I'm all aboard the Trump train. choo choo! But, I don't explain why because I don't have to.
I'm all aboard the Trump train. choo choo! But, I don't explain why because I don't have to.
I have an even better idea that might just save the Republican party from the Great Tribulation- Trump needs to appoint Jim Bakker as his running mate!Steve, that's a rhetorical question, no? We all know why. The people CURRENTLY in power don't want to and a tax code that is unreadable allows the corrupt IRS to threaten without the victim having any clear defense.
Based on the Soros (among others) funded violence against Trump's rallies and the threat against Trump towers, I think he should select Cruz as his running mate sooner rather than later. It would sow up the nomination and who's going to shoot Trump then? Hmm?
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2014/...orld-biscuits/
End of the World Biscuits, anyone?
Better yet, after Hillery is indited he could run as the democratic establishment's alternative to Sanders.
If Sanders holds on then he could appoint Colonel Sanders as his running mate. This would peel away the bearded vote from Bakker.
If Soros or Hillery or Karl Rove successfully place a hit on Trump and he is killed then Jim may have a point.
I agree it happens. I think where we disagree is to the degree that it happens.
No such thing! I see your point though.It's a lot like a conservative in Hollywood.
Would you go so far as to say that the majority of science is corrupt, though?Science is much more corrupt than the lay person would dream.
I seem to remember something about that. And I agree that the elite don't really care about the party... They want someone they can buy. My comment about republicans not wanting to switch their support to Hillary was more about the average Republican voter.there is a billionaire, health care exec in Florida that days before Jeb threw in the towel, stated that Jeb's campaign looked hopeless and he was shifting his support to Hillery.
And really, I suppose in this day and age the will of the average voter (Republican or Democrat) isn't nearly as important as the power players who control the money (PACs).
That would give him an end-run around any potential party shenanigans at the Republican convention, that's for sure. Actually, that's a damned smart strategy for him to take... Wonder if he's considering it?I think he should select Cruz as his running mate sooner rather than later. It would sow up the nomination and who's going to shoot Trump then? Hmm?
Originally Posted by ghosttrain
Read my post above. I didn't say he was racist because he was prejudiced against all immigrants. I said I felt he was racist because of his statements about Latinos and Muslims specifically. He may well be prejudiced against other immigrant groups as well, but based on what I have heard come from his mouth he is particularly offensive when speaking about those two groups. If you don't agree, that's fine too.
not every illegal immigrant is crossing the border because someone sent him to smuggle drugs or something similar, and not even the majority, I'd assume, but I still don't see this speech showing what a racist or prejudiced he is.
Someone without preconceived notions about a Latino's criminal intent would not say "some, I assume, are good people". The assumption would be that they are all good people until proven otherwise. You may feel that the difference is small, but in my mind this betrays an underlying prejudice. Particularly since he did not see fit to alter this message in his stump speech when he came to Charleston. The wording was different, but the message was clear: Elect me and I will rid our nation of these criminals... (speaking specifically about immigrants from Mexico, which are growing in numbers here in Charleston) That sort of talk gives me great pause.
Indeed. However, what was once celebrated is now demonized.I think US is and always has been a country of immigrants.
people are fed up with political correctness sissies and bought politicians.
Yup. Agree 100%. The problem is that when we get angry, we tend to make poor decisions. I am concerned that as a nation, we are all angry, and we may be about to make a poor decision. Honestly, I believe that Trump himself feels that same anger at times, and that may be why he says the things he does. (Although I also think there is some deep-seated prejudice in him as well.)
My problem with this whole thing is that I expect our statesmen to be held to a higher standard. They are to be the voice of reason when the rest of the country is frantic. True, we haven't had an actual statesman in a long, long time, (Plenty of politicians though, which is not the same thing.) But even though recent leaders have been lacking, I still feel that this is a requirement for the office. But pickings have been slim...
I agree completely that people are fed up and that is what is driving Trump's continued success. He has tapped into an anger that is present in a vast swath of the electorate. I, too, share in this anger. As I said, I am simply worried about making a decision based on that anger.He may be on the other side of the extreme by being so insensitive, but seems like that's what people want because they're fed up with the other opposite.
So who is it going to be for you, buffo? Trump or Hillary?
It may sound like I'm sticking my head in the sand (trust me, I'm not), but right now I just don't know. A lot can happen between now and November. But you're right, I will have to choose at some point. (And as Geddy Lee said: "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!")
