The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: mystery-ak on August 29, 2016, 01:31:45 pm
-
A lot of conservative pundits have hitched their stars to Donald Trump. What if he loses?
By Callum Borchers August 28
In future elections, Republicans seeking office will have to answer an important question: Where did you stand on Donald Trump?
Some seem acutely aware of this looming litmus test and are riding the fence (See: Ryan, Paul). Others are boldly offering what they hope will be the right answer.
Ted Cruz, counting on a Trump defeat in November, has positioned himself as a principled holdout, apparently convinced that refusing to endorse his party's presidential nominee will boost his 2020 stock among Republican voters, who will realize they nominated the wrong candidate this time around. Chris Christie, betting on a Trump victory, could be angling for a cabinet appointment but, absent that, may be setting himself up to be able to say in his next campaign that he got in on the ground floor of a rebuilt GOP.
more
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/08/28/a-lot-of-conservative-pundits-have-hitched-their-stars-to-donald-trump-what-if-he-loses/
-
"Ted Cruz, counting on a Trump defeat in November, has positioned himself as a principled holdout, apparently convinced that refusing to endorse his party's presidential nominee will boost his 2020 stock among Republican voters, who will realize they nominated the wrong candidate this time around."
Cruz is refusing to endorse Trump on principle. I don't know how much clearer this could be.
This writer, on the other hand, is the one with the agenda. He hopes to paint Cruz as a crass opportunist so it can be used against him at the next national election.
-
"Ted Cruz, counting on a Trump defeat in November, has positioned himself as a principled holdout, apparently convinced that refusing to endorse his party's presidential nominee will boost his 2020 stock among Republican voters, who will realize they nominated the wrong candidate this time around."
Cruz is refusing to endorse Trump on principle. I don't know how much clearer this could be.
This writer, on the other hand, is the one with the agenda. He hopes to paint Cruz as a crass opportunist so it can be used against him at the next national election.
I think a lot of people are recognizing that he was right and fear for what it means for themselves.
-
I think a lot of people are recognizing that he was right and fear for what it means for themselves.
An examination of one's conscience can be very unsettling.
As a Catholic, I understand it's an important process before participating in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. I have learned that Reconciliation is one of God's greatest gifts to us.
-
I think a lot of people are recognizing that he was right and fear for what it means for themselves.
Its no big deal to admit to being fooled, especially after being repeatedly lied to.
The truth won't hold it against you.
-
An examination of one's conscience can be very unsettling.
As a Catholic, I understand it's an important process before participating in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. I have learned that Reconciliation is one of God's greatest gifts to us.
I doubt that you will find any such "reconciliation" in the average Trump supporter, however. Hell, my own best friend (like a sister) is so closed-minded that she doesn't even want to see and won't read anything that challenges her current view of "Trump chosen by God to save America", derived from yet another cult, the Word of Faith televangelists.
Closed minds like that will never see the truth or the light. They just won't let it in.
-
A lot of conservative pundits have hitched their stars to Donald Trump. What if he loses?
There is a losing candidate in every election and many people, pundit or not, hitch themselves to every losing candidate. This is just fear mongering.
-
An examination of one's conscience can be very unsettling.
As a Catholic, I understand it's an important process before participating in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. I have learned that Reconciliation is one of God's greatest gifts to us.
A lot of people lied to themselves and others, there will be a reckoning.
For instance, Sean Hannity's false outrage over a "deal" between Cruz and Kasich to stay out of each other's way in some states. He portrayed it as unprecedented when he knows full well that candidates often stay out of states where they aren't competitive. In 2012, Gingrich stayed out of Michigan and Santorum stayed out of Georgia. It didn't require a deal.
While Hannity was complaining about those dirty goings on, Trump dredged up truly unprecedented filthy and accused Rafael Cruz of involvement in the JFK assassination. Hannity said nothing.
-
I doubt that you will find any such "reconciliation" in the average Trump supporter, however. Hell, my own best friend (like a sister) is so closed-minded that she doesn't even want to see and won't read anything that challenges her current view of "Trump chosen by God to save America", derived from yet another cult, the Word of Faith televangelists.
Closed minds like that will never see the truth or the light. They just won't let it in.
There will be no reconciliation, just anger and blame pointed at us...not Trump.
Stealing a page from Henry II, "will no one rid us from Trump's troublesome Twitter account?"
-
There is a losing candidate in every election and many people, pundit or not, hitch themselves to every losing candidate. This is just fear mongering.
No, this will be different. Those who hitched their wagons to the Trump train and its racialism and xenophobia will be dragged down with it. It's a taint that won't clean off.
-
A lot of people lied to themselves and others, there will be a reckoning.
For instance, Sean Hannity's false outrage over a "deal" between Cruz and Kasich to stay out of each other's way in some states. He portrayed it as unprecedented when he knows full well that candidates often stay out of states where they aren't competitive. In 2012, Gingrich stayed out of Michigan and Santorum stayed out of Georgia. It didn't require a deal.
While Hannity was complaining about those dirty goings on, Trump dredged up truly unprecedented filthy and accused Rafael Cruz of involvement in the JFK assassination. Hannity said nothing.
I wasn't aware of that particular Sean BS, but he was already 'dead to me' due to his constant fawning over and paving the way for The Don. It figures that he also has become unethical and underhanded though....now that he's hanging with and stumping for Trump.
-
There will be no reconciliation, just anger and blame pointed at us...not Trump.
Stealing a page from Henry II, "will no one rid us from Trump's troublesome Twitter account?"
Of course....they will 'try' to blame us for their own stupidity. Hell, they already are blaming us. But we will be here to constantly remind them of their own fallacy in choices, eh?
I fear that we will always, ad infinitum, be inflicted with the dreaded Trump Twit Tweets. It's an ancient curse ...and an eternal one. :silly:
-
No, this will be different. Those who hitched their wagons to the Trump train and its racialism and xenophobia will be dragged down with it. It's a taint that won't clean off.
We've allowed them back in too many times only to get a knife in the back for our compassion. How many times has Coulter betrayed conservatives only to do it again at the first opportunity. I don't care how much people like her books and attacks on the left, she's nothing more than a "right wing" version of Michael Moore.
They laugh at the conservatives who pay their bills.
-
No, this will be different. Those who hitched their wagons to the Trump train and its racialism and xenophobia will be dragged down with it. It's a taint that won't clean off.
Is that you Rachel Maddow?
-
I wasn't aware of that particular Sean BS, but he was already 'dead to me' due to his constant fawning over and paving the way for The Don. It figures that he also has become unethical and underhanded though....now that he's hanging with and stumping for Trump.
I'm done with all those NY media types with their "outrage" over their NY values and nonstop promotion of another NE liberal. We ended up with a candidate from a region that almost totally goes for the Rat no matter what and these NY pundits can't figure out why conservatives are not enthusiastic.
I very rarely watch Fox News. I would give up on it altogether but CNN is so biased I can't stand them either.
-
No, this will be different. Those who hitched their wagons to the Trump train and its racialism and xenophobia will be dragged down with it. It's a taint that won't clean off.
You're right Jazzhead.............. this time is very, very different.
Trump is a Democrat. He espouses all things Democrat. Every thing he tries to say to claim conservatism is a lie and a leftist stereotype.
The talk show people we believed actually were conservative have shown their true colors, and this time their cheerleading will bring them down.
-
I'm done with all those NY media types with their "outrage" over their NY values and nonstop promotion of another NE liberal. We ended up with a candidate from a region that almost totally goes for the Rat no matter what and these NY pundits can't figure out why conservatives are not enthusiastic.
I very rarely watch Fox News. I would give up on it altogether but CNN is so biased I can't stand them either.
I have begun to get all my news info on the internet. I've stopped watching Fox altogether, as well as listening to talk radio.
It's been remarkably freeing, and I doubt I'll ever go back no matter how many "mea culpas" may follow this disastrous election.
-
I wasn't aware of that particular Sean BS, but he was already 'dead to me' due to his constant fawning over and paving the way for The Don. It figures that he also has become unethical and underhanded though....now that he's hanging with and stumping for Trump.
Trump love brings many people down. It seems the unethical rubs off......
-
"Ted Cruz, counting on a Trump defeat in November, has positioned himself as a principled holdout, apparently convinced that refusing to endorse his party's presidential nominee will boost his 2020 stock among Republican voters, who will realize they nominated the wrong candidate this time around."
Cruz is refusing to endorse Trump on principle. I don't know how much clearer this could be.
This writer, on the other hand, is the one with the agenda. He hopes to paint Cruz as a crass opportunist so it can be used against him at the next national election.
Yeah, that's what leapt out at me too. It doesn't seem to occur to the writer that sometime a principled stand is just a principled stand.
-
I'm done with all those NY media types with their "outrage" over their NY values and nonstop promotion of another NE liberal. We ended up with a candidate from a region that almost totally goes for the Rat no matter what and these NY pundits can't figure out why conservatives are not enthusiastic.
