The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: Mechanicos on July 01, 2016, 07:29:45 pm
-
LET'S SEE.... WHAT ARE MY CHOICES.?
The folks speaking out against Trump are helping me make up my mind a little more every day.!
Is he the Perfect Candidate whose thoughts mirrors mine on all fronts.? NOPE
Does he say everything the way I wish he would say it.? NOPE
Am I absolutely sure that his motives are absolutely Pure.? NOPE
Can I point to any other Dem Politician that I like better.? NOPE
Is there any of the other RINO Politicians I like better.? NOPE
Am I going to sit home, refuse to Vote, and let Hillary win; because he is NOT Perfect.? NOPE
Do I like what I have seen for the last 7-1/2 years with the Jerk that sleeps in my White House.? NOPE
Do I like the "fundamental changes" that same Jerk has brought about in MY America.? NOPE
OK, your turn to decide what you are going to do in about 4 months.!
Trump's presidential qualifications…
Obama is against Trump... Check
The Media are against Trump... Check
The establishment Democrats are against Trump... Check
The establishment Republicans are against Trump... Check
The Pope is against Trump... Check
The UN is against Trump... Check
The EU is against Trump... Check
China is against Trump... Check
Mexico is against Trump... Check
Soros is against Trump... Check
Black Lives Matter is against Trump... Check
Move On is against Trump... Check
Koch Brothers are against Trump... Check
Bushes are against Trump ... Check
Planned Parenthood is against Trump....Check
Hillary & Bernie are both against Trump ... Check
Illegal aliens are against Trump ... Check
Islam is against Trump ... Check
Kasich is against Trump ... Check
Hateful, racist, violent Liberals are against Trump.. Check
NOW THAT BEING SAID...
It seems to me, Trump MUST BE the Best Qualified Candidate we could ever have.
If you have so many political insiders and left wing NUT CASES --- all SCARED TO DEATH, that they all speak out against him at the same time.!
Most of all, it will be the People's Choice...
PLUS
He's not a Lifetime Politician...Check
He's not a Lawyer.....Check
He's not doing it for the money...Check
He's a Natural Born American Citizen born in the USA from American parents. . .
Bonus points.!
Whoopi says she will leave the country...
Rosie says she will leave the country...
Sharpton says he will leave the country...
Cher says she will leave the country...
Cyrus says she will leave the country...
The Constitution and the Bill of Rights will prevail....
Hillary will go to jail.....
The budget will be balanced in 8 years....
Americans will have first choice at jobs.....
You will not be able to marry your pet....
You will be able to keep your gun(s) if you qualify...
(Not a criminal or crazy, etc.)
Only living, registered U.S. citizens can vote....
MUST SHOW ID TO VOTE...
You can have and keep your own doctor.....
You can say whatever you want without being called a racist, Islamophobic, xenophobic, etc....
He will make AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.!
Come to think of it, after Obama, we have no place to go, but UP.!
-
LET'S SEE.... WHAT ARE MY CHOICES.?
You could vote for someone other than a documented liberal. Thats a choice you SHOULD make rather than the one you have.
-
Our choices are:
A) Clinton
B) Trump
C) None of the above
I pick "C."
-
Our choices are:
A) Clinton
B) Trump
C) None of the above
I pick "C."
Because of Democrat vote fraud choice C = Hillary has an easier path.
-
LET'S SEE.... WHAT ARE MY CHOICES.?
Do his thoughts mirrors mine AT ALL? APPARENTLY NOT
Does he say even a fraction of what I'd wish he'd say? NOPE
Am I sure he has a single principled motive? APPARENTLY NOT
-
LET'S SEE.... WHAT ARE MY CHOICES.?
Our choices are much the same as they were in 2008 and 2012. Hold our noses and vote for the lesser of two evils.
How'd that work out, hmm?
Turns out that when our only choices are "Sucks" and "Doesn't suck that bad"; then we still lose.
-
It seems to me, Trump MUST BE the Best Qualified Candidate we could ever have.
There's not one positive reason listed to vote for Trump.
-
It seems to me, Trump MUST BE the Best Qualified Candidate we could ever have.
There's not one positive reason listed to vote for Trump.
He opposes the people who you like to cite too. Thats a Good reason to support him.
-
Because of Democrat vote fraud choice C = Hillary has an easier path.
Nope.
-
Nope.
Lest see your proof that all end games of #nevertrump do not end in a Hillary win.
-
Lest see your proof that all end games of #nevertrump do not end in a Hillary win.
Lets see yours that you're actually a combat Marine Vet, or a Marine at all because after your performance yesterday, there's a lot of people that think you might be lying about that too (you do have a long history of that)... that your browser doesn't show PMs s a lame excuse to avoid Mod smackdowns, when mine is the same browser and works fine; that you didn't suddenly change your tagline YET AGAIN after being caught in another lie yesterday about it, and that Trump is actually not a liberal...
-
Lest see your proof that all end games of #nevertrump do not end in a Hillary win.
lol. We oppose Trump and Hillary. Not my circus not my monkeys. You guys bought it, you pay for it. I'm not part of that crap any more, I'm writing in Ted Cruz or someone else.
-
"...
NOW THAT BEING SAID...
It seems to me, Trump MUST BE the Best Qualified Candidate we could ever have.
...."
A couple of severe logic fallacies and holes there, Skippy.
You made one HELL of a jump.
Since Trump is probably one of the LEAST qualified candidates we could have, you'll need to reconfigure your equations and re-calibrate your equipment.
Because you're producing inferior product and exclaiming that it's par excellence.
You're looking goofy.
You may want to vote for Trump, but you look like a dum-dum saying you think Trump "...must be the Best Qualified Candidate we could ever have".
Jeez! How can anyone even hear anything you say after this?
-
The only good reason to vote for Trump, is he's not Hillary, and the only good reason to vote for Hillary is she's not Trump.
(https://d.gr-assets.com/hostedimages/1433877112ra/15153358.gif)
-
Because of Democrat vote fraud choice C = Hillary has an easier path.
Unfortunate, that.
-
The answer is C
The outcome isn't my problem. Ain't my circus or monkeys.
-
Fine post, Mechanicos.
The n'ertrumpers are shootin' blanks.
At a target they can't even see.
-
Our choices are:
A) Clinton
B) Trump
C) None of the above
I pick "C."
Thank heaven you're among a small and diminishing breed. ^-^
-
The only good reason to vote for Trump, is he's not Hillary,
Good progress, @mlizzy. Let me know how I can help pull you over the finish line!
-
Does anybody else hear a faint rendition of "Dueling Banjos" whenever you read a Trumpian sermonette?
-
LET'S SEE.... WHAT ARE MY CHOICES.?
This coming from the poster who told us he never launches threads with titles in all-caps.
Integrity is a quality he simply does not value.
-
Is he the Perfect Candidate whose thoughts mirrors mine on all fronts.? NOPE
Does he say everything the way I wish he would say it.? NOPE
Am I absolutely sure that his motives are absolutely Pure.? NOPE
Has he done anything to show that he is any different from Hillary? NOPE
-
He opposes the people who you like to cite too. Thats a Good reason to support him.
The US supported Osama Bin Laden because he opposed the USSR. That was short sighted.
-
LET'S SEE.... WHAT ARE MY CHOICES.?[/size]
Stop pretending.
You don't believe in choice at all unless we vote for your prince.
And spare us the crap about voting for Hildabeast if we do not vote for your savior.
Trump is far worse, far more dangerous and far far more unhinged than Hillary is.
We're against you and yours. You have made us your enemy and Palin doubled down on it yesterday.
You wanted a war, you got one.
Now pound sand.
-
This coming from the poster who told us he never launches threads with titles in all-caps.
Integrity is a quality he simply does not value.
Uh I did not say I never launch threads with all caps. I'm not Trump, you do not get to put words in my mouth and say i said them.
-
Those in the GOP who back Trump are the damned. He will lose, and whether he takes the party and conservatism down with him depends on the patriots who have staked out there position AGAINST FASCISM now, when it matters.
If the goal of this election becomes the repudiation of Trumpism, then so be it. That is a righteous cause, and I will take up that torch for the sake of my nation, my kids, and everything good and decent I believe in. We will suffer, all of us, because we know the blighted wilderness that follows. But it is always darkest before the dawn.
-
LET'S SEE.... WHAT ARE MY CHOICES.?
The folks speaking out against Trump are helping me make up my mind a little more every day.!
Is he the Perfect Candidate whose thoughts mirrors mine on all fronts.? NOPE
Can't make it past the first point without fibbing, can you?
-
Because of Democrat vote fraud choice C = Hillary has an easier path.
Then your man has to work on his own fraud. That shouldn't be a problem for him.
-
Lest see your proof that all end games of #nevertrump do not end in a Hillary win.
Let's see your proof that all end games of supporting Trump don't end with a Hillary win.
-
Thank heaven you're among a small and diminishing breed. ^-^
Maybe. But at least we can live with ourselves.
-
Thank heaven you're among a small and diminishing breed. ^-^
I can always count on you for the small-minded, passive-aggressive insult. Maybe some day you'll discover some courage.
Cassandra was only one, but she was always right. Being amongst a small elite group does nothing to diminish the validity of one's views, just as increasing the number of lemmings running off the Trump cliff doesn't make the cliff any less fatal. Enjoy the fall from the cliff, 'cause the stop at the bottom is gonna be a b*tch.
-
Where do you want it? In the gut or in the face?
-
Is there any of the other RINO Politicians I like better.? NOPE
Am I required to vote for a RINO? NOPE
Is there a conservative to vote for? YEP, AND NOT JUST ONE.
You have already admitted that a vote against one candidate does not mean a win for another win, I thought you were done with that nonsense. Just can't help yourself, can you?
-
I see Trump for what he is. An egomaniac con man who has duped many Republican voters into thinking he has anyone else's interests at heart. He is an immoral disgusting pig of a human being who lies so much he doesn't even know when he is doing it. He has no real principles other than self promotion and people have flocked to him in droves.
He will talk a good game for whatever group he is in front of, but if you really think that the president can just come into office with unlimited powers and do whatever he pleases like eliminating Gun Free Zones, or launching Trade Tariffs- well, you need to refresh your knowledge on civics, starting with the limitations of the Federal Government and balance of powers.
-
I see Trump for what he is. An egomaniac con man who has duped many Republican voters into thinking he has anyone else's interests at heart. He is an immoral disgusting pig of a human being who lies so much he doesn't even know when he is doing it. He has no real principles other than self promotion and people have flocked to him in droves.
He will talk a good game for whatever group he is in front of, but if you really think that the president can just come into office with unlimited powers and do whatever he pleases like eliminating Gun Free Zones, or launching Trade Tariffs- well, you need to refresh your knowledge on civics, starting with the limitations of the Federal Government and balance of powers.
Easy to eliminate gun-free zones since the DOJ can prosecute those who create them as violating constitutional rights. It kinda is one of the things they can legitimately do.
-
Darrell Castle
-
Darrell Castle
He looks good but has no chance and its pretty well known. So a vote for him still ends up helping Hillary as a wasted vote that only dilutes the right.
-
Our choices are:
A) Clinton
B) Trump
C) None of the above
I pick "C."
Lets make that:
A) Clinton
B) Trump
C) Johnson
D) Stein
E) Castle
None of the above is NOT an option, as it is a cop out and helps elect one of the two leading frauds.
My pick is the only true constitutionalist is the race: Darrell Castle, Constitution Party.
-
He looks good but has no chance and its pretty well known. So a vote for him still ends up helping Hillary as a wasted vote that only dilutes the right.
Good candidates don't have a chance only if people choose a looser over them for stupidity reasons.
-
Easy to eliminate gun-free zones since the DOJ can prosecute those who create them as violating constitutional rights. It kinda is one of the things they can legitimately do.
Easy? The DOJ can prosecute schools, the NFL, major league baseball, Disneyland, county city buildings and their courtrooms, and private property owners?
And this IS about what Trump himself said back in January, when he announced he would eliminate gun-free zones on schools.
“My first day, it gets signed, okay? My first day. There’s no more gun-free zones,” Trump said at the time.
Not Without Congress he don't.
-
He looks good but has no chance and its pretty well known. So a vote for him still ends up helping Hillary as a wasted vote that only dilutes the right.
We don't care what you think.
You side with a liberal-Left fascist wannabe.
We side with an actual Conservative, whether Castle or whomever we write in.
We're against you.
We stand against you.
You and your Trump Militant compatriots have made us your enemy.
Now pound sand. We're going to do everything we can in our power to make sure an actual Conservative gets the vote in November instead of Trump or Hildabeast.
We don't care what the outcome is between two liberal NYC buffoons.
-
He opposes the people who you like to cite too. Thats a Good reason to support him.
The enemy of my enemy is not always my friend.
-
Easy? The DOJ can prosecute schools, the NFL, major league baseball, Disneyland, county city buildings and their courtrooms, and private property owners?
And this IS about what Trump himself said back in January, when he announced he would eliminate gun-free zones on schools.
“My first day, it gets signed, okay? My first day. There’s no more gun-free zones,” Trump said at the time.
Not Without Congress he don't.
I think you are wrong. It falls under civil rights and the DOJ has that power now. Should the DOJ exist is another issue. But no he does not need congress to enforce a constitutional right.
-
I think you are wrong. It falls under civil rights and the DOJ has that power now. Should the DOJ exist is another issue. But no he does not need congress to enforce a constitutional right.
Are Trump's own properties still gun free zones?
-
I think you are wrong. It falls under civil rights and the DOJ has that power now. Should the DOJ exist is another issue. But no he does not need congress to enforce a constitutional right.
Gun free zones are a state issue, and Trump cannot override a state law with an EO.
-
Are Trump's own properties still gun free zones?
Donald Trump Is Against 'Gun-Free Zones' But Guns Aren't Allowed on Many of His Properties, Staff Says
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-gun-free-zones-guns-allowed-properties/story?id=39266544
@Mechanicos
Double standard at best!
-
I think you are wrong. It falls under civil rights and the DOJ has that power now. Should the DOJ exist is another issue. But no he does not need congress to enforce a constitutional right.
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
So Trump, nor anyone else, can infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.
-
Gun free zones are a state issue, and Trump cannot override a state law with an EO.
Ever hear of the Supremacy clause. The 2nd is above all State laws. And its a Recognized right.
-
(http://i1123.photobucket.com/albums/l545/Baseballdad2/Other/third%20choice.png)
-
Donald Trump Is Against 'Gun-Free Zones' But Guns Aren't Allowed on Many of His Properties, Staff Says
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-gun-free-zones-guns-allowed-properties/story?id=39266544
@Mechanicos
Double standard at best!
Hes not President yet and has liability now. Use your head before posting such foolishness just to attack Trump.
-
Hes not President yet and has liability now. Use your head before posting such foolishness just to attack Trump.
The only absurdity is listening the Trump's foolish behavior and listening to his flock of orange koolaide drinkers.
-
Ever hear of the Supremacy clause. The 2nd is above all State laws. And its a Recognized right.
Trump could prove his sincerity and that its not all just red-meat stump speech rhetoric, if he were to immediately announce that all of his properties are now open to legal carry. It would be the simplest of simple executive orders, being he owns those properties. He wont, and you know it. At one of his early town halls an audience member asked him if he would do it, and Trump said something to the affect that "it was a good idea, and he would look into it, next question" .
-
Hes not President yet and has liability now. Use your head before posting such foolishness just to attack Trump.
What?! What you wrote doesn't even mean anything.
-
Hes not President yet and has liability now. Use your head before posting such foolishness just to attack Trump.
Ever hear of the Supremacy clause. The 2nd is above all State laws. And its a Recognized right.
These two statements cannot be reconciled.
-
Trump could prove his sincerity and that its not all just red-meat stump speech rhetoric, if he were to immediately announce that all of his properties are now open to legal carry. It would be the simplest of simple executive orders, being he owns those properties. He wont, and you know it. At one of his early town halls an audience member asked him if he would do it, and Trump said something to the affect that "it was a good idea, and he would look into it, next question" .
Then he can hire you to go to his properties and protect his High Value clients. Oh wait, You did not think the rant thru. Its Private Property, not Public. And how do you know there is no armed security there protecting the guests?
Public gun free zones are unconstitutional. Private ones are not but they carry the civil liability of protecting invitees.
I was hoping one of you would see the absurdity of mixing Public and private but nope nobody did.
-
These two statements cannot be reconciled.
Same to you, For failing to know the difference between public property and private property.
-
Use your head before posting such foolishness just to attack Trump.
We're going to do everything we can to attack Trump and make sure the NYC liberal never gets anywhere near the White House.
Because if we must have an enemy at the head of the federal government, we want them to be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve Conservatism in the disgrace of his foolish and bad liberal measures.
Trump is more dangerous to liberty than the Mao Pantsuit given his myriad statements of punishment and personal animus towards everyone and anyone who will not kiss his ring.
We're going to crusade for Darrell Castle or whomever Conservatives wish to write in on the ballot in November.
-
Same to you, For failing to know the difference between public property and private property.
Here Trump is talking about the Paris attacks, in public places, where people were not allowed to carry guns. He may have specifically mentioned schools and military bases here, but he has also made it clear with other statements that he's talking about gun free zones in general.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQOwTaG3R3c
-
We're going to do everything we can to attack Trump and make sure the NYC liberal never gets anywhere near the White House.
Because if we must have an enemy at the head of the federal government, we want them to be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve Conservatism in the disgrace of his foolish and bad liberal measures.
Trump is more dangerous to liberty than the Mao Pantsuit given his myriad statements of punishment and personal animus towards everyone and anyone who will not kiss his ring.
We're going to crusade for Darrell Castle or whomever Conservatives wish to write in on the ballot in November.
You keep saying this stuff and with no real current evidence to back it up. I contend you are wrong. I have listened to your arguments and found them to be irrational and emotional based not reasoned.
The problem you have is Good Conservatives, Good Christians in massive numbers disagree with you about Trump. What makes you so special only you can see such things that millions cannot? Is everybody crazy but you? James 1:26
-
Those in the GOP who back Trump are the damned. He will lose, and whether he takes the party and conservatism down with him depends on the patriots who have staked out there position AGAINST FASCISM now, when it matters.
If the goal of this election becomes the repudiation of Trumpism, then so be it. That is a righteous cause, and I will take up that torch for the sake of my nation, my kids, and everything good and decent I believe in. We will suffer, all of us, because we know the blighted wilderness that follows. But it is always darkest before the dawn.
goopo
-
Here Trump is talking about the Paris attacks, in public places, where people were not allowed to carry guns. He may have specifically mentioned schools and military bases here, but he has also made it clear with other statements that he's talking about gun free zones in general.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQOwTaG3R3c
Please stop the spin. He said in the US Public Places and over there he said they should have had people shooting back, clarified to be security later. In a Private place the right thing is to hold the owner liable for harm to their invitees.
You are arguing that the Federal Government should be able to tell you whether or not you can have a gun in your home. Think your arguments thru next time. This emotional need to bring down Trump is making the #nevertrumps look bad.
-
Mechanicos -> "LET'S SEE.... WHAT ARE MY CHOICES.?" ...
----------------
Simple. We can either vote for the guy who says he will work to "Make America Great Again", or we can vote for the status quo - the people who have been aiding and abetting the decline. We can vote for the status quo directly or indirectly. A Trump win will not save humanity, but it will allow us fight another day.
This November eight, we will enter the voting booth. True or False?
However many people on the ballot, only one of two people will be elected. True or False?
One candidate will be Donald Trump. The other will be the Hildebeast or some hastily fabricated replacement clone. True or False?
(Paraphrasing criticisms I have been reading:)
But but but Trump is a liberal, a scoundrel, a dangerous man ! etc,etc, - Possible.
Trump is telling us what we want to hear and will double cross us ! - Also possible.
Who is Trump and what does he want to accomplish in running for president?
Fame? He already has that without the extra responsibilities.
Wealth? He has that already.
Power? Possible. Consider though, his wealth already gives him some of that.
Maybe, just maybe, he is telling us the truth. Just maybe at this stage in his life he is worried about the country his descendants will live in. As an older guy, I find myself thinking about this a lot.
Another Trump criticism I have noticed, his ego: Did you know ego/pride has a constructive use? If I were to stand and tell about my humble accomplishments, I would be rightly regarded as a braggart and a blow-hard. When a guy like Trump talks great things, it can be for his own self motivation. How his fellow countrymen view him down the road just might be important in HIS mind. I think this is a guy who is motivated by achievement. Yes, he has an ego. In his case, that's exactly why I see him as most likely to follow through with his promises.
We now return y'all to your regularly scheduled Trumpsucks programming.
-
You keep saying this stuff and with no real current evidence to back it up. I contend you are wrong.
You think I'm wrong that we're going to do everything we can to attack Trump and make sure the NYC liberal never gets anywhere near the White House? Watch and learn. For we are.
You think that it's wrong that if we must have an enemy at the head of the federal government, we want them to be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve Conservatism in the disgrace of his foolish and bad liberal measures?
Trump has already proven himself a disgrace and a fool, and we will not suffer him to be at the head under a false banner of Conservatism.
I have listened to your arguments and found them to be irrational and emotional based not reasoned.
You're projecting again.
But of note you say the same exact thing that the Liberal Leftists tell me too on a daily basis. They find that people who will not surrender Conservative principles and go with the flow of whatever or whomever is their champion issue du jour to be irrational too, just like you do.
The problem you have is Good Conservatives, Good Christians in massive numbers disagree with you about Trump.
I don't care. History is replete with the wreckage of societies whose entire populations seig-heiled madmen who brought them to utter ruin.
You are welcome to join the lemmings off the cliff - I will not be joining you - even if I am the only one who doesn't leap.
What makes you so special only you can see such things that millions cannot?
Discernment. Something you obviously lack.
Is everybody crazy but you?
I'm not alone in my discernment. On this board there are plenty of brethren and patriots who are in agreement with where we stand in opposition to your prince.
James 1:26
The Left tries using that scripture to silence Christians from speaking up against homosexuality and abortion. It's an Alinsky's rule 4 that you attempt to toss out here with James 1:26.
Considering the amount of deceit you have spread, lies you have perpetrated and insults you have flung on this board alone, however subtle - you now illustrate yourself an abject hypocrite by biblical standards as well.
-
Please stop the spin. He said in the US Public Places and over there he said they should have had people shooting back, clarified to be security later. In a Private place the right thing is to hold the owner liable for harm to their invitees.
You are arguing that the Federal Government should be able to tell you whether or not you can have a gun in your home. Think your arguments thru next time. This emotional need to bring down Trump is making the #nevertrumps look bad.
"If you had 25 people in there that had had guns it would have been a totally different story." Trump, in the video I posted.
Unfortunately, the only totally different story is the one @Mechanicos is telling about why Trump can say gun free zones are bad yet maintains them on some of his own properties.