Argh... Pardon me while I throw up in the trash can beside my desk...I mean you have to have somebody until Kanye becomes president.
Adam
Where are those statements about latinos and muslims specifically?
Which of your post do you mean? #85? There you said he conflates illegal immigrants with rapists and murderers. That is the only speech I can recall where he's mentioned the phrase rapists and murderers among illegal immigrants. There's nothing specific there about latinos and muslims. If you mean other speeches, then I've been watching Trump and Hillary since the beginning of their campaigns and I don't recall such thing in any other speech or interviews. I don't have a perfect memory, if you can recall at least when or where he might have said that I'll look into it.
I'm sorry but what does this even mean? I don't understand you point. You can't possibly mean that there is no proof that not all illegal immigrants who are yet to cross the border are criminals therefore they should be allowed to cross the border. Presumption of innocence is a right in criminal trial, not all the time everywhere. So what do you mean?The assumption would be that they are all good people until proven otherwise.
I'll check that speech. I'm very skeptical he said that and I think you've misheard "*illegal* immigrants coming from the Mexican border" with "immigrants from Mexico" which to be honest makes me feel like you have prejudice towards Trump instead.You may feel that the difference is small, but in my mind this betrays an underlying prejudice. Particularly since he did not see fit to alter this message in his stump speech when he came to Charleston. The wording was different, but the message was clear: Elect me and I will rid our nation of these criminals... (speaking specifically about immigrants from Mexico, which are growing in numbers here in Charleston) That sort of talk gives me great pause.
EDIT: Is this the speech? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfUxoOFk0HI
I don't disagree, but I do think people should understand the difference between illegal and legal immigrants and stop ironically demonizing people who they merely think are demonizing immigrants.Indeed. However, what was once celebrated is now demonized.
Many people start yelling "racist" when anyone suggests that illegal immigrants should be deported. The whole world does that, it's a good thing, there's a good reason for it that's why laws around the world make a distinction and deport illegal immigrants. You can't ignore the law just because most of the people who are breaking those laws are good people.
Maybe I should have mentioned this earlier: I myself don't feel like I support Trump because I'm angry and he's just manipulating my anger. I'll grant you that many people do support him for exactly that. But then again I honestly believe many women support Hillary cause she's a woman and many black people supported Obama just because he was black (I'm not making this up, I've asked people).Yup. Agree 100%. The problem is that when we get angry, we tend to make poor decisions. I am concerned that as a nation, we are all angry, and we may be about to make a poor decision. Honestly, I believe that Trump himself feels that same anger at times, and that may be why he says the things he does. (Although I also think there is some deep-seated prejudice in him as well.)
He'll legalize weed thoArgh... Pardon me while I throw up in the trash can beside my desk...
Last edited by ghosttrain; 03-19-2016 at 11:06.
The point is we could object that we're being manipulated when we understood that but quietly stop supporting Trump. We don't.
Last edited by ghosttrain; 03-19-2016 at 08:52.
Remember that old joke about the man in the bar asking the women if she would sleep with him for one million dollars and she agrees. But, then he asked if she would do this for one hundred dollars and she refuses saying "do you think I'm a whore"? He replies " we've already established that, now we're only negotiating the price".I agree it happens. I think where we disagree is to the degree that it happens
The level of corruption is disputable. Here we can agree to disagree, but it doesn't have to be gross, vile drugs and cash under the table corruption to taint what is studied or the effort to prove or disprove a point. So, when you ask if I believe a majority is corrupt I will say that a majority of science is pressured not to oppose the funding sources. Scientists are human and fallible. Some scientist's dissertations are a huge contribution while others are just good enough to get buy.
Trump is very smart and I have no doubt that he has considered many options including this one. Remember, after the heated debates that Christie still endorsed Trump. The same reconciliation could occur with Cruz.That would give him an end-run around any potential party shenanigans at the Republican convention, that's for sure. Actually, that's a damned smart strategy for him to take... Wonder if he's considering it?
I agree. Anger does not make you insane. It can motivate you. The question is if you can justify your decision with facts and reason and I believe you have.Maybe I should have mentioned this earlier: I myself don't feel like I support Trump because I'm angry and he's just manipulating my anger.
Maybe Trump should look up an old business partner from years ago to be his running mate...