View Full Version : Trump carries
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3444222/I-gun-Trump-tells-French-magazine-ISIS-attacked-Paris-opened-fire.html
I like it.
After the Charlie Hebdo massacre in January of 2015, Trump tweeted, 'If the people so violently shot down in Paris had guns, at least they would have had a fighting chance.''Isn't it interesting that the tragedy in Paris too place in one of the toughest gun control countries in the world?'
'Remember, when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns!'' he said in a third tweet.
In an interview this month that ran in Valleurs Actuelles, Trump referenced the November terrorist attack on Paris and said, 'Do you really think that if there were people in the crowd, who were armed and trained, things would have turned out the same way?'
'I don't think so. They would have killed the terrorists. It makes sense,' he said.
The GOP front-runner for president then declared: 'I always have a gun on me. I can tell you that if I had been in the Bataclan or in the cafes I would have opened fire.'
'I may have been killed, but I would have drawn,' he said, according to The Local, a website that curates news from France.
Several years ago he gave an interview in which he confirmed that he has a 'carry permit - I’ve said that publicly' - and told Emily Miller, then of the Washington Times, 'I own a couple of different guns, but I don’t talk about it.'
Trump revealed to her that he owned an 'H&K .45 and a .38 Smith & Wesson.'
Speaking about the Aurora, Colorado, movie theater shooting, Trump told her, 'If some of the people in the movie theater had a gun, they’d have been shooting at him. Nobody had a gun so they were totally defenseless.'
Miller arrived at the determination after the conversation that Trump was 'a true Second Amendment enthusiast.
RblDiver
02-12-2016, 11:53
He's expressed disdain for parts of the Second in the past. I think his newfound love of the Second is purely opportunistic.
hurley842002
02-12-2016, 12:01
He's expressed disdain for parts of the Second in the past. I think his newfound love of the Second is purely opportunistic.
It's pointless trying to convince Trumpets of this, especially the OP.
RblDiver
02-12-2016, 12:07
Listening to an older soundtrack of his quotes: "I hate the concept of guns, I'm not in favor of it."
Source: https://soundcloud.com/michaelbrowntoday/trump-montage
He's expressed disdain for parts of the Second in the past. I think his newfound love of the Second is purely opportunistic.
Yep. Trump is all about himself. He's probably one of those people that thinks he should enjoy his right to protect himself but that everyone else should just rely on the police.
hurley842002
02-12-2016, 12:39
Doesn't Feinswine or one of the anti's have a permit as well? Just because you carry, doesn't mean you think the sheep should carry too.
It's pointless trying to convince Trumpets of this, especially the OP.
Easy now, I have not endorsed anyone - except for Sarah Palin for the office of my next wife.
For the record, I just want a Republican to take the office this time, and believe it will be difficult to not have that happen.
Which Republican? Doesn't matter much to me. They're all snakes of one kind or another.
I just plan to continue preparing, and enjoy the circus from up in the cheap seats.
Martinjmpr
02-12-2016, 12:44
. I think his newfound love of the Second is purely opportunistic.
EVERY SINGLE THING about Trump is opportunistic.
trlcavscout
02-12-2016, 12:47
My wife watches his show the apprentice and he has mentioned that he packs several times. He was also on the list a few years ago with celebrities that pack like Brad and Angelina.
HoneyBadger
02-12-2016, 14:33
EVERY SINGLE THING about Trump is opportunistic.
Indeed.
Doesn't Feinswine or one of the anti's have a permit as well?
Yep.
He's probably one of those people that thinks he should enjoy his right to protect himself but that everyone else should just rely on the police.
Yep. He is one of the extremely few people to have a CCW in NYC. For someone who claims to be the strongest second amendment supporter (among the GOP pres. candidates) he sure hasn't been an advocate for getting rid of the Sullivan Act or cleaning up the byzantine and arbitrary process for obtaining a permit in NYC.
Zundfolge
02-12-2016, 15:24
I just don't know how comfortable I am voting for an HK fanboy.
I wouldn't say Trump is an enthusiast about anything except Trump.
Martinjmpr
02-12-2016, 15:42
I just don't know how comfortable I am voting for an HK fanboy.
I wouldn't say Trump is an enthusiast about anything except Trump.
I'm surprised he hasn't started his own gun company by now.
That way he could carry a Trumpomatic.
Caliber: 8.8mm Trump. [LOL]
Not my 1st choice, not my 2nd choice. But, if the nominee, he will be my choice.
buffalobo
02-12-2016, 16:34
I just don't know how comfortable I am voting for an HK fanboy.
^^^This.[emoji33]
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Not my 1st choice, not my 2nd choice. But, if the nominee, he will be my choice.
that
I think the only thing the public should worry about Trump carrying is a primary.
GilpinGuy
02-12-2016, 19:36
I wouldn't say Trump is an enthusiast about anything except Trump.
He's a politician, so of course he is. Aren't they all?
Not my 1st choice, not my 2nd choice. But, if the nominee, he will be my choice.
Yes.
I think the only thing the public should worry about Trump carrying is a primary.
See above.
trlcavscout
02-12-2016, 19:46
He should do a 2nd amendment commercial with cruz's porn star.
He's not a politician, he's a self-serving businessman trying to become a politician. He'd claim he wipes his ass with Brillo pads if he thought there was a big enough payoff in it for him.
TEAMRICO
02-12-2016, 20:00
I'm surprised someone here has not said that "They would vote their conscience".
That got us far right?
Rucker61
02-12-2016, 20:32
EVERY SINGLE THING about Trump is opportunistic.
That makes him safer than a lot of candidates on both sides.
Wait a sec!! How in the hell did he get a CHP in New York City?
http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/pdf/permits/HandGunLicenseApplicationFormsComplete.pdf
I am going out on a limb here and guess Mr. Trump did not complete the form himself. He has minions and apprentices for these types of tasks. [Coffee]
trlcavscout
02-12-2016, 21:56
He's not a politician, he's a self-serving businessman trying to become a politician. He'd claim he wipes his ass with Brillo pads if he thought there was a big enough payoff in it for him.
Not that i am a trump fan, but whats different between him and the self serving politicians we are used to and he is running against? They are all business men/women trying to make money while pleasing the lobbyists to ensure they get their piece of the pie. None of the candidates are doing it for the pride of being the US president. Its all about the benjamins.
The pols Trump is running against have been GOP for a long time. Trump is very new to the GOP and his recent record is way more (D) than I'm comfortable with. That is why I say Trump looked at the left and saw he couldn't run with with the cankle or the aardvark so he looked at the right, saw an enormous void and filled it with hot air.
GilpinGuy
02-13-2016, 08:17
I am amazed at the possibility of it being Trump vs. Sanders. It feels like bizarro land.
I am amazed at the possibility of it being Trump vs. Sanders. It feels like bizarro land.
Agreed.
I am amazed at the possibility of it being Trump vs. Sanders. It feels like bizarro land.
Sanders is not going to be the DNC nominee. Even the leftist media has started asking about the rigged super-delegates process. HRC already has the super-delegates needed to be nominated even if Sanders won most of the rest of the state primaries (which he won't). If HRC is forced to withdraw (which I highly doubt will happen) the DNC will transfer all of HRC's super-delegates to another donkey of their choosing; someone like Joe Biden or even a Julian Castro.
The Dems win elections when the Dems have a reason to go out and vote. Give the Dems a Trump to vote against, and the Dems will come out to vote in droves. For the same reason, the Dems would turn out to vote against a Bush. Thankfully it is looking like Jeb may not even make it to the convention.
Who can beat HRC in the general election? Someone the Dems don't hate enough to want to turn out and vote against and the Conservatives within the GOP don't hate enough to stay home come November.
Do we really have to sit through another nine months of this? [beatdeadhorse]
HoneyBadger
02-13-2016, 09:51
I am amazed at the possibility of it being Trump vs. Sanders. It feels like bizarro land.
Have you seen the movie Idiocracy?? It's happening.
I'm surprised he hasn't started his own gun company by now.
That way he could carry a Trumpomatic.
Caliber: 8.8mm Trump. [LOL]
Hahaha guarantees a 1 trump stump of the bad guy
Great-Kazoo
02-13-2016, 13:49
Sanders is not going to be the DNC nominee. Even the leftist media has started asking about the rigged super-delegates process. HRC already has the super-delegates needed to be nominated even if Sanders won most of the rest of the state primaries (which he won't). If HRC is forced to withdraw (which I highly doubt will happen) the DNC will transfer all of HRC's super-delegates to another donkey of their choosing; someone like Joe Biden or even a Julian Castro.
The Dems win elections when the Dems have a reason to go out and vote. Give the Dems a Trump to vote against, and the Dems will come out to vote in droves. For the same reason, the Dems would turn out to vote against a Bush. Thankfully it is looking like Jeb may not even make it to the convention.
Who can beat HRC in the general election? Someone the Dems don't hate enough to want to turn out and vote against and the Conservatives within the GOP don't hate enough to stay home come November.
Do we really have to sit through another nine months of this? [beatdeadhorse]
What one has to deal with is the reality of Doomberg throwing his grassroots money in to the ring. He's paid off enough emotional mothers and weak kneed gender neutral men, under the guise of Gun Safety. He has the potential to be nominated come 9/16.
Or possibility #2. The voting public stays home disgusted with the choices. Putting Krusty the Clown in office.
You don't have to like Trump, but you what will you do???? Vote for Bernie? feelin' the Bern are ya'll???
I heard (read) most of you say "Just vote the establishment out!" Well,,,, do it!
Let's burn it to the GROUND while we're still young,, ish!
We wait now to see who the GOP will give us to vote for.
I don't believe more than 1% of the members of this board will pull the lever for HRC or the National Socialist, regardless of which one gets the DNC nomination.
With the SCOTUS in the balance, there can be no doubt that sitting out this election, regardless of how bad the GOP's nominee may be, is not an option.
HoneyBadger
02-13-2016, 21:53
You don't have to like Trump, but you what will you do???? Vote for Bernie? feelin' the Bern are ya'll???
I heard (read) most of you say "Just vote the establishment out!" Well,,,, do it!
Let's burn it to the GROUND while we're still young,, ish!
Or, you could vote for someone who will actually consistently support the principles of liberty and Capitalism (and has a proven track record of doing so). This would definitely take power away from "the establishment".
Grant H.
02-14-2016, 11:57
Or, you could vote for someone who will actually consistently support the principles of liberty and Capitalism (and has a proven track record of doing so). This would definitely take power away from "the establishment".
While I like the idea behind your point, that is exactly how we have had Obummer for 8 years.
We live in a country that has a two party political system, and that is it. Third party candidates don't get elected, but they pull votes from the candidate that could be elected, resulting in the election of someone those people REALLY don't want.
It sucks, I hate it, but there isn't a lot else that can be done. Our political system is so f*cked at this point, that it cannot be fixed, so we have two options. Operate within the system and try to limit the damage being done to our great nation, or start a revolutionary war. As much as I like the revolutionary war option, the nation isn't at a point where the critical mass needed for a revolutionary war would be achieved, and even if it was, who are the revolutionaries going to put in power after the war? The plethora of men with staunch morals, proper education, and an understanding of what it takes to create a world superpower that we had in the late 1700's and early 1800's doesn't exist today. Instead we have a nation that is more than 50% leeches on the .gov tit, and now we have a young generation that is buying hook, line, and sinker into the lie that they are owed everything for free, and that they should get it buy taxing the hardworking, driven, successful, and now wealthy portion of the society.
As much as I don't trust Trump, I also don't trust Cruz. He voted for amnesty. In my mind, immigration - legal or not - is one of the major issues right now. If we want to continue to be a country, we have to not allow socialism without borders. Otherwise the flood of people that just want to tax the rich and get stuff for free will increase, and then we will have no rich. They will either leave, or they will be taxed into poverty. It doesn't really matter which one happens, because eventually, as Margaret Thatcher pointed out, the "other peoples money" will be no more.
BlasterBob
02-14-2016, 12:40
One of the statements that really gets to me is Bernie declaring "rich people are just greedy". That's just bull shit. Most of the folks with money have been earning it by working diligently and/or invested wisely. Also the Democraps seem to dwell on the "rich" not paying their "fair" share. I feel they are paying their fair share of taxes according to the current tax laws. Why the hell would they pay more than legally required when they can plainly see the Government just pissing it away. While I am at the mini-rant stage, I had been under the impression that an attack on a U.S. Embassy is considered a direct attack on the United States of America. Did that change?
One of the statements that really gets to me is Bernie declaring "rich people are just greedy". That's just bull shit. Most of the folks with money have been earning it by working diligently and/or invested wisely. Also the Democraps seem to dwell on the "rich" not paying their "fair" share. I feel they are paying their fair share of taxes according to the current tax laws. Why the hell would they pay more than legally required when they can plainly see the Government just pissing it away.
Classic "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need". "Rich" people, who aren't members of the elite communist political class must have their income confiscated and redistributed by the government to the sloth, after the elite communists take their cut of course.
While I am at the mini-rant stage, I had been under the impression that an attack on a U.S. Embassy is considered a direct attack on the United States of America. Did that change?
Now, now, you don't expect obama to attack his own kindred spirits do you? :)
Honey badger; I agree whole heartedly, but where is this person?? I've been looking for YEARS.
Grant H; Thank you for putting some meat and eleoquence to my scribbled thought.
Foxtrot; Exactly right. The Russians, while in Afganistan, pointed that out. It will be nearly impossible to communicate effectively in that environment. But your point is just sit there and bitch? And, WTF is "Work now to preserve your later" What do you think we are trying to, peacefully, do?? Other than an uprising is just silly because we don't stand a chance, what are you saying that is useful to this conundrum?
Regardless of who takes the office I sincerely hope it's only for one term. As a registered Independent I'll pull the handle for the GOP candidate over anyone else but I won't be happy with the choice as unless something extreme comes out it will be Trump.