I very rarely watch Fox News. I would give up on it altogether but CNN is so biased I can't stand them either.
I don't watch Hannity or any of the other pundits there, but I do tune in to America's Newsroom still. You get good current events info there. Like today, they're talking about docs that Citizens United just finally managed to get re: Hillary's donations and what possible "benefit" the foreign donors may have received for those donations. CU is going over those documents now to determine what, if any, 'pay for play' Hillary handed out.
-
Is that you Rachel Maddow?
Nope, just a long-time Reagan-Kemp conservative who's disgusted by Trump and his alt-right supporters. He's going to lose anyway, so I want him losing in a landslide so the rancid corpse of Trumpism will never rise again.
-
A lot of pundits hitched their stars to Mitt Romney. What if he had lost?
A lot of pundits hitched their stars to John McCain. What if he had lost?
A lot of pundits hitched their stars to John Kerry. What if he had lost?
A lot of pundits hitched their stars to Al Gore. What if he had lost?
-
Is that you Rachel Maddow?
That's an odd statement. Why would you say that?
-
Yeah, that's what leapt out at me too. It doesn't seem to occur to the writer that sometime a principled stand is just a principled stand.
Yet "principled" is the only motive the media will never ascribed to Cruz.
Oh and Hannity can go p*ss up a rope. Personally I'm delighted these "conservative" commentators have outed themselves. To think all this time they were making fools of their conservative audiences.
-
Yeah, that's what leapt out at me too. It doesn't seem to occur to the writer that sometime a principled stand is just a principled stand.
That would first require having logic and the ability to even discern "a principled stand".
-
"Ted Cruz, counting on a Trump defeat in November, has positioned himself as a principled holdout, apparently convinced that refusing to endorse his party's presidential nominee will boost his 2020 stock among Republican voters, who will realize they nominated the wrong candidate this time around."
Cruz is refusing to endorse Trump on principle. I don't know how much clearer this could be.
This writer, on the other hand, is the one with the agenda. He hopes to paint Cruz as a crass opportunist so it can be used against him at the next national election.
Rather than run against his opponent, Lord Trumpy is running against strawmen. Against his Emmanuel Goldstein.
This will do two things, both which aid Donnie's friends - IN THE LEFT. First, it may destroy Cruz, or limit him in the short-term. Second, it forfeits the election.
WIN!
I think the Trumpbots are hysterical now because they know, deep down, they made a colossal mistake - and are frantically trying to deny it, and blame it and the consequences of it on others. On CRUZ and CONSERVATIVES.
-
In a way, I wish Trump would win. Once his rabid followers finally realize he's the wrong man for the job, they will be begging for Ted Cruz or someone like him to lead them out of darkness. If Tru,p loses, his followers will just blame Cruz, the media and anyone who didn't vote for Trump. Heck, even now they have their scapegoats ready should Trump lose.
-
This writer, on the other hand, is the one with the agenda. He hopes to paint Cruz as a crass opportunist so it can be used against him at the next national election.
It is from the Washington Post, after all.
-
Nope, just a long-time Reagan-Kemp conservative who's disgusted by Trump and his alt-right supporters. He's going to lose anyway, so I want him losing in a landslide so the rancid corpse of Trumpism will never rise again.
A Reagan-Kemp conservative who regurgitates tired liberal rhetoric that Republicans are racist xenophobes? You know very well that this is part of the Democrat playbook every year, and it isn't Trump specific. Not sure who you supported for nominee, but those same labels were applied to the forum darling Ted Cruz as well whose immigration policies such as patrolling Muslim neighborhoods were seen as even MORE draconian than Trump's.
-
Rather than run against his opponent, Lord Trumpy is running against strawmen. Against his Emmanuel Goldstein.
This will do two things, both which aid Donnie's friends - IN THE LEFT. First, it may destroy Cruz, or limit him in the short-term. Second, it forfeits the election.
WIN!
I think the Trumpbots are hysterical now because they know, deep down, they made a colossal mistake - and are frantically trying to deny it, and blame it and the consequences of it on others. On CRUZ and CONSERVATIVES.
And some of those Trumpbots ....are even cheering the GOP's loss of majority control of Congress this November. How nuckin futz is that?
-
Ted Cruz, counting on a Trump defeat in November, has positioned himself as a principled holdout, apparently convinced that refusing to endorse his party's presidential nominee will boost his 2020 stock among Republican voters, who will realize they nominated the wrong candidate this time around.
It's interesting that a number of Trump supporters on this very forum have mocked Cruz supporters for their principles.
Their alignment with the left (WaPo?) is quite strong.
-
And some of those Trumpbots ....are even cheering the GOP's loss of majority control of Congress this November. How nuckin futz is that?
If you look at their record of fully funding/supporting Barry's dreams and desires while turning their backs on or outright backstabing their voters, it doesn't make a whit of difference if we lose the house AND the Senate AND the presidency. They have done nothing different, ultimately than a Dem in those positions. they just put a show on for the rubes before the ultimate cave in to keep the illusion of two parties going.
-
A lot of conservative pundits have hitched their stars to Donald Trump. What if he loses?
And in the case of Sean Hannity, how does he look at himself in the mirror after nightly fellatio on the Trump member.
-
Most of them will blame the #NeverTrump movement, and then find the next agitation vehicle to exploit.
-
And some of those Trumpbots ....are even cheering the GOP's loss of majority control of Congress this November. How nuckin futz is that?
And some of your fellow NeverTrump supporters have criticized me for supporting and voting for the GOP which has "abandoned" you. The only ones who I see cheering against the GOP are those who can't stand its nominee.
-
If you look at their record of fully funding/supporting Barry's dreams and desires while turning their backs on or outright backstabing their voters, it doesn't make a whit of difference if we lose the house AND the Senate AND the presidency. They have done nothing different, ultimately than a Dem in those positions. they just put a show on for the rubes before the ultimate cave in to keep the illusion of two parties going.
It's a matter of degrees, Norm. How much worse will Schumer, Reid, Pelosi, etc. be back in control of Congress. If the Trumpbots even had a hope of Trump winning, one would think they would want the GOP to retain control of Congress on the hope (false or otherwise) that Trump would be able to get his agenda implemented easier under the GOP vs. under the Democrats. Right?
I'm just not seeing the logic of handing Congress back to the Democrats, no matter how inept the GOP HAS been under Obama.
-
And some of your fellow NeverTrump supporters have criticized me for supporting and voting for the GOP which has "abandoned" you.
I don't speak for others. I can only speak for myself.
The only ones who I see cheering against the GOP are those who can't stand its nominee.
Then you're not looking hard enough. I'm seeing hard-core Trump fans cheering the loss of majority control in Congress to the Democrats around the net. All presumably to 'get back at' the GOP. Again, how the Hell would that help Trump, should he win? Answer: It won't. But they're not counting on him winning anyway.....apparently.
It's looking more and more like one gigantic scam.
-
And in the case of Sean Hannity, how does he look at himself in the mirror after nightly fellatio on the Trump member.
Trump will turn on them and blame them along with everybody else. On top of that he'll tell everybody about any deals or promises he made with them.
-
Trump will turn on them and blame them along with everybody else. On top of that he'll tell everybody about any deals or promises he made with them.
And he and his ghostwriters will make a mint on a best seller.
-
The only ones who I see cheering against the GOP are those who can't stand its nominee.
You aren't looking very carefully. There are a number of us who are mourning the loss of the party we were active in supporting because "our" nominee is a corrupt leftist insider without a single conservative value.
Trump's nomination signals the end of a party I actively participated in and worked for over decades (my first active campaigning was in 1968 going door to door for Richard Nixon).
I'm not cheering against the GOP. I'm watching it throw itself into a shallow grave.
-
I have begun to get all my news info on the internet. I've stopped watching Fox altogether, as well as listening to talk radio.
It's been remarkably freeing, and I doubt I'll ever go back no matter how many "mea culpas" may follow this disastrous election.
I find I'm heading in the same direction.
I won't trust any of these media types after this election.
-
It's a matter of degrees, Norm. How much worse will Schumer, Reid, Pelosi, etc. be back in control of Congress. If the Trumpbots even had a hope of Trump winning, one would think they would want the GOP to retain control of Congress on the hope (false or otherwise) that Trump would be able to get his agenda implemented easier under the GOP vs. under the Democrats. Right?
I'm just not seeing the logic of handing Congress back to the Democrats, no matter how inept the GOP HAS been under Obama.
But whats the degree of difference between a Repub giving barry all he asks for and a Dem doing it?
Every major issue. Every one the GOP caved. It was the GOP that ran fraudulant 'investigations' into everything from global warming to Bhenghazi. It was the GOP that ran cover for the Obama admin because they refused to impeach the man because he is black.
