Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: grampster on May 10, 2016, 10:09:22 PM
-
From Author Brad Thor:
Dear friends:
I have taken a stance, which I know is unpopular with some of you, and which I feel I owe it to you to fully explain.
Throughout history, charismatic figures have appeared at critical moments in time. Some of these figures have advanced their nations. Some have set them back. Only with the benefit of hindsight is mankind able to make the final judgment.
I have long been a fan of the saying - History doesn’t repeat, but it does rhyme. In other words, history leaves clues; lessons that we can all benefit from.
We are stewards of our Republic and as such, our greatest responsibility is not to ourselves, or any political party, but to the next generation of Americans. We must work tirelessly to see to it that they inherit a freer, stronger, safer, more prosperous nation than was handed to us.
To truly fulfill that obligation we must be selfless, and above all, we must be informed. We must understand the mechanics of politics, economics, and the framework that has allowed the United States to be the greatest nation in the history of the world.
As an American, my greatest allegiance is to liberty. As long as there is liberty, no task is insurmountable, no challenge too overwhelming. As long as there is liberty, anything is possible.
The true north of my compass has been, and always will be, liberty. I owe it to those who have come before me and those who will come after. I will act to safeguard liberty no matter what personal price I may be forced to bear.
Liberty is my litmus test. I weigh all actions of my government and those who seek office, against it. The ledger of freedom is incorruptible; its pages open for anyone to examine, and most importantly - to learn from.
At great personal and professional expense, I have grown more vocal over the years about the need to reduce the size of government and place in office fellow citizens guided strictly by the Founding documents.
I have spoken on television, radio, and in front of civic organizations. I have campaigned for candidates, marched in Tea Party rallies, and was the man who drove Andrew Breitbart to Madison, Wisconsin to speak alongside him on the capitol steps in defense of Governor Scott walker.
From taking back the United States House in 2010, to taking back the Senate in 2014, we have won battle after battle for liberty. In so doing, we have placed principled, limited government Americans in office. We knew the war wouldn’t be won overnight, but rather that it would be won over time. We have been steadfast, resolute, and successful.
But in the opinion of some of our fellow Americans, we have not been quick enough. Rather than continue to fight, a plurality of voters in the Republican primary has decided to drop an atom bomb on Washington, D.C. That atom bomb is Donald Trump.
And so I come to my explanation. When I apply my litmus test of liberty to Donald Trump, he fails - completely.
In fact, he has not only failed to ever stand for liberty, he has repeatedly worked to undermine it. From supporting an assault weapons ban, the seizure of private property via eminent domain, the restructuring of libel laws, and socialized medicine (just to name a few) - throughout his entire adult life, Donald Trump has repeatedly championed the power of the state.
Regardless of what he says now, Donald Trump has a history. That history is the clearest indication of how he would govern as president. No matter how badly Americans want to “blow up” Washington, they absolutely must consider who, and what, arises from the embers of that destruction.
After voters drop that atom bomb, what happens next?
Herein lies my greatest concern. What will become of liberty under a Trump administration? Will it grow? Will it recede? Will it vanish altogether?
Our Founders realized that the normal course of history is despotism – the control of the many by the few. That is why the Founding documents sought to constrain government. They also counted on Americans to choose wisely those whom we sought to install in office. Too often we have failed in selecting the best among us.
Donald Trump is not the best among us, nor is Hillary Clinton. They are both incredibly flawed human beings whom we should be equally ashamed of.
Neither would advance the cause of freedom. Both would take us – not to that shining city on a hill of which President Reagan spoke - but into the murky valley below. Never have I seen America faced with having two such poor choices for president.
With the lessons of history as my guide, I see in Donald Trump the character flaws that are the hallmarks of despotism. In Hillary Clinton, I also see multiple character flaws, but I see them as belonging not to a potential despot, but rather to a conniving, self-serving, progressive politician who believes in lining her own pockets and enlarging/increasing the state and its power.
The two are reprehensible – but completely different. One threatens to further enlarge the state, the other, potentially (a la Napoleon), to become it.
Growing up, a wonderful nun repeatedly told me that kindness could only be expected from the strong. When Donald Trump mocked the disability of New York Times reporter Serge Kovaleski – he showed himself to be not only weak, but also lacking in compassion.
Trump’s position that he is a Christian, but has never asked for forgiveness – coupled with his incessant bragging – not only further shows that he is weak, but that he also lacks humility.
Strength, compassion, and humility are necessary in any leader – but especially so in the person who would occupy the highest and most powerful office in the world. Just look at what the absence of those qualities has done over the last seven years.
My greatest concern about Donald Trump, though, isn’t a trait he lacks, but a dangerous one he possesses – in spades. Authoritarianism.
Confident people do not bully and demean others. That is the realm of the weak and insecure. Confident people also do not threaten others, especially not their fellow citizens.
Donald Trump has told us to just wait and see what he does to Jeff Bezos once he gets into the White House. He has told us the American military will do whatever he tells them to do no matter what their reservations. He has promised to prevent American companies from moving outside the United States, regardless of what they believe is best for their businesses.
In other words, Donald Trump has clearly told all of us that he will use the power of the presidency to force people to bend to his will. This is not liberty.
In fact, Donald Trump has never even spoken about liberty. Neither has he spoken about the Constitution and the Founding documents. This is an absolute first in the history of the United States.
Instead, Donald Trump talks about hiring the “best people” and making the “best deals.” This, though, isn’t what made America great, and it certainly isn’t what will return America to its prominence.
The blueprint for America’s success is the ideas of the Framers – limited, Constitutional governance – an area in which Donald Trump is criminally ignorant.
Let me be clear that I don’t want to vote for Hillary Clinton. I also don’t want to vote for Donald Trump. My preference is to write-in or vote third party. I think they are both terrible for our future.
But between a big government progressive and a potential despot – every American must ask themselves where liberty has the greatest chance to survive over the next four years.
As a Constitutional conservative, I take solace in, and guidance from the words of Alexander Hamilton, who in the election of 1800 said, “If we must have an enemy at the head of government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible.”
I value all of you as friends, readers, and fellow patriots. There is much at stake for our Republic. Be informed, be selfless, and vote your conscience. I will not hold your decisions against you.
None of us knows the future. But I ask that all of us look to the past. Only by doing so can we safeguard liberty and chart the most well-reasoned course forward.
-
All that is well and good. But just what IS the solution? For whom do I vote? Or should I not vote at all?
I see a possibility of a improving economy with Trump.
I see another 4 to 8 years of the past 8 with Hillary.
I honestly don't think America can survive another 4 years of this....but we might almost squeek by with Trump.
-
From Author Brad Thor:
Let me be clear that I don’t want to vote for Hillary Clinton. I also don’t want to vote for Donald Trump. My preference is to write-in or vote third party. I think they are both terrible for our future.
My preference would be to write in or to vote third party, too. Except that either of those options is a vote for Hillary Clinton.
-
Here's a news flash for you guys...
Hillary is winning anyways. Even if a chunk of us hold our noses AGAIN.
I wont do it anymore
-
Astute commentary? Not so much. More like someone making excuses. I doubt he would have written this if Bush or Graham were the nominee. Neither of them are any more and probably less about liberty than Trump. Trump would not have been my first choice, not second, third, or fourth either. All these guys writing this stuff though weren't or haven't complained about Ryan, Bush, McCain, Romney, etc., etc. They just don't like Trump beating their establishment choices and are afraid he might actually stop the gravy train.
Trump can't do any of these evil things people somehow think he will do without a compliant congress. If the Republican party is really the party of liberty and small government then we should have nothing to worry about. If not then the rest of the GOP aren't any different than Trump and shouldn't have any complaints about him.
And really, these people would prefer Hillary over Trump, that is the only choice we have. A third party vote in this day and age is no more than voting for the Dem candidate period. It is not some grand principled choice not matter what some may think.
-
Except that either of those options is a vote for Hillary Clinton.
A third party vote in this day and age is no more than voting for the Dem candidate period. It is not some grand principled choice not matter what some may think.