-
You are arguing that the Federal Government should be able to tell you whether or not you can have a gun in your home. Think your arguments thru next time. This emotional need to bring down Trump is making the #nevertrumps look bad.
False. And if I said what I really thought about you saying this it would be considered a personal attack.
-
Simple. We can either vote for the guy who says he will work to "Make America Great Again", or we can vote for the status quo - the people who have been aiding and abetting the decline. We can vote for the status quo directly or indirectly.
Show us where Darrell Castle of the other Conservatives we will vote for in November are part of the Status Quo when YOUR prince not only voted FOR the Status Quo - he FUNDED the status quo (Hillary Clinton - Bill DeBlasio, McCauliffe); CAMPAIGNED FOR THE STATUS QUO; enabled Statists to gain power; aided and abetted known Communists and criminals to achieve office who have taken us directly into decline by Trump's direct help.
So the idea of Trump 'making America great again' when he is the epitome of upholding and funding the status quo is laughable on it's face.
A Trump win will not save humanity,
The only thing you wrote that I agree with.
but it will allow us fight another day.
Not if he is a stalking horse for Hillary which I am become convinced he is given his unrelenting incessant attacks on Conservatives and anyone who will not kiss his ring.
This November eight, we will enter the voting booth. True or False?
Twue.
However many people on the ballot, only one of two people will be elected. True or False?
False.
One candidate will be Donald Trump. The other will be the Hildebeast or some hastily fabricated replacement clone. True or False?
False.
Just maybe at this stage in his life he is worried about the country his descendants will live in. As an older guy, I find myself thinking about this a lot.
Lots of rich wealthy people in cahoots with government work tirelessly to ensure that the gravy train, fascist or otherwise - runs to provide the continuous revenue stream into their little empires for the sake of their offspring without regard to the little people in flyover country.
Regardless of Trump's actual motives - his liberal fruits and his continuous absurdities and demagoguery have disqualified him for the office he supposedly seeks.
Did you know ego/pride has a constructive use?
Completely unbiblical. Ego and pride is the seed to all sin and the root of all despotic tyrants who destroyed their own societies. There is NOTHING constructive about ego and pride unless the Devil's rationale and reasoning is what motivates ones thinking.
Humility and an attitude of service is what makes a good leader. Ego, pride and braggarts are what makes a tyrant.
-
We now return y'all to your regularly scheduled Trumpsucks programming.
That is now the one and only main usage; what this site has become. 24/7 ; Boring.
-
That is now the one and only main usage; what this site has become. 24/7 ; Boring.
You and yours took over and purged principled Conservatives from myriad forums and groups including FR to become Safe Spaces and echo chambers for Trump worship.
You have plenty of options to choose from to assuage your boredom with neverTrump Conservatives on this board.
Stop complaining and just go then.
-
And how do you know there is no armed security there protecting the guests?
There is. They're paid $15 per hour, I sent you the link last time we discussed this. Not exactly top flight security for high value clients.
For comparison, a single close security bodyguard from a reputable agency will cost you in the region of $200 per hour to hire, more in high risk areas. A full security detail is 5 grand a day, minimum, with expenses on top.*
*don't ask
-
You think I'm wrong that we're going to do everything we can to attack Trump and make sure the NYC liberal never gets anywhere near the White House? Watch and learn. For we are.
You think that it's wrong that if we must have an enemy at the head of the federal government, we want them to be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve Conservatism in the disgrace of his foolish and bad liberal measures?
Trump has already proven himself a disgrace and a fool, and we will not suffer him to be at the head under a false banner of Conservatism.
You're projecting again.
But of note you say the same exact thing that the Liberal Leftists tell me too on a daily basis. They find that people who will not surrender Conservative principles and go with the flow of whatever or whomever is their champion issue du jour to be irrational too, just like you do.
I don't care. History is replete with the wreckage of societies whose entire populations seig-heiled madmen who brought them to utter ruin.
You are welcome to join the lemmings off the cliff - I will not be joining you - even if I am the only one who doesn't leap.
Discernment. Something you obviously lack.
I'm not alone in my discernment. On this board there are plenty of brethren and patriots who are in agreement with where we stand in opposition to your prince.
The Left tries using that scripture to silence Christians from speaking up against homosexuality and abortion. It's an Alinsky's rule 4 that you attempt to toss out here with James 1:26.
Considering the amount of deceit you have spread, lies you have perpetrated and insults you have flung on this board alone, however subtle - you now illustrate yourself an abject hypocrite by biblical standards as well.
First, there is nothing special about you that makes you more Christian, More Conservative, More knowledgeable then me. All your arguments have been to inflict pain not do what you are supposed to. Calling me a Liberal has no effect since I am not one.
The fact is the emotion comes thru when you type. When the single-minded goal is nothing more then to hurt the bad man with no concern for collateral damage it leaves the world of rationality.
I did what I am supposed to do with an alleged fellow Christian. It was trampled into the mud.
-
"If you had 25 people in there that had had guns it would have been a totally different story." Trump, in the video I posted.
Unfortunately, the only totally different story is the one @Mechanicos is telling about why Trump can say gun free zones are bad yet maintains them on some of his own properties.
Actually you are the one looking bad here.
You admitted he said Public places in his gun-free speech and listed them.
You failed to notice it was private property in France and it was not gun free by the owner of the property but the actions of the government. In such a Large establishment with Muslims near by the owner had no option to arm security people.
And again you argue Government has the authority to control whether you have a gun in your own home aka the private Property distinction with respect to government control.
Trump's clubs are private property and Government has no say in it do they? So apples and Oranges. Next time try harder.
-
Lets make that:
A) Clinton
B) Trump
C) Johnson
D) Stein
E) Castle
None of the above is NOT an option, as it is a cop out and helps elect one of the two leading frauds.
My pick is the only true constitutionalist is the race: Darrell Castle, Constitution Party.
Castle will be my pick, too, if he's on the ballot in my state. Otherwise, I think abstaining from the presidential vote and voting downticket is a valid option.
-
Castle will be my pick, too, if he's on the ballot in my state. Otherwise, I think abstaining from the presidential vote and voting downticket is a valid option.
With respect, Catherine, only if you are sure that no "helpful" poll worker can't fill in the blank on your behalf. I don't know what your particular ballot looks like, so it may not apply, of course, but we do know fraud happens - why make it easier for her?
-
Actually you are the one looking bad here.
You admitted he said Public places in his gun-free speech and listed them.
You failed to notice it was private property in France and it was not gun free by the owner of the property but the actions of the government. In such a Large establishment with Muslims near by the owner had no option to arm security people.
And again you argue Government has the authority to control whether you have a gun in your own home aka the private Property distinction with respect to government control.
Trump's clubs are private property and Government has no say in it do they? So apples and Oranges. Next time try harder.
public, little 'p', as opposed to being at home. Not Public, big P, owned by the gov't.
-
First, there is nothing special about you that makes you more Christian, More Conservative, More knowledgeable then me.
What a high and mighty opinion you have of yourself! No wonder Trump appeals to you. Ego-driven narcissism must be contagious.
All your arguments have been to inflict pain not do what you are supposed to.
What I am 'supposed to do'????? Where is it written I must vote for Trump?
As to pain, well - you people wanted a war. You declared us the enemy and told us we were either with your or against you.
I'm against you. So expect pain, I will not make it easy for you and yours.
Calling me a Liberal has no effect since I am not one.
Neither do you have any effect when you call Conservatives who will not vote for your prince, Hillary supporters.
You have no effect.
None.
I did what I am supposed to do with an alleged fellow Christian. It was trampled into the mud.
That is what I do with lies, propaganda, insults and invective. I call it for what it is, draw the sword of truth and cut it down into the compost it is.
-
Castle will be my pick, too, if he's on the ballot in my state. Otherwise, I think abstaining from the presidential vote and voting downticket is a valid option.
The Constitution Party has been asking for help getting on the ballot in some states, if you are so inclined. He's on the ballot in Florida and I will be voting for him.
-
You and yours took over and purged principled Conservatives from myriad forums and groups including FR to become Safe Spaces and echo chambers for Trump worship.
You have plenty of options to choose from to assuage your boredom with neverTrump Conservatives on this board.
Stop complaining and just go then.
Don't you have a sermon to prepare for tomorrow? A flock to attend to? Or does your general nastiness repel people ?
I have NOT taken over anything, or been purged from any sites. That distinction belongs to you.
-
Labette -> "Did you know ego/pride has a constructive use?.... "
INVAR -> "...Completely unbiblical. Ego and pride is the seed to all sin and the root of all despotic tyrants who destroyed their own societies. There is NOTHING constructive about ego and pride unless the Devil's rationale and reasoning is what motivates ones thinking.
Humility and an attitude of service is what makes a good leader. Ego, pride and braggarts are what makes a tyrant."
--------------------------------------
Disregard for the laws of God and man make the tyrant.
EVERY single great leader, boss, manager, I ever knew had a touch of "the ego".
Think about that. We are electing a CEO, not a pope. "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one"
What I am suggesting (and what you overlooked) is that we use Trumps marketing shtick - his "ego" - to hold his feet to the fire.
Is a guy with his name in big letters on the side of his jet going to take a dive and sell out his name and his countrymen? For what?? Hillary? Would a man like this set himself up for certain ridicule?
By the way, I didn't catch who you were voting for on November eighth. Care to tip your hand and tell us what percent of the vote he/she will carry?
-
Completely unbiblical. Ego and pride is the seed to all sin and the root of all despotic tyrants who destroyed their own societies. There is NOTHING constructive about ego and pride unless the Devil's rationale and reasoning is what motivates ones thinking.
Humility and an attitude of service is what makes a good leader. Ego, pride and braggarts are what makes a tyrant.
Two thumbs way up!
-
What I am suggesting (and what you overlooked) is that we use Trumps marketing shtick - his "ego" - to hold his feet to the fire.
This makes zero sense. Trump advocates higher taxes, amnesty for deported illegals, universal health care, funding for Planned Parenthood, disregard for the Bill of Rights, and the fascism model of property rights. Exactly how are his feet being held to the fire?
Would a man like this set himself up for certain ridicule?
He already has.
-
Now I know how the Poles felt in WW II Hitler or Stalin?
-
Think about that. We are electing a CEO, not a pope. "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one"
Such has been the mantra since Reagan, and each cycle the candidates offered grow more hubris, vulgar, rash, wicked, corrupt and thoroughly compromising liberals to the point there is no difference at all between whom the Democrats put up or the GOP. Because this people buy the insipid notion that because we are not voting for a pope or pastor that we can choose someone who has zero morality, principles or trust.
Your lesser evils has resulted in evil being the only choice people are given and evil will not suffer any rivals.
What I am suggesting (and what you overlooked) is that we use Trumps marketing shtick - his "ego" - to hold his feet to the fire.
You go ahead and think that and do that. Because I will have no responsibility for voting for Trump, you can be the one to hold his feet to the fire. I think such an idea is a lesson in gross imbecility given the man Trump is.
Is a guy with his name in big letters on the side of his jet going to take a dive and sell out his name and his countrymen?
Yup. History is full of such men. Legacy, power, a dynasty and an empire are all factors that motivated Fascists.
Would a man like this set himself up for certain ridicule?
Like Trump suffers when ridiculed now???? You obviously don't even know your own candidate.
By the way, I didn't catch who you were voting for on November eighth. Care to tip your hand and tell us what percent of the vote he/she will carry?
My choice carries 96% of my principles, which vastly outweighs anything else to me.
-
Labette ->
Disregard for the laws of God and man make the tyrant.
EVERY single great leader, boss, manager, I ever knew had a touch of "the ego".
Think about that. We are electing a CEO, not a pope. "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one"
The purpose of that saying was NOT to excuse sin, but simply to remind people that it's by the grace of God that they achieve salvation.
Your remark is a classic example of how the devil works.
-
What I am suggesting (and what you overlooked) is that we use Trumps marketing shtick - his "ego" - to hold his feet to the fire.
Um ..... Kind of hard to "hold someones feet to the fire" when any criticism, no matter how small, is greeted with total rage (or worse, spin) by the guy's supporters. It gets boring.
Do you hold his feet to the fire? Criticise? I honestly don't know either way, maybe you do. :shrug:
-
Now I know how the Poles felt in WW II Hitler or Stalin?
goopo
-
This makes zero sense. Trump advocates higher taxes, amnesty for deported illegals, funding for Planned Parenthood, disregard for the Bill of Rights, and the fascism model of property rights. Exactly how are his feet being held to the fire?
...
This is one of the reasons why people are leaving #nevertrump is droves. Not one thing stated in the bolded spew was the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
1. Trump advocates higher taxes - Not true.
2. amnesty for deported illegals - Not true
3. universal health care - Not true.
4. funding for Planned Parenthood - Misleading - hes not for funding Abortions.
5. disregard for the Bill of Rights - Not true
6. and the fascism model of property rights - Not true
Every one of the talking points above have been discussed extensively in this forum and when the facts came out that it was spin, editing and taking out of context to create the above taking points.
The above talking points are either opposition spin of what was really said by Trump, or made up out of whole cloth.
-
@Mechanicos
I concede your point that for the most part the things you highlighted are not what he has said. Ultimately, though, it comes down to this:
The vast majority of trumpeters are basing their choice on what he has said throughout this campaign season, as is their right. The vast majority of #neverTrump are basing their decision on what he has DONE throughout his life, as is our right. You will not convince us that Trump is just fine and dandy because we have a record by which he can be judged. The trumpeters dismiss that record in lieu of what he says now.
And ne'er the twain shall meet.
-
@Mechanicos
I concede your point that for the most part the things you highlighted are not what he has said. Ultimately, though, it comes down to this:
The vast majority of trumpeters are basing their choice on what he has said throughout this campaign season, as is their right. The vast majority of #neverTrump are basing their decision on what he has DONE throughout his life, as is our right. You will not convince us that Trump is just fine and dandy because we have a record by which he can be judged. The trumpeters dismiss that record in lieu of what he says now.
And ne'er the twain shall meet.
Thing is as shown #neverTrump has bad information even of his life. He has done some bad things, hes also done good things. The liberals controlling #neverTrump ensure that none of the good things see the light of day and the bad things are spun to the worst possible light so as to outrage.
-
Nice talking point AND red herring all rolled into one about the "liberals controlling" #nevertrump. Source please?
All I know, is THIS man on this keyboard, has made his mind up to never vote for that despicable specimen solely based on his actual record. And the sooner you trumpeters understand that there are millions like me and stop looking for boogeymen to explain why orange glorious is failing, the better off you'll be.
I will not vote for a dishonest, utterly untrustworthy liberal...ever. And if he happens to win...and if I happen to be wrong, I'll be happy to say so. Until then, stop trying to convince us of just how dreamy orange glorious is just because you happen to believe him when he whispers that he'll still love you in the morning.
-
Nice talking point AND red herring all rolled into one about the "liberals controlling" #nevertrump. Source please?
All I know, is THIS man on this keyboard, has made his mind up to never vote for that despicable specimen solely based on his actual record. And the sooner you trumpeters understand that there are millions like me and stop looking for boogeymen to explain why orange glorious is failing, the better off you'll be.
I will not vote for a dishonest, utterly untrustworthy liberal...ever. And if he happens to win...and if I happen to be wrong, I'll be happy to say so. Until then, stop trying to convince us of just how dreamy orange glorious is just because you happen to believe him when he whispers that he'll still love you in the morning.
Google Liberals meet with RNC to Stop Trump.
Then Google Apple CEO funds Ryan
#neverTrump was never a conservative operation. It was a joint Liberal/Rino pro-Establishment op from its inception and still is. The Cruz supporters still in it IMHO are unwitting victims being used by bad people.
-
Don't you understand? Most (!!!) never trumpers aren't part of any operation! I could give a flying fig what any of those swine do with or to Ryan or any of the RNC. I despise them just as much as the most ardent trumpeter does. But you are conflating the two, people like me and whatever the powers that be are doing, so you don't have to wrap your head around WHY the vast majority of us wil not vote for trump, ever. If they manage to deny trump, I consider them useful idiots who've managed to do something right for once rather than I support them.
We regular folks who are never trump ARE #nevertrump because we believe him to be just as existential a threat to the republic as Hillary. Just as fervently as you believe him to be the savior of the republic. The problem for you is that all available evidence supports our viewpoint. All you've got is what he's flapped his lips about.
I'm not ever gonna convince you because yours is based on faith. And you're not ever going to convince me because mine is based on objective evidence. How about we both stop trying?
-
Don't you understand? Most (!!!) never trumpers aren't part of any operation! I could give a flying fig what any of those swine do with or to Ryan or any of the RNC. I despise them just as much as the most ardent trumpeter does. But you are conflating the two, people like me and whatever the powers that be are doing, so you don't have to wrap your head around WHY the vast majority of us wil not vote for trump, ever. If they manage to deny trump, I consider them useful idiots who've managed to do something right for once rather than I support them.
We regular folks who are never trump ARE #nevertrump because we believe him to be just as existential a threat to the republic as Hillary. Just as fervently as you believe him to be the savior of the republic. The problem for you is that all available evidence supports our viewpoint. All you've got is what he's flapped his lips about.
I'm not ever gonna convince you because yours is based on faith. And you're not ever going to convince me because mine is based on objective evidence. How about we both stop trying?
Beliefs based on bad information provided by people who mean you no good.
-
How condescendingly presumptuous of you.
-
How condescendingly presumptuous of you.
Based on facts. Follow the money.
-
Based on facts. Follow the money.
This is exactly what I would expect a high school ******* to say.
When do you graduate?
-
This is exactly what I would expect a high school ******** to say.
When do you graduate?
********* do not use logic reason and facts. ******* make emotional personal attacks like you just did.
-
Leave off the name calling.
-
Easy to eliminate gun-free zones since the DOJ can prosecute those who create them as violating constitutional rights. It kinda is one of the things they can legitimately do.
Would that include gun-free zones in the White House, the Capitol, jails, prisons, and courts?
-
Would that include gun-free zones in the White House, the Capitol, jails, prisons, and courts?
Good question. Jails yes for those due process has Stripped of their rights. The WH has never been gun-free. Neither has the Capital, nor are the courts.
-
**nononono*
Why did you have to include jails and prisons? That was a rock-bleeping stupid addition.
-
Don't you understand? Most (!!!) never trumpers aren't part of any operation!
Granted @Axeslinger you do not leave your computer. But nevertrumps are providing the fuel for the operations with every keystroke.
-
Says the person w 12,000+ posts? Brilliant!!!
-
Good question. Jails yes for those due process has Stripped of their rights. The WH has never been gun-free. Neither has the Capital, nor are the courts.
Try carrying a gun into the White House or Capitol and let us know how it goes.
As for prisons, we're talking about your claim that the 2nd Amendment is a blanket constitutional right. If I'm visiting someone then by your definition shouldn't I be allowed to pack heat?
-
Says the person w 12,000+ posts? Brilliant!!!
Yes, @Axeslinger ... I've posted over the past seven years.
But my keystrokes do not fuel a movement that is helping Hillary Clinton win. 888blackhat
-
so...you're opinion is a viable one to be posted because it achieves your ends...but mine is not because it doesn't achieve your ends? Got it. Thanks for clarifying.
-
Try carrying a gun into the White House or Capitol and let us know how it goes.
As for prisons, we're talking about your claim that the 2nd Amendment is a blanket constitutional right. If I'm visiting someone then by your definition shouldn't I be allowed to pack heat?
Ludicrous question not deserving a response. We get you are anti-gun.
-
Says the person w 12,000+ posts? Brilliant!!!
RiV has been around a long time. Posts add up over years. It's easy for the newer members to forget - we've been around for over 7 years.
Fake edit - RiV defended herself, ably. We can go back to sniping each other over candidates now? :beer:
-
so...you're opinion is a viable one to be posted because it achieves your ends...but mine is not because it doesn't achieve your ends? Got it. Thanks for clarifying.
@Axeslinger ... your desire to see Hillary Clinton win is certainly viable. And no one is preventing you from helping her. :shrug:
-
RiV has been around a long time. Posts add up over years. It's easy for the newer members to forget - we've been around for over 7 years.
Fake edit - RiV defended herself, ably. We can go back to sniping each other over candidates now? :beer:
@EC
Very true...and I was around at TOS for 18years. I was merely commenting on RiVs statement that I don't leave my keyboard.
-
Ludicrous question not deserving a response. We get you are anti-gun.
I see you are in a contentious mood this morning..
-
@EC
Very true...and j was around at TOS for 18years. I was merely commenting on RiVs statement that I don't leave my keyboard.
We know.... :beer:
-
@Axeslinger ... your desire to see Hillary Clinton win is certainly viable. And no one is preventing you from helping her. :shrug:
@Right_in_Virginia
Nice try...zero points. My desire is to have liberals of every stripe lose, no matter the letter they put behind their name a few months ago.
As I said to mech. Yours is faith based, ours is evidenced based, neither is gong to persuade the other, why don't you leave well enough alone? Or must everyone join the cult?
-
@Right_in_Virginia
Nice try...zero points. My desire is to have liberals of every stripe lose, no matter the letter they put behind their name a few months ago.
As I said to mech. Yours is faith based, ours is evidenced based, neither is gong to persuade the other, why don't you leave well enough alone? Or must everyone join the cult?
Then how come the evidence supporting #nevertrump is almost entirely Pro-Hillary camp created and when examined is not what it purports to be. Evidence does not need to be manipulated, massaged, added too, taken out of context, twisted or created from nothing. It can stand alone on its own feet without modification.
-
We know.... :beer:
Except that isn't what RIV said @mystery-ak
-
Then how come the evidence supporting #nevertrump is almost entirely Pro-Hillary camp created and when examined is not what it purports to be. Evidence does not need to be manipulated, massaged, added too, taken out of context, twisted or created from nothing. It can stand alone on its own feet without modification.
You're making yourself look silly. With a modicum of thought you would realize that for the most part we were all never trump before there was such a thing as #nevertrump. I've been openly opposed to the man since he announced. Why? Because I believe it will take conservative PRINCIPLES to save this country.
So, now, I'll play along: I assume you will concede that those of us who are never trump will not be persuaded by anything he SAYS. Thus if you wish to convince us, inundate us with the evidence of his deeply held conservative principles. Cite for me 3 things he has ever done, prior to running for office, that show he has a sincerely held conservative belief. With his billions and his, in your mind, staunch conservative credentials, surely the examples will be voluminous.
I'll wait.
While you fail to find any.
-
That is now the one and only main usage; what this site has become. 24/7 ; Boring.
@truth_seeker There are any number of other topics you can link to from the front page. There is a fascinating discussion on the writings of Weaver on the History anthropology forum right now that you might find interesting.
-
The WH has never been gun-free. Neither has the Capital, nor are the courts.