Foxtrot; Exactly right. The Russians, while in Afganistan, pointed that out. It will be nearly impossible to communicate effectively in that environment. But your point is just sit there and bitch? And, WTF is "Work now to preserve your later" What do you think we are trying to, peacefully, do?? Other than an uprising is just silly because we don't stand a chance, what are you saying that is useful to this conundrum?
As opposed to your calls to "burn it to the ground?"
BlasterBob, people who call for rich people to pay their fair share of taxes are those that are entirely too stupid to understand that there are exceedingly few "jobs" that pay enough to be ultra wealthy. That kind of wealth comes from venues other than an employer. Those people with such poor money management skills fail to understand that "rich" people aren't dodging the same income tax that gets taken out of their paycheck, as this is the only form of income those unfortunately souls will ever know.
Bailey Guns
02-14-2016, 14:05
As a registered Independent "Unaffiliated" voter...
I know it's semantics but saying you're registered as an "Independent" in Colorado is like saying you've registered your guns in Colorado.
I know it's semantics but saying you're registered as an "Independent" in Colorado is like saying you've registered your guns in Colorado.
Hahaha, thanks for the correction (almost like saying "clips" when people mean "magazine" or ".45 Long Colt" when it's just .45 Colt). I know I gave up the opportunity to vote in primaries but in my experiences those I've voted for were the ones that never seemed to make it to the general.
Hahaha, thanks for the correction (almost like saying "clips" when people mean "magazine" or ".45 Long Colt" when it's just .45 Colt). I know I gave up the opportunity to vote in primaries but in my experiences those I've voted for were the ones that never seemed to make it to the general.
But ya gotta keep trying. The only reason I'm a member the (R) is so I can at least try to promote the constitutional capitalists.
Bailey Guns
02-14-2016, 15:52
I know I gave up the opportunity to vote in primaries but in my experiences those I've voted for were the ones that never seemed to make it to the general.
That was always my experience as well.
Generally speaking, it was addressed to those that aren't voting/being active and just sitting everything out saying "that'll learn them, after this socialism, they'll elect the candidate I always wanted, and then the country will magically fix itself afterwards".
[As many individuals here did last election, paraphrased...]
Thank you for the clarification. Honestly. I wasn't trying to be a dick, although that follows pretty closely, I just didn't understand what you meant.
.[Beer]
BlasterBob
02-14-2016, 18:47
As opposed to your calls to "burn it to the ground?"
BlasterBob, people who call for rich people to pay their fair share of taxes are those that are entirely too stupid to understand that there are exceedingly few "jobs" that pay enough to be ultra wealthy. That kind of wealth comes from venues other than an employer. Those people with such poor money management skills fail to understand that "rich" people aren't dodging the same income tax that gets taken out of their paycheck, as this is the only form of income those unfortunately souls will ever know.
Yep, I agree with ya.
68Charger
02-14-2016, 23:52
Addressed to nobody in particular:
Revolution never will be an option because the state fully wrenched control of communications interception and the education system - two things more powerful than any collection of firearms. You have no ability to organize and you never will. The people (like last election) that are unhappy they can't get their ideal candidate (of which there would be 300 million ideal candidates, seriously, lets grow up) always like to say "screw it all, I want to see it all burn so we can get this over with and start anew".
Reality check: Nothing will happen, not now, not twenty years from now, not forty years from now. If you open your arms and welcome socialism thinking it will hasten a refresh, you're mistaken. The "producers" of society cannot bring about that change with any form of violence, the card is just not available. If they wanted to act, they needed to decades ago, too late bucko.
Now, the leeches in socialism - once free shit stops, they have that card, they might resort to (unorganized) violence ala Ferguson on a multiple city scale. What the end result is after that is not beneficial, and will be worse than what we have now, however. So stop your hedonistic whining, grow up, and accept reality, not an "ideological perfect fairy tale land" or you're personal philosophy is no better than those you oppose. Work now to preserve your later.
This is almost identical to being young and just expecting your retirement to magically be there at the end of the rainbow while you sit on your duff for forty years. If you're not working for a good result today, it won't be there tomorrow - or ever. Once you grow up and realize it it's a bit too late.
Who is John Galt?
Socialism fails slowly and painfully, when those that have come to expect the free stuff have it taken away because the producers have lost incentive to excel, they start doing just enough to get by, because if they do more, they are taxed back down to that level anyway, with the excuse that they're just greedy... But it's not the producers that start the riots, it's the takers- when there is nothing left to take.
HoneyBadger
02-15-2016, 00:20
Honey badger; I agree whole heartedly, but where is this person?? I've been looking for YEARS.
Libertarian party, bro. Consistently supporting liberty and capitalism for everyone. Not the establishment.
Grant H, (and all the others that also think this) your belief that it is strictly a two party system is exactly what the two parties want you to think. It is the only thing that really gives them power. If everyone just stopped supporting the two establishment parties that everyone is so fed up with, they would starve and die tomorrow. Stop allowing them to create your reality.
Bailey Guns
02-15-2016, 07:40
Libertarian party, bro. Consistently supporting liberty and capitalism for everyone. Not the establishment.
[ROFL2] Oh, wait...you were serious?
Grant H, (and all the others that also think this) your belief that it is strictly a two party system is exactly what the two parties want you to think. It is the only thing that really gives them power. If everyone just stopped supporting the two establishment parties that everyone is so fed up with, they would starve and die tomorrow. Stop allowing them to create your reality.
But everyone isn't going to do that. Ever. Not in our lifetimes anyway. I've been hearing that about libertarians for 30 or 40 years. As a matter of fact, almost NO ONE is going to do that. The party has slowly gained traction to where they generally command a whopping +/-1% of the vote in every election. Wow... That's the reality the libertarian party has created.
GilpinGuy
02-15-2016, 07:51
Yeah, Rosen ejamacated me to fact that I was basically foolish for voting for Perot and he was right. It was my first time voting for Prez and I was young and impressionable, so give me some slack.
Grant H.
02-15-2016, 10:03
Libertarian party, bro. Consistently supporting liberty and capitalism for everyone. Not the establishment.
Grant H, (and all the others that also think this) your belief that it is strictly a two party system is exactly what the two parties want you to think. It is the only thing that really gives them power. If everyone just stopped supporting the two establishment parties that everyone is so fed up with, they would starve and die tomorrow. Stop allowing them to create your reality.
Look at society today. Seriously, get on Youtube, and watch some of the videos of people asking questions of general society.
Due to screwed up public education, and the fact that we as a country are no longer governed as the founding fathers set up, we are permanently hosed into a two party system. The percentage of our society that actually looks beyond the 2 parties is very low, making it nearly impossible for a third party candidate to win. Then you have to factor in that there are usually several third party candidates, and now that low percentage is split across multiple candidates, so which ever main party they would have voted for loses the election, and the opposing main party says thanks to all the third party candidates for ensuring them the election.
My thinking that there are only two parties that can win a Pres. election has nothing to do with them having power because I recognize that there are other parties, and I recognize the problem that they create. The other 80-90% of Americans that think there are two parties give them that power.
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.
Since we have allowed our public schools and universities to continue to teach that we are a democracy, we are screwed. There are now too many people that believe that we are a democracy, not a Constitutional Republic, to ever correct the course without bloodshed. I disagree with Foxtrot that revolution will never be an option, but the point he makes about education is true. We no longer have control of general education, and those that do, want generally uneducated serfs.
Guys, this is the most important election of US history.
I just wanted to be the first to say that this year.
Guys, this is the most important election of US history.
But aren't they all? [ROFL1]
I just wanted to be the first to say that this year.
Now we've got that out of the way.
HoneyBadger
02-15-2016, 12:38
[ROFL2] Oh, wait...you were serious?
But everyone isn't going to do that. Ever. Not in our lifetimes anyway. I've been hearing that about libertarians for 30 or 40 years. As a matter of fact, almost NO ONE is going to do that. The party has slowly gained traction to where they generally command a whopping +/-1% of the vote in every election. Wow... That's the reality the libertarian party has created.
Cute. I'm not going to rehash your failed logic on this one. Everyone is sick of hearing it. The fact of the matter is that more than 40% of Americans identify themselves as independents (http://www.gallup.com/poll/180440/new-record-political-independents.aspx) and we now see more dissent against the parties than we have seen in 80+ years. (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/22/ace-of-spades-against-the-establishment/) Who has been most successful in the current national election cycle? (http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/21/politics/iowa-poll-hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders-donald-trump-ted-cruz/index.html) People who refuse to tow the party line. (http://www.salon.com/2016/02/02/the_democratic_primary_miracle_why_sanders_vs_clin ton_is_just_the_beginning/) People who have a long history (http://blogs.rollcall.com/hawkings/bernie-sanders-2016-proud-non-democrat/) of not agreeing with the party (http://www.vox.com/2015/11/23/9781330/bernie-sanders-democrat) and not participating in the party's control mechanisms (http://www.salon.com/2016/01/21/the_gops_terrifying_trump_plan_why_the_partys_esta blishment_thinks_it_can_control_the_donald_and_why _its_wrong/). The masses are supporting Trump and Sanders in shocking numbers (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/), and it's precisely because Trump and Sanders ARE NOT representative of the Republican and Democratic parties. (http://www.wnd.com/2016/02/congressman-trump-sanders-win-is-washington-wake-up-call/) It's obvious the 2 major parties have failed the people that support them, but the people continue to support them because the 2 major parties control so much of the election process. (http://ivn.us/2013/11/26/why-political-parties-control-elections-and-how-to-end-partisanship/)
But don't take my word for it. I'm just a crazy guy who is skeptical of your love for an organization that lets you down Every (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/09/the-republican-revolt/404365/). Single (http://www.senateconservatives.com/site/post/3174/gop-voters-disapprove-of-their-partys-leaders). Time (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/02/24/just-28-of-republicans-believe-gop-advocates-its-principles-well/). <-- That last link really speaks for the rest.
HoneyBadger
02-15-2016, 12:49
Look at society today. Seriously, get on Youtube, and watch some of the videos of people asking questions of general society. Yes, many people are ignorant. This has always been true.
Due to screwed up public education (This is a whole 'nother discussion, but yes. It's basically indoctrination), and the fact that we as a country are no longer governed as the founding fathers set up (When did this start? Go ahead and do some research and I think you'll find that it coincided with the creation of the two modern main parties), we are permanently hosed into a two party system (I disagree with you here, but that's okay. It's okay to disagree with someone else's opinion and still like them. :)). The percentage of our society that actually looks beyond the 2 parties is very low (See multiple links in my post above... notably the first several links), making it nearly impossible for a third party candidate to win. Then you have to factor in that there are usually several third party candidates, and now that low percentage is split across multiple candidates (This is true, but not a bad thing. Not everyone agrees on every topic - that would be insanely boring), so which ever main party they would have voted for loses the election, and the opposing main party says thanks to all the third party candidates for ensuring them the election. This is very circumstantial and have been proven and dis-proven almost as much as global warming. [LOL]
My thinking that there are only two parties that can win a Pres. election has nothing to do with them having power because I recognize that there are other parties, and I recognize the problem that they create. The other 80-90% of Americans that think there are two parties give them that power. This is absolutely true. The parties only have power because people give it to them. The parties are just non-profit organizations - they are not in any way a part of the Constitution. They were created several years after the US was officially formed for the same reasons they exist today: to give certain individuals more power in Washington. Unfortunately for us, the "individuals" that have the most influence (Hillary's delegate situation is a perfect example of this) are corporations that benefit from the legislation they buy through their preferred politicians. The good news for us is that the parties have undergone transformations historically and I think the GOP may be about to go the way of the Whigs.
And the last thing before we return to discussing Trump's stance on guns:
http://i.imgur.com/XN1EKAr.jpg
hollohas
02-15-2016, 14:51
Yep. Trump is all about himself. He's probably one of those people that thinks he should enjoy his right to protect himself but that everyone else should just rely on the police.
Careful, Trump might call a press conference in order to call you a "lying guy" for that and hire "very good lawyers" to sue you if you don't fix your act being a "totally unstable individual" for calling attention to his past statements....
This guy is seriously a child. There is long, recorded history of Trumps past political limp wrist. The guy has changed parties regularly, he is on record supporting the AWB, he is on record supporting MANY dems, he is on record saying he would create the best healthcare in the world and the government would pay for it...
But heaven forbid, if you point out his true history, he's going to scream liar, liar pants on fire and threaten to sue. What a juvenile douche.
HoneyBadger
02-15-2016, 15:16
Careful, Trump might call a press conference in order to call you a "lying guy" for that and hire "very good lawyers" to sue you if you don't fix your act being a "totally unstable individual" for calling attention to his past statements....
This guy is seriously a child. There is long, recorded history of Trumps past political limp wrist. The guy has changed parties regularly, he is on record supporting the AWB, he is on record supporting MANY dems, he is on record saying he would create the best healthcare in the world and the government would pay for it...
But heaven forbid, if you point out his true history, he's going to scream liar, liar pants on fire and threaten to sue. What a juvenile douche.
This post made me laugh. It's funny - because it's true. [Shake]
Oh how I am going to enjoy Trump's inauguration.
Hater's gonna hate - or some such nonsense I think I heard from the cherdrens.
Carry-on.
If Trump gets the presidency, can we expect an Omarosa nomination to the Supreme Court?
Bailey Guns
02-15-2016, 19:23
Cute. I'm not going to rehash your failed logic on this one. Everyone is sick of hearing it.
Yeah... Mine is the flawed logic. Guess I missed the part where the libertarian party is a major player. In anything. I'll keep looking, though.
