If Trumps Wins, The Clinton’s Go To Jail!

[HonestJohn]

Oh, for Heavens' sake!  EVERY one of the people on this board who opposes Trump is more conservative than ANY of you zealots.  Calling us liberals when YOU support the hard core liberal is delusional.

I guess it must be your guilty conscience screaming at you that you're supporting a bad guy that makes you falsely accuse as you do.

I've come to the conclusion that there are two rough groups that both claim to be 'conservative', but which have radically differing ideals of that it means.

The first is the old American notion of conservative, that being in the vein of our founding fathers - who were what is now considered the "Classic Liberal".

IE: a political ideology that values the freedom of individuals — including the freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and markets — as well as limited government. (It developed in 18th-century Europe and drew on the economic writings of Adam Smith and the growing notion of social progress.)

Whereas the second group generally believes in the modern European notion of conservatism.

IE: a political ideology focused mainly on national interests and upholding cultural/ethnic identity.  These generally reject notions of individualism, liberalism, and egalitarianism.

---

These two are, in my view, diametrically opposed... yet reside in one party.  No matter what happens in November, the Republican party will shrink greatly.  For the two cannot coexist anymore.

If Trump wins, look for a modest uptick in the Democrat rolls, as they are not polar opposes to the American conservative (ie: classic liberal). 

If Hillary wins, the Euro-conservatives will be pushed back into the wilderness.  Registered Republicans will decrease with an uptick in Independents.  For the Euro-conservative cannot deal with Democrats as they cannot tolerate those not of own ethnic/racial/religious group.

[musiclady]

I've come to the conclusion that there are two rough groups that both claim to be 'conservative', but which have radically differing ideals of that it means.

The first is the old American notion of conservative, that being in the vein of our founding fathers - who were what is now considered the "Classic Liberal".

IE: a political ideology that values the freedom of individuals — including the freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and markets — as well as limited government. (It developed in 18th-century Europe and drew on the economic writings of Adam Smith and the growing notion of social progress.)

Whereas the second group generally believes in the modern European notion of conservatism.

IE: a political ideology focused mainly on national interests and upholding cultural/ethnic identity.  These generally reject notions of individualism, liberalism, and egalitarianism.

---

These two are, in my view, diametrically opposed... yet reside in one party.  No matter what happens in November, the Republican party will shrink greatly.  For the two cannot coexist anymore.

If Trump wins, look for a modest uptick in the Democrat rolls, as they are not polar opposes to the American conservative (ie: classic liberal). 

If Hillary wins, the Euro-conservatives will be pushed back into the wilderness.  Registered Republicans will decrease with an uptick in Independents.  For the Euro-conservative cannot deal with Democrats as they cannot tolerate those not of own ethnic/racial/religious group.

Interesting analysis, John.  I agree that there are those who consider themselves conservative, but are not in the American sense of the word, and perhaps they are the ones who are supporting Trump, believing themselves to be Conservative.

However, the problem for me is that they are quite liberal no matter what they think of themselves.  They are, as you say, nationalists and desire ethnic purity, but they are not even familiar with what's in the Constitution..... the document that has made America great.

Add to that the fact that these Euro-ethnicists are hanging around here calling American Conservatives liberals, and they know that is an outright lie.

Bottom line is, Trump is a liberal.  He is a Democrat, who is ideologically indistinguishable from Hillary Clinton.

The "other" group who loves the guy are supporting a candidate, who by ANY definition, is a leftist.

[Cripplecreek]

If Hillary wins, the Euro-conservatives will be pushed back into the wilderness.  Registered Republicans will decrease with an uptick in Independents.  For the Euro-conservative cannot deal with Democrats as they cannot tolerate those not of own ethnic/racial/religious group.

"Euro-cons" is perfect.