THAT is why standing on and electing people of principle is what matters most. Now that we did not do that, we have America 2016. To reverse that, we have to stop stabbing our own backs. That does not happen without a lot of pain. But the right wing voter brought that pain on themselves with their moral cowardace.
We can either start fixing it now, or just keep pretending that some day, in some magical unicorn land and time, we;ll get around to it when it won't hurt at all.
-
I find I'm heading in the same direction.
I won't trust any of these media types after this election.
How can you trust someone who claimed to be a spokesperson for conservatism, and has sold his/her soul to a corrupt Democrat?
I mean seriously...... how can we trust any of them again??
-
It's a matter of degrees, Norm. How much worse will Schumer, Reid, Pelosi, etc. be back in control of Congress. If the Trumpbots even had a hope of Trump winning, one would think they would want the GOP to retain control of Congress on the hope (false or otherwise) that Trump would be able to get his agenda implemented easier under the GOP vs. under the Democrats. Right?
I'm just not seeing the logic of handing Congress back to the Democrats, no matter how inept the GOP HAS been under Obama.
FWIW, I think there is a real possibility that Trump could win. It's going to come down to how many Rats crossover and how many Blacks either stay home or vote for Trump. If he loses the battleground states it may be an electoral landslide, but I would bet it's going to be a 1.5 - 2.5% difference in the vote. As disgusted as we are with Trump a great many more people are disgusted with the establishment and direction of the country. In the end I think the Pubs will hold the House and be down 1-2 seats in the Senate.
No matter who wins the POTUS we are in for a rough generation. The global economy is a mess. The legalization of 25-30 million illegals will ultimately give the Rats majorities in both Houses of Congress and a lock on the Executive. The rise of unelected bureaucrats writing regulations with no oversight that then become law is expanding the tyranny of govt at a rapid rate. Things are going to get much worse before they get better.
-
But whats the degree of difference between a Repub giving barry all he asks for and a Dem doing it?
Every major issue. Every one the GOP caved. It was the GOP that ran fraudulant 'investigations' into everything from global warming to Bhenghazi. It was the GOP that ran cover for the Obama admin because they refused to impeach the man because he is black.
THAT is why standing on and electing people of principle is what matters most. Now that we did not do that, we have America 2016. To reverse that, we have to stop stabbing our own backs. That does not happen without a lot of pain. But the right wing voter brought that pain on themselves with their moral cowardace.
We can either start fixing it now, or just keep pretending that some day, in some magical unicorn land and time, we;ll get around to it when it won't hurt at all.
How do you propose to 'start fixing it now'? By handing control, willingly, over to the Democrats in Congress? We already know how bad they were, are and would be again. Much worse than the GOP RINOs have been, even. I just don't see the logic. Sorry.
-
Life goes on.
-
A Reagan-Kemp conservative who regurgitates tired liberal rhetoric that Republicans are racist xenophobes?
That's the point, genius. Republicans are NOT racist xenophobes, and that's why I fight as I must against Trumpism. Trumpism isn't Republicanism, it isn't conservatism, it's a vile caricature that makes decent, principled conservatives look bad.
I want the alt-right dead and buried as a political force going forward, precisely so that conservatives can restore themselves to a position of respect in this nation. We look like fools supporting this vile and unprincipled media creation for President - which is why I say that those who've bent over to accommodate Trump can and must be forever tainted.
In the sixties, Buckley cast out the racialists from the respectable conservative movement, and it's time to clean the filthy stables again.
-
FWIW, I think there is a real possibility that Trump could win. It's going to come down to how many Rats crossover and how many Blacks either stay home or vote for Trump. If he loses the battleground states it may be an electoral landslide, but I would bet it's going to be a 1.5 - 2.5% difference in the vote. As disgusted as we are with Trump a great many more people are disgusted with the establishment and direction of the country. In the end I think the Pubs will hold the House and be down 1-2 seats in the Senate.
No matter who wins the POTUS we are in for a rough generation. The global economy is a mess. The legalization of 25-30 million illegals will ultimately give the Rats majorities in both Houses of Congress and a lock on the Executive. The rise of unelected bureaucrats writing regulations with no oversight that then become law is expanding the tyranny of govt at a rapid rate. Things are going to get much worse before they get better.
Except for the part about "Trump could win", I can't argue with most of the rest of your argument. Especially the last paragraph. But in order for Trump to first win, he has to 'want or intend' to win. And I just don't think that desire or intention is there.
-
That's the point, genius. Republicans are NOT racist xenophobes, and that's why I fight as I must against Trumpism. Trumpism isn't Republicanism, it isn't conservatism, it's a vile caricature that makes decent, principled conservatives look bad.
I want the alt-right dead and buried as a political force going forward, precisely so that conservatives can restore themselves to a position of respect in this nation. We look like fools supporting this vile and unprincipled media creation for President - which is why I say that those who've bent over to accommodate Trump can and must be forever tainted.
In the sixties, Buckley cast out the racialists from the respectable conservative movement, and it's time to clean the filthy stables again.
What he said. :amen:
-
Regardless of what happens to Trump he will capitalize on this run and he will continue to do everything he can to make sure that the conservative movement is squashed and the GOP dies.
Exactly as Beck had predicted a few days ago; Trump will have a media outlet of his own.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/donald-trump-could-win-big-even-if-he-loses-election-n638326
-
Regardless of what happens to Trump he will capitalize on this run and he will continue to do everything he can to make sure that the conservative movement is squashed and the GOP dies.
The GOP was already dead, Trump's just dancing on the bones.
-
And some of those Trumpbots ....are even cheering the GOP's loss of majority control of Congress this November. How nuckin futz is that?
They're redefining "conservative." Conservative, now, IS Trump.
You've seen it elsewhere - on another site, where the trumpbots piled on me and accused me of being another liberal. I guess opposition to abortion and promotion of Federalism and individual liberty is now LEFT-WING.
And all Republicans are the enemy. ESPECIALLY those purported RINOs like Lee and Cruz. They're all bad...except for the few good ones that Donnie gives big sloppy kisses to.
Real conservatives. Like Paul Ryan and John McCain.
It's really distressing. Politics has been my lifelong obsession, and especially now with the world coming down around us, it'd be nice to have some reasonable discussions. Instead, I see people I thought were of the same mindset, all freaking out - like the villagers in the Salem Witch Trials, or the Germans as the Nazis grew in power.
-
FWIW, I think there is a real possibility that Trump could win. It's going to come down to how many Rats crossover and how many Blacks either stay home or vote for Trump. If he loses the battleground states it may be an electoral landslide, but I would bet it's going to be a 1.5 - 2.5% difference in the vote. As disgusted as we are with Trump a great many more people are disgusted with the establishment and direction of the country. In the end I think the Pubs will hold the House and be down 1-2 seats in the Senate.
No matter who wins the POTUS we are in for a rough generation. The global economy is a mess. The legalization of 25-30 million illegals will ultimately give the Rats majorities in both Houses of Congress and a lock on the Executive. The rise of unelected bureaucrats writing regulations with no oversight that then become law is expanding the tyranny of govt at a rapid rate. Things are going to get much worse before they get better.
Yes, that's an important point. Whoever wins, it's going to be rough. We're on a disastrously unsustainable economic trajectory, rapid big government growth momentum, firmly entrenched self-interested bureaucracies, massive levels of low-skilled and openly anti-American immigration, and all supported and enabled by an incredibly duped and dumbed-down native population. It would take an extraordinary leader and a large enough group of people willing to sacrifice and do what it would take to turn it around. Doesn't look like we have either.
Me - I think that Hillary will take us down harder and more disastrously than almost anyone else. Trump? Who knows? He could happily surprise us, he could be a Clinton-lite, or, as I think is most likely, he will be the same person he has been his whole life and do some good things and lose interest in things that don't promise a big return, (some of which may be very important.) But, almost inevitably, other events will overshadow whatever he does.
Buckle up; it's going to be a bumpy ride. I don't know that we have the option of driving anymore; riding along is our only option.
-
They're redefining "conservative." Conservative, now, IS Trump.
You've seen it elsewhere - on another site, where the trumpbots piled on me and accused me of being another liberal. I guess opposition to abortion and promotion of Federalism and individual liberty is now LEFT-WING.
And all Republicans are the enemy. ESPECIALLY those purported RINOs like Lee and Cruz. They're all bad...except for the few good ones that Donnie gives big sloppy kisses to.
Real conservatives. Like Paul Ryan and John McCain.
It's really distressing. Politics has been my lifelong obsession, and especially now with the world coming down around us, it'd be nice to have some reasonable discussions. Instead, I see people I thought were of the same mindset, all freaking out - like the villagers in the Salem Witch Trials, or the Germans as the Nazis grew in power.