@Mechanicos Seriously, I don't know what country you are living in! Go try and take a tour of the Whitehouse carrying a firearm. Do the same with any Federal or State courthouse. I was not permitted to carry a "Leatherman Wave" to the Statue of Liberty.
-
Ludicrous question not deserving a response. We get you are anti-gun.
@RedHead @Mechanicos Not a ludicrous question at all, your exact words: The WH has never been gun-free. Neither has the Capital, nor are the courts. Civilians are not permitted to carry a gun on either of those properties period, amen end of of discussion. By definition that makes them GUN FREE ZONES. You made a ludicrous comment and got caught, RedHead and I both called you on it. Now man up and say your Mea Culpas.
-
Looking at Trump and Hillary it's pretty obvious that Hillary has spent her entire adult life in 'a political bubble' dealing with politicians, bureaucrats, and lobbyists. In all her years "serving this nation.....she's never created a business or jobs and her acculumation of riches on the backs of US citizens is covered with scandals 24/7...............with Trump it cannot be denied he earned his money by creating successful businesses and thousands of jobs. ...has spent all his life i'n the real world ' solving business, employee, and economic problems,..so on that note Trump wins over Hillary......
Now Hillary always makes lots of speeches about women's rights, until it hits her home front where she did all in her power to destroy women who were victims of her Bills philandering. She does not walk the talk regarding womans rights......Trump on the other hand has employed and "promoted" thousands of woman....regardless of comments he's made about woman. The idea is womans rights regarding employment opportunities.
Hillary is in a war against fossil fuels....fully on board of the Global Waring scam, and invested in alternative energy sourses she promotes. Trup has said he will end this war on fossil fuels and make use of our natural resources.
Though Trump has no foreign policy expereince politically, aside from officials he's done business deals with, it's far far better than the failed Obama/Clinton policies of the past eight years wich brought us Nafta with TTP pending. Hillary's failed with Russia, the Middle East, ISIS, or our allies in Europe....it's quite possible Trump would do far better.
With Hillary, immigrants will continue to pour into this country illegally in astronomical numbers and increase 3rd world migration to this country, especially form Muslim and African nations... Trump will repeal Obama's unconstitutional executive orders, return us to the rule of law, and enforce our borders. Additionally stop the massive immigration to this country.
Hillary will enlarge and increase all there is about Obamacare.....Trump will repeal it.
Trump will appoint Conservative Supreme Judges......Hillary will appoint Progressive/Liberal Judges....on the line is liberty, free speech, and freedom of religion .
Trump will support second amendment...Hillary will trash it entirely
Tump supports the Constitution...Hillary denies it by her actions.
The lists could go on but I think it's pretty obvious of the two who would serve this nation better......and it's dangerous for this country to walk away from this significant and important election by not making a choice for this country from those we've been given to choose from.
-
You're making yourself look silly. With a modicum of thought you would realize that for the most part we were all never trump before there was such a thing as #nevertrump. I've been openly opposed to the man since he announced. Why? Because I believe it will take conservative PRINCIPLES to save this country.
So, now, I'll play along: I assume you will concede that those of us who are never trump will not be persuaded by anything he SAYS. Thus if you wish to convince us, inundate us with the evidence of his deeply held conservative principles. Cite for me 3 things he has ever done, prior to running for office, that show he has a sincerely held conservative belief. With his billions and his, in your mind, staunch conservative credentials, surely the examples will be voluminous.
I'll wait.
While you fail to find any.
Oh please. Nobody is so myopic and unknowing of the Primary process they will only vote for one person regardless. Usually its at least 2 choices with one slightly better then the other one or 2 allowing for the uncertain outcome of a primary.
Its just not believable. What would you have done if say for example Cruz had died in a plane crash early in the primary? Stay home and let the Democrats win?
-
But my keystrokes do not fuel a movement that is helping Hillary Clinton win.
Actually, they do. Because the best chance Hillary Clinton could ever have of winning is to have Donald Trump as the GOP nominee.
-
The lists could go on but I think it's pretty obvious of the two who would serve this nation better......and it's dangerous for this country to walk away from this significant and important election by not making a choice for this country from those we've been given to choose from.
Great analysis. As it currently stands, the winner in our two party system will be Hillary or Trump.
The winner will most assuredly NOT be some 3rd party or write-in candidate.
-
Oh please. Nobody is so myopic and unknowing of the Primary process they will only vote for one person regardless. Usually its at least 2 choices with one slightly better then the other one or 2 allowing for the uncertain outcome of a primary.
Its just not believable. What would you have done if say for example Cruz had died in a plane crash early in the primary? Stay home and let the Democrats win?
I note you did not actually respond to the comment.
I did not have more than one choice during the primary. I only ever planned to vote for Cruz. If something had happened to him that made me unable to vote for him in the primary I would have re-evaluated at that time, but I didn't have a backup waiting in the wings. At one point, because it was a common discussion at TOS I considered voting for Trump if he won the primary, but I have since seen the error in that thinking.
-
I note you did not actually respond to the comment.
I did not have more than one choice during the primary. I only ever planned to vote for Cruz. If something had happened to him that made me unable to vote for him in the primary I would have re-evaluated at that time, but I didn't have a backup waiting in the wings. At one point, because it was a common discussion at TOS I considered voting for Trump if he won the primary, but I have since seen the error in that thinking.
Cruz was my back-up. 3rd choice, in fact, in joint place with Rubio. :shrug: I prefer Governors - always have. It's not the hot seat, but it's a sight closer than the rest.
-
I prefer Governors - always have. It's not the hot seat, but it's a sight closer than the rest.
Agreed. The most qualified candidate was far and away Jim Gilmore. But if you are looking for a candidate who will not waver from Conservatism, Ted Cruz is your guy.
-
Actually, they do. Because the best chance Hillary Clinton could ever have of winning is to have Donald Trump as the GOP nominee.
Not only do you have no legitimate evidence to back up this claim (Liberal created polls are for the gullible herd), but the prediction record of the anti-Trumps is 100 percent wrong every time. The best chance of Hillary winning is people like you who wrongly believe and spread such crazy talk.
-
Oh please. Nobody is so myopic and unknowing of the Primary process they will only vote for one person regardless. Usually its at least 2 choices with one slightly better then the other one or 2 allowing for the uncertain outcome of a primary.
Its just not believable. What would you have done if say for example Cruz had died in a plane crash early in the primary? Stay home and let the Democrats win?
Cute...now answer the question. You didn't want to let bygones be bygones...so answer the question
-
Not only do you have no legitimate evidence to back up this claim (Liberal created polls are for the gullible herd), but the prediction record of the anti-Trumps is 100 percent wrong every time. The best chance of Hillary winning is people like you who wrongly believe and spread such crazy talk.
It's not crazy talk. I live in the Upstate of South Carolina and I know a lot of conservatives and only a very small percentage like Trump.
BTW, I got a letter from the Trump campaign asking for a donation. I wrote at the top of the form: "You want me to donate money to a billionaire? Get the F@#& outta heah!" If you're going to brag about being super rich, self funded and not owned then walk the walk.
-
But my keystrokes do not fuel a movement that is helping Hillary Clinton win.
Your own prince said he did not need us. You people keep insisting the never Trump movement is dying and Trump is gaining.
How do our keystrokes help Hildabeast if you have already declared victory and those of us who are never voting for your prince are irrelevant????
But that said -
You people declared us enemies. Called us traitors. Your Trump Militant compatriots are calling for our deaths for treason. Your celebrities are declaring that we are either for them or against them.
So we are against you and we will do everything in our power to ensure Trump's defeat by voting for actual Conservatives instead of Fascist NY liberals.
-
It's not crazy talk. I live in the Upstate of South Carolina and I know a lot of conservatives and only a very small percentage like Trump.
BTW, I got a letter from the Trump campaign asking for a donation. I wrote at the top of the form: "You want me to donate money to a billionaire? Get the F@#& outta heah!" If you're going to brag about being super rich, self funded and not owned then walk the walk.
Simple fact, you cannot be as many as you think or you would have won.
-
You state...."we will do everything in our power 'to ensure Trump's defeat' by voting for actual Conservatives instead of Fascist NY liberals.".......
????..... How does voting for someone other than Trump or Hillary insure either's defeat when in fact it IS Hillary and Trump at the top of both tickets????
If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-3C_EsePdWCk/T4A8TmMv55I/AAAAAAAAAFQ/09eigbChvgI/s1600/treefallsinforest.jpg)
-
Simple fact, you cannot be as many as you think or you would have won.
@Mechanicos
Simple fact, you still won't answer the question asked above. I think it's safe to assume that we can all safely ignore anything you say from here on out as you have no answers. Instead you merely flail about, with your delicate sensibilities offended that not everyone sees the glory of your cult and it's orange hued leader.
-
You state...."we will do everything in our power 'to ensure Trump's defeat' by voting for actual Conservatives instead of Fascist NY liberals.".......
????..... How does voting for someone other than Trump or Hillary insure either's defeat when in fact it IS Hillary and Trump at the top of both tickets????
This sElection is already lost in terms of having anyone in office that respects the Constitution and individual liberty. We have a Marxist Communist and a liberal Fascist on the top of both tickets. We're not voting for either of them.
Because we're denying Trump all the Conservative Christian votes he said he did not want nor need to "win", unless Trump can yank enough Bernie supporters to his banner, Trump will be trounced - deservedly so.
If we must have an enemy at the head of government, we want someone we can clearly oppose, and in whom we have absolutely no responsibility in selecting.
-
@Mechanicos
Simple fact, you still won't answer the question asked above. I think it's safe to assume that we can all safely ignore anything you say from here on out as you have no answers. Instead you merely flail about, with your delicate sensibilities offended that not everyone sees the glory of your cult and it's orange hued leader.
The @Mechanicos will not work for me because I will not install messenger on any of my machines for security purposes. This is the first time I have seen your response.
As far as this late to the game repeat question I have answered on other threads I will attempt to redo what you missed.
He Opposed the BLM in Nevada, He saved the NYC Veterans day parade, He has always been about since at least the 80s America first for Trade. He has been against the EPA for very long time. etc. There is more but the fact you did not know any of this shows you lacked material information here.
On other threads I have posted multiple links to this repeat question based on a dishonest meme created by bad people.
-
Cruz was my back-up. 3rd choice, in fact, in joint place with Rubio. :shrug: I prefer Governors - always have. It's not the hot seat, but it's a sight closer than the rest.
Yes, I realize that some, perhaps even most, had people they liked 1st, 2nd, 3rd. But I did not. I doubt I'm the only person in the whole US that did not. To throw around the broad generalities and think they apply to everyone is nonsense.
-
BTW, I got a letter from the Trump campaign asking for a donation. I wrote at the top of the form: "You want me to donate money to a billionaire? Get the F@#& outta heah!" If you're going to brag about being super rich, self funded and not owned then walk the walk.
This is why the GOPe is backing Trump now just as they backed Romney four years ago. After the Democrat's 2008 financial windfall, they went after candidates who were wealthy enough to compete. With Trump as the nominee, they figured they could kick back and relax instead of working their butts off raising money. Little did they know that Trump lied about funding his own campaign. At this stage of the game, they will not be able to recover.
As for Trump's wealth, it is a non-issue for me. If Trump showed any evidence of Conservatism at all, then I would have no problem giving him a campaign donation. However, I will not fund anyone who considers big-government to be the solution rather than the problem.
-
The @Mechanicos will not work for me because I will not install messenger on any of my machines for security purposes. This is the first time I have seen your response.
As far as this late to the game repeat question I have answered on other threads I will attempt to redo what you missed.
He Opposed the BLM in Nevada, He saved the NYC Veterans day parade, He has always been about since at least the 80s America first for Trade. He has been against the EPA for very long time. etc. There is more but the fact you did not know any of this shows you lacked material information here.
On other threads I have posted multiple links to this repeat question based on a dishonest meme created by bad people.
See at the top, where it says Profile?
Click it.
Hover over the button Profile Info. A menu pops up.
Bottom item is Mentions. Click it.
All your mentions are there. No Messenger involved. Just the forum software and your browser.
-
Simple fact, you cannot be as many as you think or you would have won.
Then why troll Never Trump posts and argue ad infinitum over every single syllable that needs to be redefined and re-explained to massage the imbecility of your candidates words and actions?
If we are not as many as you insist - why illustrate the fear you have that your prince is going to get trounced? Why the constant haranguing that our keyboards will get Hildabeast elected if you are so cocksure that your political savior is going to have no problem sweeping the sElection in November?
No, the truth is that you know for a fact that your prince is in deep trouble and you need every single vote you can intimidate, threaten, shame and squeeze out of former Republicans to get him into the office of Savior you people so desperately want. That is why you troll this board and engage in spouting absurdities and gross imbecility to either apologize for your prince or attack principled Conservatives.
It's you people who elected Hillary already, supporting the absolutely worst candidate ever in a NYC liberal "populist-nationalist" who destroyed Conservatism from having any voice in this sElection and whom continues to attack Conservatives who will not kiss his ring.
-
The @Mechanicos will not work for me because I will not install messenger on any of my machines for security purposes. This is the first time I have seen your response.
As far as this late to the game repeat question I have answered on other threads I will attempt to redo what you missed.
He Opposed the BLM in Nevada, He saved the NYC Veterans day parade, He has always been about since at least the 80s America first for Trade. He has been against the EPA for very long time. etc. There is more but the fact you did not know any of this shows you lacked material information here.
On other threads I have posted multiple links to this repeat question based on a dishonest meme created by bad people.
@Axeslinger
There does appear to be some evidence that Trump has for about 2 years "worked" to oppose Cuomo's gun legislation by speaking at a rally after the legislation was passed. Trump's claims about the NYC Veteran's Day parade are not as fantastic as what really happened, according to the organizer. The organizer acknowledges Trump saved the parade, but Trump gave 1/3 of the money that he claims and did not lead the parade as he claims he did.
I opposed the BLM in Nevada and have opposed the EPA for years also. :/ I have seen no evidence of Trump actively opposing either of them.
-
See at the top, where it says Profile?
Click it.
Hover over the button Profile Info. A menu pops up.
Bottom item is Mentions. Click it.
All your mentions are there. No Messenger involved. Just the forum software and your browser.
Found that, it still does not work.
Said 7 pages showed the first one the when clicking on the 2 it went back to the original profile screen, a loop where if I click it again back on the first page. So Its there but not navigable to any new stuff.
-
Um...yeah...I've never seen the meme you reference. I've been asking that question for months (at TOS) for my own satisfaction...so continuing to spout that the great boogeyman is out to harm His Orangeness, isn't really getting you anywhere.
So thanks for playing, but nope, fail.
Your answer presupposes that only a conservative supports veterans. That is demonstrably false. If it weren't we would be beating the democrats over the head with it, but we're not. So strike one.
Regrading being for America first trade...while this is laudable, upon what basis does he support this? I asked you for sincerely held conservative beliefs. Seems quite likely that he has this stance because it may benefit him in his business ventures rather than out of conviction.
And I'd be willing to bet that his opposition to the EPA is founded in the same mindset.
His opposition to the BLM in NV....what a surprise that a casino owner might be opposed to govt overreach in Nev.
Show me some adherence to conservative small government PRINCIPLES where he has had nothing to gain, or where he actually fought the good fight, standing up for a principle. Show me where, rather than donating tens of 1000's of dollars to democrats (because he had to in order to do business!), he used his money to fight that system to ensure that no one else would get ensnared in it.
-
Found that, it still does not work.
Said 7 pages showed the first one the when clicking on the 2 it went back to the original profile screen, a loop where if I click it again back on the first page. So Its there but not navigable to any new stuff.
Odd. Same is happening to mine now. I've reported it - let the brains sort it out. :tongue2:
Last mention in is at the top of page one though, so you can see the last few, at least.
-
Um...yeah...I've never seen the meme you reference. I've been asking that question for months (at TOS) for my own satisfaction...so continuing to spout that the great boogeyman is out to harm His Orangeness, isn't really getting you anywhere.
So thanks for playing, but nope, fail.
Your answer presupposes that only a conservative supports veterans. That is demonstrably false. If it weren't we would be beating the democrats over the head with it, but we're not. So strike one.
Regrading being for America first trade...while this is laudable, upon what basis does he support this? I asked you for sincerely held conservative beliefs. Seems quite likely that he has this stance because it may benefit him in his business ventures rather than out of conviction.
And I'd be willing to bet that his opposition to the EPA is founded in the same mindset.
His opposition to the BLM in NV....what a surprise that a casino owner might be opposed to govt overreach in Nev.
Show me some adherence to conservative small government PRINCIPLES where he has had nothing to gain, or where he actually fought the good fight, standing up for a principle. Show me where, rather than donating tens of 1000's of dollars to democrats (because he had to in order to do business!), he used his money to fight that system to ensure that no one else would get ensnared in it.
So willful blindness. ]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEPs17_AkTI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEPs17_AkTI)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzjiW4U4V9g (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzjiW4U4V9g)
http://dennismichaellynch.com/must-see-donald-trumps-position-on-the-blm/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmHwLaOloh4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmHwLaOloh4)
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/anti-gun-control-rally-albany-brings-trump-article-1.1742627
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/01/flashback-trump-saved-ny-veterans-day-parade/
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/donald-trump-quietly-helped-marine-whom-obama-ignored/
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/married-couple-helped-trump-after-his-limo-broke-down-what-he-did-next-is-amazing/
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/16/9-11-first-responder-helped-donald-trump-hes-humanitarian-reaches-donates/
many many more but the search engines will not be helpful for finding them as they will put up anti-Trump articles unless you know exactly what to type in - so I do not fault you for not knowing.
-
So willful blindness. ]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEPs17_AkTI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEPs17_AkTI)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzjiW4U4V9g (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzjiW4U4V9g)
http://dennismichaellynch.com/must-see-donald-trumps-position-on-the-blm/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmHwLaOloh4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmHwLaOloh4)
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/anti-gun-control-rally-albany-brings-trump-article-1.1742627
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/01/flashback-trump-saved-ny-veterans-day-parade/
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/donald-trump-quietly-helped-marine-whom-obama-ignored/
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/married-couple-helped-trump-after-his-limo-broke-down-what-he-did-next-is-amazing/
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/05/16/9-11-first-responder-helped-donald-trump-hes-humanitarian-reaches-donates/
many many more but the search engines will not be helpful for finding them as they will put up anti-Trump articles unless you know exactly what to type in - so I do not fault you for not knowing.
All paid propaganda. Why shill for the Hill?
Have a flower.
(https://www.deamuseum.org/ccp/img/opium/4i2.jpg)
-
Mechanicos has become the Leni Riefenstahl of the Trump campaign.
I fully expect "Triumph of the Wallet" to be a soon-coming film and mandatory viewing for all subjects of Trump's empire.
-
Mechanicos has become the Leni Riefenstahl of the Trump campaign.
I fully expect "Triumph of the Wallet" to be a soon-coming film and mandatory viewing for all subjects of Trump's empire.
"Leni Riefenstahl" is a blatant Nazi reference, and posters were directed by this site's owners to stop doing that.
Maybe at the place that you got kicked off from, they did make such references against other members, but we have not done so here, as a matter of policy and civil discussion and behavior.
-
All paid propaganda. Why shill for the Hill?
Have a flower.
(https://www.deamuseum.org/ccp/img/opium/4i2.jpg)
Prove it. Unlike your stuff there is no money trail back to the Democrats/Establishment PACS.
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/03/30/eric-errickson-website-resurgent-paid-by-pro-cruzanti-trump-our-principles-pac/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/21/politicos-army-of-democrats-driving-anti-trump-narrative/
http://www.wnd.com/2016/05/amazon-ceo-orders-20-man-army-to-dig-up-dirt-on-trump/
https://www.yahoo.com/celebrity/news/gop-tech-leaders-hold-secret-meeting-stop-trump-171532249.html?ref=gs
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2016/03/10/billionaire-smackdown-george-soros-funds-effort-to-stop-trump-mobilize-latinos/
http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/05/hillary-super-pac-creates-paid-troll-army-to-counter-online-attacks/
[More]
-
Ok mechanicos...ill try one more time and I'll try to use small words: what has he DONE that shows sincerely held CONSERVATIVE beliefs PRIOR to his run for office..
And as I hadn't seen the 27min long video, in the interest of being informed, I just watched most of that one. I'm sorry but bloviating about how we all will make more money does not a conservative belief make. Fully 3/4s of what you sent are since he announced his run.
Come on man, the fool is 70 years old and has more money than God. Where is his Soros (scum that he is) level of involvement and activism? Where is anything other doing things for his own enrichment and aggrandizement?
-
"Leni Riefenstahl" is a blatant Nazi reference, and posters were directed by this site's owners to stop doing that.
Maybe at the place that you got kicked off from, they did make such references against other members, but we have not done so here, as a matter of policy and civil discussion and behavior.
You prefer Baghdad Bob? Same holds true. That wasn't an overt nazi reference, at least I don't think. It was a reference to an unapologetic propagandist.
-
Ok mechanicos...ill try one more time and I'll try to use small words: what has he DONE that shows sincerely held CONSERVATIVE beliefs PRIOR to his run for office..
And as I hadn't seen the 27min long video, in the interest of being informed, I just watched most of that one. I'm sorry but bloviating about how we all will make more money does not a conservative belief make. Fully 3/4s of what you sent are since he announced his run.
Come on man, the fool is 70 years old and has more money than God. Where is his Soros (scum that he is) level of involvement and activism? Where is anything other doing things for his own enrichment and aggrandizement?
His love for America. Nothing is more conservative then that. No conservative principles exist with no America. See what you call conservatism has nothing to stand on and will not exist if we continue on the path we are on. The Fact is Purists are not rational. With Trump we get better judges at minimum, borders and stop or at least slow down of the Obama fundimental change of America.
What exactly do you hope to conserve by your actions helping the Democrats defeat our only real option to stop Obama's plan to fundamentally change America for four more years?
-
You prefer Baghdad Bob? Same holds true. That wasn't an overt nazi reference, at least I don't think. It was a reference to an unapologetic propagandist.
Goering was an art collector, Himmler was a chicken farmer, Speer was an architect. Parse words to your heart's delight.
Overt or not, it was a Nazi reference. The owners here asked that it be stopped.
-
INVAR that is over the top please remove it....and people stop quoting it...so I don't have to edit your posts as well...
-
Of course not. I just don't think the LR reference was over the top...She is known for willful propagandizing the Nazi regime, not for being one of the monsters herself, per se. But I can understand that YMMV. That's why I threw out the BB reference...to soothe your nerves. :beer:
And now I see Myst agrees w you so to that I say:
:beer:
:beer:
We're gonna be drunk at this rate
-
"Leni Riefenstahl" is a blatant Nazi reference, and posters were directed by this site's owners to stop doing that.
Maybe at the place that you got kicked off from, they did make such references against other members, but we have not done so here, as a matter of policy and civil discussion and behavior.
