part of the establishment........and does she take money from the big boys your side always complain about...................How about the TPP and how it will fuck the American Workers again...............Suddenly your side has to say how good it is for America to outsource more jobs.............

2 parties same agenda.............and your side just goes with them while stating you hate those policies......

Sucks to be you.

 

[Boss]

HRC will not be abandoned by her Party members. Drumpf will.

As bad as I hate to say it, I believe you may be right. There will be 30% of the party who will stay at home if Trump wins the nomination, and 30% will stay home if Cruz wins.... and we can't defeat HRC that way.