Ironic, isn't it. Even formerly detested RINOs like Chris Christie are now "embraced" by the same folks that were ranting and raving against them previously. But now that Saint Don has anointed them and blessed them with his version of holy water (don't ask).....they're just as special as he is....and now worthy of the adoration of the Trump fans. Simply ah-mazing.
If you had told me 5-10 years ago that we would be witnessing all of this surreal/unreal stuff going on....I would have called you worse than a liar and wouldn't have believed it. Still hard to believe and I'm seeing it with my own eyes.
-
And in the case of Sean Hannity, how does he look at himself in the mirror after nightly fellatio on the Trump member.
Hannity. I kind of feel sorry for him.
First, he was promoted WAY beyond his level of competence. He's not a political thinker; he's a CHEERLEADER. He's a roofer turned disc-jockey who broke into the Talk Radio game at the right time.
And he got a VERY-good paying job on FNC.
And...as will happen when your mentor and boss is older than you...his mentor and boss, Ailes, retired. The owner, Murdoch, is old and feeble and his Leftist kids are now in charge.
Hannity was given his marching orders by the new management. And as we all know...when you're being paid by someone above you, you're literally in his pay.
So...Hannity, with his expensive Long Island home and his expensive Southern Belle wife, and his bills and his lifestyle...got with the program; started shaking the pompoms and doing the cheers.
Except that it's now becoming obvious that Trump is not only left of Shrub; he's a whole-lot less intelligent. He doesn't HAVE any political views or convictions!
And for his own purposes, he's turning on conservatives. Because his own purposes don't include winning.
And Murdoch's kids know it. And that's the plan.
And Hannity, to keep the checks coming a few more months, has destroyed his own credibility. He should have done the honorable thing and told the young Murdochs to go screw...and found something else to do. Limbaugh is not far from retirement; Hannity could become a permanent guest-host for those days when the golf course beckons Rush...
But no more. For that matter, Limbaugh has his own credibility problem now. But that's another story.
Moral of this saga: LIES...DIVIDE.
-
Yes, that's an important point. Whoever wins, it's going to be rough. We're on a disastrously unsustainable economic trajectory, rapid big government growth momentum, firmly entrenched self-interested bureaucracies, massive levels of low-skilled and openly anti-American immigration, and all supported and enabled by an incredibly duped and dumbed-down native population. It would take an extraordinary leader and a large enough group of people willing to sacrifice and do what it would take to turn it around. Doesn't look like we have either.
Me - I think that Hillary will take us down harder and more disastrously than almost anyone else. Trump? Who knows? He could happily surprise us, he could be a Clinton-lite, or, as I think is most likely, he will be the same person he has been his whole life and do some good things and lose interest in things that don't promise a big return, (some of which may be very important.) But, almost inevitably, other events will overshadow whatever he does.
Buckle up; it's going to be a bumpy ride. I don't know that we have the option of driving anymore; riding along is our only option.
It's going to be more than a bumpy ride. Clinton plans on bringing in over 1,000,000 Muslims into this country; the SCOTUS will be tilted left and voting rights will ensure that the GOP will never hold office again. Say good-bye to a two party system and the Constitution and hello to Socialism.
-
It's going to be more than a bumpy ride. Clinton plans on bringing in over 1,000,000 Muslims into this country; the SCOTUS will be tilted left and voting rights will ensure that the GOP will never hold office again. Say good-bye to a two party system and the Constitution and hello to Socialism.
There's no reason to believe that Trump won't do exactly the same. I haven't forgotten his reflexive first comment on the syrians. "We have to let them in, they're in a living hell"
I'm sorry Trump fans chose to betray America but they'll get to choke on the situation they created as surely as we who warned against it will.
I won't be selling my soul for a "man" who is sure to lose anyway.
-
Hannity. I kind of feel sorry for him.
First, he was promoted WAY beyond his level of competence. He's not a political thinker; he's a CHEERLEADER. He's a roofer turned disc-jockey who broke into the Talk Radio game at the right time.
Hannity has turned into the mirror image of Chrissy Mattthews at MSNBC.
-
There's no reason to believe that Trump won't do exactly the same. I haven't forgotten his reflexive first comment on the syrians. "We have to let them in, they're in a living hell"
I'm sorry Trump fans chose to betray America but they'll get to choke on the situation they created as surely as we who warned against it will.
I won't be selling my soul for a "man" who is sure to lose anyway.
Nope, totally disagree with you on this point. HRC will do whatever she thinks advances her; DT has shown himself to be somewhat responsive to public opinion. And, he's not ideologically driven - she is, and it is a globalist, anti-American ideology.
-
Ironic, isn't it. Even formerly detested RINOs like Chris Christie are now "embraced"
Disgusting, is't it? They support a lifelong New York liberal like Trump and his liberal cronies while attacking any conservative who doesn't support him.
Conservatism in America isn't dead. But with so many jumping on the liberal Trump train it will be a long time before it recovers from the damage he (and they) have done.
-
The GOP was already dead, Trump's just dancing on the bones.
Not true.
It was moribund for sure, but we had hope of reviving it with a principled conservative as a presidential nominee.
It was Trump and his loyalists who stabbed the party in the heart for all time with no chance of revival.
With his stereotypical mockery of Conservatism, the left's image of who we are is sealed in the minds of the American people.
Because a Democrat is the Republican nominee, there is no chance of reviving the party.
And before now, as desperate as it may have seemed, there was still hope.
-
Ironic, isn't it. Even formerly detested RINOs like Chris Christie are now "embraced" by the same folks that were ranting and raving against them previously.
Not just RINOs but far left democrats like Jesse Jackson now.
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,222652.0.html
-
Disgusting, is't it? They support a lifelong New York liberal like Trump and his liberal cronies while attacking any conservative who doesn't support him.
Conservatism in America isn't dead. But with so many jumping on the liberal Trump train it will be a long time before it recovers from the damage he (and they) have done.
It may not be dead (yet).....but it sure as hell is on life-support and is in the process of being killed by these same idiots that champion the ones trying to kill it.
-
Not just RINOs but far left democrats like Jesse Jackson now.
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,222652.0.html
Right. Now, officially (I guess) called.....
TrumpoCrats.
-
It may not be dead (yet).....but it sure as hell is on life-support and is in the process of being killed by these same idiots that champion the ones trying to kill it.
Conservatism isn't dead, but the GOP as a conduit for Conservatism is.
-
A lot of pundits hitched their stars to Mitt Romney. What if he had lost?
A lot of pundits hitched their stars to John McCain. What if he had lost?
A lot of pundits hitched their stars to John Kerry. What if he had lost?
A lot of pundits hitched their stars to Al Gore. What if he had lost?
You never saw the kind of flat-out idol worship you have seen with the Trump base under those four. All four of those types were milquetoast moderates. Trump is proposing a bold, fundamental transformation (and not for the better).
You really have to go back to George McGovern to see that kind of mile-deep-but-an-inch-wide support you're seeing with Trump now from a major party nominee. Naturally, the McGovernites haven't been taken seriously since then.
-
You never saw the kind of flat-out idol worship you have seen with the Trump base under those four. All four of those types were milquetoast moderates. Trump is proposing a bold, fundamental transformation (and not for the better).
You really have to go back to George McGovern to see that kind of mile-deep-but-an-inch-wide support you're seeing with Trump now from a major party nominee. Naturally, the McGovernites haven't been taken seriously since then.
Obama is McGovern on steroids.
-
Ironic, isn't it. Even formerly detested RINOs like Chris Christie are now "embraced" by the same folks that were ranting and raving against them previously. But now that Saint Don has anointed them and blessed them with his version of holy water (don't ask).....they're just as special as he is....and now worthy of the adoration of the Trump fans.
They will wear orange dots on their foreheads and worshipful celebrate the high holy Trump days.
-
I wonder if some of the pundits on the right were offered something, like anchor, on the new Trump news network if they helped him win?
Now that it seems unlikely, these same pundits we use to listen to are now lashing out at us, as if we were the ones making the bad deal.
-
Nope, totally disagree with you on this point. HRC will do whatever she thinks advances her; DT has shown himself to be somewhat responsive to public opinion.
They're about equal actually. Trump is probably the most selfish, self-centered person and egotistical person alive.
-
They're about equal actually. Trump is probably the most selfish, self-centered person and egotistical person alive.
Show me a politician who isn't selfish and self-centered and egotistical.
-
They're about equal actually. Trump is probably the most selfish, self-centered person and egotistical person alive.
Really, @geronl? You really think he's worse than that fine example of womanhood, Hillary Clinton? The one who has scandal after scandal at the taxpayer's expense, Loral, Whitewater, State Department pay-for-play, rent-out-the-Lincoln Bedroom to the highest bidder, fired from Watergate, Servergate, etc., and has a long trail of dead bodies all closely related to her? The person most directly responsible for Benghazi, and maybe Libya? The one who proudly employs a Muslim Brotherhood operator as her confidant and main squeeze? Donald Trump is a piker compared to Hillary!