Well go keep hitting the 'report to moderator' button that you and your compatriots are so fond of. I mean, even using the term 'Trump Militant' is apparently offensive to you snowflakes when constantly calling us "Hillary supporters" is argued to be "accurate".
Maybe you'll get your wish and get this board to do what JR did over at FR and make this entire board a Trump Safe Space for you and yours.
It's what you people have done on just about every former Conservative board and group out there.
We know it's your M.O. to silence dissent against Trump. It's all you have.
-
INVAR that is over the top please remove it....and people stop quoting it...so I don't have to edit your posts as well...
Okay, obviously this board is going the way FR went with the constant wrist-slapping of anything negative of Trump and his precious supporters here on this board.
I guess Constitutional Conservatives will need to find another board.
-
Leave off the name calling.
I will show your pet more respect when you train him to stop pissing all over the rugs.
-
Okay, obviously this board is going the way FR went with the constant wrist-slapping of anything negative of Trump and his precious supporters here on this board.
I guess Constitutional Conservatives will need to find another board.
No it's not...I am trying my best to keep this place civil that is all. I receive enough post reports from both sides all day long to keep me busy.
I too am a Constitutional Conservative!
-
No it's not...I am trying my best to keep this place civil that is all. I receive enough post reports from both sides all day long to keep me busy.
I too am a Constitutional Conservative!
I've PM'd you.
-
Well go keep hitting the 'report to moderator' button that you and your compatriots are so fond of. I mean, even using the term 'Trump Militant' is apparently offensive to you snowflakes when constantly calling us "Hillary supporters" is argued to be "accurate".
Maybe you'll get your wish and get this board to do what JR did over at FR and make this entire board a Trump Safe Space for you and yours.
It's what you people have done on just about every former Conservative board and group out there.
We know it's your M.O. to silence dissent against Trump. It's all you have.
This isn't about whose urine is clearer, @INVAR
There's an important election ahead with two distinctly different ideologies facing off against each other.
Put down the bible and set your 'special' brand of Conservatism aside, and support the Nominee against Hillary Clinton.
-
Put down the bible and set your 'special' brand of Conservatism aside, and support the Nominee against Hillary Clinton.
Yeah, that's the way to sway an opinion.
-
Put down the bible and set your 'special' brand of Conservatism aside, and support the Nominee against Hillary Clinton.
Pound sand bub.
I'm against you and your prince, as Palin so eloquently threatened and will work tirelessly to make sure Conservatives vote for Castle, Johnson or whichever write-in fits their principles best.
I prefer Hillary be at the head of this evil government than Trump. Better an enemy at the head of government we can clearly oppose and have no responsibility for choosing.
Your snide comments about my faith are exactly what I expect from Hedonist Leftists by the way. Fitting you should make them.
-
Pound sand bub.
I'm against you and your prince, as Palin so eloquently threatened and will work tirelessly to make sure Conservatives vote for Castle, Johnson or whichever write-in fits their principles best.
I prefer Hillary be at the head of this evil government than Trump. Better an enemy at the head of government we can clearly oppose and have no responsibility for choosing.
Your snide comments about my faith are exactly what I expect from Hedonist Leftists by the way. Fitting you should make them.
You've worked real hard for my "snide", @INVAR You've earned it.
Now, I fully expect you to claim I want you all rounded up and re-educated.....or something. :laugh:
-
This isn't about whose urine is clearer, @INVAR
There's an important election ahead with two distinctly different ideologies facing off against each other.
Put down the bible and set your 'special' brand of Conservatism aside, and support the Nominee against Hillary Clinton.
Insulting other posters will not win them over to your side. And I will not set aside a lifetime of voting for good and decent men for president to support a mentally unstable bigot.
-
Now, I fully expect you to claim I want you all rounded up and re-educated.....or something. :laugh:
:laugh:
-
Now, I fully expect you to claim I want you all rounded up and re-educated.....or something. :laugh:
Actually I do not see that as being that far fetched. There are a lot of parallels between the Germany people who supported the Nazis and those Americans supporting Trump. There are more than a few Trump supporters posting that I deem most capable and willing to do so of course they would do it only to 'Save the Republic' from [Fill in the Blank].
But then maybe that is a bit over the top, so I stick with what I found to be the best explanation of Trump supporters:
Lonesome Rhodes: Rednecks, crackers, hillbillies, hausfraus, shut-ins, pea-pickers - everybody that's got to jump when somebody else blows the whistle. They don't know it yet, but they're all gonna be 'Fighters for Fuller'. They're mine! I own 'em! They think like I do. Only they're even more stupid than I am, so I gotta think for 'em.
-
Okay, obviously this board is going the way FR went with the constant wrist-slapping of anything negative of Trump and his precious supporters here on this board.
I guess Constitutional Conservatives will need to find another board.
Why not just comply with a couple of simple requests and post inside the guidelines?
-
Put down the bible and set your 'special' brand of Conservatism aside, and support the Nominee against Hillary Clinton.
Winner of least persuasive argument. Ever.
-
That is now the one and only main usage; what this site has become. 24/7 ; Boring.
Why don't you liven it up by telling us how Trump follows your Carnegie rule about being kind to people.
I remember that you used to believe in decency before you became a Trump follower.
Now you like the vulgar, mean stuff and don't like those of us who are calling for decency.
Trump has made you do a 180 in values.
Sad..... **nononono*
-
Put down the bible and set your 'special' brand of Conservatism aside, and support the Nominee against Hillary Clinton.
That about sums up the Trump follower creed, doesn't it?
Give up your morals, your values, everything important to you, and follow the Trump train into the abyss......
Trouble is, you aren't going to convince a single person of character to do that, so I would recommend that you stop with the silly bullying and recognize that some of us aren't so malleable.....
-
Winner of least persuasive argument. Ever.
But very telling as to what Trump followers expect people of values to do.
Give them up.
-
Insulting other posters will not win them over to your side.
Oh, they are not interesting in winning us over to 'their side'.
They are only interested in punishment.
Which is why they gravitate to a vulgar narcissist who speaks of punishment for those who will not kiss his ring.
-
You've worked real hard for my "snide", @INVAR You've earned it.
From day one, the moment you discovered I was not voting for your prince.
Now, I fully expect you to claim I want you all rounded up and re-educated.....or something.
I fully expect you to state something like that.
-
Why not just comply with a couple of simple requests and post inside the guidelines?
They keep getting whittled down to the point it will soon to verboten to say that Trump is a liberal, because that is offensive.
-
Oh, they are not interesting in winning us over to 'their side'.
They are only interested in punishment.
Which is why they gravitate to a vulgar narcissist who speaks of punishment for those who will not kiss his ring.
Wait......he has a ring I forgot to kiss?
-
Why not just comply with a couple of simple requests and post inside the guidelines?
I have permission from Mystery-AK to post part of this PM discussion between us. She's juggling assaults from all sides and attempting to keep the board from going into full-tilt raucous sewer, but she thought what I wrote valuable enough to share:
If we're going to keep getting slapped on the wrist because every image, every adjective, every word that the snowflakes for Trump find offensive is suddenly banned and we cannot use - then the entire point of a discussion forum is moot and your board will become just another Trump Safe Space.
Which is what I suspect they are attempting to do anyway.
Fighting for liberty is messy and ugly and often cannot be contained by artificial ramparts of civility. Just as John Adams about that.
I'm not asking for permission to post vulgarity and cursing - but for crying out loud! Referencing the most well-known propagandist in history to make a point about the tactics being used by ******** followed in minutes by being slapped down over using the term "Trump Militant"????? They ARE Militant! Some of them on social media calling for our deaths! Sorry, but some of these Trump supporters here sound like the same vocal bullies over at FR, and I'm not even sure the adjective of militant covers it. I won't tolerate a bully and I'm fed up with the subtle and direct insults they shove in our faces on a daily basis.
Every single negative thing about Trump these people declare offensive, not rational, destructive or supporting of Hillary is now a cassus belli towards the purpose of shutting that commentary and discourse down.
It's what they did at Free Republic, TOL, TB, and a host of other groups and BB boards all over the place. And I'm watching them do it again here.
They are going to complain, no matter what we say or post and it will get whittled down to the point we cannot state that Trump is lying or wrong about anything.
It's your place, but I don't go into the ring with my hands tied and the ROE so ridiculous that it makes arguing in the arena of ideas pointless.
You are never going to get them to stop calling us Hillary supporters because that is what they truly believe we are. Likewise you are never going to get me to stop calling them what they are.
Let us fight it out. You can set limits on cursing, vulgarity and the like - we do not need to become a cesspool. But if I am a Hillary supporter in all the variations they insinuate and declare, they are certainly militant for Trump and engaged in propaganda that would make Leni Reifeshtahl blush.
Duels at 40 paces over insults to honor were commonplace at the time of our Founding.
-
This isn't about whose urine is clearer, @INVAR
There's an important election ahead with two distinctly different ideologies facing off against each other.
Put down the bible and set your 'special' brand of Conservatism aside, and support the Nominee against Hillary Clinton.
@DCPatriot
:thumbsup3:
-
That about sums up the Trump follower creed, doesn't it?
Give up your morals, your values, everything important to you, .../
Stop it, @musiclady, just stop this :bs: We are fighting to save America.
@DCPatriot
-
:laugh:
I am so glad you're still here @flowers :beer:
-
I am so glad you're still here @flowers :beer:
Thanks....still need to know how to kiss Trumps ring. I didn't get that memo until just now. @Right_in_Virginia
-
Let us fight it out. You can set limits on cursing, vulgarity and the like - we do not need to become a cesspool
When Tracy and I founded TBR we encouraged vigorous debate without the insults, cursing and vulgarity. Why can't we get back to that without every term being an insult and a post report filed.
We have some brilliant minds here and talented writers..why do I and the MODS have to ride herd over every thread lately.
Everyone on both sides have gotten to be too damn sensitive...this is an adult political forum!
-
Insulting other posters will not win them over to your side.
.
Seriously, is this from you @sinkspur? ... I ask you this as one who fought to reinstate you for insulting others to the point of banishment.
-
Insulting other posters will not win them over to your side. And I will not set aside a lifetime of voting for good and decent men for president to support a mentally unstable bigot.
Buddy....first of all, the poster probably had to go on meds for his separation anxiety from TOS.
Secondly, he proved himself so determined to die on "principle hill", that he got thrown off TOS.
Thirdly, anybody that has read his posts since he's been here, together with his history, knows that he's not interested in being won over my my side.
He's an in-your-face contrarian. Nothing new.
-
Buddy....first of all, the poster probably had to go on meds for his separation anxiety from TOS.
Secondly, he proved himself so determined to die on "principle hill", that he got thrown off TOS.
Thirdly, anybody that has read his posts since he's been here, together with his history, knows that he's not interested in being won over my my side.
He's an in-your-face contrarian. Nothing new.
Spot on @DCPatriot
-
Ahhhh bub, your assumptive ignorance and outright lies are astounding. Lies because I have explained all this to you before.
Buddy....first of all, the poster probably had to go on meds for his separation anxiety from TOS.
I did , did I? Which meds and from what sites would that anxiety be from?
Secondly, he proved himself so determined to die on "principle hill", that he got thrown off TOS.
And which site would that be? I'm a member and Mod on myriad forums, BBs and groups for 18 years and never once was banned by any of them.
If you are referencing FR - I was never thrown off unless it happened after I stopped going there and one of you complained about my posts here to JR, which I would not put past you people. I was never banned to my knowledge. I never opused. I just left, and never went back.
Thirdly, anybody that has read his posts since he's been here, together with his history, knows that he's not interested in being won over my my side.
He's an in-your-face contrarian. Nothing new.
That is the only thing you've written that I agree wholeheartedly with.
I will be forever in your face, because as Palin said last week - because I am not with you and your prince - I am against you.
So I am going to live up to that assertion much more vociferously than I have thus far.
You wanted to make us enemies - and keep fanning the flames of this internecine war, you got it.
I love to fight. Been doing it in and outside the ring for decades.
-
Spot on @DCPatriot
Spot on is he?
Last I checked (10 seconds ago) I'm still a member at FR.
Perhaps you know what meds I'm supposed to be taking.
That is the thing about you Trump people - you assume so much that just isn't so.
-
(http://www.usmessageboard.com/attachments/67103/)
-
When Tracy and I founded TBR we encouraged vigorous debate without the insults, cursing and vulgarity. Why can't we get back to that without every term being an insult and a post report filed.
We have some brilliant minds here and talented writers..why do I and the MODS have to ride herd over every thread lately.
Everyone on both sides have gotten to be too damn sensitive...this is an adult political forum!
Sad to say @mystery-ak but its only going to get worse as we go into the Convention. That is what is causing the increased tension you are seeing. The Anti-Trumps are worried that the Dump Trump is going to fail while the Pro-Trump side is concerned about party corruption and the the establishment on both sides opposed to Trump.
Even after Trump is nominated I expect to see a surge in hostility as a lashing out. Its the tension build up before a battle.
-
When Tracy and I founded TBR we encouraged vigorous debate without the insults, cursing and vulgarity. Why can't we get back to that without every term being an insult and a post report filed.
We have some brilliant minds here and talented writers..why do I and the MODS have to ride herd over every thread lately.
Everyone on both sides have gotten to be too damn sensitive...this is an adult political forum!
I sure appreciate this statement. Agree completely.
-
1973...
-
Sad to say @mystery-ak but its only going to get worse as we go into the Convention. That is what is causing the increased tension you are seeing. The Anti-Trumps are worried that the Dump Trump is going to fail while the Pro-Trump side is concerned about party corruption and the the establishment on both sides opposed to Trump.
Even after Trump is nominated I expect to see a surge in hostility as a lashing out. Its the tension build up before a battle.
Hard to imagine a surge in hostility from what we have now.
-
Hard to imagine a surge in hostility from what we have now.
I'll have to get some more MODS... :thud:
-
(http://www.usmessageboard.com/attachments/67103/)
Please explain how a 40+ year old article is pertinent to today?
-
I'll have to get some more MODS... :thud:
LOL. No one will want the job.
-
LOL. No one will want the job.
You got that right.
-
You got that right.
I am currently Op'ed in 10 IRC channels with 4 being politics related, and can tell you this, its much better here.
-
You got that right.
:chairbang:
-
"...There's an important election ahead with two distinctly different ideologies facing off against each other..."
Okay, I don't think anyone on this board would disagree with this statement, by itself.
Here's the rub: I don't think it's the two ideologies you're thinking of. I believe it's two others.
Group One: A group who's "ideology" really hates Hillary, the GOPe, the establishment and all it represents. They fear what Hillary will do and what the GOPe will do if in office and left alone. They are furious about being betrayed by their own party (GOPe) and scared spitless about what Hillary will do if she gains the office. They SAY they believe the Constitution is the defining, baseline rulebook for our country. They believe that contract has been broken. This group is actually a sub-set.
The other ideology, Group Two, really hates Hillary, the GOPe, the establishment and all it represents, too. BUT, it also hates anti-freedom, tyranny, big government, "progressive" causes/mentalities that encroach on freedoms and people who tend to vilify anyone that disagrees with them. They are constitutional conservatives that see the American Contract being broken. They believe the Constitution is the defining, baseline rulebook for our country. They believe that contract has been broken.
Group one has seemed to coalesce around Trump. Trump SAYS he's going to be mean to the establishment. Trump SAYS he's going to fix stuff. Trump SAYS he's going to build a wall, ban muslims, etc. And Group one (rightly, in my mind) thinks that would be terrific. But, Group one also ignores warning signs about Trump. Or if they don't ignore the signs, they just won't allow discussion about them. They tend to vilify and disparage anyone with negative or critical comments about their guy. They are trapped into a binary thought process; either/or.
Group Group two sees Trump as a possible antidote...but one that may have too many side effects to be worth the risk. They don't disagree that much of what he SAYS he'll do would work and they would dig it if someone actually did it. But, because of history and an understanding of the way government works and an understanding of the Constitution , they realize two BIG things:
1. For a lot of what Trump promise to get accomplished to get accomplished, he would have to operate extra-Constitutionally, or Congress would have to cooperate in a fashion that it's NEVER cooperated before, or;
2. Trump ain't gonna get it done at all and is just saying what he needs to say to get people to sign on.
Either way, Group two isn't having any of it. They don't want their name on this person's legacy. They feel like there is ALWAYS another way; a better way.
But even if it is binary, they'll not sacrifice their principles because of a threat. They'll not roll over again, because "our" candidate is [seemingly] closer to our convictions than another.
It's not hard to understand. It's easy if you try.
And taking this principled approach is more honorable...and admittedly, more fraught with danger and risk than the easier, go-with-the-flow option.
It's just an abhorrent choice for us.
We just choose to continue to hunt for alternatives to what we see as two bad choices. And if the "lesser of two evils" is one of the choices, we'd really rather not vote for evil at all.
There's enough around without us putting our imprimatur on it.
-
.
Seriously, is this from you @sinkspur? ... I ask you this as one who fought to reinstate you for insulting others to the point of banishment.
I had no idea. I do appreciate it, but, as you can see, I rely less on myself these days and more on the words of others to oppose Big Orange. Everything that can be said has mostly been said, or so I thought.
Then Trump comes along and tweets something from a white supremacist site.
He will NEVER learn, which is why he is so dangerous and must never be president.
-
Thanks....still need to know how to kiss Trumps ring. I didn't get that memo until just now. @Right_in_Virginia
@flowers
LOL! :laugh:
-
@sinkspur
:talkhand:
-
Okay, I don't think anyone on this board would disagree with this statement, by itself.
Here's the rub: I don't think it's the two ideologies you're thinking of. I believe it's two others.
Group One: A group who's "ideology" really hates Hillary, the GOPe, the establishment and all it represents. They fear what Hillary will do and what the GOPe will do if in office and left alone. They are furious about being betrayed by their own party (GOPe) and scared spitless about what Hillary will do if she gains the office. They SAY they believe the Constitution is the defining, baseline rulebook for our country. They believe that contract has been broken. This group is actually a sub-set.
The other ideology, Group Two, really hates Hillary, the GOPe, the establishment and all it represents, too. BUT, it also hates anti-freedom, tyranny, big government, "progressive" causes/mentalities that encroach on freedoms and people who tend to vilify anyone that disagrees with them. They are constitutional conservatives that see the American Contract being broken. They believe the Constitution is the defining, baseline rulebook for our country. They believe that contract has been broken.
Group one has seemed to coalesce around Trump. Trump SAYS he's going to be mean to the establishment. Trump SAYS he's going to fix stuff. Trump SAYS he's going to build a wall, ban muslims, etc. And Group one (rightly, in my mind) thinks that would be terrific. But, Group one also ignores warning signs about Trump. Or if they don't ignore the signs, they just won't allow discussion about them. They tend to vilify and disparage anyone with negative or critical comments about their guy. They are trapped into a binary thought process; either/or.
Group Group two sees Trump as a possible antidote...but one that may have too many side effects to be worth the risk. They don't disagree that much of what he SAYS he'll do would work and they would dig it if someone actually did it. But, because of history and an understanding of the way government works and an understanding of the Constitution , they realize two BIG things:
1. For a lot of what Trump promise to get accomplished to get accomplished, he would have to operate extra-Constitutionally, or Congress would have to cooperate in a fashion that it's NEVER cooperated before, or;
2. Trump ain't gonna get it done at all and is just saying what he needs to say to get people to sign on.
Either way, Group two isn't having any of it. They don't want their name on this person's legacy. They feel like there is ALWAYS another way; a better way.
But even if it is binary, they'll not sacrifice their principles because of a threat. They'll not roll over again, because "our" candidate is [seemingly] closer to our convictions than another.
It's not hard to understand. It's easy if you try.
And taking this principled approach is more honorable...and admittedly, more fraught with danger and risk than the easier, go-with-the-flow option.
It's just an abhorrent choice for us.
We just choose to continue to hunt for alternatives to what we see as two bad choices. And if the "lesser of two evils" is one of the choices, we'd really rather not vote for evil at all.
There's enough around without us putting our imprimatur on it.
Yep, I was right about you. :)
-
Sad to say @mystery-ak but its only going to get worse as we go into the Convention. That is what is causing the increased tension you are seeing. The Anti-Trumps are worried that the Dump Trump is going to fail while the Pro-Trump side is concerned about party corruption and the the establishment on both sides opposed to Trump.
Even after Trump is nominated I expect to see a surge in hostility as a lashing out. Its the tension build up before a battle.
@mystery-ak
This is an example of what kind of post inflames passions. Even while discussing the name calling and hostility certain posters cannot refrain from passing out the digs. In this case the Pro Trump peoples motives are pure and honorable while those against Trump are just living in fear.
-
:chairbang:
You may rethink that response; better keep the mods as happy as you can. ;)
-
@mystery-ak
This is an example of what kind of post inflames passions. Even while discussing the name calling and hostility certain posters cannot refrain from passing out the digs. In this case the Pro Trump peoples motives are pure and honorable while those against Trump are just living in fear.
I know I caught it..
-
Yep, I was right about you. :)
[blush]
-
You may rethink that response; better keep the mods as happy as you can. ;)
LOL...true..I can't afford to lose any of them.. :nometalk:
-
[blush]
LOL. Ask around, I'm not right very often, so take my comment for what it's worth. :)
-
Stop it, @musiclady, just stop this :bs: We are fighting to save America.
@DCPatriot
No, you are trying to destroy the very concept of America and replace it with yet another European-style ethno-state.
-
He will NEVER learn, which is why he is so dangerous and must never be president.
It isn't that her never learns it is he is never wrong! Even when he is wrong no one especially Trump himself will admit it.
When Trump joked that: "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters,"
Maybe he was joking and maybe he wasn't, but either way it doesn't make it any less true.
-
No, you are trying to destroy the very concept of America and replace it with yet another European-style ethno-state.
No, @HonestJohn ,,, you are wrong, so deeply and profoundly wrong.
And, please, do not respond...I can no long fight the hatred you have brought to this once honorable site.
Godspeed.
:bighug: to:
@alicewonders
@flowers
@aligncare
@DCPatriot
@Repub4Trump
@mystery-ak
@sinkspur (Thanks for the tango through the years ^-^)
-
No, you are trying to destroy the very concept of America and replace it with yet another European-style ethno-state.
You know, I have RiV on "IGNORE" because she is always nasty. ALWAYS.
So it's funny to see her chastising me and pretending I don't love the country because I don't support her beloved vulgar, degenerate, dictator wannabe, Progressive, punk of a candidate.
Actually, it is my LOVE of country that will not be a part of destroying it by voting for Trump.
-
No, @HonestJohn ,,, you are wrong, so deeply and profoundly wrong.
And, please, do not respond...I can no long fight the hatred you have brought to this once honorable site.
We are done.
I still wish you all Godspeed.