You know....I see this more and more these days, and I have to call BS. A vote for Hillary is a vote for Hillary. Full Stop. If my ballot doesn't have a chad hanging next to her, then I didn't vote for her. My (and yours actually) duty as a voter is to vote for the person I think is the best candidate. Not "The one that I think can win", or "against the one I dislike a little more", but vote for the best one. Not that hard to comprehend.
In point of fact, it's the two of you, and people like you that have led us to this situation. You trained the Republicans (and your counterparts on the other side trained the Democrats) that no matter who they put up, in the end you come running to the bell like Pavlov's good little doggies. So they put up increasingly crappy candidates (which you ran up and voted for) until it got so bad the mouth breather types nominated Donald freaking Trump. And like good little Republicans you are lining up to vote for Donald Trump. You don't even (for the most part) think he'll be a good president, but you're still gonna vote for him.
This is YOUR fault, for not demanding better from your party 25 years ago. This is reaping what you have sown for explicitly telling the Republicans that you'll vote for whoever they nominate to "Beat [insert random democrat here]". And when Hillary wins it'll be your fault as Republicans that your party sucks so hard, because it's YOUR party and YOU built it. Quit trying to deflect the blame on those of us that have been pointing out the Republicans suck for decades.
-
Here's a news flash for you guys...
Hillary is winning anyways. Even if a chunk of us hold our noses AGAIN.
I wont do it anymore
Too bad the Republicans didn't have a good conservative candidate we could all rally around like, Dole, McCain or Romney. You know, someone we could vote for with confidence! :laugh:
It may be wrong but I'm enjoying Trumps wrecking ball affect on the establishment. Just because I'm not a Trump supporter doesn't mean I can't enjoy the chaos he has caused. He has done plenty of good just as a candidate, he already has a hard act to follow if he becomes president.
As an aside, Trump has nearly pulled even with Clinton in some battleground state polls. Wait till he actually pivots to attacking her, should be fun.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/trump-clinton-florida-ohio-pennsylvania-222994
-
Here's a news flash for you guys...
Hillary is winning anyways. Even if a chunk of us hold our noses AGAIN.
I wont do it anymore
I agree
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
-
You know....I see this more and more these days, and I have to call BS. A vote for Hillary is a vote for Hillary. Full Stop. If my ballot doesn't have a chad hanging next to her, then I didn't vote for her. My (and yours actually) duty as a voter is to vote for the person I think is the best candidate. Not "The one that I think can win", or "against the one I dislike a little more", but vote for the best one. Not that hard to comprehend.
In point of fact, it's the two of you, and people like you that have led us to this situation. You trained the Republicans (and your counterparts on the other side trained the Democrats) that no matter who they put up, in the end you come running to the bell like Pavlov's good little doggies. So they put up increasingly crappy candidates (which you ran up and voted for) until it got so bad the mouth breather types nominated Donald freaking Trump. And like good little Republicans you are lining up to vote for Donald Trump. You don't even (for the most part) think he'll be a good president, but you're still gonna vote for him.
This is YOUR fault, for not demanding better from your party 25 years ago. This is reaping what you have sown for explicitly telling the Republicans that you'll vote for whoever they nominate to "Beat [insert random democrat here]". And when Hillary wins it'll be your fault as Republicans that your party sucks so hard, because it's YOUR party and YOU built it. Quit trying to deflect the blame on those of us that have been pointing out the Republicans suck for decades.
My party? My fault?
Perhaps you should better educate yourself before casting aspersions.
Until probably the second GWB election I had never voted for a Republican or Democrat in any election. As for my party I was registered independent from the age of 18 until about 2 months ago when I registered GOP to vote for Cruz over Trump.
My comments are not for "my party" they are the voice of experience in seeing that voting third party doesn't work.
-
My party? My fault?
Perhaps you should better educate yourself before casting aspersions.
Until probably the second GWB election I had never voted for a Republican or Democrat in any election. As for my party I was registered independent from the age of 18 until about 2 months ago when I registered GOP to vote for Cruz over Trump.
My comments are not for "my party" they are the voice of experience in seeing that voting third party doesn't work.
If enough people would quit thinking like that maybe a third party candidate could actually make some noise. Not since Ross Perot have we had a third party candidate actually make any headway into the establishment. Maybe if just maybe someone had jumped on his coattails back then there wouldn't be the two party system anymore. And actually in some locations at the local and state levels third party candidates do quite well.
-
If enough people would quit thinking like that maybe a third party candidate could actually make some noise. Not since Ross Perot have we had a third party candidate actually make any headway into the establishment. Maybe if just maybe someone had jumped on his coattails back then there wouldn't be the two party system anymore. And actually in some locations at the local and state levels third party candidates do quite well.
If I thought a viable third party candidate could win I would potentially vote for them. I voted for Perot twice and continued to vote for Third parties. In this particular election a third party vote at this time is a wasted vote and only helps Clinton.
-
We don't need a third party.... We need a second party...
-
All that is well and good. But just what IS the solution? For whom do I vote? Or should I not vote at all?
State government.
If 'merika goes all Balkans, you want a strong, fiscally sound state government where you live.
Trump/hillary matter less to most people than what happens to them locally.
-
All that is well and good. But just what IS the solution? For whom do I vote? Or should I not vote at all?
I see a possibility of a improving economy with Trump.
I see another 4 to 8 years of the past 8 with Hillary.
I honestly don't think America can survive another 4 years of this....but we might almost squeek by with Trump.
If only there were a political party which stood entirely on a platform of liberty....
-
If enough people would quit thinking like that maybe a third party candidate could actually make some noise. Not since Ross Perot have we had a third party candidate actually make any headway into the establishment. Maybe if just maybe someone had jumped on his coattails back then there wouldn't be the two party system anymore. And actually in some locations at the local and state levels third party candidates do quite well.
That would only happen with major structural (constitutional) changes. American politics doesn't allow for more than two parties, at least at the national level. When a "third party" succeeds, it merely displaces the weaker of the two major parties (like the Republicans displaced the Whigs).
Nations with viable "third parties" have things like parliaments, prime ministers, and/or proportional representation. What we have is a system that only rewards whichever party gets the most votes. That's why Libertarians are accused of "wasting their votes."
It may be wrong but I'm enjoying Trump's wrecking ball affect on the establishment. Just because I'm not a Trump supporter doesn't mean I can't enjoy the chaos he has caused. He has done plenty of good just as a candidate, he already has a hard act to follow if he becomes president.
This. I'm not afraid of "throwing my vote away," by voting for a write-in/3rd party. It's just that I prefer Trump to the establishment pukes, and I'd like to let them know about it.
-
I have been in a quandary about this election. I fully understand that as a constitutional conservative, if I vote for anyone other than Hillary that is not Trump, that elects Hillary if enough principled folks of my ilk did the same. I am also a person who has been involved in government and have been elected to office, as well as serving in several appointed offices, and did my best to keep my peers acting in accordance to our proper mission.
Having said that, reading the quote from Alexander Hamilton near the end of Mr. Thor's commentary sealed it for me: "If we must have an enemy at the head of government, let it be one we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible." So, yes, I agree that voting is a right that has been hard fought for and paid for by the blood of patriots. But in good conscience I can abstain under the same principal if my countrymen have neglected to be honorable and to have failed to have participate properly in our governance so that we have only enemies striving to be the head of government. At least I can rest knowing that I have not been responsible for that "...enemy at the head of government..."
-
I think Brad is wrong in his assessment of Trump.
Public Trump isn't who Trump is. It's an act, calculated (likely with a lot of instinct) for effect.
What this means, of course, is that we have no idea who and what Trump really is. As such, I cannot trust him.
Fortunately, the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth- that God governs in the affairs of men. Whomever he has planned, whether to give us grace or for our punishment, will lead.
Furthermore, I know my public choice and that my vote doesn't really matter, anyway. I vote not because it is rational, but because I have a duty to do so.
As such, I will follow my conscience and vote for someone other than the candidates from the two main parties. I have not yet decided whom that will be.
-
"If we must have an enemy at the head of government, let it be one we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible."