-
I think a lot of people are recognizing that he was right and fear for what it means for themselves.
Yes! The immediate reaction, fueled by Trump zombies, was that Cruz had made a mistake. What mistake? Sticking to principles is a mistake? Voting your conscience is a mistake?
Trump supporters, on the other hand, are forced into pretzel like contortions to justify Trump's insanity. Just yesterday, Chris Christie went on a playground rant about who started the race war. She did, he did. Embarrassing.
-
You really have to go back to George McGovern to see that kind of mile-deep-but-an-inch-wide support you're seeing with Trump now from a major party nominee. Naturally, the McGovernites haven't been taken seriously since then.
I disagree. McGovern lost big, but the leftists who supported him remained influential within the Dem party and have influenced its leftward drift ever since. Same thing with the Goldwaterites who tasted defeat in '64, but later formed the backbone of the movement conservatism that led to Ronald Reagan.
But Trumpism is a racialist aberration that cannot be permitted to supplant genuine conservatism.
-
There is a losing candidate in every election and many people, pundit or not, hitch themselves to every losing candidate. This is just fear mongering.
I sense that you have reconciled yourself to a Trump loss but don't think Trump support will come back to bite anyone.
Trump support has turned a lot of people into strange beings who refuse to face facts and who make ridiculous statements in order to support Trump.
The only thing they have going for them is the short memory of the public. No one seems to remember 'plugs Biden' or 'plagiarizer Biden.' It's now good ole affable Biden.
-
A lot of pundits hitched their stars to Mitt Romney. What if he had lost?
A lot of pundits hitched their stars to John McCain. What if he had lost?
A lot of pundits hitched their stars to John Kerry. What if he had lost?
A lot of pundits hitched their stars to Al Gore. What if he had lost?
Pretty pathetic. Those pundits did not make absolute idiots out of themselves by attempting to defend the indefensible. There were genuine things to like about Romney and McCain, especially in view of their opposition. Kerry and algore, not so much, but nothing compares, even remotely, to what the trumpettes have to do.
-
Trump love brings many people down. It seems the unethical rubs off......
And not just the unethical part. The unhinged part has also, apparently, rubbed off on them.
-
In a way, I wish Trump would win. Once his rabid followers finally realize he's the wrong man for the job, they will be begging for Ted Cruz or someone like him to lead them out of darkness. If Tru,p loses, his followers will just blame Cruz, the media and anyone who didn't vote for Trump. Heck, even now they have their scapegoats ready should Trump lose.
I've briefly entertained that idea. The Problem is that Trump zombies will never admit that he is the wrong man or that they made a mistake. They have corrupted their own souls too much for that. They will continue to excuse and explain every stupid move he makes.
They've done it so far, what makes anyone think they will stop.
-
I've briefly entertained that idea. The Problem is that Trump zombies will never admit that he is the wrong man or that they made a mistake. They have corrupted their own souls too much for that. They will continue to excuse and explain every stupid move he makes.
They've done it so far, what makes anyone think they will stop.
Still, he beat everybody in the race, because none of them were good enough. Yes, each had their fanbois, but none of them could gain enough traction to win. It was a poor field, and it paved the way for a guy like Trump to win, because like it or not, he touched on the issues the others feared to tread. Now he may be a poor candidate, but that says more about what the state of the GOP is more than anything.
-
And not just the unethical part. The unhinged part has also, apparently, rubbed off on them.
True enough. Too many, at least. Complete transformation of personalities. It's sad.....
-
I sense that you have reconciled yourself to a Trump loss but don't think Trump support will come back to bite anyone.
That's what got to change. I have no interest in reconciling with Trump supporters. Conservatives could have taken the Presidency and Congress this year, and instead will likely lose it all because of Trump's scamming and demagoguery. Those who've supported this man and been responsible for his rise must be held to account.
-
Still, he beat everybody in the race, because none of them were good enough. Yes, each had their fanbois, but none of them could gain enough traction to win. It was a poor field, and it paved the way for a guy like Trump to win, because like it or not, he touched on the issues the others feared to tread. Now he may be a poor candidate, but that says more about what the state of the GOP is more than anything.
Completely disagree.
The problem was not with the quality of the field, but with the quantity. There were a number of reasonable prospects, some very strong.......... the strongest field, in fact that we have had in a very long time.
It's just that the rational, conservative vote was subdivided, while the angry, non-thinking vote gravitated toward Trump.
And it's not that he "may be a poor candidate." He is the absolutely worst candidate in our entire lifetimes.
That's why so many conservatives can't vote for him. He has no integrity nor virtue and he has no conservative policy positions.
-
JustPassinThru made some excellent points about Hannity. Even before Hannity went Trump, he seemed like a lightweight.
However, I take exception with anyone who tosses out the word 'shrub' in reference to the Last Good President. It seems to have become popular now to deride George W. Bush. It is not right. He made mistakes, most of which become more apparent in hindsight but which seemed right at the time.
He is a good man and a good American and tossing him aside may be temporarily satisfying but is wrong, wrong, wrong.
-
Still, he beat everybody in the race, because none of them were good enough. Yes, each had their fanbois, but none of them could gain enough traction to win. It was a poor field, and it paved the way for a guy like Trump to win, because like it or not, he touched on the issues the others feared to tread. Now he may be a poor candidate, but that says more about what the state of the GOP is more than anything.
Disagree. Trump won because of the convoluted primary season which should be reformed immediately.. Most people were against Trump even in the early primaries. But with 17 candidates, his opposition was divided and diluted. Trump might have been the only candidate a lot of people have ever heard of. He still lost almost 2/3 of the vote in the early primaries. Ted Cruz was a virtual unknown to most people outside of Texas at that point.
The Media elected Trump because every word he spoke was broadcast nationally. He had an early appeal that even I felt because it was refreshing to hear someone so unabashedly politically incorrect. Thinking people immediately realized the downside of Trump. The way, way downside.
Without his name recognition and the free ads by the press, Trump would never have won.
-
JustPassinThru made some excellent points about Hannity. Even before Hannity went Trump, he seemed like a lightweight.
However, I take exception with anyone who tosses out the word 'shrub' in reference to the Last Good President. It seems to have become popular now to deride George W. Bush. It is not right. He made mistakes, most of which become more apparent in hindsight but which seemed right at the time.
He is a good man and a good American and tossing him aside may be temporarily satisfying but is wrong, wrong, wrong.
Compared to the "choices" we have now (extreme sarc there)...... Bush was wonderful. And in answer to his question.....
Yes, George. Every day now in this Obamanation, fundamentally transformed into the TrumpoCrat-Hillary nation.
(https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M663e0833cb321beae063a5b2f9023deco0&w=299&h=225&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0)
-
Disagree. Trump won because of the convoluted primary season which should be reformed immediately.. Most people were against Trump even in the early primaries. But with 17 candidates, his opposition was divided and diluted. Trump might have been the only candidate a lot of people have ever heard of. He still lost almost 2/3 of the vote in the early primaries. Ted Cruz was a virtual unknown to most people outside of Texas at that point.
First of all, Preibus should have been canned the day after Romney lost. If I ran the RNC, I would select a committee of five people. Anybody who wants to run for President, would go up in front of this committee and state their case for running. The committee will then select the best three, and that will be your GOP candidates, no more than that. And those three should cross the political range, one Right candidate, one Center-Right, and the other one, even closer to the Center. From there, they can debate until the cows come home. But no more of these ridiculous debates with 10+ people.
-
And it's not that he "may be a poor candidate." He is the absolutely worst candidate in our entire lifetimes.
That's your opinion, unfortunately not enough saw it that way. That's Democracy for you.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/xLYgQkc.png)
-
Nope, totally disagree with you on this point. HRC will do whatever she thinks advances her; DT has shown himself to be somewhat responsive to public opinion. And, he's not ideologically driven - she is, and it is a globalist, anti-American ideology.
I don't want a populist leader that does whatever the whim of the public opinion is that day. That's not what leaders of a Republic do.
-
It may not be dead (yet).....but it sure as hell is on life-support and is in the process of being killed by these same idiots that champion the ones trying to kill it.
Conservatism isn't dead. It will never die.
Ideas that work, never go away - they're just forgotten, sometimes for millennia. But they're reality; and reality is a stubborn thing.
This is just shake-out time...those who ride bandwagons are jumping; and those who have convictions, those who recognize the difference between CORRECT and MOST POPULAR...those two groups are separating.
-
That's your opinion, unfortunately not enough saw it that way. That's Democracy for you.
Except that we live in a representative Republic, don't we?
As for whether or not it is my "opinion," can you factually refute his low character, his immorality, his unethical business practices, his liberalism, his close association with the Clintons?? (That's just naming a few of his issues).
It's not really opinion is it, that he's not Conservative, and lives an unprincipled life?