@mystery-ak
@Repub4Trump
Trump wants to ban Muslims coming to our nation, until the government can 'figure out whats going on'. (and since we all know that the government is incompetent, that means a permanent ban)
That is picking what religions make up an American.
Furthermore, he has called an American, born in America to American citizens... a Mexican. That shows he does not find those of Mexican descent capable of being American.
Once again defining the notion of an American as something derived from one's birth, inherited by blood.
And that is the very foundational concept of a European-style ethno-state. Serbia, for example.
---
America is a different sort of nation, one founded on an ideal. That all men are create equal. America is not defined by race, ethnicity, or religion. It consists of those that believe in her ideals.
And it's increasingly obvious that Trump and his supporters do not believe in those ideals.
-
@Mechanicos
I concede your point that for the most part the things you highlighted are not what he has said. Ultimately, though, it comes down to this:
The vast majority of trumpeters are basing their choice on what he has said throughout this campaign season, as is their right. The vast majority of #neverTrump are basing their decision on what he has DONE throughout his life, as is our right. You will not convince us that Trump is just fine and dandy because we have a record by which he can be judged. The trumpeters dismiss that record in lieu of what he says now.
And ne'er the twain shall meet.
Agree with the above. If Trump was in Congress for 20 years, he would, with his past statements and positions, be at least labeled a RINO.
Like you, if he wins and proves me wrong, I'll happily admit such because if those of us who oppose Trump turn out to be correct about him, the results would be disastrous. Right now, the choice is do you dismiss all past statements and positions and roll the dice and take a chance what he's saying now is real or do you trust your gut instinct and withhold your vote?
The fact is, Trump is more comfortable hanging around the elite and the beautiful people than he would be around those that currently support him. It's not a criticism of him just a fact.
-
@Mechanicos
I think it's safe to assume that we can all safely ignore anything you say from here on out as you have no answers. I
Mechanicos made his way onto my "Ignore" list. He reminds me of WENDLE on TOS. I didn't have conversations with him, either, for the same reason. That reason is, some people have a goal of agitation and only that. I don't enter into their weak dialog.
@CatherineofAragon
-
Okay, I don't think anyone on this board would disagree with this statement, by itself.
Here's the rub: I don't think it's the two ideologies you're thinking of. I believe it's two others.
Group One: A group who's "ideology" really hates Hillary, the GOPe, the establishment and all it represents. They fear what Hillary will do and what the GOPe will do if in office and left alone. They are furious about being betrayed by their own party (GOPe) and scared spitless about what Hillary will do if she gains the office. They SAY they believe the Constitution is the defining, baseline rulebook for our country. They believe that contract has been broken. This group is actually a sub-set.
The other ideology, Group Two, really hates Hillary, the GOPe, the establishment and all it represents, too. BUT, it also hates anti-freedom, tyranny, big government, "progressive" causes/mentalities that encroach on freedoms and people who tend to vilify anyone that disagrees with them. They are constitutional conservatives that see the American Contract being broken. They believe the Constitution is the defining, baseline rulebook for our country. They believe that contract has been broken.
Group one has seemed to coalesce around Trump. Trump SAYS he's going to be mean to the establishment. Trump SAYS he's going to fix stuff. Trump SAYS he's going to build a wall, ban muslims, etc. And Group one (rightly, in my mind) thinks that would be terrific. But, Group one also ignores warning signs about Trump. Or if they don't ignore the signs, they just won't allow discussion about them. They tend to vilify and disparage anyone with negative or critical comments about their guy. They are trapped into a binary thought process; either/or.
Group Group two sees Trump as a possible antidote...but one that may have too many side effects to be worth the risk. They don't disagree that much of what he SAYS he'll do would work and they would dig it if someone actually did it. But, because of history and an understanding of the way government works and an understanding of the Constitution , they realize two BIG things:
1. For a lot of what Trump promise to get accomplished to get accomplished, he would have to operate extra-Constitutionally, or Congress would have to cooperate in a fashion that it's NEVER cooperated before, or;
2. Trump ain't gonna get it done at all and is just saying what he needs to say to get people to sign on.
Either way, Group two isn't having any of it. They don't want their name on this person's legacy. They feel like there is ALWAYS another way; a better way.
But even if it is binary, they'll not sacrifice their principles because of a threat. They'll not roll over again, because "our" candidate is [seemingly] closer to our convictions than another.
It's not hard to understand. It's easy if you try.
And taking this principled approach is more honorable...and admittedly, more fraught with danger and risk than the easier, go-with-the-flow option.
It's just an abhorrent choice for us.
We just choose to continue to hunt for alternatives to what we see as two bad choices. And if the "lesser of two evils" is one of the choices, we'd really rather not vote for evil at all.
There's enough around without us putting our imprimatur on it.
Good post
-
Mechanicos made his way onto my "Ignore" list. He reminds me of WENDLE on TOS. I didn't have conversations with him, either, for the same reason. That reason is, some people have a goal of agitation and only that. I don't enter into their weak dialog.
@CatherineofAragon
Where or where is this ignore list. I cannot find any such animal
-
But even if it is binary, they'll not sacrifice their principles because of a threat. They'll not roll over again, because "our" candidate is [seemingly] closer to our convictions than another.
It's not hard to understand. It's easy if you try.
And taking this principled approach is more honorable...and admittedly, more fraught with danger and risk than the easier, go-with-the-flow option.
It's just an abhorrent choice for us.
We just choose to continue to hunt for alternatives to what we see as two bad choices. And if the "lesser of two evils" is one of the choices, we'd really rather not vote for evil at all.
There's enough around without us putting our imprimatur on it.
@Chasaway :amen: Exactly I can't stand either of them.
-
Where or where is this ignore list. I cannot find any such animal
Hit the profile button at the top of the page.
Hover over modify profile. A menu pops up.
Buddies/ignore is the bottom option. Just follow instructions.
-
We don't care what you think.
We side with an actual Conservative, whether Castle or whomever we write in.
We're against you.
We stand against you.
You and your Trump Militant compatriots have made us your enemy.
We don't care what the outcome is between two liberal NYC buffoons.
How can you say such personal things about another poster here. I can tolerate a lot but when I see this type of language used you're sounding just like the Trumpsters on FR......you really do.
As for not caring...well that's been obvious for some time....but most here do care what people think, and do care what the outcome of this election is. And we sure don't see any Trump supporters as Militant.......
I just think it's time some here back off the insults....IMO....it's going to far and those doing it know it. Like it or not there are two candidates at the top of the race......I don't think it's even close to fair claiming anyone who has chosen to support an enemy...they are not...they're simply a voter and after the election TBR will still be here for us ALL.....
-
Hit the profile button at the top of the page.
Hover over modify profile. A menu pops up.
Buddies/ignore is the bottom option. Just follow instructions.
Beautiful. Thank you. I had checked the modify profile but didn't see the hover menu.
-
Okay, obviously this board is going the way FR went with the constant wrist-slapping of anything negative of Trump and his precious supporters here on this board.
I guess Constitutional Conservatives will need to find another board.
I also post at "The Conservative Circle". Ex-FR people started that board. You will recognize them. I find this board to be fine, there are people I know from FR and other people here are nice as long as I use "ignore" for some. Our country is full of informed and uninformed people and less smart IQ people and smarter IQ people, and sometimes communication between two people just doesn't click. I don't try to force communication, if it doesn't work, it doesn't.
-
How can you say such personal things about another poster here.
They make it easy. I do not suffer bullies and we're tired of putting up with the accusations that voting for anyone but Trump makes us Hillary supporters.
That is how and why I say what I say.
I can tolerate a lot but when I see this type of language used you're sounding just like the Trumpsters on FR......you really do.
Double standard much? They asked for this fight since since day one I began posting here. The Trump Militant can dish it out but apparently cannot take it in-kind. They wanted this fight, they got it.
And we sure don't see any Trump supporters as Militant...….
I do. You simply choose not to see it.
I just think it's time some here back off the insults....IMO....it's going to far and those doing it know it.
"Some here"???? No, no, no. What you mean is "The NeverTrumps need to back off". I've watched the Trump people do this on 3 boards now in the last two months: scream about civility - shut down any those they oppose by claiming insults and offense while goading them into attack by subtlety and silence any dissent towards their comments or their Chosen by using the mod staff to create more Trump Safe Spaces.
Like it or not there are two candidates at the top of the race……
No, WRONG.
There are plenty of Conservative candidates running for the office of President this cycle. Some who will be written in. Some who are third party.
I don't think it's even close to fair claiming anyone who has chosen to support an enemy
"Hillary Supporter"; "Helping Hillary"; "If you are not for us you are against us"?????? "Traitor"????? Stop with the parsing and semantics, we know what the Trump people mean.
they're simply a voter and after the election TBR will still be here for us ALL.....
I'm not telling you people you should not vote for your Chosen. I'm taking issue with those of you who are calling us Hillary Supporters; Traitors; Irrational; Aiders and Abetters of the enemy; etc., etc., etc. and who continually assault, destroy, impugn and otherwise trash every Conservative not supporting Trump whether they are running Independent or not. The Trump Militant still cannot help bash and trash Cruz each day not to mention bashing my faith around because my principles are unmovable.
The Trump people wanted this internecine war. They stoke it each and every day.
Unlike some, I fight back. I don't back down.
For you to tell me to back off is not acceptable when we are told we are the enemy, we are told we are either for Trump or against Trump and that our principles and faith are ridiculed as a threat to the country.
-
How can you say such personal things about another poster here. I can tolerate a lot but when I see this type of language used you're sounding just like the Trumpsters on FR......you really do.
As for not caring...well that's been obvious for some time....but most here do care what people think, and do care what the outcome of this election is. And we sure don't see any Trump supporters as Militant.......
I just think it's time some here back off the insults....IMO....it's going to far and those doing it know it. Like it or not there are two candidates at the top of the race......I don't think it's even close to fair claiming anyone who has chosen to support an enemy...they are not...they're simply a voter and after the election TBR will still be here for us ALL.....
@WAC , its not a problem. I have had training both in the military and as a civilian to handle taunts, insults, mocking, etc. Really, they have zero effect on me. I do find it funny sometimes because it seems the goal is to get a rise out of me and it fails so badly.
-
Why not just stick to the issues the candidates present??? Trump and just defend and put your candidates positions out there?
I find it interesting that the people making the loudest protests are those not voting for either Hillary or Trump......when they've already disengaged from the General election which looks to be Trump and Hillary.
-
Okay, obviously this board is going the way FR went with the constant wrist-slapping of anything negative of Trump and his precious supporters here on this board.
I guess Constitutional Conservatives will need to find another board.
Invar, come on. no it isn't. We were told upfront that the moderators have a light hand and don't like to step in unless it's truly necessary.
We're all adults. I don't think we need to be running to the mods for help. We should be able to deal with others' posts without having melt downs.
This Constitutional Conservative is staying right here. I like it fine.
-
Why not just stick to the issues the candidates present??? Trump and just defend and put your candidates positions out there?
I find it interesting that the people making the loudest protests are those not voting for either Hillary or Trump......when they've already disengaged from the General election which looks to be Trump and Hillary.
None of us have disengaged from anything just because we're voting for neither of those liberals, but thanks for the concern.
-
Why not just stick to the issues the candidates present??? Trump and just defend and put your candidates positions out there?
Some people can't do that without lying and that's where a problem starts.
-
I have permission from Mystery-AK to post part of this PM discussion between us. She's juggling assaults from all sides and attempting to keep the board from going into full-tilt raucous sewer, but she thought what I wrote valuable enough to share:
If we're going to keep getting slapped on the wrist because every image, every adjective, every word that the snowflakes for Trump find offensive is suddenly banned and we cannot use - then the entire point of a discussion forum is moot and your board will become just another Trump Safe Space.
Which is what I suspect they are attempting to do anyway.
Fighting for liberty is messy and ugly and often cannot be contained by artificial ramparts of civility. Just as John Adams about that.
I'm not asking for permission to post vulgarity and cursing - but for crying out loud! Referencing the most well-known propagandist in history to make a point about the tactics being used by ******** followed in minutes by being slapped down over using the term "Trump Militant"????? They ARE Militant! Some of them on social media calling for our deaths! Sorry, but some of these Trump supporters here sound like the same vocal bullies over at FR, and I'm not even sure the adjective of militant covers it. I won't tolerate a bully and I'm fed up with the subtle and direct insults they shove in our faces on a daily basis.
Every single negative thing about Trump these people declare offensive, not rational, destructive or supporting of Hillary is now a cassus belli towards the purpose of shutting that commentary and discourse down.
It's what they did at Free Republic, TOL, TB, and a host of other groups and BB boards all over the place. And I'm watching them do it again here.
They are going to complain, no matter what we say or post and it will get whittled down to the point we cannot state that Trump is lying or wrong about anything.
It's your place, but I don't go into the ring with my hands tied and the ROE so ridiculous that it makes arguing in the arena of ideas pointless.
You are never going to get them to stop calling us Hillary supporters because that is what they truly believe we are. Likewise you are never going to get me to stop calling them what they are.
Let us fight it out. You can set limits on cursing, vulgarity and the like - we do not need to become a cesspool. But if I am a Hillary supporter in all the variations they insinuate and declare, they are certainly militant for Trump and engaged in propaganda that would make Leni Reifeshtahl blush.
Duels at 40 paces over insults to honor were commonplace at the time of our Founding.
I don't care if someone calls me a Hillary supporter, because I'm not and it's absurd. It happened to me today and I laughed at it.
Why do we have to get in such a rage over it? It's possible to have strong debate without devolving into fits of anger.
And I think it's presumptuous for us to come over from another site, be offered an internet home, and proceed to tell the owners of this site how to moderate it. They've been doing it for longer than we've known about the site, and it works, apparently. WE need to demonstrate the self-control to post within their rules.
-
I find it interesting that the people making the loudest protests are those not voting for either Hillary or Trump......when they've already disengaged from the General election which looks to be Trump and Hillary.
Disengaged? Not in the least!
-
@WAC , its not a problem. I have had training both in the military and as a civilian to handle taunts, insults, mocking, etc. Really, they have zero effect on me. I do find it funny sometimes because it seems the goal is to get a rise out of me and it fails so badly.
Well I just don't like it when people start spewing the same hatred I just got away from on FR. when it gets that personal.... It accomplishes nothing at all and makes them look like their harboring some deep seeded unfinished business from their own past playing out in the rage over a voters right to choose.
I will defend anyone's right to express themselves even when it gets heated....but there's a point it just goes too far and surpasses the election to something else altogether.....
-
I don't think we need to be running to the mods for help.
I don't ever run to the mods for help or to complain about someone.
I fight my own battles.
My issue was over having my hands tied behind my back while Trump's militants get to run roughshod because they couch their insults and invective in subtle language such as NeverTrump voters are 'irrational'; 'Hillary supporters'; 'Put down the bible and set your 'special' brand of Conservatism' etc., etc.
Meanwhile using the term Trump militants' to refer to the incessant insulters for Trump - getting slapped down as 'offensive' is the same slippery slope of censorship I've watched happen on other boards that are now Trump Safe Spaces with no dissent permitted.
I don't care if someone calls me a Hillary supporter, because I'm not and it's absurd. It happened to me today and I laughed at it.
But the Trump people cannot handle being referred to as the Trump Militant. They aren't laughing at it. They were busy reporting it as offensive.
And I think it's presumptuous for us to come over from another site, be offered an internet home, and proceed to tell the owners of this site how to moderate it.
I wasn't telling them how to moderate their board. I actually took my issue via PM to Myst, and she is the one who asked me to post what I did after a redaction.
-
Well I just don't like it when people start spewing the same hatred I just got away from on FR. when it gets that personal.... It accomplishes nothing at all and makes them look like their harboring some deep seeded unfinished business from their own past playing out in the rage over a voters right to choose.
I will defend anyone's right to express themselves even when it gets heated....but there's a point it just goes too far and surpasses the election to something else altogether.....
Here is a clue. They did it there, and they brought it here. Can't get along, anywhere. Argument addicts. In denial, but argument addicts nonetheless.
In AA we call it a "geographic," but when you go somewhere else, you take yourself along.
-
After reading the whole day's worth of back-n-forths with all the nasty stuff, I know it comes as no surprise that neither Trump nor Hillary can win (i.e., get 270 Electoral votes). So, maybe we should band together and vote for a true constitutional patriot in Darrel Castle. The more support he gets, the better chance that the GOP can be shown the door.
-
Disengaged? Not in the least!
The reality of this election is that many love this country and are not willing to give up entirely on the party system, even when mine has lost it's way. There's not one single group or individual that has presented a replacement and I'm not about ready to watch the entire system crumble without one.
Further....a lot of damage can be done to the Supreme Court in four years. Three of the eight justices are 77 or older. A decade or more of 6–3 lockstep liberal/progressive decisions is way too frightening for me to even imagine people would not be 'at least' opposing Hillary with their vote.
Had it been my way Cruz would be President.....just for the record.
So yes many I see as disengaged from the obvious election ahead when they are choosing to not vote for our Nominee...like him or not.
-
After reading the whole day's worth of back-n-forths with all the nasty stuff, I know it comes as no surprise that neither Trump nor Hillary can win (i.e., get 270 Electoral votes). So, maybe we should band together and vote for a true constitutional patriot in Darrel Castle. The more support he gets, the better chance that the GOP can be shown the door.
Here is reality:
In 2008 and 2012, the CP got 0.15 and 0.10 percent of the total votes respectively. For perspective, Buchanan got 0.5 percent in 2000.
REALITY is Castle has no chance, except providing for hours of back and forth banter. The CP has included people like Rev. Chuck Baldwin, Alan Keyes, etc. Folks that many consider to be the fringes, of the fringe.
-
Here is a clue. They did it there, and they brought it here. Can't get along, anywhere. Argument addicts. In denial, but argument addicts nonetheless.
In AA we call it a "geographic," but when you go somewhere else, you take yourself along.
"Argument addicts"....might just say it right.... Though I admit I can be highly opinionated, but show me otherwise with a reasonable argument and I might consider changing that opinion....and then sometimes new facts present themselves to reconsider ones position. ...But these dirty and nasty personal attacks are coming from some place other than an election.......and some of them sound as batty as Hillary and Trump!
:bullie smokin:
-
I will defend anyone's right to express themselves even when it gets heated....but there's a point it just goes too far and surpasses the election to something else altogether.....
word
-
Here is reality:
In 2008 and 2012, the CP got 0.15 and 0.10 percent of the total votes respectively. For perspective, Buchanan got 0.5 percent in 2000.
REALITY is Castle has no chance, except providing for hours of back and forth banter. The CP has included people like Rev. Chuck Baldwin, Alan Keyes, etc. Folks that many consider to be the fringes, of the fringe.
So in this election I give Trump and Shillary NO CHANCE too! There is not one shred of polling data that either one can get 270 Electoral votes. Hillary comes closer than Trump by a long shot. But no chance. Besides it is only no chance for the Constitution party if people continue to vote for the DemRat or GOP losers.
-
Here is a clue. They did it there, and they brought it here. Can't get along, anywhere. Argument addicts. In denial, but argument addicts nonetheless.
Right. because posting threads like this one from the Trump Militant is so productive of anything but an argument.
Bedtime for the #NeverTrump Anger Babies (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,214490.0/topicseen.html)
You people project that which you yourselves engage in.
-
REALITY is Castle has no chance, except providing for hours of back and forth banter. The CP has included people like Rev. Chuck Baldwin, Alan Keyes, etc. Folks that many consider to be the fringes, of the fringe.
Reality is that the Constitution Party platform is quintessentially Conservative, as is Castle, their candidate,to the best of my knowledge (still vetting)...
It will be a ballot choice in most, if not all states, and a write-in in others. Perfectly valid Conservative choice. Seems like a much better choice than running with the lemmings to install a NYC liberal with a flashing neon 'R' beside his name.
And I am by no means the only one to see it that way.
Without Conservatives, the Republicans will lose - And lose they will.
-
My issue was over having my hands tied behind my back while Trump's militants get to run roughshod because they couch their insults and invective in subtle language such as NeverTrump voters are 'irrational'; 'Hillary supporters'; 'Put down the bible and set your 'special' brand of Conservatism' etc., etc.
Then I suggest you learn how to do the same.
Or better still, stop being a complete tit in your self righteousness and grow the bleep up.
-
Reality is that the Constitution Party platform is quintessentially Conservative, as is Castle, their candidate,to the best of my knowledge (still vetting)...
It will be a ballot choice in most, if not all states, and a write-in in others. Perfectly valid Conservative choice. Seems like a much better choice than running with the lemmings to install a NYC liberal with a flashing neon 'R' beside his name.
And I am by no means the only one to see it that way.
Without Conservatives, the Republicans will lose - And lose they will.
Amen. That is where my energy is focused.
That, and warring against the Trump militant.
-
Right. because posting threads like this one from the Trump Militant is so productive of anything but an argument.
Bedtime for the #NeverTrump Anger Babies (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,214490.0/topicseen.html)
You people project that which you yourselves engage in.
You have to learn not to take the bait.
-
You have to learn not to take the bait.
So be silent and shut up? Be nice to trolls and those who are telling us that when the time comes they get to shoot us for treason?????
If that's the case, you will see this board go the same exact way all the other former Conservative forums went and this whole place will be just another Trump safe space.
-
You stated...."For you to tell me to back off is not acceptable when we are told we are the enemy, we are told we are either for Trump or against Trump and that our principles and faith are ridiculed as a threat to the country.".....
Well why not put yourself above that fray, because that's all it is....nonsense. Regardless of what any is "called" it's still yours to vote or not to vote, or write in another name you prefer. Nobody's going to take that from you by name calling.
I've been here just a few months and noted those opposing Trump began to dish out as much as they were getting handed when the numbers increased coming in from FR. I expected some of it to get lively, and that's a good thing, but not to look like the same crap we just got out of. So why feed into the babble????...This site is so far above FR in every respect. ...and that should include the posters here now.
There's some great minds here....why fill the threads with what every other site is doing with this crap....why not instead give this place what ost desire...a reasonable argument?
-
So be silent and shut up? Be nice to trolls and those who are telling us that when the time comes they get to shoot us for treason?????
If that's the case, you will see this board go the same exact way all the other former Conservative forums went and this whole place will be just another Trump safe space.
No, Invar. Obviously we aren't here to to be silent, but going into rage mode when someone is trying to prod you into just that makes no sense to me. You said you were here to "war", but we're sitting behind keyboards, not rocket launchers.
Whichever way this board goes or doesn't go isn't up to you or me.
-
...." we aren't here to to be silent,.....but we're sitting behind keyboards, not rocket launchers." .....
LOLOL....Good one Catherine of Aragon! Perfect! ......I sometimes picture this with how some of the threads go...LOLOL.....