I once saw a speech by Daniel Hannan about the Anglo-right, the Euro-right, and socialism. He pointed to the anger and confusion resulting from nazis being called right wing and blames it on our having forgotten the difference between the euro right and anglo right. He says that the right in english speaking countries tend to be ideological siblings and that the right in latin American countries are often closer to our thinking than the Euro right. (more like cousins)

[NavyCanDo]

Oh, for Heavens' sake!  EVERY one of the people on this board who opposes Trump is more conservative than ANY of you zealots.  Calling us liberals when YOU support the hard core liberal is delusional.

I guess it must be your guilty conscience screaming at you that you're supporting a bad guy that makes you falsely accuse as you do.

Well Said.

[musiclady]

"Euro-cons" is perfect.

I once saw a speech by Daniel Hannan about the Anglo-right, the Euro-right, and socialism. He pointed to the anger and confusion resulting from nazis being called right wing and blames it on our having forgotten the difference between the euro right and anglo right. He says that the right in english speaking countries tend to be ideological siblings and that the right in latin American countries are often closer to our thinking than the Euro right. (more like cousins)

Daniel Hannan is a very perceptive man. 

That's a good reminder.

[musiclady]

Well Said.

Thanks, Navy!

When a liberal calls this great forum "DU" because we're too conservative for Trump, it ticks me off.....

[Vulcan]

Thanks, Navy!

When a liberal calls this great forum "DU" because we're too conservative for Trump, it ticks me off.....

I have never understood the argument that because Trump is too liberal for me I must want Hillary.

I've seen it often.  I just don't get it.

I don't support liberals and that includes those who have an "R" next to their name.

Apparently, that's too deep for some.

[aligncare]

I never, ever thought that Trump was a stalking horse for Hillary.

Really? You might consider conferring with some of your NeverTrumper friends here at TBR. There are about a half dozen or so believers in the stalking horse theory of Trump's run, starting with Bigun and ending with libertybele -- I'm quite certain several of them will now deny ever holding such a view.

Of course, no one should ever be held to account for someone else's beliefs. But, when you're a Trump supporter, those are the kinds of mad, crazy ideas about Trump we face everyday.

#NeverTrump throws out sheer lunacy and then expects to be taken seriously! 

Such is life with #NeverTrump.

[Oceander]

The Clintons won't go to jail if Trump wins.  They will never go to jail, period.  The fact of the matter is, if there is anything out there so blatant that a prosecution would be unavoidable if it got out, Obama will give them a pre-emptive pardon.

Thinking the Clintons will go to jail is about as realistic as thinking Trump is anything more than a semi-literate buffoon, which is to say, not at all.

[Norm Lenhart]

This election has Everyone up in arms and at each other's throats at the drop of an innuendo.

How about backing up positions and assertions with Links proving Facts before going off attacking each other?

OK, lets do that...

Fact - Donald Trump is a lifetime liberal as documented in print, video and on the net. The examples are myriad.

Fact - Words mean things. They have clear definitions that political operatives do not get to change in support of their candidate.

Fact - Liberals have worked for decades to destroy this country and the foundations that created it.

Fact - Conservatives do not empower liberalism, or liberals with verbal/written/campaign/vote support. Conservatives support conservative values, positions, and do not alter those opinions based on which way popular or political winds blow.

If anyone wishes to deny those set in stone facts, they are simply intentionally lying. So since ALL of the above is true/fact/historically accurate, the one inescapable conclusion is that people working to empower liberals are themselves liberal and thus working to destroy America and it's foundations.

Doesn't matter if that liberal is named Trump, Clinton, Obama or Alynski.

[Norm Lenhart]

Now that ^^  ^^  is just damned dishonest, and I really have to speak up here.

This place is no way, no how anything like DU.  For you to claim that is pretty despicable, IMO.  Especially when Myst is trying and doing her level best to keep this place fair and balanced, unlike at DU...where if you even say something the least bit positive about their opposition (the Republicans), you are summarily banned forever. 

You owe this forum and Myst an apology for that crack.

What he/she is engaging in is called 'projection'. They are the people calling conservatives 'Hillary supporters' while championing a documented lifetime liberal afterall.

See also "Delphi Technique".