And with a Dem senate, Dem house, and four new new SCOTUS justices (Obama, Schumer, Feinstein, and Boxer) you would oppose Hillary - how?
I can understand people not wanting to vote for the lesser evil from the same establishment cabal (Bush, McCain, Romney, and if things had worked out differently, JEB!) but maybe - just maybe - a lesser evil that upsets the GOPe as much as he upsets the democRATS might be just what we need right now - just like a brown bomber and a dose of salts.
Sitting things out is a bit like the old cliche about cutting off your nose to spite your face.
-
State government.
If 'merika goes all Balkans, you want a strong, fiscally sound state government where you live.
Trump/hillary matter less to most people than what happens to them locally.
Then may God have mercy on the state of Alabama...... :'(
-
Only with the benefit of hindsight is mankind able to make the final judgment.
And your commentator is hindsighting about the future. Humph!
Astute, my soft pink tushie. It sounds more like something designed to draw voters away from Trump and assure a win for the Democrats.
Fear-mongering, in short. I'm as aware of historic paths to dictatorship as anyone, and I, too, have concerns about demagoguery. But I know what will happen with a President Clinton.
I, me, myself, and I, would rather vote for the unknown than Ms. Clinton (talk about demagoguery!) and hope for the best and a strong Senate and House to hold the leash.
Might work, might not. But there's no guesswork involved with the Democratic "presumptive" candidate.
You see what cards have been played, and you draw or stand accordingly.
That's "astute" for ya.
Terry, 230RN
-
If only there were a political party which stood entirely on a platform of liberty....
One that was viable. Could field a real candidate instead out getting confused by being focused on weed or rallying behind a pretty candidate with zero experience because he says what they wanna
-
One that was viable. Could field a real candidate instead out getting confused by being focused on weed or rallying behind a pretty candidate with zero experience because he says what they wanna
^...hear. (You're welcome.)
But at least he knows what we wanna hear, which is not the politically correct crap we've been fed, and he's got the balls to say it going in.
I'm sure Trump won't be able to (or want to) do everything he's said, and I'll bet there'll be a lot of foot to the fire holding, but at least he knows what working mid-America has been bitching about for years.
-
Trump is where he is because Maximus, Commander of the Armies of the North, isn't around to run.
If you want Cruz, or someone equivalent, you will have to elect Trump first. Someone has to get the chainsaw and clear the brush.
It took a century to get here, how long it takes to get back we don't know. But things move faster now. Keep the faith.
-
Trump is where he is because Maximus, Commander of the Armies of the North, isn't around to run.
If you want Cruz, or someone equivalent, you will have to elect Trump first. Someone has to get the chainsaw and clear the brush.
Sounds suspiciously like "we have to pass the bill to find out what's in it."
No thanks
-
^...hear. (You're welcome.)
But at least he knows what we wanna hear, which is not the politically correct crap we've been fed, and he's got the balls to say it going in.
I'm sure Trump won't be able to (or want to) do everything he's said, and I'll bet there'll be a lot of foot to the fire holding, but at least he knows what working mid-America has been bitching about for years.
Just because he knows, it doesn't mean he cares.
-
If "knowing what people are bitching about" is a valid metric, then Obama is a good president. He knows, but it's by design for him
-
Trump is where he is because Maximus, Commander of the Armies of the North, isn't around to run.
So Trump = Commodus?
Hmmm . . . where is Narcissus when we need him?
-
First, be careful listening to the leftist media propaganda with regard to Hilary winning. I have heard newer polls are starting to show Trump beating Hilary as a lot of Democrats hate Hilary Clinton as much or more than some Republican dislike Trump. I think most Republicans will end up voting for Trump anyway assuming Trump doesn't do something stupid.
Second, I am not a big Trump fan, but I will take him with my concerns over Hilary Clinton who is a guaranteed terrible choice for President. We KNOW she is a liar and a criminal who is out to destroy our rights. I won't do anything that helps her win.
Third, when I compare Trump to McCain and Romney who were the last two Republican candidates, I have to ask how Trump is really any worse than they are? Romney is a weak moderate who failed to stand up and fight. McCain (IMO) is a slimy establishment guy. I think I might be willing to take Trump with his unknowns over those two.
-
The so called "conservative" establishment claims to have principles and says some things are off the table, non-negotiable. They then negotiate poorly and end up violating their so called principles. And they wonder why they're hated and despised, not only by the left but now by the true right also?
Trump is not a conservative because nothing is really ever off the table. Reading the Playboy interviews from decades ago and just finally picking up and finishing "Art of the Deal" I have to say he has some conservative leanings about some issues, esp regarding nationalism and what it means to be an American. Trump is not and never will be what they call a movement conservative though. He is something of a pragmatist and also something of a problem solver.
I'm afraid he has more hubris than Obama and if he gets elected he will make similar mistakes based on his believing he is the smartest guy in the room.
Still better than crooked Hillary ;)
-
^
I think I might be willing to take Trump with his unknowns over those two.
Or over Ms. Clinton.
That's what I was getting at and I'm surprised that people are still letting their emotions get in the way of making the best bet.
That's what makes losers in card games. And not voting, like folding your cards, is a sure loss.
In a similar way, voting for unviable third-party candidates "on principle" is akin to "drawing to an inside straight."
Would be nice to get that one card, but let's face it...
I can't understand why people don't "get" that.
I don't want to overdo the card game analogy, but that's the simplest and most "universal" way to explain why it sure as hell looks like I'm going to vote for Trump, if it goes that far.
Terry, 230RN
-
And folding, like not voting, is a sure loss.
Errr... what?
http://the-econoclast.blogspot.com/2005/01/rational-non-voter.html
The likelihood that your vote will have any effect on the outcome is miniscule. "Not voting" is ZERO loss. You (me, them, everybody) is unlikely to have any effect on the vote from our voting or refraining from voting.
So feel free to vote however you wish!
-
^
Or over Ms. Clinton.
That's what I was getting at and I'm surprised that people are still letting their emotions get in the way of making the best bet.
That's what makes losers in card games. And folding, like not voting, is a sure loss. And voting for unviable candidates "on principle" is akin to "drawing to an inside straight."
Would be nice to get that one card, but let's face it...
I can't understand why people don't "get" that.
Terry, 230RN
Still too much butthurt, especially in the face of their numerous blown predictions and their florid derision of trump supporters.
Not too many folk have it in them to man up and ally with someone after they spat in his face and talked shinola about him for months. Better to go off and vote meaningless third party while claiming moral victory than admit the mouth breathers were right, they won, that trump is no worse than any gop candidate since ghwb, and that trump is much preferable to clinton.
-
^
Not too many folk have it in them to man up and ally with someone after they spat in his face and talked shinola about him for months.
You got that right. It would be amusing if it weren't potentially so tragic.
And not voting at all in "protest." Holy crap. How "astute" is that?
The "Party of Hillary Clinton" is going to organize to get every single voter to the polls if they have to lead them there by hooking their index fingers in their nostrils and dragging them there.
Even though that individual's vote has "miniscule" effect.
Gee, maybe the "Party of Hillary Clinton" is smarter than we are anyhow.
Like it or not, it's still a numbers game, which is why (it is rumored) college students vote both in their home state and in their out-of-state college residences.
Maybe your one single vote can cancel out one of those illegal votes.
Or maybe one of those corpses who vote up Chicago way.
Ya think?
Terry
-
Better to go off and vote meaningless third party while claiming moral victory than admit the mouth breathers were right, they won, that trump is no worse than any gop candidate since ghwb, and that trump is much preferable to clinton.
Right? No. More righter than the Dem. candidate, yes.
I think most Republicans will end up voting for Trump anyway assuming Trump doesn't do something stupid.
:rofl:
-
^
You got that right. It would be amusing if it weren't potentially so tragic.
And not voting at all in "protest." Holy crap. How "astute" is that?
The "Party of Hillary Clinton" is going to organize to get every single voter to the polls if they have to lead them there by hooking their index fingers in their nostrils and dragging them there.
Even though that individual's vote has "miniscule" effect.