The fact that a third of Republicans with a smattering of leftists thrown in either were ignorant of his policies and character, or simply didn't care..... and the fact that a very large Republican field (actual Republicans, that is) made the angry minority a plurality may be "democracy," but it also means that Conservatives and actually any legitimate Republican, have no one representing us in the two major parties.
-
I don't want a populist leader that does whatever the whim of the public opinion is that day. That's not what leaders of a Republic do.
Good grief, we know that! I don't want a "populist leader that does whatever the whim of the public opinion is that day"! But, much more than that I don't want the efficient and downright evil Hillary Clinton in that spot. I'm not arguing FOR DT, I'm arguing against HRC.
We have some absolutely pitiful choices, but whatever we do, we'd best make sure that the Clinton Crime Family doesn't get an opportunity to destroy us beyond recovering.
-
They have completely detached themselves from any link to conservatism at all and have drifted away from its orbit without any maneuvering thrusters, but they don't seem to care yet. Hannity, Limbaugh, Ingraham, Coulter and others are going to have a really hard time trying to pretend they are still conservatives after this debacle. They aren't and they have proven it.
I am not sure how people who followed them into Trumpism can follow them back toward a semblance of conservatism. Will they pretend that Trumpism never happened once he is history?
-
Good grief, we know that! I don't want a "populist leader that does whatever the whim of the public opinion is that day"! But, much more than that I don't want the efficient and downright evil Hillary Clinton in that spot. I'm not arguing FOR DT, I'm arguing against HRC.
We have some absolutely pitiful choices, but whatever we do, we'd best make sure that the Clinton Crime Family doesn't get an opportunity to destroy us beyond recovering.
Unfortunately, we can't do that because Trump truly is a stalking horse who's enabling the Clinton Crime Family to get back in the WH.
I can't enable it one way or the other...... either by voting Clinton, or voting Trump.
-
Not just RINOs but far left democrats like Jesse Jackson now.
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,222652.0.html
No, not now. You could try reading the thing.
-
Unfortunately, we can't do that because Trump truly is a stalking horse who's enabling the Clinton Crime Family to get back in the WH.
I can't enable it one way or the other...... either by voting Clinton, or voting Trump.
@musiclady, with all due respect, that's a long outside possibility. The chances of HRC doing horrible things in office is dead certain.
-
They have completely detached themselves from any link to conservatism at all and have drifted away from its orbit without any maneuvering thrusters, but they don't seem to care yet. Hannity, Limbaugh, Ingraham, Coulter and others are going to have a really hard time trying to pretend they are still conservatives after this debacle. They aren't and they have proven it.
I am not sure how people who followed them into Trumpism can follow them back toward a semblance of conservatism. Will they pretend that Trumpism never happened once he is history?
Trump, himself, is going to make sure we don't forget the damage he's done to the country and the political process.
While Rush, Hannity, Ingraham, et al, may pretend that they didn't betray every conservative principle they claimed to believe in, the specter of Democrat narcissist Donald Trump will live on.
He's not going to disappear once his mission to get the Clintons back in the WH is accomplished.
The spokesmen for Conservatism who have revealed that they aren't what they claimed, aren't going to be able to revive their reputations.
-
@musiclady, with all due respect, that's a long outside possibility. The chances of HRC doing horrible things in office is dead certain.
I believe the same thing is true of Trump.
He has no principles. He has no ethics. He has no knowledge of the Constitution.
There is little to no possibility that he will do anything better than Clinton will do.
-
Trump, himself, is going to make sure we don't forget the damage he's done to the country and the political process.
While Rush, Hannity, Ingraham, et al, may pretend that they didn't betray every conservative principle they claimed to believe in, the specter of Democrat narcissist Donald Trump will live on.
He's not going to disappear once his mission to get the Clintons back in the WH is accomplished.
The spokesmen for Conservatism who have revealed that they aren't what they claimed, aren't going to be able to revive their reputations.
Even the majority of people who cast a vote for Trump seem to think he is scum. I wonder how their audiences will judge them? Harshly I would hope. They can no longer claim any mantle of conservatism, so what appeal do they have once this race is over?
-
I believe the same thing is true of Trump.
He has no principles. He has no ethics. He has no knowledge of the Constitution.
There is little to no possibility that he will do anything better than Clinton will do.
He has no knowledge or respect of the Constitution. And it is very unlikely he would be any better than the woman with which he shares a liberal ideology.
-
Even the majority of people who cast a vote for Trump seem to think he is scum. I wonder how their audiences will judge them? Harshly I would hope. They can no longer claim any mantle of conservatism, so what appeal do they have once this race is over?
I suppose turncoats have appeal to someone, somewhere. :shrug:
Just not to people who actually ARE Conservative, and believe that Conservatism is the only solution to the mess we're in.
I'm sure they won't talk much about it, but they have to have lost a large part of their audience.
-
and the respect of that audience.
How can anyone who embraced Trump wholeheartedly as messiah go back to being pro-life, pro-liberty, pro-constitution as if they hadn't abandoned it for a charlatan?
They should check out Robert Tilton, who followed the false messiah of money instead of Jesus.
-
(http://i.imgur.com/xLYgQkc.png)
I think Trump dumped Sarah after that first disastrous speech. He can't say so publicly. I wonder what he promised her.
-
First of all, Preibus should have been canned the day after Romney lost. If I ran the RNC, I would select a committee of five people. Anybody who wants to run for President, would go up in front of this committee and state their case for running. The committee will then select the best three, and that will be your GOP candidates, no more than that. And those three should cross the political range, one Right candidate, one Center-Right, and the other one, even closer to the Center. From there, they can debate until the cows come home. But no more of these ridiculous debates with 10+ people.
That's not the worst idea I've ever heard ... but it's close. Why not just appoint a president.
-
and the respect of that audience.
How can anyone who embraced Trump wholeheartedly as messiah go back to being pro-life, pro-liberty, pro-constitution as if they hadn't abandoned it for a charlatan?
They should check out Robert Tilton, who followed the false messiah of money instead of Jesus.
Simple answer. They can't.
-
I believe the same thing is true of Trump.
He has no principles. He has no ethics. He has no knowledge of the Constitution.
There is little to no possibility that he will do anything better than Clinton will do.
Some of us, me included, have accused Trumpers of being fact free. Given that, we have an obligation to make sure our arguments are not.
So, let's look at the facts, what do we know about HRC and DT that would have some bearing on our decisions as to their characters and future actions?
They are about the same age, grew up in the same America.
DT went to Wharton and then into business. HRC went to Wellsley and Yale and then went into law and government. She wrote her thesis on Saul Alinsky and appears to have established a close relationship with over their shared interest in subverting and overturning the government of the United States, to the point that I have seen her referred to as "Alinsky's daughter". DT bought and sold properties and promoted the Trump name. DT appears to not have an established ideology.
HRC was on the impeachment inquiry staff for Watergate, and according to her then-boss was fired for lying. Apparently DT was buying, selling, promoting, marrying and fathering during this time.
HRC also married and according to one of her husband's long-term lovers, chose to have abortions during this time and had her one child as a political calculation.
DT - ran around on wife #1 and married wife #2 even though he was "bored with her". Established some successful businesses, declared business bankruptcies 4 times. Became a reality TV show star. Married a Slovenian model and has thus far managed to remain married.
HRC during the same time period: Whitewater...Vince Foster...Tyson Chicken....cattle futures....Travelgate...FBI gate....Benghazi...Juanita Broaderick and many others...Monica's War...Loral...Ron Brown...innumerable dead people...IRS abuses....Libya....Syria....Chinese fund-raisers and bundlers...Muslim Brotherhood...Clinton Foundation pay for play...and on and on and on.
Hmmm. Neither one of them qualified to be president, in my opinion. But, equivalent? I just can't see it.
-
How do you propose to 'start fixing it now'? By handing control, willingly, over to the Democrats in Congress? We already know how bad they were, are and would be again. Much worse than the GOP RINOs have been, even. I just don't see the logic. Sorry.
You start by doing what we should have done all along. Voting for what we actually believe in as conservtives.
I don't care what excuse you (the general 'you') come up with. you can rehash the same fearmongering 'The dem is the devil' rethoric till the moon turns to cheese. It does not in any way change the simple F A C T that you will NEVER stop liberalism until you stop electing liberals. If you (the general you, remember) want to make the arguement that 'this time is world ending' then I put to you that every election to date someone says that and every election to date someone says 'next time but not today.'
Today is all there is. Had people lestened to people saying the things I say 10 freaking years ago instead of fear voting, the Dem Party would be competing with the Green Party for the barking moonbat vote. Instead, they made excuses, fear voted and created the world we live in today. You did it before. I did it before. We all did itbefore. The difference is some learned the lessons of their history and some choose to dream of magic dust and unicorns.