You guys never get it. It's not that I don't like libertarians. It makes no difference what I like or dislike. It does make a difference that about 98% (made that up...but it should be close) of people vote R or D. And that's the bottom line. If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times...I don't vote R because I'm in love with the party. And you know that. I vote R because they can win. And by winning they control at least a part of the government process. I also vote R because they most closely align with my beliefs and they can win.
Libertarians can't win, and therefore can't control, jack s**t.
Reality sucks.
HoneyBadger
02-15-2016, 20:05
Yeah... Mine is the flawed logic. Guess I missed the part where the libertarian party is a major player. In anything. I'll keep looking, though.
You guys never get it. It's not that I don't like libertarians. It makes no difference what I like or dislike. It does make a difference that about 98% (made that up...but it should be close) of people vote R or D. And that's the bottom line. If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times...I don't vote R because I'm in love with the party. And you know that. I vote R because they can win. And by winning they control at least a part of the government process. I also vote R because they most closely align with my beliefs and they can win.
Libertarians can't win, and therefore can't control, jack s**t.
Reality sucks.
Yes, please continue to tell me that I live in a fantasy world while ignoring the pile of empirical evidence I presented. Then ask yourself which one of us is refusing to accept reality. If this is your reality, it exists only because you allow it to. If you didn't continue to blindly support "the party" then the party would cease to exist. It really is that simple.
Yes, please continue to tell me that I live in a fantasy world while ignoring the pile of empirical evidence I presented. Then ask yourself which one of us is refusing to accept reality. If this is your reality, it exists only because you allow it to. If you didn't continue to blindly support "the party" then the party would cease to exist. It really is that simple.
I don't think Bailey has that much clout. Guessing you're going to have to convince maybe another 65 million or so.
But I could be wrong.
HoneyBadger
02-15-2016, 20:56
I don't think Bailey has that much clout. Guessing you're going to have to convince maybe another 65 million or so.
But I could be wrong.
The whole is comprised of many individuals.
There is something in the neighborhood of, maybe, 400,000 registered libertarians. (can't even get them to register). There are roughly 8000 US Senate, State Senate, US House, State House and Governorships combined with exactly ONE sitting Libertarian. Hopefully your vote will just be wasted and not something worse. Sorry, that my friend, is the reality.......unfortunately.
HoneyBadger
02-15-2016, 21:09
There is something in the neighborhood of, maybe, 400,000 registered libertarians. (can't even get them to register). There are roughly 8000 US Senate, State Senate, US House, State House and Governorships combined with exactly ONE sitting Libertarian. Hopefully your vote will just be wasted and not something worse. Sorry, that my friend, is the reality.......unfortunately.
It is only "reality" because you - and people like you - continue to make it so. I wish that wasn't the case. [Dunno]
As a side note, the low number of registered Libertarians is probably because most of them are registered as Republicans (and many as Democrats too) to vote in the closed primaries. I am a registered Republican.
These are serious questions for you "hard libertarians" (Not meant to be a bad thing). Why do you register as republicans? Don't you think it would help the cause to get the number of registered libertarians a bigger percentage of a voting block, after all, you are voting libertarian in the general right? Libertarians need to get their numbers up to the 30 to 40% range before they'll have any shot. Why would a libertarian register republican if they're going to vote libertarian anyhow? If you're going to be principled, go all in. I'd love to see a viable libertarian party but until the numbers get up, again unfortunately, it's a vote for the progressives. Just the way it is.
The only way to win a presidential election, is to lie your ass off.
So why doesn't somebody run for president that is truly principaled, a true American patriot, would appoint strong conservatives to the Supreme Court, would eliminate 75% of the .gov, and would sign every piece of pro-liberty legislation that came across his or her desk.
All they have to do is pander to idiots, then once elected, make the switch. Think Trojan horse. Use Salinskys playback on them.
We need a closet Patriot, an electable by everyone canidate.
Aloha_Shooter
02-15-2016, 22:26
http://s3.amazonaws.com/armstrongeconomics-wp/2013/11/Dead-Horse.jpg
HoneyBadger
02-16-2016, 00:10
These are serious questions for you "hard libertarians" (Not meant to be a bad thing). Why do you register as republicans? To influence the republican Party, of course. Don't you think it would help the cause to get the number of registered libertarians a bigger percentage of a voting block, after all, you are voting libertarian in the general right?
Honestly, I haven't decided yet. I would happily vote for Cruz. I would consider voting for Carson. Rubio is basically a younger Jeb with bigger ears and a better fitting suit, but he serves the same political purpose. I will probably vote Libertarian if the (R) nominee ends up being Rubio, Bush, or Trump. There are a few things Trump has said that piqued my interest, but he says a lot of things to rile people up and then lacks in substance, credibility, and accountability. And then when people call him on it by stating the facts and quoting The Donald himself (in context, even), he throws a hissy fit and threatens to sue them. Surely we can do better than that. Do I like some of the things he says? Yes. Do I think he would make a decent president? ... And you thought Obama was an international embarrassment...
The only way to win a presidential election, is to lie your ass off.
So why doesn't somebody run for president that is truly principaled, a true American patriot, would appoint strong conservatives to the Supreme Court, would eliminate 75% of the .gov, and would sign every piece of pro-liberty legislation that came across his or her desk.
All they have to do is pander to idiots, then once elected, make the switch. Think Trojan horse. Use Salinskys playback on them.
We need a closet Patriot, an electable by everyone canidate.
The problem with this "Trojan Horse" idea is that a principled and virtuous person simply could never get elected president, thanks in part to the way the two main parties (and the profit-seeking media) have manipulated the election process, and thanks mostly to the progressive indoctrination in schools. I would pay Trump 100% of my savings right this minute if I could somehow guarantee that he would flip a switch and become the most principled Libertarian possible once elected. ..But we all know he has a better chance of becoming the next supreme court justice than actually becoming a virtuous and principled man. [LOL]
Great-Kazoo
02-16-2016, 00:45
I don't see anyone on the R side that has earned my vote. Trump being the last on radar.
IMO Bloomberg is going to enter, trump splits to 3rd party.
HRC has her vaginal side kick Humia take the fall and Rome burns.
Who ever gets elected in what again IMO will probably the lowest turn out for a presidential election. Will put Holder and Jeh (AMERICAS SAFE FROM TERRORIST) johnson on SCOTUS
Making matters worse. There will be 2 blow hard NYC elite buffoons commandeering votes.
Fucking anyone who actually removes their hat, puts a hand over their heart when the Flag goes by in parades, or events forever.
Now what was this thread about, again?
Oh yeah Fibbertarians
GilpinGuy
02-16-2016, 07:26
The problem with libertarianism is that most Americans just aren't up to the task of being self reliant and responsible. You start saying that people should be responsible for their own actions and take care of themselves and half the population says "WHAAAAT? F*ck that....."
It's sad.
Having both the Rs and the Ds acting like Santa Clause doesn't help them change their minds either.
HoneyBadger
02-16-2016, 10:05
The problem with libertarianism is that most Americans just aren't up to the task of being self reliant and responsible. You start saying that people should be responsible for their own actions and take care of themselves and half the population says "WHAAAAT? F*ck that....."
It's sad.
Having both the Rs and the Ds acting like Santa Clause doesn't help them change their minds either.
This is a very sad reality. :( Millions of people (especially millennials) would welcome a tyrannical welfare state with open arms. The good news is, there are more than 100 million of us who wouldn't welcome such a change, but as Foxtrot posted earlier, it won't happen with a bang: it is the quiet incrementalism that is killing us. Incrementalism in gun rights. Incrementalism in education. Incrementalism in economic policy. Incrementalism in Executive actions. While there will always be a small number of lazy and selfish individuals, the state has actually made it very appealing and hip to be lazy and selfish (and entitled). It will be interesting to see how this movement collides with significant geopolitical movements like Islam over the next few decades. It most certainly won't be pleasant.
KestrelBike
02-16-2016, 14:03
The only way to win a presidential election, is to lie your ass off.
So why doesn't somebody run for president that is truly principaled, a true American patriot, would appoint strong conservatives to the Supreme Court, would eliminate 75% of the .gov, and would sign every piece of pro-liberty legislation that came across his or her desk.
All they have to do is pander to idiots, then once elected, make the switch. Think Trojan horse. Use Salinskys playback on them.
We need a closet Patriot, an electable by everyone canidate.
At this point, I don't think it would even matter if you got someone like that miraculously elected because Congress is The Establishment by its very nature. Back to electability: Ron Paul was extremely principled in my opinion, but he had zero chance because A) people don't believe his policies would stand a snowball's chance in hell against the vested interests (the establishment juggernaut consisting of 95% of the left and right) and in that they were correct, B) the media wouldn't give him the time of day (skip to 1:19 and stop when it gets to that idiot piers morgan at 2:37) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMO7YG3Ul5g
So, in my opinion, we had the candidate you were speaking of, but he was clearly and decisively defeated and there will never be a success like that. Ted Cruz, in my opinion, is the closest thing to it and I don't think that's going to happen and he's doing amazing/awesome, far more than I ever thought he would. In fact, you can see over the past 4 years how much he's had to tone down his message and kind of blur the line between establishment and how I (perhaps naively) think he really is.
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=231121
And Now, The Trump Card
I'm liking this...
Donald Trump dramatically escalated his feud with rival Ted Cruz on Monday, threatening to sue the Texas senator over his eligibility for office if he does not retract alleged “lies” about Trump’s positions – and calling on the Republican National Committee to intervene on two fronts.
The billionaire businessman wants the RNC to pressure Cruz, and also stop allowing so many donors at the debates. If the RNC does not “get its act together,” Trump warned, they would be violating the “pledge” he signed to support the eventual GOP nominee.
I think he should sue.
Cruz either has a CRBA from the State Department or he does not. For a citizen born outside the United States that document is the proof that you were born as a citizen of the United States, just as a US birth certificate is the proof that you were born here as a citizen if you are born in the United States, as I've written on before.
But there's more here that Trump has every right to be angry over. First, the GOP misappropriated his name and likeness to solicit donations for the GOP. They recently solicited donations allegedly for "Trump supporters" but the funds they were soliciting will go to the GOP generally, not to Trump's campaign, and they did it without his permission.
Absent some sort of formal agreement by Trump to allow his name and likeness to be used in this fashion that's an outrageous abuse and breaks a number of laws, including the fact that the GOP needs a photo release for the picture they used since it was used for commercial, not editorial, purpose.
The law on such is quite-clear, incidentally. I can take a photo of you (provided I have or acquire the copyright) and use it for editorial purpose, or for that matter I can sell the image as a work of art. But if I use that image to sell something (e.g. a brand of soda, a brand of shirt, etc) then I have to have a release from every person in the picture or I've violated your rights and the person who does the advertising (not the photographer) can be sued and will probably lose.
Well, GOP? Where's your photo release? You don't have one, do you?
That's what I thought.
Then there is the stacking of debate audiences, "strategic" placement of microphones in the stacked portions of the audience and worse, blatant electronic "enhancement" of both boos and cheers, all of which has happened in the last two "contests."
Remember that Trump signed his pledge to the Republican Party under the specific condition that his candidacy be treated fairly.
Any one of the above would be a clear violation of that constraint and thus free him from his pledge. But he doesn't have one violation, he has at least three, never mind the phony GOP solicitation made under his name but for the GOP's benefit, not his.
There's a basic reality that the GOP has to face here: The establishment GOP is not in charge when it comes to Trump, nor for that matter, are they in charge when it comes to voters.
They may think they are but we have a candidate in the race this time around who is more than willing to stick up the middle finger when it's called for -- and in my opinion that line was crossed quite some time ago with all the phony promises of "reducing spending", "erasing the deficit", "enforcing the rule of law" and similar flat-out lies.
As for people like Starnes who wish to blame Republican voters for "screwing this up" by refusing to vote for Romney **** you with a rusty chainsaw. Neither I or anyone else is under any obligation to vote for anyone or to vote at all.
The party that wishes me to vote for their candidate instead of either staying home or voting for Cthulu has the affirmative obligation to run a candidate worth voting for, and if they cannot be bothered to do that they deserve to be destroyed as a political force in this or any other nation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=272&v=OYZPKYecRGM
KestrelBike
02-16-2016, 16:13
As for people like Starnes who wish to blame Republican voters for "screwing this up" by refusing to vote for Romney **** you with a rusty chainsaw. Neither I or anyone else is under any obligation to vote for anyone or to vote at all.
The party that wishes me to vote for their candidate instead of either staying home or voting for Cthulu has the affirmative obligation to run a candidate worth voting for, and if they cannot be bothered to do that they deserve to be destroyed as a political force in this or any other nation.
That's all well and good, but do not forget that tangible, perhaps irreversible harm is done when the alternatives are elected due to abstaining from voting (R). See: obamacare. open borders and the legacy that does/will entail. Supreme court nominations (Kagan, Sotomayor, next-??? don't forget any of those justices could drop dead at any moment, they're allllll within range of a fatal cardiac or neural event. Hell, ginsburg was a complete selfish idiot (for liberals, not conservatives lol) for not retiring from '08 to a year ago when it would have been a slam-dunk for obummer to nominate another Kagan/Soto in her place). AG nominations who let themselves and other departments get away with egregious crimes against the country (F&F, lois lerner at the IRS targetting conservatives, hillary emailgate, holder's big-bank circlejerkism http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/eric-holder-wall-street-double-agent-comes-in-from-the-cold-20150708 , the trade deals, the chance of another AWB, etc etc that's just off the top of my head.
Is all of that concrete hurt worth the raspberry you give to the establishment that already has all the money and power they amicably trade back and forth with the other side of the same coin, the dems? The GOP might not hold up to the exact standards you want them to, but by not voting for them, you vote *by default* for the dems who WILL do their damnedest to make you live how THEY want you to live. Of zero consequence besides your conscience (and again, totally up to you, but don't pretend you're doing the better tangible good) is your absent vote. Tell me again how Romney rues the day he couldn't get you to come out and vote for him, or how bad Cantor, Boehner, or Ryan are doing after they lost, quit, or just aren't your favorite. People like obummer, biden, and hillary would send you a thank you card for your actions if they had your address.