Edit/Addition: See also "Gaslighting"

[Cripplecreek]

The Clintons won't go to jail if Trump wins.  They will never go to jail, period.  The fact of the matter is, if there is anything out there so blatant that a prosecution would be unavoidable if it got out, Obama will give them a pre-emptive pardon.

Thinking the Clintons will go to jail is about as realistic as thinking Trump is anything more than a semi-literate buffoon, which is to say, not at all.

Ted Cruz was honest about it when he said he would direct his AG appointment to follow the leads wherever they may go to whatever conclusions they may reach. He knows that you simply can't make bold absolute promises that you can't keep and hope people will forget about them. They have a tendency to boomarang.

George Bush Sr was eaten alive over "Read my lips. No new taxes" and that was mild.

[Norm Lenhart]

Ted Cruz was honest about it when he said he would direct his AG appointment to follow the leads wherever they may go to whatever conclusions they may reach. He knows that you simply can't make bold absolute promises that you can't keep and hope people will forget about them. They have a tendency to boomarang.

George Bush Sr was eaten alive over "Read my lips. No new taxes" and that was mild.

The thing with GB though is that his statement happened in a time when most rank and file Republicans and yes, even some Democrats cared about keeping ones word. Now, as we see here and elsewhere, many people simply have no interest in quaint notions of honesty, integrity, right and wrong. There is only "Winning no matter what".

[ABX]

I've come to the conclusion that there are two rough groups that both claim to be 'conservative', but which have radically differing ideals of that it means.

The first is the old American notion of conservative, that being in the vein of our founding fathers - who were what is now considered the "Classic Liberal".

IE: a political ideology that values the freedom of individuals — including the freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and markets — as well as limited government. (It developed in 18th-century Europe and drew on the economic writings of Adam Smith and the growing notion of social progress.)

Whereas the second group generally believes in the modern European notion of conservatism.

IE: a political ideology focused mainly on national interests and upholding cultural/ethnic identity.  These generally reject notions of individualism, liberalism, and egalitarianism.

---

These two are, in my view, diametrically opposed... yet reside in one party.  No matter what happens in November, the Republican party will shrink greatly.  For the two cannot coexist anymore.

If Trump wins, look for a modest uptick in the Democrat rolls, as they are not polar opposes to the American conservative (ie: classic liberal). 

If Hillary wins, the Euro-conservatives will be pushed back into the wilderness.  Registered Republicans will decrease with an uptick in Independents.  For the Euro-conservative cannot deal with Democrats as they cannot tolerate those not of own ethnic/racial/religious group.

I totally agree with your assessment. This split has been a long time coming. I call it the difference in the Liberty Right versus the Authoritarian Right. They have for the longest time, been united on issues but divided on philosophy. Now, the philosophy difference is too much to ignore and is too great.

[Cripplecreek]

The thing with GB though is that his statement happened in a time when most rank and file Republicans and yes, even some Democrats cared about keeping ones word. Now, as we see here and elsewhere, many people simply have no interest in quaint notions of honesty, integrity, right and wrong. There is only "Winning no matter what".

Back in the days when people wouldn't have accepted attacking a candidates family, accused them of affairs with zero proof or accused their fathers of killing former presidents.

Degenerating cultures choose degenerate candidates.

[GtHawk]

Really? You might consider conferring with some of your NeverTrumper friends here at TBR. There are about a half dozen or so believers in the stalking horse theory of Trump's run, starting with Bigun and ending with libertybele -- I'm quite certain several of them will now deny ever holding such a view.

Of course, no one should ever be held to account for someone else's beliefs. But, when you're a Trump supporter, those are the kinds of mad, crazy ideas about Trump we face everyday.

#NeverTrump throws out sheer lunacy and then expects to be taken seriously! 

Such is life with #NeverTrump.

After reading that all I can say is:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sONfxPCTU0



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVAdt5bH2tE
Wow I really had trouble to keep from laughing, reading the comments of a Trump Asylum inmate accusing others of lunacy

[Norm Lenhart]

\Wow I really had trouble to keep from laughing, reading the comments of a Trump Asylum inmate accusing others of lunacy

Generally, when I want to get away from reality, I fire up Skyrim or Fallout 4 on the Vive. However, I find more and more every trip into VR that the computer generated, scripted AI characters I encounter have a better grasp of reality than most of the Trump supporters I have encountered in the real world.