Gee, maybe the "Party of Hillary Clinton" is smarter than we are anyhow.
Like it or not, it's still a numbers game, which is why (it is rumored) college students vote both in their home state and in their out-of-state college residences.
Maybe your one single vote can cancel out one of those illegal votes.
Or maybe one of those corpses who vote up Chicago way.
Ya think?
Terry
So, what you're saying is that without my single vote, Trump is going to lose the election? And with it, he's going to win?
-
So, what you're saying is that without my single vote, Trump is going to lose the election? And with it, he's going to win?
The content of my post in no way addressed the probabilities of any one vote, to include yours, influencing the outcome of an election. But you knew that already.
Right? No. More righter than the Dem. candidate, yes.
For which value of right? It appears they were right in asserting Trump could win the GOP nomination. He ended up beating most the field like a drum and Cruz like a red-headed step-child. And that he would be competitive with Clinton. Were they right in their faith that Trump can make America suck less? To be determined.
-
So, what you're saying is that without my single vote, Trump is going to lose the election? And with it, he's going to win?
It does not follow, and putting nonexistent words in my mouth.
You can do better than that, despite the fact that you couched it as questions.
What I am saying is that your attitude, spread over dozens, hundreds, thousands, millions of voters will probably put Ms. Clinton in that office.
Fold, then.
Give up.
"...go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms."
And hopefully, there will be enough others to carry on the fight against Ms. Clinton's (as a presumptive candidate) winning.
Terry, 230RN
REF:
https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/31693.Samuel_Adams
-
It does not follow, and putting nonexistent words in my mouth.
You can do better than that, despite the fact that you couched it as questions.
What I am saying is that your attitude, spread over dozens, hundreds, thousands, millions of voters will probably put Ms. Clinton in that office.
Fold, then.
Give up.
"...go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms."
And hopefully, there will be enough others to carry on the fight against Ms. Clinton's (as a presumptive candidate) winning.
Terry, 230RN
REF:
https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/31693.Samuel_Adams
That's fine. But changing my attitude has absolutely no effect on the other citizens, does it?
And, I'm not giving up. I just cannot vote for the snake-oil salesman that I have no ability to vet.
It's rolling the dice.
As my "rolling the dice" will have no effect on the outcome, I'm abstaining this time. Should he win and provide some mechanism by which I CAN judge him, I may be able to vote for him next time.
-
That's fine. But changing my attitude has absolutely no effect on the other citizens, does it?
And, I'm not giving up. I just cannot vote for the snake-oil salesman that I have no ability to vet.
It's rolling the dice.
As my "rolling the dice" will have no effect on the outcome, I'm abstaining this time. Should he win and provide some mechanism by which I CAN judge him, I may be able to vote for him next time.
Your rolling the dice does have an affect on the outcome. You just have to look at it in terms of lots more people having the same idea as you. If 3 million potential R voters decide not to vote, the other side wins. IMO, convincing the potential base of voters to come out and vote has become a major part of this election. This is what I meant by Trump doing something stupid. If he is smart, then he will try to convince all those Cruz voters and others that he is worth your vote. Romney had this same problem. He chose poorly and came out the loser.
The same thing is happening on the Democrat side as well. Don't let anyone convince you otherwise. A whole lot of Bernie supporters are pissed that their delegate system is rigged and than Hilary is a self serving crook. There is no guarantee Hilary will get a good voter turnout either.
-
What a joy it would be if every single ballot was marked None Of The Above.
-
In a similar way, voting for unviable third-party candidates "on principle" is akin to "drawing to an inside straight."
I'll have to see, but all signs point to a secure Trump victory for my state, I'm voting for Gary Johnson.
-
I am entertained that one of us is voting for the candidate that we genuinely believe will be the best president, and actively trying to get others to do the same, while the other is voting for the POS being served to them by the establishment that they dislike the least.
But I'm the one giving up.
Additionally, we (third party voters) have gotten this very same speech every four years for as long as I've been able to vote. Probably longer. "THIS election is the end, it's too important to waste on third party." In voting for the lesser you have actively incentivised the two major parties putting forward crap. Perhaps if you had listened to us 20-30 years ago, we'd have had two decades of crap presidents and built a viable alternative. As opposed to where we are now, two decades* of crap presidents with no alternative in sight.
But whatever, keep voting for the same thing**, and bemoaning when it fails like some sad caricature of a trailer park girlfriend that is in the ER for the fifth time.
*At least
**Big government, Anti Liberty Authoritarians. Whatever else Mr. Trump may be, he is a man that loves using the power of government to serve his ends.
-
And, I'm not giving up. I just cannot vote for the snake-oil salesman that I have no ability to vet.
I understand your emotion, but not your logic.
And the "vetting" for the presumptive opposing candidate has already been done, even if not conclusively or judicially. Yet.
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men [or bluestarlizzard :)] to do nothing."
Go home in peace.
Y'know, I stood back through most of the candidate selection process, not saying much.
I only offered my insight into his change from that New York City strong anti-gun attitude, since I lived in his neighborhood as well, and had the same enlightenment when I "saw the elephant" by coming out to Colorado.
You want to self-justify your not voting? Fine.
Others want to self-justify their --yes --throwing away their vote? Fine
But your counsels are not needed.
Terry, 230RN
-
I'm keenly interested in the fireworks between the end of both conventions to election day. Maybe that's when we'll see what the bear is doing in the buckwheat.
I am convinced that Hillary is an absolute danger to the Republic, not only because she is corrupt, but that there are many corrupt backers both in and out of the government, combined with the ignorance, fantasy, and emotionalism of a good deal of the general public.
Trump reminds me of a caricature from Saturday Night Live who will actually hold the red button.
-
...
Trump reminds me of a caricature from Saturday Night Live who will actually hold the red button.
The president (no matter who is elected) can not just order Nukes to be launched (red button). It just doesn't work that way. Others need to agree with the decision of any president before a launch can happen.
-
I find this argument (as well as all the ones past and all the ones that will be in the future) to be somewhat silly.
Voting is a duty, but, from a more philosophical standpoint, the real duty of voting isn't the actual casting of a ballot, but the thoughtful and deliberate thinking required in the making of a choice.
and I'm pretty sure everyone on this board is being thoughtful and very deliberate in that choice, especially this spin on the merry go round.
I don't see that anyone who chooses not to vote in protest as being in the same category as the idjits who are just to lazy to make time to go to the polls and certainly better than the idjits who are not thoughtful, deliberate or even cognizant of what is going on who still come out to the polls every four freeking years.
While, personally, I wish you all would vote (even if it's just "none of the above") because I think the protest no vote doesn't express your displeasure to the people you are displeased with, I certainly do think you have the right and even the duty to abstain if that is what your conscience dictates.
(also, 'conscience' is a stupid word and impossible for people who need words to be spelled like they sound)
-
Ahhh, heck. I've just been kidding. ALL HAIL HILLARY... >:D [ar15] Never mind, just kidding again.
-
To the third-party voters and non-voters who've made a personal decision to exercise their inarguable right NOT vote for flawed GOP candidates in the last two elections.
Thank you for Obama - and Obamacare.
Thank you for SCOTUS justice Sonia Sotomayor.
Thank you for SCOTUS justice Elena Kagan.
Thank you for an 18 trillion dollar national debt, de facto amnesty for illegal aliens, use of the IRS as a weapon against conservative groups, a path to a nuke for Iran, the rise of ISIS . . . and more.
Perhaps we'll be thanking you for another President Clinton next year.
Now let the indignation begin.
[popcorn]
-
To the third-party voters and non-voters who've made a personal decision to exercise their inarguable right NOT vote for flawed GOP candidates in the last two elections.
Thank you for Obama - and Obamacare.
Thank you for SCOTUS justice Sonia Sotomayor.
Thank you for SCOTUS justice Elena Kagan.
Thank you for an 18 trillion dollar national debt, de facto amnesty for illegal aliens, use of the IRS as a weapon against conservative groups, a path to a nuke for Iran, the rise of ISIS . . . and more.