Either you vote for what you believe in or you don't. A child knows that if he asks for Chocolate ice cream, he isn't going to get steak and caviar instead.
-
I think Trump dumped Sarah after that first disastrous speech. He can't say so publicly. I wonder what he promised her.
She made other speeches for him too. Remember when Todd got injured and she still popped in to speak before flying to see her injured husband?
Sometime during the later primary she was less and less prominent and of course did not go to the convention.
-
Some of us, me included, have accused Trumpers of being fact free. Given that, we have an obligation to make sure our arguments are not.
So, let's look at the facts, what do we know about HRC and DT that would have some bearing on our decisions as to their characters and future actions?
They are about the same age, grew up in the same America.
DT went to Wharton and then into business. HRC went to Wellsley and Yale and then went into law and government. She wrote her thesis on Saul Alinsky and appears to have established a close relationship with over their shared interest in subverting and overturning the government of the United States, to the point that I have seen her referred to as "Alinsky's daughter". DT bought and sold properties and promoted the Trump name. DT appears to not have an established ideology.
HRC was on the impeachment inquiry staff for Watergate, and according to her then-boss was fired for lying. Apparently DT was buying, selling, promoting, marrying and fathering during this time.
HRC also married and according to one of her husband's long-term lovers, chose to have abortions during this time and had her one child as a political calculation.
DT - ran around on wife #1 and married wife #2 even though he was "bored with her". Established some successful businesses, declared business bankruptcies 4 times. Became a reality TV show star. Married a Slovenian model and has thus far managed to remain married.
HRC during the same time period: Whitewater...Vince Foster...Tyson Chicken....cattle futures....Travelgate...FBI gate....Benghazi...Juanita Broaderick and many others...Monica's War...Loral...Ron Brown...innumerable dead people...IRS abuses....Libya....Syria....Chinese fund-raisers and bundlers...Muslim Brotherhood...Clinton Foundation pay for play...and on and on and on.
Hmmm. Neither one of them qualified to be president, in my opinion. But, equivalent? I just can't see it.
I know the facts about Hillary Clinton.
That's why it's so significant that many of us who are thinking, educated people do not see a qualitative difference between the two.
No matter how bad Clinton is, there is no empirical evidence that Trump will do anything different. He has the same political views and lack of ethics.
The bottom line for me is that neither deserves my vote. Neither will represent my views, nor my ethics at all. Not Clinton. Not Trump.
I appreciate your making the effort to try to convince me that Trump won't be as bad, but you haven't provided any new information with which I am convinced to change my mind.
I'm sorry. I respect you completely. But I respectfully disagree with your conclusion. I also respect your right to reluctantly vote for a candidate who doesn't represent you in the least, so that Hillary doesn't win. I just can't agree with that decision.
And I've thought about it more than you may know. My conscience just won't allow it.
-
I know the facts about Hillary Clinton.
That's why it's so significant that many of us who are thinking, educated people do not see a qualitative difference between the two.
No matter how bad Clinton is, there is no empirical evidence that Trump will do anything different. He has the same political views and lack of ethics.
The bottom line for me is that neither deserves my vote. Neither will represent my views, nor my ethics at all. Not Clinton. Not Trump.
I appreciate your making the effort to try to convince me that Trump won't be as bad, but you haven't provided any new information with which I am convinced to change my mind.
I'm sorry. I respect you completely. But I respectfully disagree with your conclusion. I also respect your right to reluctantly vote for a candidate who doesn't represent you in the least, so that Hillary doesn't win. I just can't agree with that decision.
And I've thought about it more than you may know. My conscience just won't allow it.
OK, MusicLady. We've communicated clearly and respectfully, and that means a lot.
God help us, regardless of which way this shakes out.
-
OK, MusicLady. We've communicated clearly and respectfully, and that means a lot.
God help us, regardless of which way this shakes out.
Amen and AMEN!! It should never have come to this. **nononono*
-
I wasn't aware of that particular Sean BS, but he was already 'dead to me' due to his constant fawning over and paving the way for The Don. It figures that he also has become unethical and underhanded though....now that he's hanging with and stumping for Trump.
He's been dead to me (for all intensive porpoises) since the McCain campaign, as has FOX, and talk radio generally. Since the Romney campaign I haven't listened at all, to any of it... To the degree that I have eschewed CableTV, and put my radio back to a country music station.
Now I get *all* my content (with the exception of music and local news on the radio) from the internet - I simply bought an old Vista era computer with HDMI and Blu-Ray DVD for $25, installed a wireless N USB dongle, and added a wireless keyboard. My TV is now just a monster computer monitor. Now my media is served in a true ala-carte fashion, and I couldn't be happier.
You can't imagine the difference in my blood pressure.
And I might add, part and parcel with that: I have had to view very, very little of Trump. It is worth it, if for no other reason, just for that.
-
How does someone who preaches "borders, language, culture" for years flip on a dime and start saying "well, we need someone to mow the lawn and sweep the floor..." and expect to have any credibility left? These people obviously have zero shame.
-
I removed Fox News from my channel lineup back in 2004 when I heard Bill O'Reilly, a man who never served a day in the military, say combat veterans (the Swift Boat Vets) had no right to be heard. A man who never served a single day in the military yet is all over the media said those who fought and bled for this country have no right to be heard? FUBO.
I find Hannity as annoying to listen to as Hillary.
-
My TV is now just a monster computer monitor. Now my media is served in a true ala-carte fashion, and I couldn't be happier.
I like watching Asian drama on my laptop. Who needs TV?
-
I like watching Asian drama on my laptop. Who needs TV?
Me too. Are you watching "W"? IMHO it's the best KDrama I've seen.
-
Me too. Are you watching "W"? IMHO it's the best KDrama I've seen.
I just finished "Doctors" with Park Shin-hye and am still slogging through with "Monster". I have decided to suspend my watching of the Chinese "Ice Fantasy" for now and am about to start "W" and maybe "Uncontrollably Fond" although it seems run of the mill after one episode.
-
A Reagan-Kemp conservative who regurgitates tired liberal rhetoric that Republicans are racist xenophobes? You know very well that this is part of the Democrat playbook every year, and it isn't Trump specific. Not sure who you supported for nominee, but those same labels were applied to the forum darling Ted Cruz as well whose immigration policies such as patrolling Muslim neighborhoods were seen as even MORE draconian than Trump's.
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.
---
We had a problem with bigots in the GOP. Buckley drove them out.
Now the same people Buckley unceremoniously booted from the GOP have wormed themselves back in.
Buchanon is a perfect example.
-
That's the point, genius. Republicans are NOT racist xenophobes, and that's why I fight as I must against Trumpism. Trumpism isn't Republicanism, it isn't conservatism, it's a vile caricature that makes decent, principled conservatives look bad.
I want the alt-right dead and buried as a political force going forward, precisely so that conservatives can restore themselves to a position of respect in this nation. We look like fools supporting this vile and unprincipled media creation for President - which is why I say that those who've bent over to accommodate Trump can and must be forever tainted.
In the sixties, Buckley cast out the racialists from the respectable conservative movement, and it's time to clean the filthy stables again.
You beat me too it. And said it much better, too.
-
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.
---
We had a problem with bigots in the GOP. Buckley drove them out.
Now the same people Buckley unceremoniously booted from the GOP have wormed themselves back in.
Buchanon is a perfect example.
You know your history well, HJ. And this is why I want Trump to lose in a landslide. To cleanse and make the political landscape conducive for conservatives again.
-
They will wear orange dots on their foreheads and worshipful celebrate the high holy Trump days.
And offer their virgin daughters for the Orange One's prima nochta rights.
-
I like watching Asian drama on my laptop. Who needs TV?
Haven't ventured there - Most everything that is on TV is available online, one way or another - My biggest problem now is series binging - Just finished Fringe (2008)... Five seasons worth in about a couple weeks... It's hard to stop between episodes because they always end with a cliffhanger, and since the next episode is immediately available...
But it's all out there, to include new series episodes and movies...
-
Really, @geronl? You really think he's worse than that fine example of womanhood, Hillary Clinton? The one who has scandal after scandal at the taxpayer's expense, Loral, Whitewater, State Department pay-for-play, rent-out-the-Lincoln Bedroom to the highest bidder, fired from Watergate, Servergate, etc., and has a long trail of dead bodies all closely related to her? The person most directly responsible for Benghazi, and maybe Libya? The one who proudly employs a Muslim Brotherhood operator as her confidant and main squeeze? Donald Trump is a piker compared to Hillary!
Who paid for that? Trump donations, for one...
-
Completely disagree.
The problem was not with the quality of the field, but with the quantity. There were a number of reasonable prospects, some very strong.......... the strongest field, in fact that we have had in a very long time.
It's just that the rational, conservative vote was subdivided, while the angry, non-thinking vote gravitated toward Trump.