Trump is an 9/11 truther moron asshat, I don't care if he carries.
Trump will be a nation-wide version of Arnold Schwarzenegger. Once Trump gets elected he'll see how hard it is to be conservative and he'll go liberal to make/keep friends. Basically, we're screwed....
RblDiver
02-16-2016, 22:24
Is all of that concrete hurt worth the raspberry you give to the establishment that already has all the money and power they amicably trade back and forth with the other side of the same coin, the dems? The GOP might not hold up to the exact standards you want them to, but by not voting for them, you vote *by default* for the dems who WILL do their damnedest to make you live how THEY want you to live. Of zero consequence besides your conscience (and again, totally up to you, but don't pretend you're doing the better tangible good) is your absent vote. Tell me again how Romney rues the day he couldn't get you to come out and vote for him, or how bad Cantor, Boehner, or Ryan are doing after they lost, quit, or just aren't your favorite. People like obummer, biden, and hillary would send you a thank you card for your actions if they had your address.
Sometimes, a forest fire is necessary to burn things to the ground so you can rebuild. Sometimes, you need to address the plank in your eye first. If other shit happens, that sucks, but your integrity is the only thing you have that others can't take away from you.
KestrelBike
02-16-2016, 22:31
Sometimes, a forest fire is necessary to burn things to the ground so you can rebuild. Sometimes, you need to address the plank in your eye first. If other shit happens, that sucks, but your integrity is the only thing you have that others can't take away from you.
Understood, but we're no where near that... Yet.
Bailey Guns
02-17-2016, 07:21
Sometimes, a forest fire is necessary to burn things to the ground so you can rebuild.
Yeah...ever heard of China, the USSR, Viet Nam, Cambodia? They had "forest fires" there and look what they rebuilt. What makes you think the "rebuilding" is going to look like you imagine it?
I don't understand this idea that we can "burn it down" and start anew.
Does anyone pay any attention to their neighbors, YOU might be patriotic and constitutional, your neighbors probably are not. Your neighbors will look for security first, not liberty, and that means they'll bond with a strong arm dictatorship before they accept their situation and assume personal responsibility. This is why the (D) does so well, they promise the stars and deliver a bag of shit, and your neighbors are so fucking stupid they fall for it every time.
68Charger
02-17-2016, 08:59
Yeah...ever heard of China, the USSR, Viet Nam, Cambodia? They had "forest fires" there and look what they rebuilt. What makes you think the "rebuilding" is going to look like you imagine it?
With popular opinion right now, the government would be rebuilt as the USSA and we would all be declared dissidents overnight
With popular opinion right now, the government would be rebuilt as the USSA and we would all be declared dissidents overnight
Alot of us are already terrorists in the eyes of the government. We own guns, we discuss the constitution, liberty, independence, economics, capitalism, right-wing politics, some might be classified as preppers, I could go on.
68Charger
02-17-2016, 09:28
Alot of us are already terrorists in the eyes of the government. We own guns, we discuss the constitution, liberty, independence, economics, capitalism, right-wing politics, some might be classified as preppers, I could go on.
True, but it's still not as bad as being an enemy of the state where you can be jailed or worse just for not agreeing with the state
68Charger
02-17-2016, 09:32
So, Trump carries then?
Carries what? New Hampshire?
It might almost be worth it if he won, just to see the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the left... He is to them what Obama is to many of us- they'll think the world is coming to an end, and their under developed amigdylas won't deal well with that fear.
True, but it's still not as bad as being an enemy of the state where you can be jailed or worse just for not agreeing with the state
Agreed.
Trump is a self serving narcissist that will say anything to advance his own agenda. The difference between him and the self serving narcissist that will say anything to advance his own agenda that already occupies the White House is that Trump is not nearly as effective at disguising his self serving narcissism. Think of it as a transparent bag of poop, as opposed to an opaque one with deodorizer. My prediction: Cruz gets the nomination for the GOP, Trump throws a tantrum and runs as an independent, and Hitlary/Biden/Bloomberg wins the presidency. Bernie is the outlier here, if he runs as an independent as well, everything is up in the air. Trump could very well win in that case.
Martinjmpr
02-17-2016, 10:48
Trump is a self serving narcissist that will say anything to advance his own agenda. The difference between him and the self serving narcissist that will say anything to advance his own agenda that already occupies the White House is that Trump is not nearly as effective at disguising his self serving narcissism. Think of it as a transparent bag of poop, as opposed to an opaque one with deodorizer. My prediction: Cruz gets the nomination for the GOP, Trump throws a tantrum and runs as an independent, and Hitlary/Biden/Bloomberg wins the presidency.
Yup, this is how I see it going down with 1 more addition: After it's over, Trump goes back on TV and brags that this was his plan all along and that Republicans are teh stoopid for supporting him.
Bernie is the outlier here, if he runs as an independent as well, everything is up in the air. Trump could very well win in that case.
I don't see this happening, Dems are still steamed at Nader for running as a 3rd party candidate.
We gave the House to the R's in 2012 - they've done nothing we wanted them to do and they promised to do with their majority.
We gave the Senate to the R's in 2014 - they've done nothing we wanted them to do and they promised to do with their majority.
We forced Boehner out of the top spot in the House - they replaced him with Ryan who immediately passed Obama's Omnibus bill.
So, remind me again why we want to give the Presidency to the establishment R's (Jeb, Marco, or Ted) in 2016.
Trump is the only one running as an R who is not in the pocket of the establishment R's (Rand Paul is now out).
Jeb, Marco, and Ted are all loyal members of the same party leadership that we put in the Congress in 2012 and 2014 - see above. What makes you think they will turn out a different result than seen above?
Therefore, Trump is the only one who has a chance to win because he is running on the R ticket, and the only one who will go against the establishment.
Third party will not win. Wish it could, but it will not.
In the end, we will never have a good candidate for any office due to the Ann Barnhardt Axium:
The fact that a given person is holding or seeking high-level public office is, in and of itself, proof that said person is morally and/or psychologically UNFIT to hold public office.
Aloha_Shooter
02-17-2016, 12:44
I don't want Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Warren, or Joe Biden picking the next 2 or 3 Supreme Court Justices. I didn't want Obama picking the 2 that he did but McCain and Romney weren't conservative enough for some people so we gave those picks to a dedicated anti-American socialist. Seeing people call Cruz or Rubio "establishment" is about as entertaining as seeing Hillary defend her illegal actions on the vast right-wing conspiracy.
Cruz pisses me off on some things, Rubio pisses me off on some things, Trump pisses me off on a lot of things. Guess what, no one is going to agree with you 100% on everything. I will vote for any of the Republican candidates -- including ones who have dropped out -- over the prospect of another 4 years of Democrat control of the White House and the continued damage to the Constitution if they get to nominate any more SC justices.
Zundfolge
02-17-2016, 13:05
So, remind me again why we want to give the Presidency to the establishment R's (Jeb, Marco, or Ted) in 2016.
Because the alternative is to put someone worse than Obama in office.
If a Democrat is our next president, America is over. Period. (of course even if its a Republican that doesn't mean we're saved ... at this point I'm pretty well convinced that America will not be saved).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnHmsbLG4L4
Trump is an 9/11 truther moron asshat, I don't care if he carries.
Great argument.
I was not aware of the 9/11 truther bit. Where does that assertion come from?
Ranger353
02-17-2016, 16:25
WTF am I missing about Trump? Why are 46% of GOP registered voters in SC voting for him?
What is it about that jack-wad do people see and like? I am going to be so pissed if he gets the nomination. Am I out there in left field by myself, am I worried over nothing? Do other 2A proponents see him as some sorta protector of 2A rights? He has spoken out against the 2A in the past and I fear that he is just telling the masses whatever it is he needs to for the vote.
Trump =[pileoshit]
Great-Kazoo
02-17-2016, 16:25
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnHmsbLG4L4
This vid should confirm Trump is a SALESMAN first. sell, sell, sell. Typical NYC salesman.
It's the ultimate Resume, Nothing but pablum loaded with Buzz Words.
pssssssssssssssssssssttttttttttt hey kid have i gotta bridge for you. Know what i mean ha!
Great-Kazoo
02-17-2016, 16:28
well you could probably start here, instead of running another 3-4 pg trump thread
https://www.ar-15.co/threads/154376-Trump-carries
Entertaining as all get out, ain't he!
RblDiver
02-17-2016, 16:38
Great argument.
I was not aware of the 9/11 truther bit. Where does that assertion come from?
In last Saturday's South Carolina debate, he was blaming 9/11 on Bush, saying he "let it happen."
Great-Kazoo
02-17-2016, 16:39
Entertaining as all get out, ain't he!
I don't want an entertainer. I want someone who's going to actually do something, other than kiss Islamist and snowflakes asses. You want the job tell me something other than WELL WHEN ELECTED I'LL DO MANY THING, MANY A GREAT THING. HE'S A FUCKIN IDIOT.
Put him in a pants suit he sounds like HRC.
He is a social liberal, and thus closer to the middle (libertarian thoughts) on several "moral" issues (that the Federal Government never should have gotten into in the first place) than the rest of the GOP.
If he was "Pro-Life" and against same sex marriage, he would be in 3rd or 4th place right now.
Fun experiment, do a gop primary poll here. That way no one has resentment over someone being openly Cruz/trump and get an idea of how folk swing.
There are stupid people on both sides of the aisle?
hollohas
02-17-2016, 17:08
It will be the greatest. You'll see. It will be tremendous, no one will have ever seen anything greater. We'll make the most money, have the biggest wall, everyone will love us. We'll have the best people working in the government. Believe him. No one builds greater walls. We'll be the most powerful people in all the universe, it will be spectacular, you'll see, I promise you that. Everyone else is stupid. They're dumb. I mean, look at their fat ugly faces. They're liars. We'll have so much winning when he gets elected, you'll get bored with winning. Believe him. Sorry losers and haters, his IQ is the highest. Don't feel stupid or insecure, it's not your fault.
Sounds like a soild plan there, huh?
Trump probably donated the money that bought HRC her pantsuit.
In last Saturday's South Carolina debate, he was blaming 9/11 on Bush, saying he "let it happen."
I thought 9/11 truthers were those that think Bush and Co planned it.
I believe Trump's statements at the debate were a rebuttal to Jeb saying his brother "kept us safe."
Trump is now saying the Saudi's were likely involved in the planning - not a bad argument considering where the hijackers originated and the immediate fleeing of Saudi families from the US after the attack.
You won't hear any other candidates questioning anything about the Saudi scum we've been propping up for years.
Refreshing.
Trump probably donated the money that bought HRC her pantsuit.
Another great argument. Must be on a roll
Fun experiment, do a gop primary poll here. That way no one has resentment over someone being openly Cruz/trump and get an idea of how folk swing.
Done:
https://www.ar-15.co/threads/154489-1st-GOP-Primary-Election
Zundfolge
02-17-2016, 17:19
He's a loud mouth that tells the media and PC people to fuck themselves. THIS is really the only reason people like him. Hell its what I like about him even if I don't really like him (and I like him less and less as time goes on).
I'll vote for him if he's the candidate but I won't do so enthusiastically.
Given the choice between a giant douche and sh!t sandwich it's more a matter of who hurts me the least.
theGinsue
02-17-2016, 17:46
Merged threads
Bailey Guns
02-17-2016, 19:44
Entertaining as all get out, ain't he!
Yeah. That's my number 1 criteria for selecting a president.
68Charger
02-17-2016, 22:23
This vid should confirm Trump is a SALESMAN first. sell, sell, sell. Typical NYC salesman.
It's the ultimate Resume, Nothing but pablum loaded with Buzz Words.
pssssssssssssssssssssttttttttttt hey kid have i gotta bridge for you. Know what i mean ha!
Entertaining as all get out, ain't he!
Yeah. That's my number 1 criteria for selecting a president.
What I want to know is can he sell Brawndo, the thirst mutilator?
HoneyBadger
02-17-2016, 22:33
What I want to know is can he sell Brawndo, the thirst mutilator?
Would he legally change his middle name to "Mountain Dew" in sponsorship?
GilpinGuy
02-17-2016, 22:43
There are stupid people on both sides of the aisle?
Entertaining as all get out, ain't he!
Given the choice between a giant douche and sh!t sandwich it's more a matter of who hurts me the least.
I've said it before, the election is like the WWF. Both guys/gals talk all kinds of shit before the fight, pretend to beat each other up during the fight, then have cocktails together after the fight...on the dime of those who paid to watch the fight.
I didn't make that up but it sure seems to be the way it is these days.
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2016-02-17.html#read_more
Trump is the first presidential candidate in 50 years who might conceivably: (1) deport illegal aliens, (2) build a wall, (3) block Muslim immigration, (4) flout political correctness, (5) bring manufacturing home, and (6) end the GOP's neurotic compulsion to start wars in some godforsaken part of the world.
That's all that matters! Are you listening yet, RNC?
There is not another candidate who agrees with Trump on all these positions. Maybe one issue, but not all of them -- and if it's immigration, they would be lying.
Even Ted Cruz still refuses to say he'd deport illegal aliens (unless they're arrested for breaking some other law), build a wall (instead he talks about "border security," which is code for: No Wall), or reduce legal immigration at all.
