http://i.imgur.com/vmBidXA.png
Printable View
Trump supporters don't care when you compare what he said to what Bill has done! If you compare that to all the corrupt things Washington has done. This is kind of the anti establishment election against both spit and polish parties. Trump is NOT a spit and polish politician and that is part of his issue and his charm with most voters. I mean they either hate him or love him and both will vote for him, ??? (big question mark on that). Heck, just to have him get up and speak his mind is refreshing and to slam both the left and right establishment makes us all want to Locker Room trash Talk! One the polls are crap, The news media is not free its been bought and paid for by the left. 90% of the journalist are Democrats. So I could care less, has a Trump Supporter Damn the P's and full speed head! I do like the T-shirt says "Trump can crab my P any time" LOL
I think in time we will find the other allegations to be false!
Nothing is quite as refreshing as racism, xenophobia, and misogyny
Really? Sarcasm? You deny the corruption in Washington? You deny that abortion is genocide? You deny that crime and crime lords pour across USA border? You deny that ISIS is worse than any Christian Freedom Fighter? You will have to deny a lot of things to say that RHC is better than Mr. Trump. Its OK, we are all entitled to our Opinions. I understand if you don't like and loath him but if he wins it will be a different world. Honestly I and many Americans not sure what will happen. Only that this it is a game changer either way. This might not end with the election, we could have a Shattered Union. Soon we will know.Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
Yes*, Yes, Yes, Yes*Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockie Cantais
Wait, were you trying to make a point or something? Or just spouting off random stuff that sounds pretty but isn't much connected to anything?
(At least no conspiracy theories - afaik there was a study shows they feed on themselves, cause a low grade break from reality. No seriously, they are warning signs of mental illness, and this is why we can't actually argue with those people. You might well still live in the real world though, like I attempt to.)
*Washington, and other high profile elected officials, can clearly be "bought" in the sense that money provides access, and defines who the official is friends with, and this will in turn greatly influence their positions. Our system as a whole, however, is (weirdly) resistant to this problem, and has been muddling though it for well over 200 years already.
* Bit of a cheat - of course there exists a single individual of almost any major group worse than the average of IS/ISIS. Historically, there have been plenty of worse averages too, some in the name of "the church". As far as I know, IS/ISIS is the worst large scale organization in play at the moment, although the situation they arise from doesn't make that too surprising. Not that I'd recommend it, but give them a country of their own, and they'd mellow out fairly quickly to be only North Korea level bad, I would guess. (More "incidents", aka terrorist acts, but no nukes, so they can't wipe out whole cities.)
Mostly what Ethan said, but most importantly, if Trump should somehow win this election I will very seriously consider moving elsewhere. There are a plenty of other counties and people that deserve my support and tax dollars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockie Cantais
You can come to Canada Palem, we'll take you :). Just make sure to get in before we build that wall... and make America pay for it.
I'm positive president Trump will pay to have that wall built to keep the socialists from invading from the north ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Selephant
Then we can make it a one way ticket for you then, RIGHT? :)
Why doesn't anyone move to Mexico? We should have invaded Canada long ago and set the Quebecers FREE! wink!
We kind of that now, The West Coast, East Coast around DC and those weird New Englanders! Then we have the rest of the country that the elites fly over and never stop unless its election year! Funny how the rest of the world see's the heartland of America.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan
Drunkly shouting into someone's else's echo chamber, but here we go.
Did you serious just claim *New England* is an IS hotbed? WTF? I know *best ever* Brady is kinda galling, but...
Seriously, I know we've aped the Queen's English (sorry for the mangling to all the proper British... although Brexit, so ya'll as bad as the bad half of us'all anyway) and have some other idiomatic quirks, but the use of wicked as an exclamatory hardly qualifies for "weird" if we are being serious. Weird would be things like not liking beer. (I actually fall into that, though it is a gene quirk... you'd hate it too if it always came in a soapy glass.)
Wealth correlates with voting R. Education correlates with voting D. Things have gotten kinda weird now that Wealth correlates with Education though, hence the silicon valley (and 128 tech sector [+Boston], which is nearly as big, and a good bit more practical it turns out) confusion. Remember Mit? Know why he was so lame? At root, he was a New England R - have to actually *make sense*, since your votes can rub two sticks together (or, well, actually know that rubbing sticks is pointless, but whatever). Tough to win when you really are a blue dog type trying to clam the "true conservative" mantle.
Gotta give Trump that though - he's figured out the magic of winning the votes of a block while *explicitly stating he'll do the opposite of what they want*. I thought the second Bush tested the limits of my faith in the US political system (generalized, kinda unfairly, to all of humanity), but turns out it was Trump, and it looks like there is *too evil* for the average man.
