It does not bother me in the slightest that some powerful and rich politicians on the Left--in Germany--will now be inconvenienced by those with a different perspective. And I, for one, am glad that they finally found a way out of the shadowy corner that they were pushed into. One side wants to open all the doors and windows, while the other side believes that MUCH more caution is best. Too much of either direction can be very, very bad. But trying to find the exact middle ground is not always the best option either. When one side--whichever one it is--achieves near total domination, that is a political bomb waiting to explode. The citizens of Germany are speaking loud and clear. The citizens of America are doing the same. In each nation, leaders are rising up to represent the will of many millions of human beings. It is great to see peeps take a stand against the totalitarian mindset. There is no perfection on either side, so this move back towards balance is groovy beans.
Do you notice how you're writing in broad, sweeping platitudes full of (mixed) metaphorical cliches? You're telling a story, a pleasingly simple story, with good guys and bad guys and an easy-to-understand plot. Your story makes no noticeable contact with anything like a fact or detail. I don't get any sense from what you say that you grasp Alternative für Deutschland's past or current situation beyond the headlines, and I'm pretty sure that I cite Donald Trump's actual words and actions in this thread more than you do. You are, in short, doing nothing more than describing a vague fantasy in order to get yourself excited. And it's nauseatingly obvious to everyone who hasn't bought into the same fantasy. If you want to play a meaningful part in this conversation, you need to let go of this rhetoric that, like a balloon, soars into the sky but only because it's empty and filled with hot air. You need to look at, and talk about, what real people are doing in the real world.
Now. Totalitarianism. You keep using that word. But the only candidate in the American presidential race who is making totalitarian noises is Donald J. Trump. Bernie Sanders isn't threatening legal action against critics in the media. Hillary Clinton isn't encouraging mob violence against protesters. Marco Rubio isn't leading crowds in weird-ass pledges of allegiance. Ted Cruz isn't bragging that he could commit murder and his cult of personality would still be behind him. So if you're not big on totalitarianism, I recommend you throw your support behind anyone else. (And look, there's me citing Trump's actual words and actions again.)
The status quo is totalitarian in nature. Only Bernie and Trump oppose the corrupt status quo. I cannot force u to see, and would not do so even if I could. All the other candidates are more of the same. No Bush. No Clinton. No status quo politician.
I sense that u mistakenly believe the R and D powers-that-be are trying to improve America.
They have created a permanent dependent class. In other words, slavery. And their wall of choice is millions of pages of laws. The media are busy shaming and bullying, all too often. And their lies are legion. Fines, imprisonment, and authorized violence are a few more of the tools used by the left statists.
The attacks against Trump from so many seemingly different directions is partly the nature of the beast, but a lot of it is also the status quo getting desperate because they are losing power. They having gotten filthy rich to date, and they want the gravy train to keep on rolling.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." Elie Wiesel
2. I'm telling you what I'm seeing on other forums.
And I'm saying that what you're seeing on other forums is irrational decision making. Agree or disagree?
Humans are not always rational or logical. But I can empathize with their decision making process. It's why the boy who cried wolf is such an enduring tale.
The leftists that keep illegally disrupting rallies, and then initiating violence, are personally to blame.
This is A not entirely true (Trumps opposition clearly passes beyond party lines, to say that only leftists protest him is an outright lie) and B a separate issue. Trump's language and rhetoric is easily seen as giving authorization to be violent. This is a serious problem especially for one who claims to want to unite the country.
Do you deny that Trump is advocating violence, at the very least indirectly, through his speeches and tweets?
The status quo is totalitarian in nature. Only Bernie and Trump oppose the corrupt status quo. I cannot force u to see, and would not do so even if I could. All the other candidates are more of the same. No Bush. No Clinton. No status quo politician.
I sense that u mistakenly believe the R and D powers-that-be are trying to improve America.
They have created a permanent dependent class. In other words, slavery. And their wall of choice is millions of pages of laws. The media are busy shaming and bullying, all too often. And their lies are legion. Fines, imprisonment, and authorized violence are a few more of the tools used by the left statists.
The attacks against Trump from so many seemingly different directions is partly the nature of the beast, but a lot of it is also the status quo getting desperate because they are losing power. They having gotten filthy rich to date, and they want the gravy train to keep on rolling.