(http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M462a47c175246320a97ad639ba7c28a8H0&w=299&h=169&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0)(http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.Mfbfb95ae5a2d39011c326ac68f7506aeH0&w=300&h=221&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0)
-
Right. because posting threads like this one from the Trump Militant is so productive of anything but an argument.
Bedtime for the #NeverTrump Anger Babies (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,214490.0/topicseen.html)
You people project that which you yourselves engage in.
Maybe if you called them Jihadi's, it would sound more nicer than militants. LOL
-
...why not instead give this place what ost desire...a reasonable argument?
If reasoning with the unreasonable was even remotely possible, there would not have been an exodus from former Conservative forums that became Trump Safe Spaces (and there are a lot more than just FR) that turned those BBs into cesspools.
If they are going to insult our faith, our principles and our sacred vote because we choose not to vote for their candidate - I'm going to punch back and call them what they are. Not just for me, but for all the other folks they anger and intimidate with that garbage. I'm not putting up with it because some folks think being a walking carpet for trolls and bullies is 'the adult thing to do'. If the ROE says we have to let them do so so we can appear to be 'above the fray', this is definitely not the place for me.
-
You said you were here to "war", but we're sitting behind keyboards, not rocket launchers.
The battleground of ideas and policies is fought with words. That translates to rulers who act upon those words.
Words will lead to peace and prosperity, or subjugation and bloodshed depending on which words prevail first.
The War of Independence was first fought in the pulpits of the Churches in the Colonies a decade-plus before the first shot was fired.
This is a war. Whether you would want one or not.
-
Reality is that the Constitution Party platform is quintessentially Conservative, as is Castle, their candidate,to the best of my knowledge (still vetting)...
It will be a ballot choice in most, if not all states, and a write-in in others. Perfectly valid Conservative choice. Seems like a much better choice than running with the lemmings to install a NYC liberal with a flashing neon 'R' beside his name.
And I am by no means the only one to see it that way.
Without Conservatives, the Republicans will lose - And lose they will.
That's the way I see it too. I posted the section of the Republican Party Platform in the new Worldview area. I was really surprised by some of the things in the platform, some to my mind unconstitutional. The republican party deserves to be thumped for many things and for me this is the year to start thumping. Get the word out to enough Constitutional Conservatives and neither the republicans nor democrats are going to win this one outright. Keep playing their game and we'll keep getting gamed.
-
@RedHead @Mechanicos Not a ludicrous question at all, your exact words: The WH has never been gun-free. Neither has the Capital, nor are the courts. Civilians are not permitted to carry a gun on either of those properties period, amen end of of discussion. By definition that makes them GUN FREE ZONES. You made a ludicrous comment and got caught, RedHead and I both called you on it. Now man up and say your Mea Culpas.
If they have paid, armed security, then they are not Gun-Free Zones by definition. :facepalm2:
-
That's the way I see it too. I posted the section of the Republican Party Platform in the new Worldview area. I was really surprised by some of the things in the platform, some to my mind unconstitutional. The republican party deserves to be thumped for many things and for me this is the year to start thumping. Get the word out to enough Constitutional Conservatives and neither the republicans nor democrats are going to win this one outright. Keep playing their game and we'll keep getting gamed.
As Republicans try to emulate the DemRats, partially because it has been infiltrated, they are taking on a similar appearance. And in doing so, try the same stupid asinine unconstitutional actions. Why else would Trump want the GOP? Why else would McConnel protect Obama's actions?
As you said, if more people saw that the Constitution party was a real conservative alternative, your might even see some good names jump from the sinking GOP ship.
-
Sad to say @mystery-ak but its only going to get worse as we go into the Convention. That is what is causing the increased tension you are seeing. The Anti-Trumps are worried that the Dump Trump is going to fail while the Pro-Trump side is concerned about party corruption and the the establishment on both sides opposed to Trump.
Even after Trump is nominated I expect to see a surge in hostility as a lashing out. Its the tension build up before a battle.
If those who voted for Trump were really concerned about rooting out corruption in Washington, they would have voted for anyone but Trump. Trump was/is the only person running to be the GOP's POTUS candidate who gave so much of his own money to progressive and RINO political candidates.
-
None of us have disengaged from anything just because we're voting for neither of those liberals, but thanks for the concern.
And, with a total of 30 posts, how can be so confident making that statement?
Or, are you another sock-puppet account? :whistle:
-
And, with a total of 30 posts, how can be so confident making that statement?
Or, are you another sock-puppet account? :whistle:
There are only 6 or 8 active Trump supporters on this site. I'm guessing the anti-Trumps are better than 30 or 40.
I think he can be confident.
-
There are only 6 or 8 active Trump supporters on this site. I'm guessing the anti-Trumps are better than 30 or 40.
I think he can be confident.
Meh. Not in the context of the conversation.
-
And, with a total of 30 posts, how can be so confident making that statement?
Or, are you another sock-puppet account? :whistle:
It is very informative to discover the recent refugees as a group, seem to favor a minor political party, which has won 0.15% and 0.10%, respectively in the two most recent general elections.
Pat Buchanan did FIVE times better than that, in 2000, when it could logically be claimed his 0.5% jeopardized the Bush narrow electoral college win.
That fact alone, has transformed this site from highly relevant, to utterly irrelevant. Dale Carnegies, these folks are clearly not. By that I mean nobody is being converter or persuaded, by #nevertrump grumpy arguments.
-
It is very informative to discover the recent refugees as a group, seem to favor a minor political party, which has won 0.15% and 0.10%, respectively in the two most recent general elections.
Pat Buchanan did FIVE times better than that, in 2000, when it could logically be claimed his 0.5% jeopardized the Bush narrow electoral college win.
That fact alone, has transformed this site from highly relevant, to utterly irrelevant. Dale Carnegies, these folks are clearly not. By that I mean nobody is being converter or persuaded, by #nevertrump grumpy arguments.
Well, since there are almost no arguments coming from the Trumpkins, it's safe to say you're making no converts either.
-
Meh. Not in the context of the conversation.
The context of the conversation precludes me because I haven't had as much to drink as you.
-
After reading the whole day's worth of back-n-forths with all the nasty stuff, I know it comes as no surprise that neither Trump nor Hillary can win (i.e., get 270 Electoral votes). So, maybe we should band together and vote for a true constitutional patriot in Darrel Castle. The more support he gets, the better chance that the GOP can be shown the door.
I will bet you any amount of money the winner of the 2016 election will be either the Republican or the democrat, with over 270 electoral votes.
How much do you want to bet ? I will donate 25% of my certain earning to this website.
-
It is very informative to discover the recent refugees as a group, seem to favor a minor political party, which has won 0.15% and 0.10%, respectively in the two most recent general elections.
Pat Buchanan did FIVE times better than that, in 2000, when it could logically be claimed his 0.5% jeopardized the Bush narrow electoral college win.
That fact alone, has transformed this site from highly relevant, to utterly irrelevant. Dale Carnegies, these folks are clearly not. By that I mean nobody is being converter or persuaded, by #nevertrump grumpy arguments.
If you're a constitutional conservative the republican party does not make sense to be a part of. And, if you read the platform you can see why they have, in general, helped put the country in the toilet or at least haven't lifted too many fingers to keep it from there in the last decade. The republican party isn't going to be the savior of this country, and depending on your view, even or especially, with Trump.
-
If you're a constitutional conservative the republican party does not make sense to be a part of. And, if you read the platform you can see why they have, in general, helped put the country in the toilet or at least haven't lifted too many fingers to keep it from there in the last decade. The republican party isn't going to be the savior of this country, and depending on your view, even or especially, with Trump.
If that is so, then how come Cruz, Sessions and others remain in this (unacceptable to you) party?
Answer: Because fringe minor parties have no chance, plain and simple. Like it or not, it is the fact.
-
If that is so, then how come Cruz, Sessions and others remain in this (unacceptable to you) party?
Answer: Because fringe minor parties have no chance, plain and simple. Like it or not, it is the fact.
That any politician is still in or not in the party has nothing to do with what I said. It's pretty apparent, if you compare the two platforms and look at the work, again in general, the republicans have done, that what I said is accurate. Whether the Constitution Party has or doesn't have a chance makes no difference regarding the accuracy of what I said. Nothing to get in a bunch over.
-
That any politician is still in or not in the party has nothing to do with what I said. It's pretty apparent, if you compare the two platforms and look at the work, again in general, the republicans have done, that what I said is accurate. Whether the Constitution Party has or doesn't have a chance makes no difference regarding the accuracy of what I said. Nothing to get in a bunch over.
Can you tell the difference between 51% and 0.15% ?
Tell me quickly off the top of your head, about the Republican "platform" for national security, and for the economy. Same for the CP. What then are the material differences?
Darrel Castle happens to be a personal injury and bankruptcy lawyer. Ambulance chaser.
-
Blah blah blah!
I am a member of the GOP, always have been always will be!
Over the years on the Internet I have noticed......
People who run from party to party are never satisfied!
Just as people who move from church to church, leave when the going gets rough!
It is best to leave them be
It is usually the same kind of people, who think they are more important than they are.
:patriot:
-
Blah blah blah!
I am a member of the GOP, always have been always will be!
Over the years on the Internet I have noticed......
People who run from party to party are never satisfied!
Just as people who move from church to church, leave when the going gets rough!
It is best to leave them be
It is usually the same kind of people, who think they are more important than they are.
:patriot:
Agreed. People are looking for Mr. Perfect. If that is their desire then fine. But I know, I'm not going to get the perfect candidate it be Mitt or whomever.
-
Can you tell the difference between 51% and 0.15% ?
Tell me quickly off the top of your head, about the Republican "platform" for national security, and for the economy. Same for the CP. What then are the material differences?
Darrel Castle happens to be a personal injury and bankruptcy lawyer. Ambulance chaser.
Since we were talking about personal attacks on this thread earlier I was wondering, if I called you a butthole for calling me stupid "can you tell the difference between 51% and 0.15%" would that be any different of a personal attack than you calling me stupid?
Go take a look at the republican platform in the Worldview area. It's broken down by section. I'll be happy to have a conversation with you about it there. No one else wanted to discuss it. Actually I think I have one last section to post, maybe I'll get to that sometime tomorrow. In the 23 years I've been a republican I hadn't read it before. I was surprised at some of the things in it. I do not have it committed to memory. Have you read it that many times that you remember it or do you have a photographic memory? Impressive either way.
Just like you don't care about Trump running a bogus "university", I don't care about Castle being an attorney. I guess we all have our faults.
-
Since we were talking about personal attacks on this thread earlier I was wondering, if I called you a butthole for calling me stupid "can you tell the difference between 51% and 0.15%" would that be any different of a personal attack than you calling me stupid?
Go take a look at the republican platform in the Worldview area. It's broken down by section. I'll be happy to have a conversation with you about it there. No one else wanted to discuss it. Actually I think I have one last section to post, maybe I'll get to that sometime tomorrow. In the 23 years I've been a republican I hadn't read it before. I was surprised at some of the things in it. I do not have it committed to memory. Have you read it that many times that you remember it or do you have a photographic memory? Impressive either way.
Just like you don't care about Trump running a bogus "university", I don't care about Castle being an attorney. I guess we all have our faults.
That was well said and stated.
-
Answer: Because fringe minor parties have no chance, plain and simple. Like it or not, it is the fact.
Hallmark of Trump supporters: they don't persuade, they antagonize, they condescend. Yet another fact.
And, like this fact or not, we're never voting for your political savior or your party. We have other plans.
-
I will bet you any amount of money the winner of the 2016 election will be either the Republican or the democrat, with over 270 electoral votes.
I will bet you any amount of money that if Clinton and Trump are the candidates in November, then the winner of the 2016 election will be a Big Government liberal.
I don't vote for liberals. It's just a personal rule I have.
-
Keep playing their game and we'll keep getting gamed.
That's why I am lobbying my RTL and Christian contacts to endorse Castle unless something crazy happens at the convention.
It'll take the Christians money and the TEA Party's political organization to lift Castle out of the cheap seats... A NRTL endorsement for Castle would be a clarion call to the Christians... and with Cruz's TEA Party grassroots pretty much ready to go, it'd be worth a shot.
And it's folks like us that can raise the hue and cry...
-
And, with a total of 30 posts, how can be so confident making that statement?
Or, are you another sock-puppet account? :whistle:
Because the number of posts one makes on an Internet forum translates to how engaged one is.
-
Darrel Castle happens to be a personal injury and bankruptcy lawyer. Ambulance chaser.
Which is worse: the bankruptcy lawyer, or the four-times bankrupt adulterer?
-
Which is worse: the bankruptcy lawyer, or the four-times bankrupt adulterer?
Cruz is better then both. Cruz would also have a far greater chance.
-
I am a member of the GOP, always have been always will be!
Over the years on the Internet I have noticed......
People who run from party to party are never satisfied!
It is best to leave them be
It is usually the same kind of people, who think they are more important than they are.
@Repub4Trump https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump
Trump's party affiliation has changed over the years. Although his party affiliation prior to 1987 is unclear, Trump was an early supporter of Republican Ronald Reagan for U.S. President in the late 70s. In 1987 he registered as a Republican until 1999. He then switched to the Reform Party for three years and ran a presidential exploratory campaign for its nomination. After his run, Trump left the party in 2001 due to the involvement of David Duke, Pat Buchanan and Lenora Fulani within the party. From 2001 to 2009 he was a Democrat and then switched back to the Republican Party in 2009 after endorsing Republican John McCain for President. In December 2011, Trump became an Independent for five months, before returning to the Republican Party, where he has pledged to stay
-
Which is worse: the bankruptcy lawyer, or the four-times bankrupt adulterer?
FIVE times! Gaaah!!!
People always leave out his moral bankruptcy!
-
(http://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13512105_603178686508535_7113172188603568780_n.png?oh=44381c79001f41abb703edbfddfdfc4a&oe=57F9AA60)
-
What a false argument, DC. There is not one person who opposes Trump who demands a "perfect" candidate.
But of course, you have to make false accusations in order to support a deeply flawed, corrupt, deceitful, moral degenerate like Trump.
You can't make arguments FOR him........since there are none..... so you are left with disparaging everyone who can't support him by accusing them of demanding "perfection."
Lame.
-
It is very informative to discover the recent refugees as a group, seem to favor a minor political party, which has won 0.15% and 0.10%, respectively in the two most recent general elections.
Pat Buchanan did FIVE times better than that, in 2000, when it could logically be claimed his 0.5% jeopardized the Bush narrow electoral college win.
That fact alone, has transformed this site from highly relevant, to utterly irrelevant. Dale Carnegies, these folks are clearly not. By that I mean nobody is being converter or persuaded, by #nevertrump grumpy arguments.
Have you forgotten history? In 1856, the GOP was a minority party and won in the following election. In fact, prior to 1856, the GOP didn't even exist. So...can history repeat? Ye of no faith!
-
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/07/e6/a4/07e6a48f8594cc63e8535dfb4ecb04e8.jpg)
-
What a false argument, DC. There is not one person who opposes Trump who demands a "perfect" candidate.
But of course, you have to make false accusations in order to support a deeply flawed, corrupt, deceitful, moral degenerate like Trump.
You can't make arguments FOR him........since there are none..... so you are left with disparaging everyone who can't support him by accusing them of demanding "perfection."
Lame.
:amen: Well said! Nothing new and entirely tiresome!
-
What a false argument, DC. There is not one person who opposes Trump who demands a "perfect" candidate.
But of course, you have to make false accusations in order to support a deeply flawed, corrupt, deceitful, moral degenerate like Trump.
You can't make arguments FOR him........since there are none..... so you are left with disparaging everyone who can't support him by accusing them of demanding "perfection."
Lame.
(http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n151/hagemangroup/%20victor%20and%20ML_zpsghqi8o4d.jpg) (http://s111.photobucket.com/user/hagemangroup/media/%20victor%20and%20ML_zpsghqi8o4d.jpg.html)
I call this one, "Victor with the MusicLady". :laugh:
-
I call this one, "Victor with the MusicLady". :laugh:
Again, because there are NO arguments for Trump, you resort to lame ad hominems instead of admitting that your premise that we are demanding "perfection" is a total crock.
You can't win this DC, because truth is not on your side. Stop fooling yourself into thinking you're being clever.
-
If that is so, then how come Cruz, Sessions and others remain in this (unacceptable to you) party?
Answer: Because fringe minor parties have no chance, plain and simple. Like it or not, it is the fact.
Sessions has been bought and paid for by Trump to get Alabama's vote. Cruz, because of Texas politics, is positioning for reelection to the Senate in 2 years. But if the GOP doesn't shape up and the likes of McConnell and Cornyn keep pissing him off, he could shake up the party. IF he the GOP holds on after this election cycle, Cruz, Lee and a few other could easily take the majority away from McConnell and Cornyn by even just becoming independents in the Senate. THEN neither so your entrenched major parties would hold power.
-
@Repub4Trump https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump
Trump's party affiliation has changed over the years. Although his party affiliation prior to 1987 is unclear, Trump was an early supporter of Republican Ronald Reagan for U.S. President in the late 70s. In 1987 he registered as a Republican until 1999. He then switched to the Reform Party for three years and ran a presidential exploratory campaign for its nomination. After his run, Trump left the party in 2001 due to the involvement of David Duke, Pat Buchanan and Lenora Fulani within the party. From 2001 to 2009 he was a Democrat and then switched back to the Republican Party in 2009 after endorsing Republican John McCain for President. In December 2011, Trump became an Independent for five months, before returning to the Republican Party, where he has pledged to stay
In his celebrated book Trump pretty much accused Reagan of being vacuous and not entirely there.
Recently he denied knowing who David Duke was.
A couple of thoughts I had while reading this bio.
-
Again, because there are NO arguments for Trump, you resort to lame ad hominems instead of admitting that your premise that we are demanding "perfection" is a total crock.
You can't win this DC, because truth is not on your side. Stop fooling yourself into thinking you're being clever.
ROFL! So...now my innocent graphic is considered an ad hominem?
I thought it cute...it fits you so well...getting the vapors over a simple FB meme suggesting that a "perfect man" is easy to find in a "Trumpeter".
Carry on, dear. :seeya:
-
Blah blah blah!
I am a member of the GOP, always have been always will be!
Over the years on the Internet I have noticed......
People who run from party to party are never satisfied!
Just as people who move from church to church, leave when the going gets rough!
It is best to leave them be
It is usually the same kind of people, who think they are more important than they are.
That sounds just like the DemRats, union types, or uninformed voters. Vote for the party, no matter what loser the propose.
-
What a false argument, DC. There is not one person who opposes Trump who demands a "perfect" candidate.
But of course, you have to make false accusations in order to support a deeply flawed, corrupt, deceitful, moral degenerate like Trump.
You can't make arguments FOR him........since there are none..... so you are left with disparaging everyone who can't support him by accusing them of demanding "perfection."
Lame.
During the primaries Trump fans continuously slammed Cruz for two or three votes of his - raising the cap on H1Bs and initial support of TPA and I can't recall a third... Because of these Cruz with his 97% ACU rating was totally unacceptable to them.
Now here they are accusing anyone not on board with Trump of being perfectionists. Irony.
-
There are only 6 or 8 active Trump supporters on this site. I'm guessing the anti-Trumps are better than 30 or 40.
I think he can be confident.
LOL! So, you're telling us that "30 or 40" #nevertrumps are going to sway the election?
You're here in a corner of the internet talking to no more than 50 people...period.
It's a BIG country...filled with lots of angry people.
-
Since we were talking about personal attacks on this thread earlier I was wondering, if I called you a butthole for calling me stupid "can you tell the difference between 51% and 0.15%" would that be any different of a personal attack than you calling me stupid?
Go take a look at the republican platform in the Worldview area. It's broken down by section. I'll be happy to have a conversation with you about it there. No one else wanted to discuss it. Actually I think I have one last section to post, maybe I'll get to that sometime tomorrow. In the 23 years I've been a republican I hadn't read it before. I was surprised at some of the things in it. I do not have it committed to memory. Have you read it that many times that you remember it or do you have a photographic memory? Impressive either way.
Just like you don't care about Trump running a bogus "university", I don't care about Castle being an attorney. I guess we all have our faults.
Kudos @RoosGirl. Nicely stated. At some point, it would be interesting to have a thread or threads on the comparison of all party platforms, point by point.
-
ROFL! So...now my innocent graphic is considered an ad hominem?
I thought it cute...it fits you so well...getting the vapors over a simple FB meme suggesting that a "perfect man" is easy to find in a "Trumpeter".
Carry on, dear. :seeya:
LOL! Once again, trying hard to be clever.
And falling short of the mark.
And once again, it's because there is not a single legitimate argument you can use to defend your losing candidate.
But that's OK. You have to live with the guilt of electing Hillary.
I don't.
-
LOL! So, you're telling us that "30 or 40" #nevertrumps are going to sway the election?
You're here in a corner of the internet talking to no more than 50 people...period.
It's a BIG country...filled with lots of angry people.
If this site is representative (and I think it is), the number of Trump supporters is about 38% of the population. That's where Trump is on the RCP averages. Can't win an election with 38%.
-
During the primaries Trump fans continuously slammed Cruz for two or three votes of his - raising the cap on H1Bs and initial support of TPA and I can't recall a third... Because of these Cruz with his 97% ACU rating was totally unacceptable to them.
Now here they are accusing anyone not on board with Trump of being perfectionists. Irony.
Being consistent is not a strong suit of Trump supporters.
Being hypocritical and projecting their own inadequacies are what they do best.
-
...." we aren't here to to be silent,.....but we're sitting behind keyboards, not rocket launchers." .....
LOLOL....Good one Catherine of Aragon! Perfect! ......I sometimes picture this with how some of the threads go...LOLOL.....
(http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M462a47c175246320a97ad639ba7c28a8H0&w=299&h=169&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0)(http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.Mfbfb95ae5a2d39011c326ac68f7506aeH0&w=300&h=221&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0)
Yep, there it is, all right...perfect representation, I imagine!
-
ROFL! So...now my innocent graphic is considered an ad hominem?
I thought it cute...it fits you so well...getting the vapors over a simple FB meme suggesting that a "perfect man" is easy to find in a "Trumpeter".
Carry on, dear. :seeya:
@DCPatriot @musiclady
A picture is worth a thousand words. Isn't that the saying?
I guess it is unless you're trying to avoid taking responsibility for things you've posted.
-
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
Dishonest media is trying their absolute best to depict a star in a tweet as the Star of David rather than a Sheriff's Star, or plain star
I smell fear from Trump.
If it was a plain star, Donald, why did you take it down?
-
The battleground of ideas and policies is fought with words. That translates to rulers who act upon those words.
Words will lead to peace and prosperity, or subjugation and bloodshed depending on which words prevail first.
The War of Independence was first fought in the pulpits of the Churches in the Colonies a decade-plus before the first shot was fired.
This is a war. Whether you would want one or not.