Now, I'll personally pitch Hillery, but on the principle that the current system inherently must select a total slimeball, and at least she's a slimeball that will mostly just stay the course. I'm *far* left... but I generally vote center, or at best left-center, because the radicals don't get **** done. I'd also like to see electoral overhaul, but good luck on that ya'll. You'll get my vote, for what little (nothing... directly) a vote is worth.
I'll give this election one thing! Its got everyone fired up and taking notice of it all. I do find it interesting that each side has a candidate that is not what we really want but its one devil or the other so pick your poison. Center? Center of what? What is left, right or liberal or conservative? Who don't get stuff done? Laughing my head off, both parties play the same game, its called the Game of Power. We the people let them play us and we dance to their tune. So Trump is flawed, so are all of us and for the record any man or women who stand with me is my brother or sister regardless of race! We are a melting pot and we take the best of each to make the whole better. The only thing I am sure of is that Trump is our anti hero and we strangely find him refreshing to the blue devil.
Yea, I know the feeling this is an Echo chamber for someone too! winkQuote:
Originally Posted by Ethan
I've seen as many retarded republicans as I have democrats, so I don't think we can make neat clearcut organizations of what a D or R is. Both groups contain people of intelligence and wealth, but the difference lies in the execution of how the country should obtain these statuses. On the one side the nurturing government of the 'left' is there to guide and mold you through adulthood and to spot you some cash if you're in a pinch, while the government of the 'right' gives you tough love and pushes you to be more independent because that's just the way the world is. Family structures, more than status or wealth, may be closer to the root of our political differences.
Democrats truly don't care about anything besides buying votes. Do people not read the stolen emails. They laugh and make fun of their supporters. Nothing they do actually helps anyone. Like charities such as Clinton foundation. Who use tragedies to raise money and then they steal it and hide it over seas. Also don't forget using Hillary Clinton position to sell favors for money. I could keep going on but if your voting for Hillary Clinton your head is buried in the sand and you refuse to acknowledge the truth.Quote:
Originally Posted by natebane
Nobody here is oblivious to obvious corruption, but you should try to understand things from a different perspective than your own. For people on the left side of the aisle Trump's platform is an affront to their very core beliefs, while their own candidate is shilling for the same corporations she exclaims to save them from. Trump is spouting things in direct conflict with their view on the world while there's an off chance Hillary might not be as destructive with a republican majority congress anyway. Somebody in here has said it about Trump and his remarks, and that people just don't give a f***, and it's obvious at this point the remaining hillary supporters either live in a hole or they just don't give a f*** either or have the same pre-conceived notions about wikileaks as the right does about the mainstream media.Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
I lean very far to the right and own many guns, very pro-life, and think the free market does better than the government in most things. I would vote for Trump over Hillary, but tunnel vision is a b**** though, if you can't look at your own candidate objectively then it's hard to expect others to do the same of theirs. I'm still going with Gary, but not nearly as excited about it as I was earlier in the season.
We [USA] did invade Canada. Burnt Toronto. Off topic but history is important IMOQuote:
Originally Posted by Rockie Cantais
Much of the democratic core would still vote democrat if an abortion doctor ran. Winning the general election is not likely. A video of the doctor/candidate gloating about "easy money from baby killing" would certainly harm his/her chances of winning the election. The comparison with Trump would only work if the doctor/candidate followed the video with dismissive and insulting responses. Maybe suggesting that babies are just property and their welfare should not be a public concern.Quote:
Originally Posted by handofthrawn
It is Trump's responses to the accusations and video that is disturbing to me. The accusations could be faked or exaggerated. A one time video might not represent future behavior in the public sphere. Trump's supporters keep avoiding Trump's statements in public, including statements in the presidential debates. We are confident that all former presidents have pulled down their pants and shat. But no president that I am aware of has done so at a presidential debate.
There is DNA evidence suggesting Jefferson had relations with slaves. Slaves can not technically give consent because they are slaves. You would have to free them first and then ask [probably free friends and relatives too then ask]. However, there is nothing in writing from Jefferson condoning sex with slaves. There is certainly nothing from Jefferson like "there is no way I would f__k that one I can buy much better". Our presidents were/are human. We can expect that presidential private life on average contained as much sin as average American life. But we do expect presidents to attempt to behave and speak in an appropriate manner.
And hopefully not make a mockery of the country by their enthics if i may add, world is watching.