Perhaps we'll be thanking you for another President Clinton next year.
Now let the indignation begin.
[popcorn]
and thank you for alienating us further so we are even less inclined to jump on your bandwagon.
We are all in this together. :angel:
-
Well, I would agree with the commentary on the SCOTUS since the next President will likely nominate 2 or 3 (one in the first year). If Hilary nominates them, I have a feeling none of her nominees would be pro-gun or respect the 2nd amendment.
Of course, there is no guarantee who Trump will nominate either, but at least there is a better chance.
-
What this means, of course, is that we have no idea who and what Trump really is.
We have decades of his actions on which to judge him. And his actions ahve always been to support gun bans, and socialism, and abuse of eminent domain, and abuse of bankruptcy laws etc etc etc.
I don't understand how the folks who mocked people that bought Mitt Romney's empty rhetoric over his history are doing exactly the same thing with Trump.
-
First, be careful listening to the leftist media propaganda with regard to Hilary winning. I have heard newer polls are starting to show Trump beating Hilary as a lot of Democrats hate Hilary Clinton as much or more than some Republican dislike Trump. I think most Republicans will end up voting for Trump anyway assuming Trump doesn't do something stupid.
Second, I am not a big Trump fan, but I will take him with my concerns over Hilary Clinton who is a guaranteed terrible choice for President. We KNOW she is a liar and a criminal who is out to destroy our rights. I won't do anything that helps her win.
Third, when I compare Trump to McCain and Romney who were the last two Republican candidates, I have to ask how Trump is really any worse than they are? Romney is a weak moderate who failed to stand up and fight. McCain (IMO) is a slimy establishment guy. I think I might be willing to take Trump with his unknowns over those two.
Trump is not an unknown. Trump is a lifelong, hardline democrat who changed his branding slightly. The only difference between him and Hillary is that Republicans will oppose the things she tries to push through.
-
Still too much butthurt, especially in the face of their numerous blown predictions and their florid derision of trump supporters.
Not too many folk have it in them to man up and ally with someone after they spat in his face and talked shinola about him for months. Better to go off and vote meaningless third party while claiming moral victory than admit the mouth breathers were right, they won, that trump is no worse than any gop candidate since ghwb, and that trump is much preferable to clinton.
Trump is worse than Hillary in every metric. He has identical instincts and beliefs (which is why they've always been such good friends and he's always given so much to her) but becuase he has an R by his name then the GOP sheep will support his version of socialism and corruption. See the difference in response to Medicare Part D and Obamacare.
-
To the third-party voters and non-voters who've made a personal decision to exercise their inarguable right NOT vote for flawed GOP candidates in the last two elections.
Thank you for Obama - and Obamacare.
Thank you for SCOTUS justice Sonia Sotomayor.
Thank you for SCOTUS justice Elena Kagan.
Thank you for an 18 trillion dollar national debt, de facto amnesty for illegal aliens, use of the IRS as a weapon against conservative groups, a path to a nuke for Iran, the rise of ISIS . . . and more.
Perhaps we'll be thanking you for another President Clinton next year.
Now let the indignation begin.
[popcorn]
The blame for that rests on the GOP for nominating Democrat-lite candidates.
-
and thank you for alienating us further so we are even less inclined to jump on your bandwagon.
We are all in this together. :angel:
Apparently we aren't all in this together. Way too many folks ready to hand the election to Hillary because they are butt hurt that their chosen candidate didn't make the cut.
Those that think a Hillary presidency would be better than a Trump presidency because "by damn, I got principals" better hope their *expletive deleted*ing principals will buy them some beans in about 3 years.
-
One the other hand.....copied from another site.
Exactly who is Trump?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Something to think about for both republicans or democrats, or independents...or atheists...or, or, or
Whether you like him or not, read this. If you love your country, your family, your children and grandchildren, this is important.
I copied this from a post by Michael Smith. He recognized how this gentleman characterized Donald Trump perfectly.
This is an interesting assessment of "The Donald". This person may have nailed him for what he really is.
Trump Is Not Conservative; he’s A Pragmatist.
By Mychal Massie on January 19, 2016 in Daily Rant, Race & Politics
We recently enjoyed a belated holiday dinner with friends at the home of other friends. The dinner conversation was jocund, ranging from discussions about antique glass and china to theology and politics. At one point reference was made to Donald Trump being a conservative to which I responded that Trump is not a conservative.
I said that I neither view, nor do I believe Trump views himself, as a conservative. I stated it was my opinion that Trump is a pragmatist. He sees a problem and understands it must be fixed. He doesn’t see the problem as liberal or conservative, he sees it only as a problem. That is a quality that should be admired and applauded, not condemned. But I get ahead of myself.
Viewing problems from a liberal perspective has resulted in the creation of more problems, more entitlement programs, more victims, more government, more political correctness, and more attacks on the working class in all economic strata.
Viewing things according to the so-called Republican conservative perspective has brought continued spending, globalism to the detriment of American interests and well being, denial of what the real problems are, weak, ineffective, milquetoast, leadership that amounts to Barney Fife Deputy Sheriff – appeasement oriented and afraid of its own shadow. In brief, it has brought liberal ideology with a pachyderm as a mascot juxtaposed to the ass of the Democrat Party.
Immigration isn’t a Republican problem – it isn’t a liberal problem – it is a problem that threatens the very fabric and infrastructure of America. It demands a pragmatic approach not an approach that is intended to appease one group or another.
The impending collapse of the economy isn’t a liberal or conservative problem it is an American problem. That said, until it is viewed as a problem that demands a common sense approach to resolution, it will never be fixed because the Democrats and Republicans know only one way to fix things and the longevity of their impracticality has proven to have no lasting effect. Successful businessmen like Donald Trump find ways to make things work, they do not promise to accommodate.
Trump uniquely understands that China’s manipulation of currency is not a Republican problem or a Democrat problem. It is a problem that threatens our financial stability and he understands the proper balance needed to fix it. Here again successful businessmen like Trump who have weathered the changing tides of economic reality understand what is necessary to make business work and they, unlike both sides of the political aisle, know that if something doesn’t work you don’t continue trying to make it work hoping that at some point it will.
As a pragmatist Donald Trump hasn’t made wild pie-in-the-sky promises of a cell phone in every pocket, free college tuition, and a $15 hour minimum wage for working the drive-through a Carl’s Hamburgers.
I argue that America needs pragmatists because pragmatists see a problem and find ways to fix them. They do not see a problem and compound it by creating more problems.
You may not like Donald Trump but I suspect that the reason people do not like him is because: 1) he is antithetical to the “good old boy” method of brokering backroom deals that fatten the coffers of politicians; 2) they are unaccustomed to hearing a candidate speak who is unencumbered by the financial shackles of those who own them vis-a`-vis donations; 3) he is someone who is free of idiomatic political ideology; and 4) he is someone who understands that it takes more than hollow promises and political correctness to make America great again.
Listening to Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders talk about fixing America is like listening to two lunatics trying to “out crazy” one another. Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio are owned lock, stock, and barrel by the bankers, corporations, and big dollar donors funding their campaigns. Bush can deny it but common sense tells anyone willing to face facts that people don’t give tens of millions without expecting something in return.
We have had Democrats and Republican ideologues and what has it brought us? Are we better off today or worst off? Has it happened overnight or has it been a steady decline brought on by both parties?
I submit that a pragmatist might be just what America needs right now. And as I said earlier, a pragmatist sees a problem and understands that the solution to fix same is not about a party, but a willingness and boldness to get it done.
People are quick to confuse and despise confidence as arrogance but that is common amongst those who have never accomplished anything in their lives and who have always played it safe not willing to risk failure
Pass it on. Spread it to any page that has anything to do with the election on both sides. Make people think, not just hear, what the media is saying, and add your words and thoughts to the bottom.
This man is a New Yorker who says what he means. Not one incident has been highlighted of his boardroom dealings and negotiations that were any thing less then honorable. With men or WOMEN!
-
To the third-party voters and non-voters who've made a personal decision to exercise their inarguable right NOT vote for flawed GOP candidates in the last two elections.