And that isn't remotely an exaggeration. For example:

* Both repeat the same lines someone wrote for them regardless of the situation.
* Both display no will of their own.
* Both repeat the same patterns over and over.

The DIFFERENCE is that sometimes, someone coded the game AI really well and it/the NPC recognizes it in fact has options to running straight into it's own destruction.

[musiclady]

I have never understood the argument that because Trump is too liberal for me I must want Hillary.

I've seen it often.  I just don't get it.

I don't support liberals and that includes those who have an "R" next to their name.

Apparently, that's too deep for some.

The argument itself is an outright lie.

Everyone here knows that Trump was the most liberal candidate in the Primary, so EVERYONE who supported ANYONE else is more Conservative than a Trump supporter.

Many of us here on TBR supported Cruz, who is light years more conservative than Trump.

Now the bozos who are Trump zealots are accusing us of being liberal.

It's like their minds are gone.  Either that, or their consciences.

[musiclady]

The thing with GB though is that his statement happened in a time when most rank and file Republicans and yes, even some Democrats cared about keeping ones word. Now, as we see here and elsewhere, many people simply have no interest in quaint notions of honesty, integrity, right and wrong. There is only "Winning no matter what".

Ah, yes....... I remember the days, not that long ago when integrity mattered to Republicans, and yes, many Democrats.

The Trump candidacy is proof positive that integrity is not a factor in who the "Republicans" choose.

He is the most character-less person that could have been picked, and is an embarrassment to all of us who used to call ourselves Republicans.

[Norm Lenhart]

The argument itself is an outright lie.

Everyone here knows that Trump was the most liberal candidate in the Primary, so EVERYONE who supported ANYONE else is more Conservative than a Trump supporter.

Many of us here on TBR supported Cruz, who is light years more conservative than Trump.

Now the bozos who are Trump zealots are accusing us of being liberal.

It's like their minds are gone.  Either that, or their consciences.

Ever known a liberal with a conscience? No such animal. that would be like a Satanist evangelizing for Christ. The two are mutually exclusive. A liberal is a liberal exactly because they are unfettered by a conscience. If one HAS a conscience, they cannot be liberal. They can of course still be wrong/mistaken in action, however after literally two decades of increasing, documented leftism by the GOP, anyone still backing that horse isn't 'just' wrong. They are aware of it and so intentionally trying to promote the GOP's liberalism.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"If Trumps Wins, The Clinton’s Go To Jail!"

Not satisfied with destroying both the GOP and conservatism, Trump supporters turn their attention to the English language.

[Norm Lenhart]

Not satisfied with destroying both the GOP and conservatism, Trump supporters turn their attention to the English language.

Just read their posts or listen to them talk in real life. A lot of them I have encountered wouldn't sound out of place in a remake of Deliverance. And I don't mean southern hillbilly rednecks. I mean the supposedly highly educated types.

[unknown]

Just read their posts or listen to them talk in real life. A lot of them I have encountered wouldn't sound out of place in a remake of Deliverance. And I don't mean southern hillbilly rednecks. I mean the supposedly highly educated types.

Yes! Absolutely.

The DEPLORABLES!

[Norm Lenhart]

Yes! Absolutely.

The DEPLORABLES!

I don't hold most of you in such high regard actually. You've never given me a reason to.

[bigheadfred]

Ever known a liberal with a conscience? No such animal. that would be like a Satanist evangelizing for Christ. The two are mutually exclusive. A liberal is a liberal exactly because they are unfettered by a conscience. If one HAS a conscience, they cannot be liberal. They can of course still be wrong/mistaken in action, however after literally two decades of increasing, documented leftism by the GOP, anyone still backing that horse isn't 'just' wrong. They are aware of it and so intentionally trying to promote the GOP's liberalism.

Everyone who thinks they have too much to lose are that way.