Again, you're stringing together words, but they don't mean anything. Bold, unsubstantiated statements like "The status quo is totalitarian in nature" may sound impressive in your own head, but all they tell me is that you are not giving this subject the thought it deserves -- you've picked a story you like and now you're just going to repeat it ad nauseam. Like an evangelist preacher spouting stock phrases about the wages of sin and the glory of God. If you keep this up, I'm not going to keep talking to you, because I can't keep talking to you, because you're producing nothing to talk about.
And this is the direction our country's going. A peaceful member of the working press arrested for no reason (well, besides being brown-skinned, probably).
There are a heck of a lot more racists on the Left. They blame darn near everything on whitey, and constantly vote for theft. They are fine with artificially lowering Asian test scores while simultaneously increasing Black test scores, so that college is "fair". That is open racism for all with eyes to see. They justify burning down restaurants and cars because a cop--of any color--dared to defend her/himself from violence. Their rage is stoked daily by their allies in media and gvt and others--like Soros. Regressive to the max.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." Elie Wiesel
Humans are not always rational or logical. But I can empathize with their decision making process. It's why the boy who cried wolf is such an enduring tale.
Does this constitute a retraction of your earlier claim that "sometimes 'if they're against it then I'm for it' is a rational and reasonable response"?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
The attacks against Trump from so many seemingly different directions is partly the nature of the beast, but a lot of it is also the status quo getting desperate because they are losing power. They having gotten filthy rich to date, and they want the gravy train to keep on rolling.
Are you trying to say that it is a conspiracy to defame Trump? That is why he is getting attacked from every direction?
Is it perhaps possible that he is actually just a despicable human being who preys on people with cheap political rhetoric and outright lies to advance his agenda?
There are a heck of a lot more racists on the Left.
Once again, rather than examine to the problem of racists rushing to Trump's dog whistle, you're trying to change the subject. Maybe there are racists on the left, but the racists in your own camp aren't going anywhere just because you're averting your eyes from them.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
The leftists that keep illegally disrupting rallies, and then initiating violence, are personally to blame.
This is A not entirely true (Trumps opposition clearly passes beyond party lines, to say that only leftists protest him is an outright lie) and B a separate issue. Trump's language and rhetoric is easily seen as giving authorization to be violent. This is a serious problem especially for one who claims to want to unite the country.
Do you deny that Trump is advocating violence, at the very least indirectly, through his speeches and tweets?
Obama has killed 1000s of innocent Muslims with his illegal wars. Many Repub politicians are guilty for agreeing, or doing nothing. Where are all the war protesters? Apparently they are more bothered by Trump's tweets, than the death of so many innocent Muslims. Indefensible, IMO.
People should not be so thin skinned. Being upset by a mean tweet is NOT a valid excuse to initiate violence. I am not fooled in the slightest by all the pearl clutching from the vicious bullies and liars known as journalists.
Trump might just be the chemotherapy this country needs, so that we can be great again.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." Elie Wiesel
And this is the direction our country's going. A peaceful member of the working press arrested for no reason (well, besides being brown-skinned, probably).
There are a heck of a lot more racists on the Left. They blame darn near everything on whitey, and constantly vote for theft. They are fine with artificially lowering Asian test scores while simultaneously increasing Black test scores, so that college is "fair". That is open racism for all with eyes to see. They justify burning down restaurants and cars because a cop--of any color--dared to defend her/himself from violence. Their rage is stoked daily by their allies in media and gvt and others--like Soros. Regressive to the max.
I'm a Republican, and even I can tell you have no idea what you are talking about. So much of what you just said absolutely reeks of ignorance. Seriously, stop watching FOX news.
Obama has killed 1000s of innocent Muslims with his illegal wars. Many Repub politicians are guilty for agreeing, or doing nothing. Where are all the war protesters? Apparently they are more bothered by Trump's tweets, than the death of so many innocent Muslims. Indefensible, IMO.
As B_S has repeatedly attempted to point out, it is entirely possible for people to be in the wrong on both sides. As this is the Trump thread, it is more important to focus discussion on Trump, whether that be his merits or his flaws.