Thank you for Obama - and Obamacare.
Thank you for SCOTUS justice Sonia Sotomayor.
Thank you for SCOTUS justice Elena Kagan.
Thank you for an 18 trillion dollar national debt, de facto amnesty for illegal aliens, use of the IRS as a weapon against conservative groups, a path to a nuke for Iran, the rise of ISIS . . . and more.
Perhaps we'll be thanking you for another President Clinton next year.
Now let the indignation begin.
[popcorn]
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. You are not entitled to my vote. When the Republicans put a decent candidate forward, they'll earn my vote. I vote for R candidates when they seem better, D candidates when they seem better. Voting straight party line, Dem or Republican, is what got us all of that. ObamaCare, those SCOTUS Justices are admittedly on the Dems. The huge national debt, de facto amnesty, ISIS, etc are equally Republican as Democrat. You're arguing that because a party gave us bad things, we should blindly vote for them. For what purpose? So that they can continue to do more bad things..? Allegedly because they're less bad than the opposition.
Can you name me one single time of when Republicans had the majority that they used their power to significantly uphold the Constitution, reduce the power of government, reduce the size of the bureaucracy, reduce the national debt or ANYTHING other than token legislation? I can't think of any in the last couple of decades. At best, they can be at times lesser of two evils. But one can't say they're substantially better, just allegedly slightly less evil than the opposition.
Reality is, Republicans just suck in different areas than the Dems. The Entitlement mindframe that I see in this thread is just enabling it further.
-
One the other hand.....copied from another site.
Exactly who is Trump?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Something to think about for both republicans or democrats, or independents...or atheists...or, or, or
Whether you like him or not, read this. If you love your country, your family, your children and grandchildren, this is important.
I copied this from a post by Michael Smith. He recognized how this gentleman characterized Donald Trump perfectly.
This is an interesting assessment of "The Donald". This person may have nailed him for what he really is.
Trump Is Not Conservative; he’s A Pragmatist.
By Mychal Massie on January 19, 2016 in Daily Rant, Race & Politics
Ahhhhh, so what we need is a dictator, not a person that understands the role and function of government and will work to reduce it's size and scope.
;/ ;/ ;/
-
"...a person that understands the role and function of government and will work to reduce it's size and scope."
And that would be.....? I can't recall one in my lifetime. I have Justin Amash in my congressional district. Trouble is that he is one of a handful, thus pissing in the wind.
-
"...a person that understands the role and function of government and will work to reduce it's size and scope."
And that would be.....? I can't recall one in my lifetime. I have Justin Amash in my congressional district. Trouble is that he is one of a handful, thus pissing in the wind.
We had two with actual chops in attempting to prevent the growth of government running in the Republican primary, and they were eschewed in favor of Trump. Two who actually shut the federal government down over austerity measures.
Then, there's always third party....
-
The logic that runs from anger/dismay at the GOP nominees up to Trump also disqualifying Trump is flawed. Trump ran from outside the GOPe. Ideologically, he may be similar to McCain & Romney, but he is coming from a different direction. So, despite similar ideologies, the GOPe despised and feared him. The despite is slowly dissolving due to many in the GOPe facing reality, but I think the fear is still there.
Thing is, this is not much an ideological election. The many folk here who place ideology above all other factors are doomed to disappointment. The GOP used to make noise at being an ideological party, throwing out boob bait for bubba, making pro-life, so-con noise, and the occasional small-gov't bull-talk for the libertarian-minded. But what made the GOP roll was donor money and service to the donor class's interests and cultural predilections. Trump has kicked that apart and based his campaign on American nationalism.
The Dem party is similar. Oh, it professes far-left ideology, but the glue that holds the Coalition of the Fringes together is Hate Whitey. The ideology is merely the money-extraction mechanism (taxes & fees) and the emotional-satisfaction mechanism (rubbing real Americans' noses in the Left's cultural filth) and the weapon (destruction of American culture). All that latter stuff is negotiable. Hate Whitey is not.
IOW, it is an existentialist election. On the Dem side, we have further destruction of America into a continent-wide Balkan mess. On the GOP side, we likely will have a candidate that simply does not hate America...and some small chance of arresting the dispossession of Americans from their patrimony. Already, given the 61 million immivaders since 1964 and their progeny, it has become nigh-impossible for a candidate who espouses American interests to become elected. Keep it going and it will become mathematically impossible.
The conservative ideologically correct, America-loving candidate with good manners does not exist. Anywhere. We got what we got and we'd best address the rent in the hull before we start quibbling about the arrangement of the deck chairs.
-
I guess I don't see Trump as the lefty communist that Hilary is. I am not a fan, but I don't see how he is worse than Hilary.
-
Trump is less absurd as a candidate than Hillary.
-
Trump is less absurd as a candidate than Hillary.
"...less absurd as a candidate than Hillary." Well, that really narrows it down.
-
I guess I don't see Trump as the lefty communist that Hilary is. I am not a fan, but I don't see how he is worse than Hilary.
The Republicans that hold the House and Senate would fight Hillary, and roll over for Trump.
-
I'm glad we have someone who's not going to be a puppet of the donor class! He'll self fund and be independent!
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/14/report-gop-mega-donor-adelson-to-give-trump-up-to-100-million.html
-
IOW, it is an existentialist election. On the Dem side, we have further destruction of America into a continent-wide Balkan mess.
Funny you should mention that. At just about any McDonalds in my area of operations (and that covers a lot of Mickey Ds), you pretty much have to speak Spanish if you want to get decent service. None of the kitchen crew members speak English, and the counter workers generally have a barely adequate grasp of English.
And I'm getting awfully tired of pressing three to speak English ...
-
Apparently we aren't all in this together. Way too many folks ready to hand the election to Hillary because they are butt hurt that their chosen candidate didn't make the cut.
Those that think a Hillary presidency would be better than a Trump presidency because "by damn, I got principals" better hope their *expletive deleted*ing principals will buy them some beans in about 3 years.
We heard the same crap about Romney, from many of the same people.
Respectfully, get bent. You nominated a democrat. Now, you'll get one in the white house. No matter who wins.
This isn't the fault of people who won't vote for trump. if it was only Obama and Hillary running, I'd bet you change your tune. But because the dude has an "R" by his name, we ignore the fact that he's a big government liberal with deep ties to the democrats?
Jesus.
I say again: the people who are handing this election to Hillary are the nincompoops who supported trump.
Then again, some of us called this...
-
In many ways Trump has run a brilliant campaign.
Trump has identified the prevailing anxieties of flyover country and aligned himself as an ally. Anti immigration/concern over Islamic immigration, nationalism over internationalism and anti establishment rhetoric. He has chosen great enemies, Islamists, the establishment, China, Mexico. And that's just a small rundown of the emotional buttons he is pushing.
Trump is motivational, has Teflon armor unlike any we've ever seen and literally has taken both sides of every issue or at least has left possible negotiation open.
He is the Republican Obama where everyone sees what they want. Hell, I've even caught myself rooting for him on occasion as he smashed those I oppose. It was truly a joy seeing Trump spearhead what is potentially the end of the Bush dynasty and disenfranchisement of the neocon foreign policy establishment.
Nonetheless Fitz's point stands. Trump has a history of running with the enemy. He swims and breaths in the establishment/elite world, is part of the donor class and doesn't even pay lip service to small government/constitutionalist concerns. On the social issues front the best one could hope for under a Trump administration is that he ignores social issues, some would consider that a win.
There isn't much to hang onto there other than the immigration issue.
-
oh I definitely get the rooting for him aspect of it. I can't stand the guy, but there have been times when things he's said and done have made me cackle maniacally.
"YEAH! TAKE THAT!"
But, unlike some, I recognize what he actually is
-
I say again: the people who are handing this election to Hillary are the nincompoops who supported trump.
Just because you say so does not make it true.
Poll data shows Trump & Hillary closing. And Trump hasn't even started in on Hillary. Were I Trump, I would hold off until she beats Sanders, as Sanders is the more difficult for Trump or any GOP candidate to beat in the general.