Words on a forum have nothing to do with subjugation and bloodshed, and if we think so, we're in some kind of fantasyland that exists as an excuse for us to behave like a rage addict.
Those are high-minded words, but you're just on the internet, Invar. For God's sake, tone down the rage, please?
I'm done.
-
If this site is representative (and I think it is), the number of Trump supporters is about 38% of the population. That's where Trump is on the RCP averages. Can't win an election with 38%.
No this site is in no way representative of whats out there The only reason there as many of you as there are is because a much larger forum purged the few who are attacking Trump.
The fact is online most people attacking Trump are not Republicans although they may claim to be. Most people have moved on and are not emotionally driven to hurt the mean man regardless of the consequences - its not a rational position.
-
Agreed. People are looking for Mr. Perfect. If that is their desire then fine. But I know, I'm not going to get the perfect candidate it be Mitt or whomever.
No one is looking for Mr. Perfect because he doesn't exist. Then again, Mr. (and Mrs.) Disgustingly Horribly Sleaze-Coated Unacceptable are not viable options, either.
-
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
Dishonest media is trying their absolute best to depict a star in a tweet as the Star of David rather than a Sheriff's Star, or plain star
I smell fear from Trump.
If it was a plain star, Donald, why did you take it down?
This is biting the media in the ass. 1. Its not a Star of David and that obvious. 2. Its seen as a distraction from Snakes on a plane.
6 out of 112 is nowhere near majority. Fake Polls created by for-profit political public relations firms are not working for ya.
Trump is going to win in November and win massive.
-
@DCPatriot @musiclady
A picture is worth a thousand words. Isn't that the saying?
I guess it is unless you're trying to avoid taking responsibility for things you've posted.
The desperation to evade responsibility for things one has said and done is, to me, pathetic.
But, as I have said before, it's all that Trump supporters are left with. They cannot engage in the realm of ideas, so they are left with (stupid) attacks and deceit to make a point that cannot be made.
I countered DC's false meme with the truth, and he responded by a very unclever personal attack.
Again.......... it's all he has, so it's what I expect from him.
It doesn't make me look bad (as is his intent). It just makes him look utterly foolish.
-
If this site is representative (and I think it is), the number of Trump supporters is about 38% of the population. That's where Trump is on the RCP averages. Can't win an election with 38%.
I'd hazard it's representative of the mid-conservative to extreme conservative side of the political spectrum. It's not representative of the American electorate in total, though. If it was, we'd have slightly more liberal members than conservative.
-
No this site is in no way representative of whats out there The only reason there as many of you as there are is because a much larger forum purged the few who are attacking Trump.
That is a false representation. This site was her before Trump decided to run.
The fact is online most people attacking Trump are not Republicans although they may claim to be. Most people have moved on and are not emotionally driven to hurt the mean man regardless of the consequences - its not a rational position.
Attacking Trump has nothing to do with being or not being a Republican. Yes I have moved on from the GOP, at least at the national level. The GOP has become an extension of the liberal Democrats and Trump is the candle on that leftist cake. Those who run on the national GOP platform, endorse that leftist view of their role in the bloated, bankrupt Federal Government. They believe the constitution is just a tool to keep themselves glorified in a public office entitlement. They believe that States and individuals have no rights. And that the unborn have no rights.
So, why is it again that one should support these so called Pubbies?
-
The desperation to evade responsibility for things one has said and done is, to me, pathetic.
But, as I have said before, it's all that Trump supporters are left with. They cannot engage in the realm of ideas, so they are left with (stupid) attacks and deceit to make a point that cannot be made.
I countered DC's false meme with the truth, and he responded by a very unclever personal attack.
Again.......... it's all he has, so it's what I expect from him.
It doesn't make me look bad (as is his intent). It just makes him look utterly foolish.
Again...you haven't been right about ONE THING since last June, when he announced. Like all the rest of you #nevertrumps
And no matter how many times you claim what I posted was a personal attack, it doesn't make it so.
-
No one is looking for Mr. Perfect because he doesn't exist. Then again, Mr. (and Mrs.) Disgustingly Horribly Sleaze-Coated Unacceptable are not viable options, either.
I wonder why Trump apologists continue to use the vacant argument that the rest of us are demanding perfection.
It's a really dumb argument, and there is absolutely no factual basis for it.
I think it's a desperate attempt to defend the gaping holes in the character of Donald J. Trump, and to turn against those who are asking for integrity in a candidate, and make us look like there's something wrong with us.
You might as well use that argument.........."I'm not looking for Mr Perfect"........... in defending votes for Bill Clinton or Barack Obama.
It's an empty-headed and utterly meaningless argument.
-
Yep, there it is, all right...perfect representation, I imagine!
Catherine, I found the perfect candidate. Back in 2001 England's Screaming Looney Party ran a cat named Mandu for government.
Back in 2012 your own state ran a kitty for Senate. Remember Hank the Cat? Now it's time to run a kitteh for President!!!! We already have two rats running- what's the leap in asking a kitty to run?
-
Again...you haven't been right about ONE THING since last June, when he announced. Like all the rest of you #nevertrumps
And no matter how many times you claim what I posted was a personal attack, it doesn't make it so.
You know, it's funny DC. I was very late coming on to the #NeverTrump bandwagon. (I wasn't there last June). But I have been right about pretty much everything I've ever said about Trump.
He lacks integrity. He lacks Conservatism. He lacks values. He lacks principles. He lacks fidelity. He lacks morality. He lacks truthfulness.
All these months later, every bit of that is still true. He's a degenerate Progressive.
The only thing I missed is that there would be enough blind followers (even a plurality of primary voters, well mixed with Democrat crossovers, salivating at the chance to get Hillary elected), to give him the nomination.
But as a believer in miracles, I'm still praying that he falls short of the votes in Cleveland, and that a real candidate...... a serious conservative with values....... can be on the ballot, so that I can continue my fifty years of voting for Republicans.
-
Kudos @RoosGirl. Nicely stated. At some point, it would be interesting to have a thread or threads on the comparison of all party platforms, point by point.
The Republican platform posts would probably be a good place to have that discussion. Since the platforms aren't going to be formatted the same or touch on the same exact points it would be difficult to do a side by side I think. But we could start with the Republican, which as I said is already posted and I did post the final section late last night, and discuss the significant differences. For example, I could be remembering incorrectly, but I don't think the Republican platform discusses the UN, but the Constitution Party is pretty clear that the US should not be a part of the UN.
-
The Republican platform posts would probably be a good place to have that discussion. Since the platforms aren't going to be formatted the same or touch on the same exact points it would be difficult to do a side by side I think. But we could start with the Republican, which as I said is already posted and I did post the final section late last night, and discuss the significant differences. For example, I could be remembering incorrectly, but I don't think the Republican platform discusses the UN, but the Constitution Party is pretty clear that the US should not be a part of the UN.
As you are probably aware, here for starters are the categories the Constitution Party has stated platform positions. Posted here for benefit of others that be read at: https://www.constitutionparty.com/our-principles/platform-and-resolutions/
Defense
Foreign Policy
Religious Freedom
Sanctity of Life
Domestic Federal Aid
Gambling
Social Security
Bring Government Back Home
Drug Abuse
Government and Private Partnership
Statehood
Character and Moral Conduct
Education
Gun Control
State Sovereignty
Congressional Reform
Election Reform
Healthcare and Government
Tariffs and Trade
Conscription
Electoral College
Immigration
Taxes
Constitutional Convention
Energy
The Judiciary
Terrorism and Personal Liberty
Copyrights and Patents
Environment
Money and Banking
Veterans
Cost of Big Government
Executive Orders
Personal and Private Property
Security
Wage and Price Control
Crime
Family
Pornography, Obscenity, and Sexually-Oriented Businesses
Welfare
-
You know, it's funny DC. I was very late coming on to the #NeverTrump bandwagon. (I wasn't there last June). But I have been right about pretty much everything I've ever said about Trump.
He lacks integrity. He lacks Conservatism. He lacks values. He lacks principles. He lacks fidelity. He lacks morality. He lacks truthfulness.
All these months later, every bit of that is still true. He's a degenerate Progressive.
The only thing I missed is that there would be enough blind followers (even a plurality of primary voters, well mixed with Democrat crossovers, salivating at the chance to get Hillary elected), to give him the nomination.
But as a believer in miracles, I'm still praying that he falls short of the votes in Cleveland, and that a real candidate...... a serious conservative with values....... can be on the ballot, so that I can continue my fifty years of voting for Republicans.
Will always love ya, @musiclady :laugh:
I still believe in miracles and pray you'll see the error of your ways before Election Day.
-
Will always love ya, @musiclady :laugh:
I still believe in miracles and pray you'll see the error of your ways before Election Day.
Ah........... so you're praying that I lose every sense of value that I have before November.
Ain't gonna happen good buddy! Some of us have fixed values based on eternal principles.
THAT is why we're not wrong about Trump, and will never support him. :patriot:
-
I wonder why Trump apologists continue to use the vacant argument that the rest of us are demanding perfection.
It's a really dumb argument, and there is absolutely no factual basis for it.
I think it's a desperate attempt to defend the gaping holes in the character of Donald J. Trump, and to turn against those who are asking for integrity in a candidate, and make us look like there's something wrong with us.
You might as well use that argument.........."I'm not looking for Mr Perfect"........... in defending votes for Bill Clinton or Barack Obama.
It's an empty-headed and utterly meaningless argument.
I think you're right; the hope is that we'll seem unreasonable, holding out for unattainable perfection. Combined with avoidance of Trump's amorality and his liberalism, he's painted as just another imperfect guy who's perfectly acceptable. Unless, of course, you're one of those crazy purists.
To me, though, the argument is nothing short of desperately silly. Is there any one of us who thinks there's a perfect person to be found, outside of the One sitting at the right hand of God? Of course not, and the ones making that charge know it. Do any of us believe our spouses are perfect? No. So then, why would we expect to see that quality in a politician?
There's a vast spectrum in between perfection and Trump.
-
Catherine, I found the perfect candidate. Back in 2001 England's Screaming Looney Party ran a cat named Mandu for government.
Back in 2012 your own state ran a kitty for Senate. Remember Hank the Cat? Now it's time to run a kitteh for President!!!! We already have two rats running- what's the leap in asking a kitty to run?
Freya, I think a cat would be a huge improvement on both of them. Maybe we should ask the RNC to start scouring the shelters.
BTW, Hank's page is still up:
http://hankforsenate.com/ (http://hankforsenate.com/)
-
Freya, I think a cat would be a huge improvement on both of them. Maybe we should ask the RNC to start scouring the shelters.
BTW, Hank's page is still up:
http://hankforsenate.com/ (http://hankforsenate.com/)
Or get someone here to run their kitty. I've begged Slings to run Deimos.
@Hopalong Ginsberg
-
FIVE times! Gaaah!!!
People always leave out his moral bankruptcy!
LM damn AO!
-
I finally figured out what my problem is with this whole thread: And its original premise.
"LET'S SEE...WHAT ARE MY CHOICES?"
Well, I'd certainly suggest that at this late date it's wrong for people who've been involved in this process to even ask that question. Here's why:
First off, it suggests that, "Oh, my! I have to pick between one of two choices. What am I to do?" Fakery and fatuous and a specious question, at the very BEST!
For crying out loud, this is what Trump supporters have been doing all they can do to accomplish. For many moons, there were NUMEROUS candidates that offered more conservative credentials, that offered (depending on the particular issue) the same or a better option than Trump has offered. But Trump supporters went for the glittery, shiny object. They swallowed the pill whole, without question...and then went whole hog attack-dog on any one that differed with them.
ALL the other candidates were smeared and besmirched by Trump...and his supporters cheered like something out of a Monty Python movie. The craziest, most insane, most fringe accusations/allegations/statements were made and Trump supporters treated them as if they were undisputable, honest-to-God facts and should be universally accepted.
One by one, candidates dropped out. Finally, Cruz suspended his campaign.
And now, NOW...someone wants to ask what his choices are?!
Your choices were spread before you like a buffet. Your choices were numerous and viable.
But, early on...you did it. You made your choice.
Nothing else even gets on your radar screen. You've decided and you've circled the wagons. No dissent is allowed. No criticism is countenanced.
You were warned/told that Trump was going to have a helluva time winning this thing; that hitching your wagon to the Trump campaign was going to lead to disaster.
Of course, you derided that. Oh, that was FUNNY! That was the stuff of idiots, of those unaware, of [gasp!] people who wanted Hillary elected!
The vitriol; the level of bile; the lack of any sort of adult, mature discussion or debate about concerns was epic. We talk about the "vetting" of candidates. When we talk about that re Trump, we are yelled down with a cacophany of voices that say, "NO CANDIDATE IN OUR HISTORY HAS BEEN VETTED MORE THAN TRUMP!" or "He's been in the public eye for years...everyone already knows Trump!"
You know, I think that is just about the most brainless thing. Personally, I never paid a bit of attention to Trump. At the absolute most, he was on the periphery of anything I knew or paid any attention to. I sure wasn't watching him with the view that he may be sitting in the seat of power and having control over my life!
Anyway, now that everyone else is gone the question is posed: What are my choices?
You should have asked that earlier, goofus. Back when you had more choices. Back when you could have made a difference.
But you know what?...[and this is you all over again]...You're not asking because you want any help.
You're putting that question out as if you're a thoughtful, well-meaning, "open-to-input" kind of person. Anyone here already knows you. Integrity, thoughtfulness, etc. are kind of antonyms to the way you treat this issue.
There have been LOTS of answers to that question on this thread. I'm not a mind-reader, but I'll bet none of them that didn't agree with you broke through your awareness to the point that you'd concede you might...MIGHT...be making a mistake.
So again, I submit that your question was asked too late and that you're not interested in the answer to it anyway. It was just another way for you to market "your guy".
I don't post a lot. But sometimes you knuckleheads get me to the point I have to write SOMETHING!
Maybe no one else agrees, but dammit...I'm tired of you.
-
(http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n151/hagemangroup/%20victor%20and%20ML_zpsghqi8o4d.jpg) (http://s111.photobucket.com/user/hagemangroup/media/%20victor%20and%20ML_zpsghqi8o4d.jpg.html)
I call this one, "Victor with the MusicLady". :laugh:
;)
-
Words on a forum have nothing to do with subjugation and bloodshed, and if we think so, we're in some kind of fantasyland that exists as an excuse for us to behave like a rage addict.
Words on a forum today are no different than the words printed in Paine's Common Sense, Sermons from Mayhew and Henry. Those words spoken and written had everything to do with resisting subjugation and led to bloodshed for the cause of liberty. There is nothing new under the sun. A fight for liberty against ideas that will lead to tyranny, or ideas that will lead to ruin and slavery happens first with words. Forums and social media are today's Town Greens, Green Dragon's and Williamsburg Taverns. I'm sorry if you do not see that. It's why Trump and Hillary have armies of paid operatives to shape the narratives for their chosen dear leader, because they understand that their words will assuage a people to more easily accept subjugation and their rule.
Those are high-minded words, but you're just on the internet, Invar. For God's sake, tone down the rage, please?
Tell you what - if you can get the morons calling for our deaths for treason because we will not support Trump to tone it down, and convince those here who daily insist that not voting for Trump is voting for Hillary and that we are not rational to tone it down - I'll tone down 'the rage' as it were. What do you think of that?
-
You stated..."if you can get the morons calling for our deaths for treason because we will not support Trump to tone it down, and convince those here who daily insist that not voting for Trump is voting for Hillary and that we are not rational to tone it down - I'll tone down 'the rage' as it were. What do you think of that?"......
Well I don't think much of that because basically that makes you on par with them and nothing more.
Defend 'your position' rather than play romper room in the mud with them.
-
I finally figured out what my problem is with this whole thread: And its original premise.
"LET'S SEE...WHAT ARE MY CHOICES?"
Well, I'd certainly suggest that at this late date it's wrong for people who've been involved in this process to even ask that question. Here's why:
First off, it suggests that, "Oh, my! I have to pick between one of two choices. What am I to do?" Fakery and fatuous and a specious question, at the very BEST!
For crying out loud, this is what Trump supporters have been doing all they can do to accomplish. For many moons, there were NUMEROUS candidates that offered more conservative credentials, that offered (depending on the particular issue) the same or a better option than Trump has offered. But Trump supporters went for the glittery, shiny object. They swallowed the pill whole, without question...and then went whole hog attack-dog on any one that differed with them.
ALL the other candidates were smeared and besmirched by Trump...and his supporters cheered like something out of a Monty Python movie. The craziest, most insane, most fringe accusations/allegations/statements were made and Trump supporters treated them as if they were undisputable, honest-to-God facts and should be universally accepted.
One by one, candidates dropped out. Finally, Cruz suspended his campaign.
And now, NOW...someone wants to ask what his choices are?!
Your choices were spread before you like a buffet. Your choices were numerous and viable.
But, early on...you did it. You made your choice.
Nothing else even gets on your radar screen. You've decided and you've circled the wagons. No dissent is allowed. No criticism is countenanced.
You were warned/told that Trump was going to have a helluva time winning this thing; that hitching your wagon to the Trump campaign was going to lead to disaster.
Of course, you derided that. Oh, that was FUNNY! That was the stuff of idiots, of those unaware, of [gasp!] people who wanted Hillary elected!
The vitriol; the level of bile; the lack of any sort of adult, mature discussion or debate about concerns was epic. We talk about the "vetting" of candidates. When we talk about that re Trump, we are yelled down with a cacophany of voices that say, "NO CANDIDATE IN OUR HISTORY HAS BEEN VETTED MORE THAN TRUMP!" or "He's been in the public eye for years...everyone already knows Trump!"
You know, I think that is just about the most brainless thing. Personally, I never paid a bit of attention to Trump. At the absolute most, he was on the periphery of anything I knew or paid any attention to. I sure wasn't watching him with the view that he may be sitting in the seat of power and having control over my life!
Anyway, now that everyone else is gone the question is posed: What are my choices?
You should have asked that earlier, goofus. Back when you had more choices. Back when you could have made a difference.
But you know what?...[and this is you all over again]...You're not asking because you want any help.
You're putting that question out as if you're a thoughtful, well-meaning, "open-to-input" kind of person. Anyone here already knows you. Integrity, thoughtfulness, etc. are kind of antonyms to the way you treat this issue.
There have been LOTS of answers to that question on this thread. I'm not a mind-reader, but I'll bet none of them that didn't agree with you broke through your awareness to the point that you'd concede you might...MIGHT...be making a mistake.
So again, I submit that your question was asked too late and that you're not interested in the answer to it anyway. It was just another way for you to market "your guy".
I don't post a lot. But sometimes you knuckleheads get me to the point I have to write SOMETHING!
Maybe no one else agrees, but dammit...I'm tired of you.
That was absolutely AWARD WINNING!!!!!
Thank you!
:thumbsup2: :thumbsup2: :thumbsup2: :thumbsup2: :thumbsup2:
-
I finally figured out what my problem is with this whole thread: And its original premise.
"LET'S SEE...WHAT ARE MY CHOICES?"
Well, I'd certainly suggest that at this late date it's wrong for people who've been involved in this process to even ask that question. Here's why:
First off, it suggests that, "Oh, my! I have to pick between one of two choices. What am I to do?" Fakery and fatuous and a specious question, at the very BEST!
For crying out loud, this is what Trump supporters have been doing all they can do to accomplish. For many moons, there were NUMEROUS candidates that offered more conservative credentials, that offered (depending on the particular issue) the same or a better option than Trump has offered. But Trump supporters went for the glittery, shiny object. They swallowed the pill whole, without question...and then went whole hog attack-dog on any one that differed with them.
ALL the other candidates were smeared and besmirched by Trump...and his supporters cheered like something out of a Monty Python movie. The craziest, most insane, most fringe accusations/allegations/statements were made and Trump supporters treated them as if they were undisputable, honest-to-God facts and should be universally accepted.
One by one, candidates dropped out. Finally, Cruz suspended his campaign.
And now, NOW...someone wants to ask what his choices are?!
Your choices were spread before you like a buffet. Your choices were numerous and viable.
But, early on...you did it. You made your choice.
Nothing else even gets on your radar screen. You've decided and you've circled the wagons. No dissent is allowed. No criticism is countenanced.
You were warned/told that Trump was going to have a helluva time winning this thing; that hitching your wagon to the Trump campaign was going to lead to disaster.
Of course, you derided that. Oh, that was FUNNY! That was the stuff of idiots, of those unaware, of [gasp!] people who wanted Hillary elected!
The vitriol; the level of bile; the lack of any sort of adult, mature discussion or debate about concerns was epic. We talk about the "vetting" of candidates. When we talk about that re Trump, we are yelled down with a cacophany of voices that say, "NO CANDIDATE IN OUR HISTORY HAS BEEN VETTED MORE THAN TRUMP!" or "He's been in the public eye for years...everyone already knows Trump!"
You know, I think that is just about the most brainless thing. Personally, I never paid a bit of attention to Trump. At the absolute most, he was on the periphery of anything I knew or paid any attention to. I sure wasn't watching him with the view that he may be sitting in the seat of power and having control over my life!
Anyway, now that everyone else is gone the question is posed: What are my choices?
You should have asked that earlier, goofus. Back when you had more choices. Back when you could have made a difference.
But you know what?...[and this is you all over again]...You're not asking because you want any help.
You're putting that question out as if you're a thoughtful, well-meaning, "open-to-input" kind of person. Anyone here already knows you. Integrity, thoughtfulness, etc. are kind of antonyms to the way you treat this issue.
There have been LOTS of answers to that question on this thread. I'm not a mind-reader, but I'll bet none of them that didn't agree with you broke through your awareness to the point that you'd concede you might...MIGHT...be making a mistake.
So again, I submit that your question was asked too late and that you're not interested in the answer to it anyway. It was just another way for you to market "your guy".
I don't post a lot. But sometimes you knuckleheads get me to the point I have to write SOMETHING!
Maybe no one else agrees, but dammit...I'm tired of you.
You need to post a LOT more! This is BRILLIANT, and absolutely accurate.
THANK you!! :patriot: :patriot:
-
Well I don't think much of that because basically that makes you on par with them and nothing more.
Defend 'your position' rather than play romper room in the mud with them.
Okay Mom, if that's what you think, so be it.
In my experience, you cannot reason with bullies (or jihadists). But if you think you can, more power to you.
I'm not one of those people.
-
That was absolutely AWARD WINNING!!!!!
Thank you!
...
(http://www.awardsengraving.co.uk/ekmps/shops/trophyman4001/images/star-shaped-badge-4-colour-required-sb036-14286-p.jpg)
Yeah....why not give HIM a 'star'? :whistle:
-
Okay Mom, if that's what you think, so be it.
In my experience, you cannot reason with bullies (or jihadists). But if you think you can, more power to you.
I'm not one of those people.