These three words describe Donald Trump far, far more accurately than any journalist. And unlike you I will give specific reasons why. "Vicious": Trump praises violence and advocates for crueler treatment of America's enemies, up to and including the war crime of targeting civilians. "Bully": Trump constantly uses juvenile name-calling to demean his opponents when he doesn't have a cogent response to what they're saying. "Liar": Trump still maintains far and away the worst truth record on Politifact of any candidate.
Obama has killed 1000s of innocent Muslims with his illegal wars. Many Repub politicians are guilty for agreeing, or doing nothing. Where are all the war protesters? Apparently they are more bothered by Trump's tweets, than the death of so many innocent Muslims. Indefensible, IMO.
You might need to come up with a citation for that number because I believe you pulled it out of thin air or worse a trump speech. Also Obama hasn't started any illegal wars that was the previous administration, and there were plenty of protesters. Not that I agree with the wars but faulting Obama for them is just hilariously wrong on so many levels.
People should not be so thin skinned. Being upset by a mean tweet is NOT a valid excuse to initiate violence. I am not fooled in the slightest by all the pearl clutching from the vicious bullies and liars known as journalists.
Trump has the thinnest skin of them all. He turns into a child at the slightest provocation. Its a bit sad really. And I must remind you that violence has been initiated many times by Trump supporters as well as protesters, tell the whole truth please.
Let me put my support for Trump in a different way. Several members seem to not realize that there are multiple angles to why Trump may be getting his support.
A quick post from "on the issues", although it's a bit outdated...
Trade deals...
Trump was talking about Bringing jobs back into the econony by renegotiating our Trade deals before anyone except one person...
Ted Cruz didn't talk about it until it became a talking point that Americans actually agreed with.
Hillary Clinton has no credibility on the issue whatsoever.
Bernie Sanders has also emphasized how terrible our trade deals are.
Score points for Trump and Bernie.
Illegal immigration...
Once again, this was an issue that nobody else else was talking about on the campaign trail before Trump brought it up.
Ted Cruz actually has some decent points on this issue, but he was busy talking up tax cuts for the rich while Trump was talking about this issue.
Hillary Clinton Has no credibility on the issue whatsoever
Bernie Sanders has some high and low points. Yes he's mentioned increased enforcement but at the most recent debate he actually talked about not deporting illegal immigrants and he voted yes on continuing to give federal funding to sanctuary cities.
Score one for Trump.
Foreign policies in the middle east...
Trump has often advocated that we work with Putin to defeat ISIS. A bold move considering Putin is not well liked but makes sense. Furthermore he's often railed against the notion of "moderate rebels" and as time has shown again and again, those people are not our friends.
Ted wants to bomb ISIS back into the stone age, which is a talking point that's easy to make. Takes a more tepid stance about "moderate rebels".
Hillary Clinton heavily supported destablizing Libya in favor of "moderate rebels" and wants to establish a no-fly zone in Syria. She is absolutely unfit to be the commander in chief.
Bernie sanders has often emphasized that we need to have middle eastern countries step up and handle their own problems. Once the U.S. takes a back seat the middle east will be forced to confront their own problems instead of relying on the U.S. military.
Score one for Bernie and Trump.
On a couple of other things I would also point out, Ted Cruz says he is a Christian first and an American second. Then Ted Cruz lied about Ben Carson dropping out and falsely claims that Trump would nominate liberals to the Supreme Court. I don't care who gets nominated to the S.C. as long as they're highly qualified. The only person who mentioned possible Supreme Court nominees is Trump and Trump mentioned two far right conservatives, so Cruz is a blatant liar in that regard. I would never vote for Hillary under any circumstances but I could see myself voting for Bernie Sanders.
When it comes to supporting Trump many people don't take into account another part of the equation: who's better than him on the issues that voters CARE ABOUT. Voters dont' care about tax cuts to the 1%. Trump's not talking about tax cuts to the 1%, he's talking about bringing jobs back into this country and that resonates with Americans. Trump talks about tackling sanctuary cities and many Americans, at least in the Republican Party, see those as an affront to the law.