It is very doubtful Cruz would have won any more states' electoral votes than Romney, as his appeal was solely to a slice of the GOP base. To win, he would have had to angle for more & more base votes with Trump-like nationalistic issues. That he would do so successfully is unlikely, given his charisma deficit. Senator Paul (R-Jerry Lee Lewis) was even worse in that he went full *let's not go there* on his way out the door.
The simple fact of the matter is that the American electorate no longer supports contemporary ideological conservatism and never supported the fraud of "fiscally conservative, socially liberal." That is what 50 years of third world immivasion gets you: an un-American electorate.
"Will Trump stick with his major issues?" is another point altogether. I give him a 10% chance of that. Still better odds than any of the other GOP candidates and better than Hillary. Our choices are what they are. Pining for an ideologically pure candidate will leave you waiting for godot.
-
"Will Trump stick with his major issues?" is another point altogether. I give him a 10% chance of that. Still better odds than any of the other GOP candidates and better than Hillary. Our choices are what they are. Pining for an ideologically pure candidate will leave you waiting for godot.
You're right. Much better to stick to the big government liberal who put an R next to his name and rails against mooslims and mexicans
-
We heard the same crap about Romney, from many of the same people.
Respectfully, get bent. You nominated a democrat. Now, you'll get one in the white house. No matter who wins.
This isn't the fault of people who won't vote for trump. if it was only Obama and Hillary running, I'd bet you change your tune. But because the dude has an "R" by his name, we ignore the fact that he's a big government liberal with deep ties to the democrats?
Jesus.
I say again: the people who are handing this election to Hillary are the nincompoops who supported trump.
Then again, some of us called this...
Name calling? Starting to sound like a democrat there.
And, if you care to go look I was a Cruz supporter up until he went out. And while I'm not a huge fan of Trump I still think he would be a damn sight better than Hillary. But yeah I get it, you can't have your perfect candidate so you'll take your vote and go home and cut your nose off to spite your own face. And while you're at it go ahead and engage in some autonomous intercourse.
-
You're right. Much better to stick to the big government liberal who put an R next to his name and rails against mooslims and mexicans
Oh, the noes! A big gov't LIBERAL!? Who would have thought it? Is there a cream for that?
What you are lacking is context. You make noise about, "unlike some, I recognize what he actually is" but do not see that it is not Trump vs Nothing or Trump vs George Washington's clone or Trump vs Ideal Candidate X. Most likely, it is Trump vs Hillary.
Big gov't liberal who talks about how he likes actual Americans vs the even farther left Hillary who makes no bones about her antipathy to actual Americans. Those are your choices. The open border & privatize the sidewalks libertarian has zero chance, even in the case of a catastrophe that incapacitates both Trump and Hillary at the same time.
Somebody needs to "rails against mooslims and mexicans" since nobody is looking out for the interests of Americans in the face of their depredations.
-
Name calling? Starting to sound like a democrat there.
Do I call folks names regularly or something? If so, definitely apologize, I don't remember doing that other than in jest or under rare circumstances.
-
Name calling? Starting to sound like a democrat there.
And, if you care to go look I was a Cruz supporter up until he went out. And while I'm not a huge fan of Trump I still think he would be a damn sight better than Hillary. But yeah I get it, you can't have your perfect candidate so you'll take your vote and go home and cut your nose off to spite your own face. And while you're at it go ahead and engage in some autonomous intercourse.
I'm not abstaining from voting, I'm voting for the candidate that actually represents my principles.
You know, kinda how it's supposed to work.
And you're worried about name calling? Please. After hearing months and months of people who simply WILL NOT vote for trump, you turn around and start vilifying us for it?
If you're gonna tell me to go *expletive deleted*ck myself, at least have the balls to come out and say it, coward .
Go ahead and tell yourself you fought the good fight when Hillary is inaugurated
-
Oh, the noes! A big gov't LIBERAL!? Who would have thought it? Is there a cream for that?
What you are lacking is context. You make noise about, "unlike some, I recognize what he actually is" but do not see that it is not Trump vs Nothing or Trump vs George Washington's clone or Trump vs Ideal Candidate X. Most likely, it is Trump vs Hillary.
Big gov't liberal who talks about how he likes actual Americans vs the even farther left Hillary who makes no bones about her antipathy to actual Americans. Those are your choices. The open border & privatize the sidewalks libertarian has zero chance, even in the case of a catastrophe that incapacitates both Trump and Hillary at the same time.
Somebody needs to "rails against mooslims and mexicans" since nobody is looking out for the interests of Americans in the face of their depredations.
When choosing between a kick in the balls and a punch in the balls, begging master for the punch is something I'm not willing to lower myself to. If we end up with Hillary or trump, it won't be because I willingly begged my masters for it
Are you under the impression that I actually think we have a chance at a libertarian president? Because I'm not. The point is, if i want smaller government, the "party of small government" is going to have to lose votes until it realizes that it needs to pay more than lip service to that
-
I'm not abstaining from voting, I'm voting for the candidate that actually represents my principles.
You know, kinda how it's supposed to work.
And you're worried about name calling? Please. After hearing months and months of people who simply WILL NOT vote for trump, you turn around and start vilifying us for it?
If you're gonna tell me to go *expletive deleted*ck myself, at least have the balls to come out and say it, coward .
Go ahead and tell yourself you fought the good fight when Hillary is inaugurated
Yeah, the anti-trumpers on APS have been calling his supporters names for months now here and when one sorta-trump-supporter closely questions you about your vote--and calls you on your resort to name-calling--you claim he is "vilifying you?" And then call him another name.
Here ya go:
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fecx.images-amazon.com%2Fimages%2FI%2F61czCYR86cL._SY355_.jpg&hash=9da9c4bf3c3cbb0b469aca12be7cc4a63a896bc6)
When choosing between a kick in the balls and a punch in the balls, begging master for the punch is something I'm not willing to lower myself to. If we end up with Hillary or trump, it won't be because I willingly begged my masters for it
Are you under the impression that I actually think we have a chance at a libertarian president? Because I'm not. The point is, if i want smaller government, the "party of small government" is going to have to lose votes until it realizes that it needs to pay more than lip service to that
There is no party of small gov't in the USA. Even the "upper-case L" Libertarian Party is A-OK with expanding gov't power to press its agenda. Welcome to reality.
-
"Closely questions"
Is that what you call it when someone who says I'm voting for a candidate who represents me is "voting for Hillary"
It's not a question, or even a call for discussion. It's an attack by someone who is aware that trump will lose, and is already seeking someone to blame
Go back to begging master for the small whip instead of the large one.
You're right. No party is completely hands off, but we have had plenty of options better than trump, and the fact that a completely unobtrusive government isn't a possibility is no reason to stop trying to decrease government intrusion into our lives
Would you stop carrying a gun because a crime free society is impossible
Whatever helps you justify your choices, I suppose
Interesting quote in your sig. You should reflect on it
-
Oh, the noes! A big gov't LIBERAL!? Who would have thought it? Is there a cream for that?
What you are lacking is context. You make noise about, "unlike some, I recognize what he actually is" but do not see that it is not Trump vs Nothing or Trump vs George Washington's clone or Trump vs Ideal Candidate X. Most likely, it is Trump vs Hillary.
Big gov't liberal who talks about how he likes actual Americans vs the even farther left Hillary who makes no bones about her antipathy to actual Americans. Those are your choices. The open border & privatize the sidewalks libertarian has zero chance, even in the case of a catastrophe that incapacitates both Trump and Hillary at the same time.
Somebody needs to "rails against mooslims and mexicans" since nobody is looking out for the interests of Americans in the face of their depredations.
Gasp. If only there were other political parties to choose from. Maybe even one that believes in respecting personal liberty, property and religious rights.
-
Gasp. If only there were other political parties to choose from. Maybe even one that believes in respecting personal liberty, property and religious rights.
Go on.
No, don't. Not in this thread. It's not worth continuing.
-
Gasp. If only there were other political parties to choose from. Maybe even one that believes in respecting personal liberty, property and religious rights.
I would like to behold such a unicorn.