RblDiver
02-18-2016, 08:55
Trump identifies as Bernie Sanders:
http://twitchy.com/2016/02/18/was-this-the-most-embarrassing-moment-for-donald-trump-at-the-trumpsctownhall-hint-yes-video/
HoneyBadger
02-18-2016, 09:19
Trump identifies as Bernie Sanders:
http://twitchy.com/2016/02/18/was-this-the-most-embarrassing-moment-for-donald-trump-at-the-trumpsctownhall-hint-yes-video/
That's hilarious. And bad. Very, very bad.
hollohas
02-18-2016, 09:23
Trump identifies as Bernie Sanders:
http://twitchy.com/2016/02/18/was-this-the-most-embarrassing-moment-for-donald-trump-at-the-trumpsctownhall-hint-yes-video/
Hahaha.
68Charger
02-18-2016, 09:40
Trump identifies as Bernie Sanders:
http://twitchy.com/2016/02/18/was-this-the-most-embarrassing-moment-for-donald-trump-at-the-trumpsctownhall-hint-yes-video/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzX_CXxijyM
Trump identifies as Bernie Sanders:
http://twitchy.com/2016/02/18/was-this-the-most-embarrassing-moment-for-donald-trump-at-the-trumpsctownhall-hint-yes-video/
That's hilarious. And bad. Very, very bad.
Hahaha.
“[The] candidate is considered a political outsider by all of the pundits. He’s tapping into the anger of voters, delivers a populist message. He believes everyone in the country should have health care. He advocates for hedge fund managers to pay higher taxes. He is drawing thousands of people at his rallies and bringing in a lot of new voters into the political process.”
“Who am I describing?” Brzezinski asked.
“You’re describing Donald Trump,” Trump responded.
“Actually, I was describing Bernie Sanders,” Brzezinski replied.
[LOL]
Trump is the GOP version of wealth-envy, authoritarianism, and socialized medicine. Hey Trumpettes, if Trump doesn't get the GOP nomination you can vote for The Bern.
Yuck it up when you can.
Still appears the "trumpettes" will have the last laugh.
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/presidential-candidates-fox-poll-south-carolina-02-18-16.jpg?w=640&h=616
Aloha_Shooter
02-18-2016, 21:01
I hope Trump of 2016 is the Paul of the GOP where Trump of 2012 was more like Saul. As I said before, I will vote for any of those running on the GOP side (including those who have dropped out) rather than let one of the Dems win.
HoneyBadger
02-18-2016, 23:24
http://www.reasonstovotetrump.com/
Yet another strong argument.
I'm nearly convinced we should put up another professional politician who is an immigrant with strong Cuban ties instead of a natural born American with economic expertise.
It's all starting to make sense.
68Charger
02-18-2016, 23:36
Yet another strong argument.
I'm nearly convinced we should put up another professional politician who is an immigrant with strong Cuban ties instead of a natural born American with economic expertise.
It's all starting to make sense.
Only if you're falling for it... I don't trust politicians, but I trust entertainers even less.
I'd vote for intelligence and morals in a heartbeat, but Ben Carson doesn't stand a chance with today's public... So he won't make it past the primary
hurley842002
02-18-2016, 23:40
Only if you're falling for it... I don't trust politicians, but I trust entertainers even less.
I'd vote for intelligence and morals in a heartbeat, but Ben Carson doesn't stand a chance with today's public... So he won't make it past the primary
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160219/c47f3e92702e5036ce9e61610fcbb430.jpg
Only if you're falling for it... I don't trust politicians, but I trust entertainers even less.
I'd vote for intelligence and morals in a heartbeat, but Ben Carson doesn't stand a chance with today's public... So he won't make it past the primary
I agree Ben has intelligence and strong morals, and is probably a great guy, but I'm afraid the job is just too far out of his lane.
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160219/c47f3e92702e5036ce9e61610fcbb430.jpg
That's the best you could come up with?
Your debate skills are simply unmatched.
68Charger
02-18-2016, 23:55
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160219/c47f3e92702e5036ce9e61610fcbb430.jpg
I'm trolling the troll...[gohome]
68Charger
02-19-2016, 00:01
I agree Ben has intelligence and strong morals, and is probably a great guy, but I'm afraid the job is just too far out of his lane.
That's what a cabinet is for... But it's irrelevant- he's unelectable with the current voting public
If it's possible, I'll take intelligence and morals over entertainment and deceit any day.
But with our current political system, we're forced to choose between different forms/levels of deceit.(Can't get the vomit emoticon to work with my tablet)
hurley842002
02-19-2016, 00:06
That's the best you could come up with?
Your debate skills are simply unmatched.
Interesting, you actually thought I was trying to debate.
Interesting, you actually thought I was trying to debate.
Nope, I don't expect that from you.
I figured you were just chiming in to amuse yourself.
Carry-on.
Worth a watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=627&v=_H2ssTEJ9kg
hollohas
02-19-2016, 15:59
Now our potential entertainer-in-cheif is calling for a boycott of Apple because they won't build software that would allow the Feds to break into phones.
Nice.
A candidate who believes it's OK for the government to force a private company to create a product is bad enough. But to force them to build a product that would allow them to abuse individual privacy?
The Donald says
"Tim Cook is living in a world of make believe" " I would come down on him so hard -- you have no idea. -- his head would be spinning all the way back to silicon valley"
"I think Tim Cook is totally out of line and I think the government should come down on him very, very hard."
Sounds like the anti-establishment, small government kind of guy that we've been waiting huh????
Hahahah...no. He's a statist tool.
Bailey Guns
02-19-2016, 16:07
Yeah. I agree. I've about enough of Trump's big-brother nonsense. Unfortunately, I may be in the minority.
HoneyBadger
02-19-2016, 16:20
Now our potential entertainer-in-cheif is calling for a boycott of Apple because they won't build software that would allow the Feds to break into phones.
Nice.
A candidate who believes it's OK for the government to force a private company to create a product is bad enough. But to force them to build a product that would allow them to abuse individual privacy?
The Donald says
"Tim Cook is living in a world of make believe" " I would come down on him so hard -- you have no idea. -- his head would be spinning all the way back to silicon valley"
"I think Tim Cook is totally out of line and I think the government should come down on him very, very hard."
Sounds like the anti-establishment, small government kind of guy that we've been waiting huh????
Hahahah...no. He's a statist tool.
As I've said from the beginning, he's an authoritarian. Authoritarians are never good for individual liberty (which is kind of what gun rights are all about, in case anyone here missed the memo).
Yeah. I agree. I've about enough of Trump's big-brother nonsense. Unfortunately, I may be in the minority.
You're certainly not in the minority here: https://www.ar-15.co/threads/154489-1st-GOP-Primary-Election?p=1959529&viewfull=1#post1959529
Feeling like you're in the minority is exactly what Trump supporters want you believe, as they shout you down and call you a liar for quoting Trump (in context, no less!). Good old playground tactics. "You beat me in one of the (relatively insignificant) primaries? I'll sue your ass! Blah Blah Blah"
Now can we please stop bumping this thread and giving Trump and his supporters even MORE undeserved recognition? [Shake]
Captain Trap
02-19-2016, 18:19
A little history lesson for those too young or too old (Like me) to remember.
George W had only been in office for about 9 months after having fought Big Al Gore to see who was going to be Pres. Yes, Big Al lost on all accounts. And the recounts. GW was being called the "the Appointed Pres by the SCOTUS, an Illegitimate Pres and that he had stolen the election". By all accounts and recounts by several liberal news papers GW had received more votes than Big Al. The lawsuit was filled by Big Al to only recount the ballots ONLY in the most liberal counties like Broward county in the Miami area. This recount of selected counties was not allowed by Florida Law. If they were to recount the ballets, then they would have had to recount all of the counties. Big Al sued to the SCOTUS to overturn Florida law because he did not want a recount in some of the more Conservative counties like where Pensacola is located. This is how the world became aware what a Chad is and what a dimpled chad, pregnant chad and :voter intent" with a mark on a chad was.
After getting into the White House and starting to set up GW's administration, GW had to get Hillary to return hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of stuff she was tring to steal. The Clinton staff stole all of the "W"s from the computers and general house keeping chores.
Then we had laws that prevented the FBI, CIA, NSA and local authorities from talking with each other about potential terrorist threats inside and outside of the US. This prevented many of the agencies from "connecting the dots".
GW was preoccupied with getting his administration up and running when 9/11 occurred. So for Trump to make this allegation that 9/11 happened under GW's watch and GW did not keep America safe is a Left Wing talking point, disingenuous and false. Did it happen, yes, could he have prevented it? No At the time we did not have a system to find and stop the attacks.
Hope this fills in the back ground and what mind set Trump is coming from.
BlasterBob
02-19-2016, 18:32
"The Donald" says what a lot of folks want to hear and he may be good as the Pres., but I sure believe he is a "loose cannon" and question how he'd be for diplomacy in his dealings with foreign countries........... [blah-blah]
As I've said from the beginning, he's an authoritarian. Authoritarians are never good for individual liberty (which is kind of what gun rights are all about, in case anyone here missed the memo).
You're certainly not in the minority here: https://www.ar-15.co/threads/154489-1st-GOP-Primary-Election?p=1959529&viewfull=1#post1959529
Feeling like you're in the minority is exactly what Trump supporters want you believe, as they shout you down and call you a liar for quoting Trump (in context, no less!). Good old playground tactics. "You beat me in one of the (relatively insignificant) primaries? I'll sue your ass! Blah Blah Blah"
Now can we please stop bumping this thread and giving Trump and his supporters even MORE undeserved recognition? [Shake]
Wow.
Maybe I should just put my fingers in my ears and yell, "La La La" whenever someone other than my favorite candidate speaks.
Bump
Just curious; do some of you plan on bumping this thread in the hopes of changing someone's mind on who they are going to vote for in November?
Whatever it takes to help you select the candidate you will vote for, have at it.
Just remember, November; it is the only poll that counts and it is only February, so if you keep beating the drum for your candidate, you stand a good chance of turning off more people than you will pursuade to support your candidate.
Keep it civil please.
Great-Kazoo
02-19-2016, 21:47
Just curious; do some of you plan on bumping this thread in the hopes of changing someone's mind on who they are going to vote for in November?
Whatever it takes to help you select the candidate you will vote for, have at it.
Just remember, November; it is the only poll that counts and it is only February, so if you keep beating the drum for your candidate, you stand a good chance of turning off more people than you will pursuade to support your candidate.
Keep it civil please.
Is Dudley running for office?
Is Dudley running for office?
I think Dudley has an office. I'm not sure whether he allows running in his office. I'm fairly certain Dudley could not win a state wide election for any office, but that is just my personal opinion.
I'm just happy we are not going to be forced into voting for a Bush, Romney, or McCain this go-around. Any of the current top three contenders are exponentially better both in terms of ability to win the general election, and in their political leaning. No candidate is perfect, but at least I won't have to get drunk before voting Republican this year.
Trump Carries Nevada - Landslide
https://theconservativetreehouse.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/nevada-results.jpg?w=640
Unfortunately, Kasich will stay in until after Ohio in order to suck as many votes as possible away from Trump.
Dishonest number games being played.
If you have no possible chance to win the nomination, GET OUT OF THE RACE.
hollohas
02-24-2016, 14:28
One thing's for sure. Trump sure has managed to get out the vote. Biggest turnout ever in NV.
Aloha_Shooter
02-24-2016, 15:55
One thing's for sure. Trump sure has managed to get out the vote. Biggest turnout ever in NV.
... and that by itself is positive even if you don't trust Trump (and I don't). Vote turnout affects the side races and we need to make the regressive Stalinists absolutely CRY in the races for Senate, House, governor, city councilman. Returning this country to a constitutional form of government will be a long term affair that has to be carried out at the lowest levels as well as highest.
HoneyBadger
02-24-2016, 16:05
He sure is entertaining:
8XMYwWI9H4c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=5&v=XbvGxDmD3dY
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=231154
Trump utterly destroyed the rest of the field in Nevada last night with almost 46% of the vote.Rubio edged Cruz, which is not a huge surprise, despite the fact that they're both vicious snakes.
Kascich and Carson are basically done, with neither managing to break the 5% barrier. They look like a Libertarian candidate in the context of vote-getting, and yes, that's an insult.
If Trump runs the table similar to what he's been doing here Super Tuesday may not formally be a stake in the heart of his competitors but in terms of any sort of legitimate challenge, it will be over.
Then the GOP will get to decide -- will they support and back the actual winner, or will they try to play games and blow their own brains out?
Great-Kazoo
02-24-2016, 16:46
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=231154
I'm going with B for $1000 Alex.
68Charger
02-26-2016, 14:45
Finally found a reason to vote for Trump:
http://www.caintv.com/endorsement-sharpton-promises
HoneyBadger
02-26-2016, 14:57
Finally found a reason to vote for Trump:
http://www.caintv.com/endorsement-sharpton-promises
It's tempting, isn't it...
[shithitsfan]
Bailey Guns
02-26-2016, 15:49
Sorry, Ted. But this seals the deal for Trump!
[Coffee]
Finally found a reason to vote for Trump:
http://www.caintv.com/endorsement-sharpton-promises
As if anyone could trust the Rev. Sharpton to keep his word. [ROFL3]
68Charger
02-26-2016, 16:50
As if anyone could trust the Rev. Sharpton to keep his word. [ROFL3]
Well, you got me there... he has forever tainted the title of "Reverend"... might as well be renamed to "charlatan"
Ironic, since that's the title of Rev. Martin Luther King... father of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
All professions have disappointing representatives of said profession. It need not reflect badly on all representatives of that profession.
There are even a few lawyers I like...but not many. [Flower]
68Charger
02-26-2016, 17:27
All professions have disappointing representatives of said profession. It need not reflect badly on all representatives of that profession.
There are even a few lawyers I like...but not many. [Flower]
LOL, reminds me of the quote "99% of lawyers give the other 1% a bad name"
But I agree, I have met a couple good lawyers in my life of 45 years...
hollohas
02-26-2016, 19:20
Trump is simply unbelievable. The guy was going after the Amazon founder today for buying the Washington Post for "political influence". Trump is saying that when he is president there's going to be "such problems" for Jeff Bezos because buying political influence is wrong.