Many individuals are so focused on Trying to tear down Trump or denigrate his supporters that they also don't take into account that Trump is often the only one who brings up certain issues, and on many other issues he forces other candidates to talk up those issues because Americans were paying attention to the points Trump was bringing up. Nobody was talking about trade deals in the Republican party except Trump. Nobody was talking about doing something about illegal immigration except Trump. Nobody in the GOP dare criticize the Iraq War boondoggle except Trump.
Humans are not always rational or logical. But I can empathize with their decision making process. It's why the boy who cried wolf is such an enduring tale.
Does this constitute a retraction of your earlier claim that "sometimes 'if they're against it then I'm for it' is a rational and reasonable response"?
I don't see them as mutually exclusive. I can see why people would support Trump when those in the establishment have proven to deliberately mislead people for their own personal benefit.
The fact that u don't recognize the extremists on the Left is disturbing.
We recognize extremists on the left just fine. We're just not talking about them here because the topic of this thread is Donald Trump, who is an extremist on the right and who attracts other extremists on the right. The existence of bad people on the left does not make the people on the right any better. When you see what Stalin and Mao did, you don't think to yourself, "Wow, Hitler must have been a swell guy!" The Five-Year Plans and the Great Leap Forward do not excuse the Holocaust. Any student of reasoning ought to know that the tu quoque argument is fallacious. And yet you and your buddies here repeatedly keep changing the subject by pointing at these bad leftists. It's like you don't have an actual defense for the horrible things Trump is saying and we're calling him out on, and part of you knows that but you're not willing to admit it, so you're trying to distract our attention instead.
Protesters are breaking the law over and over and over. Trump is not.
I don't find the vast majority of Trump's statements horrible. You need to implement some specificity, otherwise your sweeping condemnation will never sway me.
You folks appear to be more bothered by Trump's brash comments than the plethora of illegal actions by the USA Gvt. Thus, sir, it is impossible for me to take your concerns all that seriously. U don't like Trump's rudeness. Got it. Meanwhile, crony capitalists are bleeding we the people dry.
I took the red pill a few years after 9-11-01, and I ain't fixin on ever being a traitor.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." Elie Wiesel
Let me put my support for Trump in a different way. Several members seem to not realize that there are multiple angles to why Trump may be getting his support.
A quick post from "on the issues", although it's a bit outdated...
Trade deals...
Trump was talking about Bringing jobs back into the econony by renegotiating our Trade deals before anyone except one person...
Ted Cruz didn't talk about it until it became a talking point that Americans actually agreed with.
Hillary Clinton has no credibility on the issue whatsoever.
Bernie Sanders has also emphasized how terrible our trade deals are.
Score points for Trump and Bernie.
Illegal immigration...
Once again, this was an issue that nobody else else was talking about on the campaign trail before Trump brought it up.
Ted Cruz actually has some decent points on this issue, but he was busy talking up tax cuts for the rich while Trump was talking about this issue.
Hillary Clinton Has no credibility on the issue whatsoever
Bernie Sanders has some high and low points. Yes he's mentioned increased enforcement but at the most recent debate he actually talked about not deporting illegal immigrants and he voted yes on continuing to give federal funding to sanctuary cities.
Score one for Trump.
Foreign policies in the middle east...
Trump has often advocated that we work with Putin to defeat ISIS. A bold move considering Putin is not well liked but makes sense. Furthermore he's often railed against the notion of "moderate rebels" and as time has shown again and again, those people are not our friends.
Ted wants to bomb ISIS back into the stone age, which is a talking point that's easy to make. Takes a more tepid stance about "moderate rebels".
Hillary Clinton heavily supported destablizing Libya in favor of "moderate rebels" and wants to establish a no-fly zone in Syria. She is absolutely unfit to be the commander in chief.
Bernie sanders has often emphasized that we need to have middle eastern countries step up and handle their own problems. Once the U.S. takes a back seat the middle east will be forced to confront their own problems instead of relying on the U.S. military.
Score one for Bernie and Trump.
On a couple of other things I would also point out, Ted Cruz says he is a Christian first and an American second. Then Ted Cruz lied about Ben Carson dropping out and falsely claims that Trump would nominate liberals to the Supreme Court. I don't care who gets nominated to the S.C. as long as they're highly qualified. The only person who mentioned possible Supreme Court nominees is Trump and Trump mentioned two far right conservatives, so Cruz is a blatant liar in that regard. I would never vote for Hillary under any circumstances but I could see myself voting for Bernie Sanders.