-
Deeds not words. Trump's personal history (until he decided he'd have better luck as an R than a D) is solid, hardline leftist literally no different than Hillary.
Ignore his rhetoric, assume he didn't have a life changing epiphany in his 60's and that the things he has always done in the past he will continue to do. If that is the case, then he will be far far worse than Hillary. As the GOP "leadership" is busy proving, they are spineless and will vote party uber alles. If the guy putting forth the marxist policy has an R by his name many of them will not oppose it. If Hillary does it is in their best interest to do so.
Trump is worse than Hillary.
-
Deeds not words. Trump's personal history (until he decided he'd have better luck as an R than a D) is solid, hardline leftist literally no different than Hillary.
Ignore his rhetoric, assume he didn't have a life changing epiphany in his 60's and that the things he has always done in the past he will continue to do. If that is the case, then he will be far far worse than Hillary. As the GOP "leadership" is busy proving, they are spineless and will vote party uber alles. If the guy putting forth the marxist policy has an R by his name many of them will not oppose it. If Hillary does it is in their best interest to do so.
Trump is worse than Hillary.
Trump is a nationalist, Hillary is an internationalist.
Trump is not an ideological Marxist, he is a crony capitalist. Hillary is a cultural Marxist as well as a welfare state proponent.
Nothing Trump has done or said over the decades makes me think he dislikes the USA or western civilization in general. Hillary will continue to try and dismantle our country under the guise of equality.
While I doubt Trump is a conservative (whatever the hell that means) I don't think he has as evil intentions as Hillary.
-
While I doubt Trump is a conservative (whatever the hell that means) I don't think he has as evil intentions as Hillary.
From what I've been seeing the last couple of decades, A "Conservative" is someone that talks one way and votes another. Tell their voters they oppose liberalism but voting for and supporting it in the legislature. Accepting of one sided compromises and willing to sacrifice principals for political and monetary gain.
-
If you're gonna tell me to go *expletive deleted*ck myself, at least have the balls to come out and say it, coward .
I'm sorry, did I use words with too many syllables?
-
Trump is a nationalist, Hillary is an internationalist.
Trump is not an ideological Marxist, he is a crony capitalist. Hillary is a cultural Marxist as well as a welfare state proponent.
Nothing Trump has done or said over the decades makes me think he dislikes the USA or western civilization in general. Hillary will continue to try and dismantle our country under the guise of equality.
While I doubt Trump is a conservative (whatever the hell that means) I don't think he has as evil intentions as Hillary.
1. I disagree with your analysis of his record.
2. Regardless, he will actually be able to carry out his agenda in a way Hillary would not be able to do. Gridlock vs Medicare part D and the TSA redux.
-
1. I disagree with your analysis of his record.
2. Regardless, he will actually be able to carry out his agenda in a way Hillary would not be able to do. Gridlock vs Medicare part D and the TSA redux.
If by Med. Part D and TSA, you mean another Bush administration; and if by Gridlock, you mean a continuation of the past seven years - I'd prefer the former.
-
What sort of SC Justices do you think Trump would nominate? Would he nominate internationalist commies like Obama has done?
-
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2F9gXy0G3.jpg&hash=2294795ad29d8d21a8848e72906ea48182240a53)
:rofl: :rofl:
-
Interesting article that discusses the rise of Trump and Hillary Clinton.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/17/opinion/campaign-stops/trumpism-and-clintonismare-the-future.html?ref=opinion&_r=0
The centrality of identity politics, rather than progressive economics, to the contemporary Democratic Party is nothing new. In 1982, the Democratic National Committee recognized seven official caucuses: women, blacks, Hispanics, Asians, gays, liberals and business/professionals. Thirty-four years later, this is the base of the Democratic Party of Hillary Clinton.
Whatever becomes of his bid for the presidency, Mr. Trump exposed the gap between what orthodox conservative Republicans offer and what today’s dominant Republican voters actually want — middle-class entitlements plus crackdowns on illegal immigrants, Muslims, foreign trade rivals and free-riding allies. Other candidates less flawed than Mr. Trump and more acceptable to the Republican establishment, like Ted Cruz, are likely to bring Republican policy positions and Republican voter preferences more closely into alignment, by moving somewhat to the left on middle-class entitlements and somewhat to the right on immigration and trade.
it is likely that the future of the Democrats will be Clintonism — Hillary Clintonism, that is, a slightly more progressive version of neoliberalism freed of the strategic concessions to white working-class voters associated with Bill Clintonism. On the other side of the aisle, it is probably only a matter of time before the conflict between elite libertarianism and the populism of the voters in the Republican Party is resolved more or less in favor of the voters, by a new orthodoxy that moves left on entitlements and right on immigration, while eschewing Mr. Trump’s inflammatory approach.
-
Consider this, please. For years Americans who identify as R's have been very loud about wanting the R's to stand up and be the loyal opposition...not D Lite. So far, the GOPe has continued to be lap dogs. Now we finally have someone who is scratching the scab off and getting in the faces of the progs/liberals/etc. Maybe he's not the one we'd prefer, but Trump is certainly not lying down on his back looking for a belly rub from the Ds, Rinos and the MSM. We on the Right have been wanting the gloves off for several decades. Now they are off.
Before any of us pass judgment on The Donald, we need to see what he says and proposes during the real campaign after the conventions. Frankly I'm not interested in what The Donald has been. I'm more interested in what he will be.
As for the notion that he sees himself as some sort of dictator, get real. We have two other bodies of the .fed gov. Maybe they'll start doing their jobs of defending the Constitution if The Donald tries to get frisky and extra-constitutional as Obama has. They'll certainly not be in fear and trembling by doing what we sent them to do as Trump is a white male billionaire. No one should be afraid of picking on him or holding him accountable.
My point is that none of us should be locking in our decisions now. We are getting what we've been asking for. Let's see what happens. No one needs to close up their mind at this point. If you do, maybe you are part of the problem. Deciding to fail to vote or voting for some obscure ideologue because somebody stole your ice cream cone may wind up being what needs to happen. Now is not the time to decide to do that. Man, I've been going back and forth on this almost hourly sometimes. We need to have patience.
Again, who cares what The Donald was. I'm more interested what he will be. We won't know about that unless he wins the election. The Republic has survived many bad elected critters. We can survive a Trump if he turns out to be a stalking horse for more progressivism, but I doubt it. He is a capitalist after all and progs hate capitalism. Maybe he's a sort of statist, but again, we have the congress and the courts to rein him in. For me, give me the unknown. We do know what Hillary will do. For sure we know what Hillary will do and it will not be best for America, period. Who is president is important for many reasons, not just a single issue or a couple of them.
-
The Repub convention isn't until late July two months away. The election is another 3 or more months after that. Lots of time to see what Trump does and how he handles himself.
Personally, I think he will get a sold win (maybe landslide) assuming he doesn't completely fall apart or start running as a liberal.
-
Two pols, Fox and another mainline one show Trump up by around 5 pts over Hillary.
-
Two pols, Fox and another mainline one show Trump up by around 5 pts over Hillary.
See people? As I said before, it's not going to matter if I don't vote for Trump.
So you can have your Republican Obama, and I don't have to be a part of it.
-
But, but, what if only three voters showed up... you, and two Hillary voters?
At the very least, your vote for Trump might cancel out one of those students who vote both at home and at their dorms.
>:D ;)
-
An additional data point in the Hillary vs Trump debate, this one concerning the plans of both over the next few days.
Hillary will meet with the family of Trayvon Martin and other parents who have lost children to gun violence, and will be keynote speaker at an event sponsored by the Trayvon Martin foundation where she is expected to repeat her recent calls for restrictive gun control.
Trump, on the other hand, will be speaking at the NRA convention.
That is all.
-
"Epiphany?"
Hey, I had a 180° one when I moved out to Colorado from New York City in the 1960s.
Not impossible.
Terry
-
Well, here's some astute commentary for you:
http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/article79165287.html#fmp
If by "astute commentary" we mean "recycle article from 2008, and replace 'racism' with 'misogyny.'"
-
nm