But wait, didn't Trump say he gave all that money to Dems over the years with the sole purpose of helping his own business? To buy political influence???
Hypocrisy is one thing, all are guilty of that, but Trump threatening an individual for simply purchasing a private company is frightening. The idea that any conservative, or even Republican, supports a guy who thinks it OK for the federal government to punish business owners for nothing more than buying other business is mind boggling.
Trump went on to explain that as president he'll open up libel laws so that when people say horrible, false things, "we can sue them and win lots of money".
Oh great.
We have some very conservative, anti-GOP folks to pick from this time, something we have been begging for, and what do we do? We pick an insane, ultra-narcissistic, authoritarian, douche.
Lord help us.
HoneyBadger
02-26-2016, 22:46
Trump is simply unbelievable. The guy was going after the Amazon founder today for buying the Washington Post for "political influence". Trump is saying that when he is president there's going to be "such problems" for Jeff Bezos because buying political influence is wrong.
But wait, didn't Trump say he gave all that money to Dems over the years with the sole purpose of helping his own business? To buy political influence???
Hypocrisy is one thing, all are guilty of that, but Trump threatening an individual for simply purchasing a private company is frightening. The idea that any conservative, or even Republican, supports a guy who thinks it OK for the federal government to punish business owners for nothing more than buying other business is mind boggling.
Trump went on to explain that as president he'll open up libel laws so that when people say horrible, false things, "we can sue them and win lots of money".
Oh great.
We have some very conservative, anti-GOP folks to pick from this time, something we have been begging for, and what do we do? We pick an insane, ultra-narcissistic, authoritarian, douche.
Lord help us.
https://media.giphy.com/media/aLdiZJmmx4OVW/giphy.gif
Great-Kazoo
02-26-2016, 23:44
The only thing worthwhile about trumpet. Will be watching him debate her highnAss. Or should i say decimate.
Of course if he's the sleeper i believe him to be. Come debate time he'll say You Know I believe Hillary would make a better president then me.
HoneyBadger
02-27-2016, 18:33
If you're a Trump supporter, I DARE YOU to watch this and then ask yourself if this is really someone that you stand behind. Seriously. Do it. Why won't you? Are you afraid that your blind enthusiasm isn't well founded? Are you afraid that you have been energetically supporting your worst enemy? Well... You are probably right.
yX5dBzxKNOw
Trump IS a sleeper, not Hillary's, but Kanye's.
Kanye doesn't need to run in 2020, because White Kanye is running right now.
If you're a Trump supporter, I DARE YOU to watch this and then ask yourself if this is really someone that you stand behind. Seriously. Do it. Why won't you? Are you afraid that your blind enthusiasm isn't well founded? Are you afraid that you have been energetically supporting your worst enemy? Well... You are probably right.
And they say Trump supporters are overly dramatic.
"Dare" really? "Afraid?"
Looks like some establishment conservatives are all up in a tizzy over Trump's popularity.
I'm not certain it's a good idea to publicly bash the leading Republican nominee before we even get past the primary.
Should probably leave that to the Dems.
As far as Shapiro, too many half truths and out of context quotes to bother trying to defend.
"I dare you" to look them up and see for yourself - don't take Ben's word for it.
Trump for Emperor!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/
In a very important time – This is must listen audio from Steven Miller for anyone concerned about Trans-Pacific Trade (TPP) or Trade Promotion Authority (TPA), or the comprehensive immigration reform platform as it relates to Globalism -vs- Nationalism.
https://soundcloud.com/breitbart/breitbart-news-saturday-stephen-miller-february-26-2016
Burn it down.
Might as well just pull the lever Hils.
(and I mean the 2 party system that's fucking us IRVING)
Burn it down.
Might as well just pull the lever Hils.
(and I mean the 2 party system that's fucking us IRVING)
Well, I think we're seeing the beginning of the end of it.
Well, I think we're seeing the beginning of the end of it.
I think the beginning was a ways back. The front half of the roller coaster has crested the top of the track and we'll be picking up speed on the downhill side very quickly.
I think the beginning was a ways back. The front half of the roller coaster has crested the top of the track and we'll be picking up speed on the downhill side very quickly.
That's true, and oh yeah, the track is on fire too.
Democrat turnout is way down compared to 2008, and Republican turnout is way up.
Lack of turnout for McCain and Romney played a huge part in the Republican loss in 2008 and 2012.
Trump is the reason for the increase.
Bump Trump out, and the newly energized Republican voters will stay home, giving the Democrats another win.
Trump as the nominee is an easy win - based on turnout.
Take him out and his fans stay home, or he runs as an independent and splits the vote. Either way, the Dems win.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/02/336255/
Bailey Guns
02-28-2016, 08:56
I'm not a Trump fan-boy or Trump supporter by any means. I do like the fact he's totally got the old-guard, establishment pain-in-the-ass, "let's reach across the aisle", faux conservatives in the party in panic mode, though.
Oh...and I'll take Trump as president any day over Sanders or Clinton. And I'll vote for him if he's the nominee. I won't like it, but I'll do it.
RblDiver
02-28-2016, 09:01
I refuse to vote for a Dem. Ergo, I refuse to vote for Trump.
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/361790.php
I'm not a Trump fan-boy or Trump supporter by any means. I do like the fact he's totally got the old-guard, establishment pain-in-the-ass, "let's reach across the aisle", faux conservatives in the party in panic mode, though.
Oh...and I'll take Trump as president any day over Sanders or Clinton. And I'll vote for him if he's the nominee. I won't like it, but I'll do it.
I'm trying to decide if I could vote for Trump or not. I also like how he has turned everything upside down, which is exactly what many of us have been asking for a number of years now, but I don't need to vote for him in order for him to accomplish that part.
hollohas
02-28-2016, 10:10
Everyone keeps saying he has turned it upside-down but he really hasn't other than getting huge turnouts. He has publicly said he will reach across the aisle and work with Dems. Exactly what we have been pissed at the GOP for doing. He is not going to do anything different. He is as establishment as any one else eventhough he has not served in politics prior.
But I'm with the others. He is more of the same, but I believe he is not as left as Clinton and for that reason I will vote for him if/when he wins the primary.
He has been shunned by the GOP the whole time, yet is likely to get the nomination. If the GOP doesn't take that as a sign that something is wrong with what they've been doing, then I don't think anything will get through to them.
I can vote for Trump, I won't like it but I can do it.
Almost anything to poke a stick in the eye of the GOPe.
hurley842002
02-28-2016, 13:30
I can vote for Trump, I won't like it but I can do it.
Almost anything to poke a stick in the eye of the GOPe.
Which is the sensible thing to do, yet just about every Trump supporter I've spoken to, says they'll stay home if Trump isn't nominated.
The only thing this election season is missing is Yakety Sax as background music...
The only thing this election season is missing is Yakety Sax as background music...
Ask, and ye shall receive:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZ3Urb-YHUg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUH3_2QGLgM
hollohas
02-29-2016, 10:14
He has been shunned by the GOP the whole time, yet is likely to get the nomination. If the GOP doesn't take that as a sign that something is wrong with what they've been doing, then I don't think anything will get through to them.
I disagree completely. As soon as the primaries started and Ted showed he could win, establishment GOP congressmen came out in numbers SUPPORTING Trump over Cruz saying Trump would work with them. They claimed nobody in DC liked Cruz because he wouldn’t’ bend. At the very same time, as if coordinated, Trump began his attack of Cruz calling him a “mean guy, who nobody likes.” Many GOP Congressmen flooded national media on every station claiming Cruz has shown his unwillingness to work with them so they are supporting Trump instead. I don’t exactly call that being “shunned”.
Because I’m not particularly articulate, here is an opinion piece that sums up my observations pretty spot on. Although this piece is written directly, I’m not quoting it here directly to any particular person.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/three_simple_questions_for_trump_supporters.html
Don't you find it odd that Trump, who habitually says the harshest, crudest, vilest things he can think of about anyone he perceives as an opponent or threat, never substantively criticizes the key players in the establishment at all?
On the contrary, he boasts about his willingness to work with them, trumpets their willingness to work with him, and promises he'll make deals with them. Even a diehard Trump supporter, if he has retained any glimmer of objectivity, can see that the candidate most hated and feared by the entire Washington establishment, both Republican and Democrat, is Cruz. In fact, Trump himself has highlighted this fact as an argument against Cruz. Remember that Trump's original branding of Cruz as a "mean" and "nasty" guy whom "nobody likes" was explicitly focused on Cruz's criticism of Mitch McConnell on the Senate floor and his alleged inability to get along in Washington. (By the way, that's the same McConnell Trump funded heavily against a Tea Party challenger, and about whom he tweeted this in 2014: "Someone unknown tweeted incorrectly that I'm for Sen. Mitch @McConnellPress for speaker. I'm supporting him for Senate Majority Leader.")
So everyone, from mainstream "liberals" Robert Reich and Bill Maher to mainstream Republicans Orrin Hatch, Bob Dole, and Trump himself, acknowledges that Cruz is the only candidate so anti-establishment as to cause real hatred and fear among the bipartisan progressive zeitgeist.
And yet you've chosen to vent your anti-establishment anger against Cruz? And you're channeling that anger into supporting the only candidate in the race who actually boasts of having been a member of the establishment? (If Trump doesn't fit the definition of a crony capitalist, then how do you define what you have been railing against all these years?) You are proudly supporting the only candidate who touts his "great relationships" with the establishment's front men (including their socialist fronts, e.g., Pelosi, Schumer)? The only one who, over the past five years, has heavily bankrolled the operations of Karl Rove, John Boehner, and Mitch McConnell?
The only one about whom leftist entertainer/culture critic Bill Maher recently said this:
Ted Cruz is scarier than Donald Trump…. Because I think Donald Trump, despite some of the crazy things he says, he also says some things that a liberal can love.
An earlier point in the article also questions why the attacks on Trump from the Liberal Mainstream media have been virtually zero. Remember when they took the stupid dog strapped to the car roof story about Romney and ran it for weeks turning it into a big deal? The liberal media consistently tries to dig up decades old dirt on any Republican turning meaningless old stories into controversy yet they have nothing for Trump. Nothing. And can anyone really tell me there isn't a ton of old dirt on the guy? Yeah right.
So the so-called "anti-establishment" guy we decided to pick is preferred by DC insiders both left and right, is basically left alone by the liberal media who gives him as much air time as he could ever want, gets a pass on saying the most absurd things that would immediately titanic anyone else's election bid, has a history of funding establishment candidates more than anyone else in the race, has the most flip-floppy history of any candidate we've ever seen and has consistently given indications that he'll pursue anti-conservative ideals?
He is anything but anti-establishment and his supporters are being played. It's unbelievable.
Which is the sensible thing to do, yet just about every Trump supporter I've spoken to, says they'll stay home if Trump isn't nominated.
That is bullshit and chickenshit.
milwaukeeshaker
02-29-2016, 13:46
Tell us how you really feel LOL[Beer]
That is bullshit and chickenshit.
Great-Kazoo
02-29-2016, 15:57
I disagree completely. As soon as the primaries started and Ted showed he could win, establishment GOP congressmen came out in numbers SUPPORTING Trump over Cruz saying Trump would work with them. They claimed nobody in DC liked Cruz because he wouldn’t’ bend. At the very same time, as if coordinated, Trump began his attack of Cruz calling him a “mean guy, who nobody likes.” Many GOP Congressmen flooded national media on every station claiming Cruz has shown his unwillingness to work with them so they are supporting Trump instead. I don’t exactly call that being “shunned”.
Because I’m not particularly articulate, here is an opinion piece that sums up my observations pretty spot on. Although this piece is written directly, I’m not quoting it here directly to any particular person.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/three_simple_questions_for_trump_supporters.html
An earlier point in the article also questions why the attacks on Trump from the Liberal Mainstream media have been virtually zero. Remember when they took the stupid dog strapped to the car roof story about Romney and ran it for weeks turning it into a big deal? The liberal media consistently tries to dig up decades old dirt on any Republican turning meaningless old stories into controversy yet they have nothing for Trump. Nothing. And can anyone really tell me there isn't a ton of old dirt on the guy? Yeah right.
So the so-called "anti-establishment" guy we decided to pick is preferred by DC insiders both left and right, is basically left alone by the liberal media who gives him as much air time as he could ever want, gets a pass on saying the most absurd things that would immediately titanic anyone else's election bid, has a history of funding establishment candidates more than anyone else in the race, has the most flip-floppy history of any candidate we've ever seen and has consistently given indications that he'll pursue anti-conservative ideals?
He is anything but anti-establishment and his supporters are being played. It's unbelievable.
Yet the same "establishment" R's are hoping Cruz or Rubio can get some more delegates to have a so called revolt within the party forcing Trump out of contention.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/mcconnell-on-trump-well-drop-him-like-a-hot-rock/article/2584417
even though Ryan and others feel differently
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/265911-mcconnell-not-interested-in-voting-on-trump-proposals
Ryan told reporters that he and other leaders would back the eventual Republican nominee, even if Trump wins.
“We’re going to support whoever our nominee is. You know why? Because it’s the Republican primary voter who makes that decision and that’s who we respect,” he said.
McConnell should have been forced out of his senate positions years ago. He and others are, THE PROBLEM within the R party
hollohas
02-29-2016, 16:10
I was hoping the right could get thier shit together this time around. Looks like that's never going to happen. We're going to be stuck with different levels of statist candidates from here on out I guess.
I was hoping the right could get thier shit together this time around. Looks like that's never going to happen. We're going to be stuck with different levels of statist candidates from here on out I guess.
The time to kill off the communist movement was in the late 40s, 50s, and 60s. Americans were tired of fighting, the communists knew this and took advantage of the situation.