When it comes to supporting Trump many people don't take into account another part of the equation: who's better than him on the issues that voters CARE ABOUT. Voters dont' care about tax cuts to the 1%. Trump's not talking about tax cuts to the 1%, he's talking about bringing jobs back into this country and that resonates with Americans. Trump talks about tackling sanctuary cities and many Americans, at least in the Republican Party, see those as an affront to the law.
Many individuals are so focused on Trying to tear down Trump or denigrate his supporters that they also don't take into account that Trump is often the only one who brings up certain issues, and on many other issues he forces other candidates to talk up those issues because Americans were paying attention to the points Trump was bringing up. Nobody was talking about trade deals in the Republican party except Trump. Nobody was talking about doing something about illegal immigration except Trump. Nobody in the GOP dare criticize the Iraq War boondoggle except Trump.
It's not always the case that something is better than nothing. I would much rather have someone who wasn't talking about an issue than someone who talks about it and presents a completely unworkable, unintelligent and unconstitutional "solution" that would only make things worse. So, when you tell me that Trump is the only one bringing up illegal immigration, that doesn't really impress me.
I don't find the vast majority of Trump's statements horrible. You need to implement some specificity, otherwise your sweeping condemnation will never sway me.
at you telling me to be specific. Read, like, anyofmyposts. I'm very specific in what I find objectionable about Trump's statements. You just keep choosing to ignore it or change the subject. Why is that?
And you say you don't find the vast majority of Trump's statements horrible. Which of them do you find horrible?
There are a heck of a lot more racists on the Left.
Once again, rather than examine to the problem of racists rushing to Trump's dog whistle, you're trying to change the subject. Maybe there are racists on the left, but the racists in your own camp aren't going anywhere just because you're averting your eyes from them.
"More racists on the Left" infers that I agree there are racists on the Right. Reading comprehension.
I would love for racism to end right now. But it never will with so many people getting filthy rich by racism and/or race baiting. And "racist" is such a frequently used term, that it has come to mean "I disagree with your politics and I want you to buy me stuff until I say to stop."
Trump is not at all responsible for the racist laws passed by D and R politicians. Why would I be mad at him for the actions of others? Please provide proof that more racists support Trump than either of the Dem candidates.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." Elie Wiesel
Please provide proof that more racists support Trump than either of the Dem candidates.
Both Louis Farrakhan and David Duke endorsed him and not either of the Dem candidates. Reporters don't get repeatedly insulted and ultimately arrested on account of their race at rallies for either of the Dem candidates.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
And this is the direction our country's going. A peaceful member of the working press arrested for no reason (well, besides being brown-skinned, probably).
There are a heck of a lot more racists on the Left. They blame darn near everything on whitey, and constantly vote for theft. They are fine with artificially lowering Asian test scores while simultaneously increasing Black test scores, so that college is "fair". That is open racism for all with eyes to see. They justify burning down restaurants and cars because a cop--of any color--dared to defend her/himself from violence. Their rage is stoked daily by their allies in media and gvt and others--like Soros. Regressive to the max.
I'm a Republican, and even I can tell you have no idea what you are talking about. So much of what you just said absolutely reeks of ignorance. Seriously, stop watching FOX news.
What kind of a Republican are you? Enlighten.
I have not watched Fox News in many years, except for a few minutes here and there when I visit my parents.
Even u can tell huh? So I am being dishonest about test scores? Proof please.
BLM and KKK are each full of vile racists. I denounce both with equal vigor. A bunch of racists support Trump. A bunch of other racists support Bernie and/or Hillary. What do u want me to do about it. Trump has disavowed 12+ times. When will either of the Democrat candidates do the same? Byrd was a huge buddy of Hillary, so she must disavow 12+ times right away.
This thread is about Trump, and his opponents, so I will NOT cease and desist from continued comparisons. I know that would be convenient, but criticizing Trump in a vacuum makes no sense. If all are scum, one should vote for the lesser of two evils.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented." Elie Wiesel
I can see why people would support Trump when those in the establishment have proven to deliberately mislead people for their own personal benefit.
Charles Manson is also not a member of the establishment. If he were running for President, would it be reasonable to support him?