That's why I choose to ignore them. They are not here to exchange ideas, or be reasonable. They are here to cause trouble.
That's all.
And the more you engage them, the more trouble they can cause. I guarantee that he loves making you angry. It's despicable, but that's exactly what he's here for.
NO one takes this guy seriously, because there's nothing serious about him. Don't give him ammunition so he can keep shooting his nonsense.
-
That's why I choose to ignore them. They are not here to exchange ideas, or be reasonable. They are here to cause trouble.
That's all.
And the more you engage them, the more trouble they can cause. I guarantee that he loves making you angry. It's despicable, but that's exactly what he's here for.
NO one takes this guy seriously, because there's nothing serious about him. Don't give him ammunition so he can keep shooting his nonsense.
Listen up, @musiclady And don't ever forget it.
In about two weeks, he's going to be the official GOP Nominee.
That means YOU, then, "...are not here to exchange ideas, or be reasonable. {but]are here to cause trouble."
-
(http://www.awardsengraving.co.uk/ekmps/shops/trophyman4001/images/star-shaped-badge-4-colour-required-sb036-14286-p.jpg)
Yeah....why not give HIM a 'star'? :whistle:
DCP...some of us aren't in it for that.
Savvy?
And I'll ask you a serious question: Besides trying to prove yourself a jerk to someone (all of us), what was the point of your post?
I'd like a serious answer.
-
DCP...some of us aren't in it for that.
Savvy?
And I'll ask you a serious question: Besides trying to prove yourself a jerk to someone (all of us), what was the point of your post?
I'd like a serious answer.
I was using absurdity to describe the absurdity of seeing several threads by the usual suspects of seeing "Jew" and "antisemitism" in a tweet sent by Donald Trump.
And the absurdity that despite the ridiculous 0-fer batting average of #nevertrump....they continue to claim " [This] is the big one!"
That's why.
We're two weeks away from coming together to beat Hillary Clinton.
Lead, follow, or get the hell out of our way.
-
First of all, your answer made no sense to me and wasn't responsive.
Second, to your demand:
”We're two weeks away from coming together to beat Hillary Clinton.
Lead, follow, or get the hell out of our way.”
No.
-
Listen up, @musiclady And don't ever forget it.
In about two weeks, he's going to be the official GOP Nominee.
That means YOU, then, "...are not here to exchange ideas, or be reasonable. {but]are here to cause trouble."
That's absurd, and you know it.
The ideals and values that the Republican party is SUPPOSED to stand for will be swirling down the toilet if Trump is nominated in about two weeks.
I have no more business voting for Trump than Ronald Reagan did voting for LBJ after the Democrat party left him.
And I will ALWAYS be here to engage in, and read the exchange of ideas of thinking Conservatives.
And in the meantime, your deceitful buddy will STILL be here causing trouble, because he doesn't have a single idea in his Trump-filled head.
-
That's why I choose to ignore them. They are not here to exchange ideas, or be reasonable. They are here to cause trouble.
That's all.
And the more you engage them, the more trouble they can cause. I guarantee that he loves making you angry. It's despicable, but that's exactly what he's here for.
I'm a former mod at a forum that collapsed and was taken over by the same kind of virulent trollish behavior we see from the Trump minority here. In my experience ignoring such people and refusing to call them out on what they are and were doing, led to the exodus of the most valued contributors to the site. When I confronted and cut down such people, the site grew and prospered, but the owner changed his mind and bought into the demand that all views and all philosophies must be given equal space and ordered us mods not to engage or stop 'contrarian views'. Ultimately the whole forum was overrun and taken over by those who intended to destroy it from the beginning and they used the "rules" against the host and those who established the board. The owner simply had the same philosophy you do - and the place collapsed and became a vile cesspool.
NO one takes this guy seriously, because there's nothing serious about him. Don't give him ammunition so he can keep shooting his nonsense.
At some point Conservatives need to learn to fight back. Ignoring the Left and capitulating to them in the name of 'tolerance' and 'decorum' has led the GOP itself to ruin.
I have no intention of letting those kinds of people get away with it for what remains of Conservatism.
-
I'm a former mod at a forum that collapsed and was taken over by the same kind of virulent trollish behavior we see from the Trump minority here. In my experience ignoring such people and refusing to call them out on what they are and were doing, led to the exodus of the most valued contributors to the site. When I confronted and cut down such people, the site grew and prospered, but the owner changed his mind and bought into the demand that all views and all philosophies must be given equal space and ordered us mods not to engage or stop 'contrarian views'. Ultimately the whole forum was overrun and taken over by those who intended to destroy it from the beginning and they used the "rules" against the host and those who established the board. The owner simply had the same philosophy you do - and the place collapsed and became a vile cesspool.
At some point Conservatives need to learn to fight back. Ignoring the Left and capitulating to them in the name of 'tolerance' and 'decorum' has led the GOP itself to ruin.
I have no intention of letting those kinds of people get away with it for what remains of Conservatism.
I understand your perspective, but I disagree. On this forum, with this particular virulent (brainless) disruptor, I still believe it's best for everyone to ignore him rather than feed him. The more he is engaged, the more idiotic he becomes.
Again, NO one believes him. There is obviously a time and place to fight back, and I agree with you fully on this.
But I believe that with this particular trouble maker on this particular forum, it is counter-productive.
He'll shrivel up and go away if no one bothers with him or takes his dumb and deceitful arguments seriously.
JMHO......
-
We're two weeks away from coming together to beat Hillary Clinton.
Not gonna happen. I will be doing everything in my power to get as many Conservatives and former Republicans to go third party or write in.
If we must have an enemy at the head of government, we want one who we can clearly oppose and whom we are not responsible.
Lead, follow, or get the hell out of our way.
You have no authority to make such demands.
You are nobody.
And I WILL be standing in your way.
-
I understand your perspective, but I disagree. On this forum, with this particular virulent (brainless) troll, I still believe it's best for everyone to ignore him rather than feed him. The more he is engaged, the more idiotic he becomes.
Again, NO one believes him. There is obviously a time and place to fight back, and I agree with you fully on this.
But I believe that with this particular trouble maker on this particular forum, it is counter-productive.
He'll shrivel up and go away if no one bothers with him or takes his dumb and deceitful arguments seriously.
I cannot disagree in regards to a specific paid operative or True Believer, as each kind of 'trouble maker' has different things that affect or motivate them.
However, that said - letting a lie stand without countering it with the truth is how evil overtakes a society.
-
First of all, your answer made no sense to me and wasn't responsive.
Well, how could it make any sense to you when you've got less than 2 dozen posts here?
Try to pay attention. There is no review of the material at this late stage.
-
Well, how could it make any sense to you when you've got less than 2 dozen posts here?
Try to pay attention. There is no review of the material at this late stage.
That's going to get you in a jam someday.
-
Lead, follow, or get the hell out of our way.
Or else what? You'll post more vapid drivel on an Internet forum?
-
Lest see your proof that all end games of #nevertrump do not end in a Hillary win.
Lets see yours that you're actually a combat Marine Vet, or a Marine at all because after your performance yesterday, there's a lot of people that think you might be lying about that too (you do have a long history of that)... that your browser doesn't show PMs s a lame excuse to avoid Mod smackdowns, when mine is the same browser and works fine; that you didn't suddenly change your tagline YET AGAIN after being caught in another lie yesterday about it, and that Trump is actually not a liberal...
:hands:
Some posters simply diminish TBR. Freedom of speech is a good concept. Howver, "Ignore" is a great tool, folks. Everytime you respond to some of these folks, particularly when you quote them, you give them additional "air time" and enable them to dominate the forum.
Note: I'm not attacking this individual because of what he believes, or his loyalty to Trump. I'm maintaining that he's been called on intellectual dishonestly, to which he simply responds with more of the same.
As others on this forum are my witnesses, I'm not violating TBR's terms of service, and attacking another person because of his beliefs or politics. Others have said he's here only to "cause trouble". There's another common word for that, but it's banned on TBR, so I will not use it
-
Well, how could it make any sense to you when you've got less than 2 dozen posts here?
Try to pay attention. There is no review of the material at this late stage.
There is an interesting quote, attributed to Abe Lincoln by the way, that I believe is pertinent to this discussion:
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool..." [which you apparently think of me] "...than to speak and to remove all doubt..."
I believe you've decided to be the proof of the second part of the sentiment...exponentially.
Unhappily for you, posting history is no indication of awareness, length of time engaged, intelligence...or very little else other than postings.
To ascribe many or few postings to a forum member's capacities indicates some pretty shallow critical thinking skills.
Again, which I believe you've decided to demonstrate ably over the past few months and numerous posts.
-
I was using absurdity to describe the absurdity of seeing several threads by the usual suspects of seeing "Jew" and "antisemitism" in a tweet sent by Donald Trump.
And the absurdity that despite the ridiculous 0-fer batting average of #nevertrump....they continue to claim " [This] is the big one!"
That's why.
We're two weeks away from coming together to beat Hillary Clinton.
Lead, follow, or get the hell out of our way.
And... how is that star related to Judaism in any way?
-
@Repub4Trump https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump
Trump's party affiliation has changed over the years. Although his party affiliation prior to 1987 is unclear, Trump was an early supporter of Republican Ronald Reagan for U.S. President in the late 70s. In 1987 he registered as a Republican until 1999. He then switched to the Reform Party for three years and ran a presidential exploratory campaign for its nomination. After his run, Trump left the party in 2001 due to the involvement of David Duke, Pat Buchanan and Lenora Fulani within the party. From 2001 to 2009 he was a Democrat and then switched back to the Republican Party in 2009 after endorsing Republican John McCain for President. In December 2011, Trump became an Independent for five months, before returning to the Republican Party, where he has pledged to stay
I was referring to knee jerk reactions, and holier than thou attitudes...But as RIV would say.."YOU already knew that!," **nononono*
-
I was referring to knee jerk reactions, and holier than thou attitudes...But as RIV would say.."YOU already knew that!," **nononono*
*You* may have been referring to such, but @verga supplied a beautiful, real life example of what you said. It was a perfect, brilliant example of the type of person you described. Pretty funny, actually.
-
Listen up, @musiclady And don't ever forget it.
In about two weeks, he's going to be the official GOP Nominee.
That means YOU, then, "...are not here to exchange ideas, or be reasonable. {but]are here to cause trouble."
Then either get the Mods to ZOT us, or go back to FreeRepublic.
At least we know where you stand, morally, on the issue.
"Listen up, and don't ever forget it."
And before you beat up on the ladies, tough guy, come meet my fist.
-
I cannot disagree in regards to a specific paid operative or True Believer, as each kind of 'trouble maker' has different things that affect or motivate them.
However, that said - letting a lie stand without countering it with the truth is how evil overtakes a society.
Again, I agree with the principle, but when nearly every post contains one lie or another, which has been repeated ad nauseam (and refuted with multiple facts), sometimes it's best to leave them alone.
If all of us who know the truth responded to every false statement and accusation by said poster there would be no end to the rebuttals.
I still think his miniscule self-worth will suffer if we all just pass his comments off as the nonsense they are and let him rant all alone in his little Trump cave.
-
Words on a forum today are no different than the words printed in Paine's Common Sense, Sermons from Mayhew and Henry. Those words spoken and written had everything to do with resisting subjugation and led to bloodshed for the cause of liberty. There is nothing new under the sun. A fight for liberty against ideas that will lead to tyranny, or ideas that will lead to ruin and slavery happens first with words. Forums and social media are today's Town Greens, Green Dragon's and Williamsburg Taverns. I'm sorry if you do not see that. It's why Trump and Hillary have armies of paid operatives to shape the narratives for their chosen dear leader, because they understand that their words will assuage a people to more easily accept subjugation and their rule.
Tell you what - if you can get the morons calling for our deaths for treason because we will not support Trump to tone it down, and convince those here who daily insist that not voting for Trump is voting for Hillary and that we are not rational to tone it down - I'll tone down 'the rage' as it were. What do you think of that?
Has someone called for our deaths? I missed that.
I'm not a moderator so I'm not going to play one. What I was trying to do was appeal to your sense of reason. When someone---one individual, in this case---is pulling your chain and trying to prod you into blowing up, you're playing right into his hands when you do it. Personally I refuse to give anyone that kind of power.
As for calling us Hillary supporters, who cares!? It's stupid to begin with...why let it bother you so much that you give pleasure to the person saying it? All you do is feed the behavior.
-
That sounds just like the DemRats, union types, or uninformed voters. Vote for the party, no matter what loser the propose.
Did I say who you should vote for?
Considering I am none of those type people you mentioned, I think you should watch the insults..Not just to me, but all the members too!
Thanks!
-
LOL! So, you're telling us that "30 or 40" #nevertrumps are going to sway the election?
You're here in a corner of the internet talking to no more than 50 people...period.
It's a BIG country...filled with lots of angry people.
So which is it? Do you need us or do we not matter? Does Trump need us to win or is Trump as omnificent as you and he believes that our puny numbers and votes don't matter one way or another? If our numbers and so small and insignificant then why are you so obsessed over those who choose not to choose? Which is it? If Trump is so loved by the masses as you claim and is such a superior candidate so what if he has detractors. especially if they are not promoting his opponent? Why do as you claim a handful of malcontents cause you such concern unless you take our lack of support personally as disparaging your choice? You made fun about conspiracies of anti-Trumpers arrest and re-education, but isn't it true that those are the common results of politicos and their supporters who can not accept the fact that not everyone loves them? I said it before and I say it again I see the shades of 1930's Germany in this debate.
-
Lead, follow, or get the hell out of our way.
AH...don't you just love the sounds of Jackboots in the afternoon?
-
I was referring to knee jerk reactions, and holier than thou attitudes...But as RIV would say.."YOU already knew that!," **nononono*
Clarification, Repub............ is everyone who maintains Biblical moral standards and opposes Trump on the basis of those standards "holier than thou" in your view?
I mean, is there anyone who, in your estimation, has the right to hold on to absolute values without feeling the brunt of your condemnation?
I have been called many, many names by Trump supporters simply because I recognize Donald Trump as an unrepentant sinner, and a serial adulterer, and believe that his absolute lack of character would be deadly in a President.
Is that "knee jerk" and "holier than thou" in your view................ OR, do I have the right to believe what Christians have believed for centuries without being mocked by people like your buddy, RiV? (And you??)
-
Is that "knee jerk" and "holier than thou" in your view................ OR, do I have the right to believe what Christians have believed for centuries without being mocked by people like your buddy, RiV? (And you??)
Just a reminder @musiclady, I'm not involved in your latest dispute. The last thing you want to do is invite me into it. :nono:
@Repub4Trump
-
AH...don't you just love the sounds of Jackboots in the afternoon?
Who are you accusing of wearing jackboots @kartographer ... Mitt Romney?
Mitt Romney repeated Thomas Paine's oft-quoted aphorism, “lead, follow, or get out of the way,” in his victory speech last night —
@DCPatriot
-
But Mitt was wrong wasn't he?
-
But Mitt was wrong wasn't he?
Answer my question.
-
Musiclady don't ever forget it.
In about two weeks, he's going to be the official GOP Nominee.
That means YOU, then, "...are not here to exchange ideas, or be reasonable. {but]are here to cause trouble."
ROFLMBO, trying to strong-arm at two different forums. How is that working for ya DC?
Put me down on your trouble making list too. I need the laughs.
-
You look good in them.
The statement is false. OPPOSING is also a choice and a legitimate one. Rolling over to tyrants and bullies never works. You just have to be aware that opposing tyrants and bullies really piss them off. Doesn't it?
-
Who are you accusing of wearing jackboots @kartographer ... Mitt Romney?
@DCPatriot
@kartographer
http://kenburchell.blogspot.com/2012/02/did-paine-ever-say-or-write-lead-follow.html
Did Paine ever say or write: "Lead, follow or get out of the way."
Followers of this blog will already know the answer to this question. It's been treated here before. But a recent article by essayist and commentator John Nichols of The Nation magazine treats Mitt-the-Mormon's miserable misquote of a few days ago. See:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/165986/tom-paine-would-not-have-approved-mitt-romney
The quote has already been roundly debunked here on this blog:
http://kenburchell.blogspot.com/2011/07/thomas-paine-never-said-nor-wrote-lead.html
but you're excused if you missed it and in case you did, a generous reader contributed what is probably the actual citation:
"We herd sheep, we drive cattle, we lead people. Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way." George S. Patton, as quoted in Pocket Patriot : Quotes from American Heroes (2005) edited by Kelly Nickell, p. 157
[and thanks to Harvey J. Kaye for the tip-off on the Nichols piece]
-
@kartographer
http://kenburchell.blogspot.com/2012/02/did-paine-ever-say-or-write-lead-follow.html
Did Paine ever say or write: "Lead, follow or get out of the way."
Followers of this blog will already know the answer to this question. It's been treated here before. But a recent article by essayist and commentator John Nichols of The Nation magazine treats Mitt-the-Mormon's miserable misquote of a few days ago. See:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/165986/tom-paine-would-not-have-approved-mitt-romney
The quote has already been roundly debunked here on this blog:
http://kenburchell.blogspot.com/2011/07/thomas-paine-never-said-nor-wrote-lead.html
but you're excused if you missed it and in case you did, a generous reader contributed what is probably the actual citation:
"We herd sheep, we drive cattle, we lead people. Lead me, follow me, or get out of my way." George S. Patton, as quoted in Pocket Patriot : Quotes from American Heroes (2005) edited by Kelly Nickell, p. 157
[and thanks to Harvey J. Kaye for the tip-off on the Nichols piece]
Thank you for the information Roos!
-
I'm a former mod at a forum that collapsed and was taken over by the same kind of virulent trollish behavior we see from the Trump minority here. In my experience ignoring such people and refusing to call them out on what they are and were doing, led to the exodus of the most valued contributors to the site. When I confronted and cut down such people, the site grew and prospered, but the owner changed his mind and bought into the demand that all views and all philosophies must be given equal space and ordered us mods not to engage or stop 'contrarian views'. Ultimately the whole forum was overrun and taken over by those who intended to destroy it from the beginning and they used the "rules" against the host and those who established the board. The owner simply had the same philosophy you do - and the place collapsed and became a vile cesspool.
At some point Conservatives need to learn to fight back. Ignoring the Left and capitulating to them in the name of 'tolerance' and 'decorum' has led the GOP itself to ruin.
I have no intention of letting those kinds of people get away with it for what remains of Conservatism.
I am a Trump supporter and as long as I am here, the Trump supporters will be too!!!
You got that! Now stop posting insulting personal attacks!
-
ROFLMBO, trying to strong-arm at two different forums. How is that working for ya DC?
Put me down on your trouble making list too. I need the laughs.
Wonder if he'll ever figure out that trying to strong-arm people because they hold principles and moral absolutes dear will always end in failure because of those very values he's trying to make us forget we have..... :shrug:
-
Listen up, @musiclady And don't ever forget it.
In about two weeks, he's going to be the official GOP Nominee.
That means YOU, then, "...are not here to exchange ideas, or be reasonable. {but]are here to cause trouble."
If all you want to read and type are posts in fawning worship of The Orange One, TOS is there 24/7 for your echo-chamber needs. People like you have already strong armed it into a forum that engages in redefining conservatism to mirror the ever-changing opinions of The Orange One who demands unyielding and unquestioning worship and adoration at every turn.
The main ones who are active over there are the Cruz Derangement Syndrome, populist loving, conservative hating ZOG conspiracy types.
Those of us who see through The Orange One's BS will not be silenced by keyboard bullies (or real ones). Period.
I will happily, proudly vote 3rd party. I will not put my name beside either Hillary or Trump. I can't and won't endorse either of them. I have to answer to God and His opinion of my vote is more important than yours.
-
Then either get the Mods to ZOT us, or go back to FreeRepublic.
At least we know where you stand, morally, on the issue.
And before you beat up on the ladies, tough guy, come meet my fist.
Our. Mods do not Zot! And DC has been with us since the beginning!
Now after explaining that, both of you should calm down.
Thanks! :patriot:
-
Clarification, Repub............ is everyone who maintains Biblical moral standards and opposes Trump on the basis of those standards "holier than thou" in your view?
I mean, is there anyone who, in your estimation, has the right to hold on to absolute values without feeling the brunt of your condemnation?
I have been called many, many names by Trump supporters simply because I recognize Donald Trump as an unrepentant sinner, and a serial adulterer, and believe that his absolute lack of character would be deadly in a President.
Is that "knee jerk" and "holier than thou" in your view................ OR, do I have the right to believe what Christians have believed for centuries without being mocked by people like your buddy, RiV? (And you??)
Take it as you want!
I was not talking to you, and. No one is mocking you! Stop the drama!
-
I am a Trump supporter and as long as I am here, the Trump supporters will be too!!!
You got that! Now stop posting insulting personal attacks!
I hope very much that you have the clout to oppose INVAR, and his violent remarks. His "swords" and his "cut down such people" references, are beyond ridiculous.
It is way over the top, and is damaging this site, of yours. The site is coming to reflect only the fringe of the fringe. IMO
-
LOL. When the Mod is adding to the drama they are saying to end. I am seriously laughing at this thread. Maybe I will start a new topic... "A personal insult is neither personal nor insulting." Discuss.
I'd actually rather see outright insults "You're a dumba**" "You smell like cheese." than the thinly veiled supposed personal insults and threats that permeate just about every thread.
-
I hope very much that you have the clout to oppose INVAR, and his violent remarks. His "swords" and his "cut down such people" references, are beyond ridiculous.
It is way over the top, and is damaging this site, of yours. The site is coming to reflect only the fringe of the fringe. IMO
There are people in both camps that express themselves that way.
-
Take it as you want!
I was not talking to you, and. No one is mocking you! Stop the drama!
Drama?? Moi??
I think not! (Now you can calm down).
(btw, I didn't think it was a rule of the forum not to respond to a comment when the poster "was not talking" to me. I will remember that, and only talk to you if you talk to me first. Mea culpa...... )
-
I hope very much that you have the clout to oppose INVAR, and his violent remarks. His "swords" and his "cut down such people" references, are beyond ridiculous.
It is way over the top, and is damaging this site, of yours. The site is coming to reflect only the fringe of the fringe. IMO
You mean like the reflection of the Trump fringe??
I'd like to get rid of that too, but unlike you, I believe in free speech.
-
LOL. When the Mod is adding to the drama they are saying to end. I am seriously laughing at this thread. Maybe I will start a new topic... "A personal insult is neither personal nor insulting." Discuss.
I'd actually rather see outright insults "You're a dumba**" "You smell like cheese." than the thinly veiled supposed personal insults and threats that permeate just about every thread.
It will be shut down soon.
You can take that to the bank.....
-
It will be shut down soon.
You can take that to the bank.....
Yep CIAO!
THIS THREAD IS SERVING NO PURPOSE ANYWAY!