The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, the Americans in the late 40s, 50s, and 60s dropped the ball.
Been too late for a looooong time.
Will any of you be at Cook Park Rec tomorrow to caucus?
Good article explaining how the primaries will not matter. In the end, the GOPe will nominate whomever they wish.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/03/01/how-the-gop-insiders-plan-to-steal-the-nod-from-trump/
Then there is rule 40-B.Please note that Rule 40 as it is currently written expires on the day before the convention when the Rules Committee meets to make up the new Rules of the Convention and for the Republican Party for the next 4 years. Rule 40-B currently requires a nominee to have “the “majority of the permanently seated delegates from at least 8 states.” Romney lawyer Ben Ginsberg was able to change Rule 40 from “plurality of the delegates from at least 5 states” to the current rule. The potential for skullduggery is clear. Even if Trump runs the tables in the primaries winning a plurality in virtually every state the rule can be tailored by a controlled Rules Committee to prevent a Trump nomination.
Rule 40-B used to require a majority in six states but when Congressman Ron Paul met that goal it was quickly changed to eight states. Under control of the insiders the number of states required can be amended to any number to block Trump.
Also, the goal of the extended nomination process will be to make it so either no one gets to eight states (or what ever number the establishment changes it to) Then, under the guise of letting “the voters be heard”, the Rules committee will make a more lax Rule 40. After all, Cruz and Rubio and Romney “deserve to be nominated,” they will argue. Romney will enter the late primaries because he is concerned that Rule 40 B will be changed to allow only those who won some delegates from voters in the states to be considered and because he might stand a better chance of chiseling delegates from Trump in late “’winner take all” primaries than the hapless Rubio.
Surely the party pros know that a nomination wrenched from the hands of Donald Trump would be worthless but they don’t care. The ruling elite that has dominated the party would rather have globalist Hillary Clinton than the uncontrollable nationalist Donald Trump. The idea of a president not beholden to the ruling elite is more than they can stand.
Which leads us back to - Given the choice to vote for the GOP nominee or the DNC nominee, who will you vote for?
In the general election, the DNC nominee can usually count on about 40% of the votes cast. The fairness or correctness of this can be argued for decades, but statistically it has been a pretty stable assumption. The GOP nominee can normally count on about 30 to 35% of the votes cast. If a third party candidate runs, the DNC candidate wins. If GOP voters do not turn out and vote, the DNC candidate wins. If the GOP candidate does not convince more than 10% of the undecided voters to vote GOP, the DNC candidate wins.
I believe Bush the Younger won in 2000 because of Clinton scandal fatigue, and he barely won at that against Al Gore and his electric personality. [Sarcasm2]
The DNC strategists know the numbers and they know what they can count upon in November. If the GOP puts up a weak candidate or a candidate that is not able to draw votes from the undecided or the DNC, then the default choice in November will be the DNC candidate.
While a great deal of money is being spent and much time is being devoted to the current political campaign, the numbers underlying the process do not change very much. Regardless of how the GOP chooses or who the GOP chooses to nominate, the GOP has a pretty steep haul to overcome the built in advantage that the DNC has going into this election.
So I ask again, Who will you vote for come November? The GOP or the DNC? Any other choice is a vote for the DNC, and the DNC nomination process has essentially been concluded through their super-delegate process.
Just my opinion, and worth exactly what you paid for it. [Flower]
God Bless the Republic.
Be safe.
The real problem with trump is that he is an unpredictable blowhard douche bag. Most of us will vote for him if he is the R candidate. That is my uninformed opinion and does not reflect the opinions of other rednecks.
Great-Kazoo
03-01-2016, 17:43
There will be as many voting for T from the D party as voting for HRC from the R party.
I'll vote for a fucking toilet seat over ANY D, ANYTIME.
This will be the demise of the RNC as most know it. Possibly the D's, depending how butt hurt the sillyennials are, over HRC's nomination fix.
My assessment after little to no meaningful research of any kind:
If the RNC nominates Trump, he will win in a landslide against any D based simply on the massive turnout he has proven to attract.
If the RNC nominate anyone else, the Ds will win simply based on a pissed off mass of Rs who either vote third party or don't vote at all.
This Presidential election is entirely up to the RNC to either surely win, or surely lose.
Unfortunately, either way, the RNC loses the power they have either way. And that is their dilemma.
The only way the RNC keeps hold of their power is to nominate someone other than Trump, lose the election, and start fund-raising and continue schmoozing for the next one. I'm afraid this will be the inevitable outcome - greedy power-hungry pricks that they are.
hollohas
03-01-2016, 19:53
SNIP
- greedy power-hungry pricks that they are.
That discribes not only the RNC, but also defines the entire character of the supposed anti-establishment guy the so-called angry R's have picked to stick it to the man.
This is what is so troubling. These huge crowds of anrgy R's and independents that Trump has generated are supporting a man who is 100%, no question about it, EXACTLY like the people they are angry at. TO A T.
They say they are angry and are voting with pure emotion and zero sense. They are angry so they support a man who says he's angry too, no matter what his history, character or true intentions may be. That's the very same kind of behavior that got us Obama.
All the while, they are ignoring Cruz who is just as angry and regularly says as much but who can also back the retoric up with his anti big government and pro constitution history, fighting against the DC bullshit.
I have a different prediction that mirrors an earlier link I posted but goes a bit further. The RNC is going to support Trump. And if/when he wins and sucks just as bad as Obama, they will say "we told you so" and ask the R's to come back to the party. But at that point, the left will be so enraged that the DNC screwed them by going with Hillary, they will revolt against the DNC and band together behind someone as bad or worse than Bern. The angry R's will again stay home at the next election, because they got dupped by Trump (and that's what they do normally anyway) and this country will take a harder swing left than we've ever seen.
And the real, important questions for the average American: Who will the Bachelor give his roses to, and what do the Kardashians think about his choices?
We're SOOOOOOOO screwed...
The reason Trump's Secret Service detail is so aggressive is because he only carries a .380.
The reason Trump's Secret Service detail is so aggressive is because he only carries a .380.
Was it worth it? [LOL]
The reason Trump's Secret Service detail is so aggressive is because he only carries a .380.
Thread winner!
Uberjager
03-02-2016, 14:52
And the real, important questions for the average American: Who will the Bachelor give his roses to, and what do the Kardashians think about his choices?
We're SOOOOOOOO screwed...
I wonder who Trump will pick as VP.
I wonder who Trump will pick as VP.
I'm betting on Krispy...
hurley842002
03-02-2016, 15:16
I'm betting on Krispy...
Yup...
Nah, Krispy is in it for AG
Expect more squealing for Rubio and boos for Trump at tonight's debate:
Jonathan Oosting, Detroit News Lansing Bureau 12:06 p.m. EST March 3, 2016
Lansing — The Michigan Republican Party received more than 21,000 ticket requests for Thursday’s presidential debate in Detroit but will only be giving out about 50 tickets to the public.
The Republican National Committee allocated 400 tickets to the state party, which is expected to give roughly 350 to elected officials, state committee members and grassroots activists, said Michigan GOP spokeswoman Sarah Anderson.
This leaves 50 tickets for the public. The tickets will be randomly awarded to some of the 21,000 people who filled out an online form on the state party website.
Let's get Dave's title switched to Trumpublican.
Let's get Dave's title switched to Trumpublican.
I just now (last post) became a Grand Master Know It All - Same thing really.
And all accomplished without a single PWT or WA post I may add.
Congratulations sir. You have Obama to thank for helping to build your post empire.
Congratulations sir. You have Obama to thank for helping to build your post empire.
Don't sell yourself short. I've spent plenty of time arguing with you here. [Beer]
Well what else are we going to do, work, go shooting? Puhlease.
hollohas
03-03-2016, 16:45
Trump may have a permit but that doesn't give him pro-gun credentials. Here is an article written by someone much more articulate than me, Bob Owens from Bearing Arms, that mirrors my opinion.
http://bearingarms.com/view-cruz-second-amendment-toast-part-2/
Donald Trump has successfully captured the hearts of many Americans who are sick to death of “politics as usual.” Mr. Trump’s bombastic style has earned him a dedicated fan base, and his current rhetoric on the Second Amendment is second to none. He brags of being a concealed carry permit holder and a Life Member of the NRA.
It is true that Mr. Trump has a concealed carry permit issued in New York City. Unfortunately, concealed carry permits in NYC are a badge of the worst sort of political cronyism, awarded exclusively to the powerful and connected. Nothing in Mr. Trump’s record shows that he has expressed even a moderate interest in combating the corrupt “may issue” permitting system of NYC. He’s clearly interested in protecting himself, but not so much the self-defense rights of his fellow New Yorkers. In this regard, he’s only mildly less repellent that fellow wealthy New Yorker Michael Bloomberg, who has a phalanx of armed guards carrying guns for him.
When it comes to Mr. Trump’s NRA Life Membership, his supporters routinely miscast it as if it is a lifetime membership, one that he has hand for many, many years. In fact a “Life Membership” is the simple one-time act of purchasing $1,000 membership. While I thank Mr. Trump for his support of the National Rifle Association, I find myself wondering when he decided to support the organization, and why (Mr. Trump is unrated by the NRA, because he has no voting record to rank).
Mr. Trump does not like hunting, but he has defended his two sons that are hunters. It’s not the full-throated defense you would hope for in a Second Amendment candidate, but it is better than nothing.
Where Trump falters, and falters badly, is in his weathervane views on not just the Second Amendment, but on seemingly every issue, and even in his party affiliation, which he’s changed five times since the mid 1980s.
Mr. Trump has adopted the stance of a Second Amendment absolutist since he dedicated himself to running for office, but he has supported bans on AR-15s and other common firearms in the past with his self-professed support of so-called “assault weapon” bans. Mr. Trump has likewise favored waiting periods.
He is not a “gun guy.” While he has mentioned his concealed carry permit, no one seems to have ever seen Mr. Trump fire the guns he claims to own, and an image search of “Donald Trump shooting” isn’t going to return images of the on-again-off-again candidate actually shooting a gun.
CONTINUED>>>>> (http://bearingarms.com/view-cruz-second-amendment-toast-part-2/)
And excerpts from another from the same author making the case that Cruz is unarguably the most pro-gun candidate.
http://bearingarms.com/view-cruz-second-amendment-toast-part-3/
Earlier in the primary season, we had a wealth of strong Second Amendment supporters running for the Presidency. One by one they dropped out, but of the three remaining, only Senator Ted Cruz comes close to having the Second Amendment credentials of a true “gun nut” like Rick Perry or Rand Paul.
It’s frankly odd to see so many people rallying around a big government-supporting crony capitalist like Donald Trump in the mistaken belief that he is the “anti-establishment candidate.” Nothing could be further from the truth. Trump is the face of everything people claim that they hate about politics in America, even bragging in debates about how he paid off candidates in both parties to get what he wanted in a naked proclamation of his belief in the corruption of “business as usual.”
Ted Cruz, on the other hand, is hated by his peers in the establishment Senate GOP for refusing to be a “go along to get along” supporter of big government GOP policies....
....Cruz is hands down the most qualified candidate to ever consider nominating a justice for the Supreme Court, having served a law clerk for Mike Luttig (a very influential textualist judge often compared to Justice Scalia) and Chief Justice William Rehnquist. He also authored 73 briefs and argued nine cases before the Supreme Court, all of those cases pushing for the textualist/constructionist views. He is also the author of the amicus brief 31 states signed on to in the landmark Heller case protecting our Second Amendment rights.
If Cruz is elected President, he would have the opportunity to appoint the strict constructionist judges we need to not just maintain our Second Amendment rights, but to roll back punitive gun laws that have gutted the right to bear arms in California, Connecticut, Maryland, New York, and elsewhere.
If you have other interests driving your voting, then I’m not qualified to tell you how to vote.
It is crystal clear, however, that Senator Ted Cruz is our best bet for both defeating Hillary Clinton and rebuilding a Supreme Court that will help repeal many of this nation’s blatantly unconstitutional gun laws, and who most clearly has his heart and soul and record on the right to bear arms we can trust.
As a supporter of the right to bear arms, Ted Cruz is clearly our best option.
Great-Kazoo
03-03-2016, 17:02
Trump may have a permit but that doesn't give him pro-gun credentials. Here is an article written by someone much more articulate than me, Bob Owens from Bearing Arms, that mirrors my opinion.
http://bearingarms.com/view-cruz-second-amendment-toast-part-2/
And excerpts from another from the same author making the case that Cruz is unarguably the most pro-gun candidate.
http://bearingarms.com/view-cruz-second-amendment-toast-part-3/
Again the RNC has not liked Cruz for some time. To the point of dismissing him , re mitch mcconnell .
The whole party system has been fucked for some time. Either the revolution starts within the party itself or the street.
I think EVERYONE should stay home this election cycle.
Bailey Guns
03-07-2016, 18:06
http://assets.patriotpost.us/images/2016-03-04-da7c71f3_large.jpg
Great-Kazoo
03-07-2016, 19:50
Ballot and soap box have been ignored.
hollohas
03-16-2016, 15:57
Well, The Donald decided there has been enough debates and the debate in SLC scheduled for next week has been canceled.
The strange thing is Kasich said he wasn't going if Trump wasn't going. You would think the guy who has been complaining about not getting a fair amount of time to speak in the debates would jump at the opportunity for a 50% time split. But nope. That proves Kasich never had any intention of being elected and makes one question what his motivation is for staying in. My guess is you'll see him standing behind Trump right next to Christy and his shocked face before long. Trump has to have promised Christy something too...I can't think of any other reason Christy would willingly stand behind Trump while he directly insults him.
I lost all respect for Carson too who, by his own admission, sold his endorsement for a spot in a Trump admin.
Trump or Hillary folks. God help us.