It depends. If I like his politics enough to overlook that whole "helter skelter" thing then yeah. And that pill would become significantly easier to swallow if Hillary Clinton were to be the Dem nominee. And I'm not even saying that as a joke.
I sense that u mistakenly believe the R and D powers-that-be are trying to improve America.
They have created a permanent dependent class. In other words, slavery. And their wall of choice is millions of pages of laws. The media are busy shaming and bullying, all too often. And their lies are legion. Fines, imprisonment, and authorized violence are a few more of the tools used by the left statists.
The attacks against Trump from so many seemingly different directions is partly the nature of the beast, but a lot of it is also the status quo getting desperate because they are losing power. They having gotten filthy rich to date, and they want the gravy train to keep on rolling.
Humans are not always rational or logical. But I can empathize with their decision making process. It's why the boy who cried wolf is such an enduring tale.
This is A not entirely true (Trumps opposition clearly passes beyond party lines, to say that only leftists protest him is an outright lie) and B a separate issue. Trump's language and rhetoric is easily seen as giving authorization to be violent. This is a serious problem especially for one who claims to want to unite the country.
Do you deny that Trump is advocating violence, at the very least indirectly, through his speeches and tweets?
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Are you trying to say that it is a conspiracy to defame Trump? That is why he is getting attacked from every direction?
Is it perhaps possible that he is actually just a despicable human being who preys on people with cheap political rhetoric and outright lies to advance his agenda?
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
People should not be so thin skinned. Being upset by a mean tweet is NOT a valid excuse to initiate violence. I am not fooled in the slightest by all the pearl clutching from the vicious bullies and liars known as journalists.
Trump might just be the chemotherapy this country needs, so that we can be great again.
I'm a Republican, and even I can tell you have no idea what you are talking about. So much of what you just said absolutely reeks of ignorance. Seriously, stop watching FOX news.
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
It seems to me that the person with the thinnest skin in this arena is Trump.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Oh God yes. Try saying that John Kasich has small hands and see what happens.
(The answer is nothing. Absolutely nothing will happen. Because John Kasich is an grown-up.)
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
You might need to come up with a citation for that number because I believe you pulled it out of thin air or worse a trump speech. Also Obama hasn't started any illegal wars that was the previous administration, and there were plenty of protesters. Not that I agree with the wars but faulting Obama for them is just hilariously wrong on so many levels.
Trump has the thinnest skin of them all. He turns into a child at the slightest provocation. Its a bit sad really. And I must remind you that violence has been initiated many times by Trump supporters as well as protesters, tell the whole truth please.
You sound just like him. Are you so easily swayed by his lies?
A quick post from "on the issues", although it's a bit outdated...
Trade deals...
Trump was talking about Bringing jobs back into the econony by renegotiating our Trade deals before anyone except one person...
Ted Cruz didn't talk about it until it became a talking point that Americans actually agreed with.
Hillary Clinton has no credibility on the issue whatsoever.
Bernie Sanders has also emphasized how terrible our trade deals are.
Score points for Trump and Bernie.
Illegal immigration...
Once again, this was an issue that nobody else else was talking about on the campaign trail before Trump brought it up.
Ted Cruz actually has some decent points on this issue, but he was busy talking up tax cuts for the rich while Trump was talking about this issue.
Hillary Clinton Has no credibility on the issue whatsoever
Bernie Sanders has some high and low points. Yes he's mentioned increased enforcement but at the most recent debate he actually talked about not deporting illegal immigrants and he voted yes on continuing to give federal funding to sanctuary cities.
Score one for Trump.
Foreign policies in the middle east...
Trump has often advocated that we work with Putin to defeat ISIS. A bold move considering Putin is not well liked but makes sense. Furthermore he's often railed against the notion of "moderate rebels" and as time has shown again and again, those people are not our friends.
Ted wants to bomb ISIS back into the stone age, which is a talking point that's easy to make. Takes a more tepid stance about "moderate rebels".
Hillary Clinton heavily supported destablizing Libya in favor of "moderate rebels" and wants to establish a no-fly zone in Syria. She is absolutely unfit to be the commander in chief.