Cartoon is 10 years old and still relevant
http://i.imgur.com/pgEQdpY.jpg
There's an important nuance to be drawn here: When talking about the influence of money in Washington, we're talking almost exclusively about political donations to support friendly and 'accessible' politicians: Keep me happy or I won't finance your re-election campaign. This is distinct from traditional corruption, which personally lines the pockets of politicians in exchange for doing what the payor wants.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ethan
But, seen in that light, I'm not sure how 'resistant' the American system is to it. If you look at post-enlightenment democracies, the actual collapses have tended not to relate to the 'influence of money' in that sense, and of those that have persisted, the US shows more indicia of plutocratic influence than its comparitors. I could point to a lot of examples of corporate interests getting preference over good public policy, to the detriment of the average American...but to avoid getting bogged down in arguments about guns, healthcare, or tax policy, let me instead point to Mickey Mouse. and the ongoing series of copyright law reforms to protect Disney's revenue streams.
And, in the wake of Citizens United, you can only expect it to get worse. Other countries impose limitations on political financing - limiting or prohibiting corporate donations; limiting the amount a person or party can spend on a single campaign, etc. But the bar keeps getting raised on the cost of an American election campaign.
Of course, neither Trump nor Clinton is a solution to this particular problem. Clinton's a pretty typical politician, beholden in many ways to the corporate interests that finance her political campaigns. Trump's claims of self-financing are pretty dubious, too, and in any event he actually raises the likelihood of, ahem, 'traditional corruption'. He's always been pretty happy to play the game on the donor's side, including donations to attorneys general who were reviewing files affecting his businesses, but he's also been known to self-deal with money that's not exactly his in the first place - for instance, paying fines out of funds in his charity's coffers. He also doesn't appear to know the meaning of the phrase 'blind trust' - traditionally, a president will hand his assets over to an independent third party to manage over the course of his administration, without knowing how those assets are being managed. Trump, by contrast, intends to have his children manage his assets, and one would reasonably expect him to continue to be active in operating the Trump Organization while being president, despite the overt conflict of interest it would generate, as he assesses the majority of the net worth of the organization as being connected to his own personal brand. (We've seen this even during the campaign, where he has used campaign-funded events to hawk Trump-affiliated products.) Electing a President who is literally his own corporate interest is hardly a way to get Washington out of the pocket of corporate interests.
Sanders looked like a solution, but the truth is that the problem is self-perpetuating. Sanders never could have funded a competitive presidential campaign through his grassroots donations. I'm slightly hopeful (though not holding my breath) that his involvement with a Clinton administration might facilitate a push toward incremental electoral reform.
Isn't it a little premature to start a refugee program for Americans? (Frankly, given the number of "I want to move to Canada" comments following events like SCOTUS protecting gay marriage, I'm more concerned about accepting American refugees than Syrian refugees... Not that I have a problem with Palem, of course.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Selephant
Only thing Trump has said that I agree with 100%Quote:
Originally Posted by Landro
ROFL :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Landro
Well at least "good ol' Adolf" built the Autobahn which is still of use to most Germans.
The Drumpf proclaims to build a wall, which will in all likelihood be just as useful as most great walls have been historically, ie not particularly. Hadrian's wall didn't terribly help the Romans and the Great Wall didn't realy help the Chinese against Genghis Khan nor what later became the Qing dynasty.
Maybe in 1900-2200 years the Great Trump Wall can also become a great source of tourism :P
Hey Germany how is your Immigration Policy working out.
Victors get to write history, maybe Adolf wasn't as bad as he's made out to be. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4obeqaxhRs
@chanain There's two sides to the Citizen's United decision. The unintended consequence was the decision to allow money from corporation's be designated as free speech towards political candidates. The side of it that Hillary wants reversed is what allows independent filmmakers to produce films on her like 'Clinton Cash' and 'Hillary's America'. She benefit's immensely from one aspect of it, but her intention was to censor the free speech making critical documentaries on her.
At this point it shouldn't be a surprise, and people voting for him already would have been like "Yeah I could see him saying that", and nothing changes. As noobium stated, just a clever deflection from having to discuss the wikileaks at length.
If you don't grab them by their genitals, how do you get their attention?
Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day, Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Come on! Hitler wasn't crude and disrespectful like Trump.. don't compare the two. (If you got proof of Hitler being rude in the same manner as Trump please prove me wrong and show them).
yes jail for peaple who done crime cant happen...
That be like HITLER! NAZI NAZI NAZI!
Equility under the law is a nazi, nazi Hitler SS Wicked Demonic thing. Cant have that.
Batrom Server with state secrets and whats not of crime.. noooo... Thats not illigel becourse i like her.
Logic and consistency is a tool of the patriachy
trump 2024