Zundfolge
03-16-2016, 16:25
The strange thing is Kasich said he wasn't going if Trump wasn't going. You would think the guy who has been complaining about not getting a fair amount of time to speak in the debates would jump at the opportunity for a 50% time split.
At this point my theory about Kasich is that either he expects to be Trumps VP or he expects to use the smoke filled backrooms of a brokered convention to steal the nomination from Trump.
They've all made illegal deals with Trump, only problem is that Carson has exposed his illegal deal and that puts all the rest in jeopardy. :)
Trump is confirming that he is as ignorant of the law as I thought. He isn't "the bitch" so he can't get away with overseeing the murder of Americans in Libya, much less selling cabinet slots for endorsements.
Great-Kazoo
03-16-2016, 18:31
They've all made illegal deals with Trump, only problem is that Carson has exposed his illegal deal and that puts all the rest in jeopardy. :)
Trump is confirming that he is as ignorant of the law as I thought. He isn't "the bitch" so he can't get away with overseeing the murder of Americans in Libya, much less selling cabinet slots for endorsements.
AMERICA, asked for someone not from the beltway career politician cloth. WE GOT EM.
Unless the R's backstab Trump (SURPRISE) It's going to worth the price of admission to hear trump tell HRC.
Not only are you a liar, you're a fukin liar. You have a sexual predator for a husband, yet tell America The republicans have a war on women
You condemn the 1%, yet demand $200K + speaking fees from Goldman Sachs
You say America is the strongest nation in the world YET accept money through the Clinton Foundation from Any Government and bank. Hoping those payments give them anything, once elected.
YOU, YOU, YOU
YOU LIE.
AMERICA, asked for someone not from the beltway career politician cloth. WE GOT EM.
Unless the R's backstab Trump (SURPRISE) It's going to worth the price of admission to hear trump tell HRC.
Not only are you a liar, you're a fukin liar. You have a sexual predator for a husband, yet tell America The republicans have a war on women
You condemn the 1%, yet demand $200K + speaking fees from Goldman Sachs
You say America is the strongest nation in the world YET accept money through the Clinton Foundation from Any Government and bank. Hoping those payments give them anything, once elected.
YOU, YOU, YOU
YOU LIE.
Entertaining to say the least, Trump is just barely better than HRC. Trump and Bernie have the same economics "knowledge". :)
I think Trump is in for a SURPRISE but we'll see.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=15&v=17EOM3RTD1Y
HoneyBadger
03-16-2016, 20:18
AMERICA, asked for someone not from the beltway career politician cloth. WE GOT EM.
Unless the R's backstab Trump (SURPRISE) It's going to worth the price of admission to hear trump tell HRC.
Not only are you a liar, you're a fukin liar. You have a sexual predator for a husband, yet tell America The republicans have a war on women
You condemn the 1%, yet demand $200K + speaking fees from Goldman Sachs
You say America is the strongest nation in the world YET accept money through the Clinton Foundation from Any Government and bank. Hoping those payments give them anything, once elected.
YOU, YOU, YOU
YOU LIE.
Kazoo for president 2016!
What happens when a white liberal decides to protest at a Trump rally while wearing a KKK hood?
He unfortunately runs into a black republican who is not amused and gets the crap kicked out of himself, that's what.
Second white hooded liberal is smart enough to quickly remove her hood.
[ROFL2]
Can't figure out how to imbed the Twitter video.
http://www.weaselzippers.us/262500-video-man-hit-and-stomps-leftist-agitator-at-trump-rally-in-arizona/
ETA:
Here's the Bernie supporting liberal who got thumped.
Notice he did not mention the KKK hoods.
Liberal logic on display:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBHoyzysWIk
http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3388/2649/original.jpg?w=600&h
milwaukeeshaker
03-22-2016, 10:23
Yessir!!
UOTE=davsel;1970438]http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3388/2649/original.jpg?w=600&h[/QUOTE]
RblDiver
03-22-2016, 12:46
http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3388/2649/original.jpg?w=600&h
Osama Bin Laden it is then?
HoneyBadger
03-22-2016, 13:40
http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3388/2649/original.jpg?w=600&h
Are we talking about Rand Paul again? [LOL]
Are we talking about Rand Paul again? [LOL]
No, Ted Cruz! :)
or was that Carly Fiorina?
Uberjager
03-23-2016, 14:09
It's good to see that he is consistently pro-gun:
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/280754630047199232
Taking a look back to see what Cruz and Trump were up to in 1988:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Usb0iE5WiZI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt-vG_TdOT4
HoneyBadger
03-23-2016, 15:32
It's good to see that he is consistently pro-gun:
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/280754630047199232
That's no surprise. He supported the AWB too.
The thread title should be changed to "Trump is a whining cry-baby".
It’s very unfair, the 1,237. The reason it’s very unfair — and I think I’ll get there, I think I’ll get there! — but the reason it’s very unfair is the following:
When I started there were 17 candidates and people never says this — I’ve never even heard it said — those early states — nobody says it and it’s very unfair — but on a lot of those early… there were so many candidates that if you got 30% or 25%, you’d win and it would be an unbelievable victory. Honestly, Kasich should not be allowed to run and I’ll go opposite on you: he hurts Trump much more than he hurts Cruz.
Waaaaaaaaaahhh.....poor baby, what will Trump do, sue them? LOL what a jackass, told ya Trump was a bed-wetting (D) in (R) clothing.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/trump-having-to-get-1237-delegates-for-the-nomination-is-very-unfair/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/04/03/trump-calls-on-kasich-to-drop-out-of-gop-primary-says-he-voiced-displeasure-to-rnc-chair/
hollohas
04-06-2016, 18:18
He's such a tool. Literally, everything that doesn't go his way, he says is unfair. He's exactly what we've all been saying is wrong with with the country...he's an entitled, whinny asshole.
And furthermore, he knows nothing about this process. If he doesn't get the magic number, he will lose, and not because the establishment "stole" it from him. He will lose on a 2nd vote because he's done exactly NOTHING to secure delegates. Like it or not, we live in a representative form of government, and that includes the election process and always has.
If he doesn't get the required delegates, the only way to get more is to have a 2nd vote and the only way for a 2nd vote to work is to let delegates change their vote. That's the rules and that's how it works. He's doing zero to secure them, so some will switch. That's not a stolen election...that's simply the way the process works.
I'm so sick of this guy.
Now, if the GOP changes the rules to allow Kasich or someone else to be included in the 2nd vote even though they don't have the required minimum delegates, THAT would be a stolen election.
But if the 2nd vote only includes Trump and Cruz because they are the only candidates with the required delegates and Cruz wins, that's simply due process and nothing more.
And you see no problem with the candidate who has by far the most popular votes not getting the nomination?
Just because you don't like the guy doesn't mean he isn't getting screwed by the system (RNC/GOPe)
hollohas
04-06-2016, 19:55
And you see no problem with the candidate who has by far the most popular votes not getting the nomination?
Just because you don't like the guy doesn't mean he isn't getting screwed by the system (RNC/GOPe)
It may not be right, but that's how the electoral college works. It has changed a bit since it was devised in 1787, but the fundamentals are the same...the presidential election is not a popular vote and never has been. The way each state selects them has changed over the years, but our President has always been selected by "representatives".
It's what we do with the general election and it's what we do with the primary. Perhaps that may change one day, perhaps this election will be the catalyst, but as of right now, that's how it works.
Yes, that is the way it works, but has nothing to do with the electoral college when it comes to selecting nominees. The RNC and DNC make, change, and ignore their own rules.
Bernie is in the same boat.
Hopefully people will wake up and see how rigged the system has become - bought and payed for.
But I doubt it.
hollohas
04-06-2016, 20:42
...but has nothing to do with the electoral college when it comes to selecting nominees.
You're right and I wasn't very clear. I was using the electoral college as an example of how the nomination system is setup. If functions much the same way, "representatives" do the selecting.
If a remeber correctly, more than a couple folks at the constitutional convention expressed their worry about the potential for corruption when using an electoral college/representative election process.
Hell, up until 1913, we didn't even elect United States Senators by popular vote. Prior to that even they were elected by representatives (which at that point were actual elected representatives in the form of the state legislatures).
Yep - the 17th Amendment corrupted our Senate and should be repealed.
Professional politicians always find a way to stay in power.
hollohas
04-06-2016, 21:23
PIERS MORGAN prefers Trump over Cruz...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3527242/PIERS-MORGAN-Trump-Cruz-sound-equally-crazy-scary-thing-Ted-actually-means-it.html
Some highlights.
Cruz
... Cruz who is equally loathed by colleagues on both sides of the Senate for his abrasive ‘outsider’ onslaughts against pretty much everything federal government stands for...
His astonishing, and scary, ambition manifested itself publicly in 2013 when he threw one of the great tantrums in U.S. political history over Obamacare and successfully managed to shut down the government for 16 days. A self-aggrandising stunt which temporarily put 800,000 Americans out of work and cost the U.S. economy $22 billion...
...Cruz is not, as many believe Trump to be, just pandering to the hard-line Conservative right in America, he IS the hard-line Conservative right in America; a brutally ideological zealot who wants to drag his country kicking and screaming back to the very dark days of bigoted fear and hatred of government....
Hated by both sides of the Senate? Check.
Hatred of federal goverment? Check.
Actually tried to stop Obamacare? Check.
Wants to return us to a Constitutional government? Check.
He repeatedly claims that more guns mean less crime, despite all statistical evidence to the contrary. In fact, he's so gun-mad, even by Republican standards, that he makes breakfast for his family by wrapping pieces of bacon around a machine gun.
He denies the very existence of man-made climate change.
Supports guns? Check.
Not a tree hugger? Check.
But Trump, at his heart, is a businessman.
He’s spent his life doing deals, often taking extreme starting positions – whether he’s buying buildings or golf courses, or haggling over a TV show salary - to secure leverage and then negotiating back to a more reasonable place.
He’s been adopting the exact same strategy in this presidential race – to great effect.
The presidency is just another deal to Trump, albeit the biggest of his life.
To win the White House, he has to first win the Republican nomination, and he’s calculated that the best way to do that is to hammer away with tough-sounding messages on hot button Conservative issues like Islamic terrorism, immigration and abortion.
It’s undeniably made him sound at times both racist and sexist, neither of which I have ever heard him be in the ten years we’ve been friends.
But I suspect everything he’s been saying is negotiable, from his Mexican wall to short term Muslim ban.
And Trump? EVERYTHING is negotiable.
Whether you love or loathe Trump, ask yourself which is the more dangerous potential leader for America right now: a ‘deeply principled’ right wing evangelist lunatic who means exactly what he says, or a pragmatic extrovert businessman with a big mouth whose whole career has been built on compromise?
It physically pains me to say this, but Peirs is right. Cruz is a deeply principled conservative who means what he says and Trump has no principles and will compromise anything.
Liberals hate Cruz more than they hate Trump. I have had many personally tell me as much. If there were no other reasons, this one alone would be enough for me to support Cruz. But there are other reasons, the most important of which are the guy is a principled conservative that believes in small government and is extremely pro gun. That, to me is far more important than supporting an unpredictable yet entertaining blow hard for no other reason than the guy is making a mockery of the screwed up election process.
Trump: Natural born citizen? Check
He is more principled than he is made out to be.
Cruz is not the conservative he is made out to be - dig deeper.
More liberals hating Cruz means Trump has a better chance of winning in the General Election.
Either one will be better than any Democrat.
Depressing article concerning Obama's DOJ lawyers in charge of voter laws and enforcement
https://pjmedia.com/blog/exclusive-meet-the-radical-lawyers-the-doj-hired-to-oversee-elections/
No borders - No rule of law - No defense - No country
RblDiver
04-07-2016, 10:38
And you see no problem with the candidate who has by far the most popular votes not getting the nomination?
Just because you don't like the guy doesn't mean he isn't getting screwed by the system (RNC/GOPe)
Question: Imagine we're going into the convention with 10 candidates. Eight of them have 10% of the vote, one has 9%, and the last has 11%. Should the last guy get the nod because he has the most votes?
Question: Imagine we're going into the convention with 10 candidates. Eight of them have 10% of the vote, one has 9%, and the last has 11%. Should the last guy get the nod because he has the most votes?
I'm not going to speculate on the results of a hypothetical involving unrealistic factors.
Imagine we're going into the convention with 3 candidates. one has 60% of the vote, one has 30%, and the last has 10%. Yes, the first guy should get the nomination.
RblDiver
04-07-2016, 11:27
I'm not going to speculate on the results of a hypothetical involving unrealistic factors.
Imagine we're going into the convention with 3 candidates. one has 60% of the vote, one has 30%, and the last has 10%. Yes, the first guy should get the nomination.
New York City has 8.55 million people. Colorado has 5.5 million. Do you want one single city to have more weight than an entire state?
Also, that "I'm not going to speculate on the results of a hypothetical involving unrealistic factors" shows how weak your argument is. The rules are there for a reason. You have to set a cutoff. In this case, the cutoff is 50% of the delegates, period, full stop. You don't have 50? You don't win. Period, full stop.
Whatever
I am not disputing what the rules currently are.
The fact is, the rules are different in every single state when it comes to primary elections. That is a problem.
The people holding power in the RNC/DNC are free to make/change the rules to suit their personally chosen candidate. That is a problem.
Our current two party system is manipulated by the people in power in DC. That is a problem.
Which psycho gets nominated or elected is something I only have a passing interest in due to the system being so broken and corrupt - it amuses me when I'm bored.
GilpinGuy
04-11-2016, 19:21
Which psycho gets nominated or elected is something I only have a passing interest in due to the system being so broken and corrupt - it amuses me when I'm bored.
This is where I'm at, but I hate it. It's an assclown circus.
Officially changed my registration from Republican to Unaffiliated today.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.