Bernie sanders has often emphasized that we need to have middle eastern countries step up and handle their own problems. Once the U.S. takes a back seat the middle east will be forced to confront their own problems instead of relying on the U.S. military.
Score one for Bernie and Trump.
On a couple of other things I would also point out, Ted Cruz says he is a Christian first and an American second. Then Ted Cruz lied about Ben Carson dropping out and falsely claims that Trump would nominate liberals to the Supreme Court. I don't care who gets nominated to the S.C. as long as they're highly qualified. The only person who mentioned possible Supreme Court nominees is Trump and Trump mentioned two far right conservatives, so Cruz is a blatant liar in that regard. I would never vote for Hillary under any circumstances but I could see myself voting for Bernie Sanders.
When it comes to supporting Trump many people don't take into account another part of the equation: who's better than him on the issues that voters CARE ABOUT. Voters dont' care about tax cuts to the 1%. Trump's not talking about tax cuts to the 1%, he's talking about bringing jobs back into this country and that resonates with Americans. Trump talks about tackling sanctuary cities and many Americans, at least in the Republican Party, see those as an affront to the law.
Many individuals are so focused on Trying to tear down Trump or denigrate his supporters that they also don't take into account that Trump is often the only one who brings up certain issues, and on many other issues he forces other candidates to talk up those issues because Americans were paying attention to the points Trump was bringing up. Nobody was talking about trade deals in the Republican party except Trump. Nobody was talking about doing something about illegal immigration except Trump. Nobody in the GOP dare criticize the Iraq War boondoggle except Trump.
I don't see them as mutually exclusive. I can see why people would support Trump when those in the establishment have proven to deliberately mislead people for their own personal benefit.
I don't find the vast majority of Trump's statements horrible. You need to implement some specificity, otherwise your sweeping condemnation will never sway me.
You folks appear to be more bothered by Trump's brash comments than the plethora of illegal actions by the USA Gvt. Thus, sir, it is impossible for me to take your concerns all that seriously. U don't like Trump's rudeness. Got it. Meanwhile, crony capitalists are bleeding we the people dry.
I took the red pill a few years after 9-11-01, and I ain't fixin on ever being a traitor.
Do you honestly believe that Trump will not engage in crony capitalism? I mean for real talk about the fox guarding the hen house.
It's not always the case that something is better than nothing. I would much rather have someone who wasn't talking about an issue than someone who talks about it and presents a completely unworkable, unintelligent and unconstitutional "solution" that would only make things worse. So, when you tell me that Trump is the only one bringing up illegal immigration, that doesn't really impress me.
And you say you don't find the vast majority of Trump's statements horrible. Which of them do you find horrible?
"You need to implement some specificity, otherwise your sweeping condemnation will never sway me."
Is that like being Born Again? Or more like raising your Operating Thetan level?
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I would love for racism to end right now. But it never will with so many people getting filthy rich by racism and/or race baiting. And "racist" is such a frequently used term, that it has come to mean "I disagree with your politics and I want you to buy me stuff until I say to stop."
Trump is not at all responsible for the racist laws passed by D and R politicians. Why would I be mad at him for the actions of others? Please provide proof that more racists support Trump than either of the Dem candidates.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Both Louis Farrakhan and David Duke endorsed him and not either of the Dem candidates. Reporters don't get repeatedly insulted and ultimately arrested on account of their race at rallies for either of the Dem candidates.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I have not watched Fox News in many years, except for a few minutes here and there when I visit my parents.
Even u can tell huh? So I am being dishonest about test scores? Proof please.
BLM and KKK are each full of vile racists. I denounce both with equal vigor. A bunch of racists support Trump. A bunch of other racists support Bernie and/or Hillary. What do u want me to do about it. Trump has disavowed 12+ times. When will either of the Democrat candidates do the same? Byrd was a huge buddy of Hillary, so she must disavow 12+ times right away.
This thread is about Trump, and his opponents, so I will NOT cease and desist from continued comparisons. I know that would be convenient, but criticizing Trump in a vacuum makes no sense. If all are scum, one should vote for the lesser of two evils.
It depends. If I like his politics enough to overlook that whole "helter skelter" thing then yeah. And that pill would become significantly easier to swallow if Hillary Clinton were to be the Dem nominee. And I'm not even saying that as a joke.