And it's not that he "may be a poor candidate." He is the absolutely worst candidate in our entire lifetimes.
That's why so many conservatives can't vote for him. He has no integrity nor virtue and he has no conservative policy positions.
I'd agree with that. I think that nearly all of the GOP voters could have stomached any of the other candidates. That's not to say that many would have been pleased if Jeb Bush (for example) had taken it... but GOP voters could have taken a deep breath, sighed, and said, "I can vote for him in November."
-
Disagree. Trump won because of the convoluted primary season which should be reformed immediately.. Most people were against Trump even in the early primaries. But with 17 candidates, his opposition was divided and diluted. Trump might have been the only candidate a lot of people have ever heard of. He still lost almost 2/3 of the vote in the early primaries. Ted Cruz was a virtual unknown to most people outside of Texas at that point.
The Media elected Trump because every word he spoke was broadcast nationally. He had an early appeal that even I felt because it was refreshing to hear someone so unabashedly politically incorrect. Thinking people immediately realized the downside of Trump. The way, way downside.
Without his name recognition and the free ads by the press, Trump would never have won.
The GOP needs to seriously vet candidates (for GOP bona fides) and establish a maximum quota per Presidential election cycle. (I'd like to say conservative bona fides, but we're talking about a political party, not an ideology)
-
He's been dead to me (for all intensive porpoises) since the McCain campaign, as has FOX, and talk radio generally. Since the Romney campaign I haven't listened at all, to any of it... To the degree that I have eschewed CableTV, and put my radio back to a country music station.
Now I get *all* my content (with the exception of music and local news on the radio) from the internet - I simply bought an old Vista era computer with HDMI and Blu-Ray DVD for $25, installed a wireless N USB dongle, and added a wireless keyboard. My TV is now just a monster computer monitor. Now my media is served in a true ala-carte fashion, and I couldn't be happier.
You can't imagine the difference in my blood pressure.
And I might add, part and parcel with that: I have had to view very, very little of Trump. It is worth it, if for no other reason, just for that.
Kudos to you for your ingenuity.
I don't currently have blood pressure problems....but then....
this year ain't over yet. :laugh:
-
It was a poor field, and it paved the way for a guy like Trump to win, because like it or not, he touched on the issues the others feared to tread. Now he may be a poor candidate, but that says more about what the state of the GOP is more than anything.
@dfwgator
No, it was a good field, and one that showed the weakness of a First Past the Post system. Voting systems designed to get the most acceptable candidate, such as ranked or others, would not have yielded the unpopular Trump.
-
How does someone who preaches "borders, language, culture" for years flip on a dime and start saying "well, we need someone to mow the lawn and sweep the floor..." and expect to have any credibility left? These people obviously have zero shame.
Was Hannity preaching "borders, language, culture"...?
Because that's Michael Weiner Savage's line. As it happens, it's correct - but Savage Weiner holds his finger to the wind and figures out which way the crowd is running the better to be at the head of it. Back ten years ago, when gas prices were rising, Savage Weiner ignored FACTS about WHY, and instead thumped the tub for GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION and criminal prosecution.
All he is is an agitator. He just tries, or tried, to agitate the wrong group. Informed people don't take to agitation.
And rambling monologues about his meatball sandwiches and bodily functions don't enlighten anyone.
And for Hannity to pick THIS fool to copy and mimic...words fail me.
-
Was Hannity preaching "borders, language, culture"...?
I meant Savage. But they all have preached conservative messages (more or less) and none of them stand by their own message when election time comes around. I don't understand why their audiences stick around, what is the attraction? For a long time I liked Limbaugh because I thought he meant most of it, but he has proven me wrong.
-
A lot of people blame conservative pundits and the conservative media sphere for Trump, but nobody blames the voters? Why do they escape blame? They listen uncritically to charlatans like Limbaugh and Hannity on the radio and voted in a complete stooge because of cookie cutter, Mickey Mouse BS reasons like 'He tells it like it is" etc. etc.
-
A lot of people blame conservative pundits and the conservative media sphere for Trump, but nobody blames the voters? Why do they escape blame? They listen uncritically to charlatans like Limbaugh and Hannity on the radio and voted in a complete stooge because of cookie cutter, Mickey Mouse BS reasons like 'He tells it like it is" etc. etc.
I blame the mindless Trumpanzees who ignored and continue to ignore Trump's flip-flops, his lying, his duplicity and his long liberal past. That includes morons like Sean Hannity.
-
A lot of people blame conservative pundits and the conservative media sphere for Trump, but nobody blames the voters? Why do they escape blame? They listen uncritically to charlatans like Limbaugh and Hannity on the radio and voted in a complete stooge because of cookie cutter, Mickey Mouse BS reasons like 'He tells it like it is" etc. etc.
I blame the yellowback voters on a regular basis. Those posts are followed by said yellowbacks spouting excuses of moral cowardace and refusal to take responsibility for their votes destroying America.
Then they blame actual conservatives that stand on principle and deride us for our 'purity'.
-
"Ted Cruz, counting on a Trump defeat in November, has positioned himself as a principled holdout, apparently convinced that refusing to endorse his party's presidential nominee will boost his 2020 stock among Republican voters, who will realize they nominated the wrong candidate this time around."
Cruz is refusing to endorse Trump on principle. I don't know how much clearer this could be.
This writer, on the other hand, is the one with the agenda. He hopes to paint Cruz as a crass opportunist so it can be used against him at the next national election.
They ALWAYS tell you who they truly fear! It NEVER fails!
-
A lot of people blame conservative pundits and the conservative media sphere for Trump, but nobody blames the voters? Why do they escape blame? They listen uncritically to charlatans like Limbaugh and Hannity on the radio and voted in a complete stooge because of cookie cutter, Mickey Mouse BS reasons like 'He tells it like it is" etc. etc.
The idea that conservative voters are more intelligent has been completely exploded
-
The idea that conservative voters are more intelligent has been completely exploded
Yup ****sheep****
-
Yup ****sheep****
Is that sheep taken by any chance? She sure is pretty...
-
Is that sheep taken by any chance? She sure is pretty...
She's not taken but she's pretty wary. You see how she keeps checking her 6.
-
She's not taken but she's pretty wary. You see how she keeps checking her 6.
She must be from Montana.
-
She must be from Montana.
Hay now...
-
Nope, just a long-time Reagan-Kemp conservative who's disgusted by Trump and his alt-right supporters. He's going to lose anyway, so I want him losing in a landslide so the rancid corpse of Trumpism will never rise again.
"Alt-Right" are the Trump supporters?
ROFL!!!!
Alt-Right are YOU guyz! Out of control, hissy-fitting, extremist SOCONS.
You're so far right in the Conservative movement that you've fallen off the grid.
Otherwise, you would put the nation first and stop Hillary. By refusing to support Trump, you are making it easier for Hillary.
"Alt-Right" is the very definition of a RINO, er RAT (Republicans against Trump)
Of course, we can set the timer for how long some of them will claim no association with the Party.
...their voter registrations be damned.
-
Hay now...
Jus' sayin...those Montana guys are pretty Baaa.. d about that.
-
"Alt-Right" are the Trump supporters?
ROFL!!!!
Alt-Right are YOU guyz! Out of control, hissy-fitting, extremist SOCONS.
You're so far right in the Conservative movement that you've fallen off the grid.
Otherwise, you would put the nation first and stop Hillary. By refusing to support Trump, you are making it easier for Hillary.
"Alt-Right" is the very definition of a RINO, er RAT (Republicans against Trump)
Of course, w
e can set the timer for how long some of them will claim no association with the Party.
...their voter registrations be damned.
You're embarrassing yourself, DC.
Your boy Bannon is the Chief of the alt-right: Jew hating, Catholic hating, abuser of women.
I can understand why you wouldn't want that crowd around you, but you got 'em. They say so.
They're sticking like glue to Trump because he needs their votes.
Still won't be enough though.
-
You're embarrassing yourself, DC.
Your boy Bannon is the Chief of the alt-right: Jew hating, Catholic hating, abuser of women.
I can understand why you wouldn't want that crowd around you, but you got 'em. They say so.
They're sticking like glue to Trump because he needs their votes.
Still won't be enough though.
Just remember....you bet and swore that Trump would be out by Super Tuesday...and then that he'd NEVER get the Nomination.
:seeya:
-
Otherwise, you would put the nation first and stop Hillary.
If there was a Republican on the ballot, that'd be easy. But November 9 has become a Democrat primary.
-
You're embarrassing yourself, DC.
Your boy Bannon is the Chief of the alt-right: Jew hating, Catholic hating, abuser of women.
I can understand why you wouldn't want that crowd around you, but you got 'em. They say so.
They're sticking like glue to Trump because he needs their votes.
Still won't be enough though.
He's been embarrassing himself for many months now! Nothing new about that!
-
No, this will be different. Those who hitched their wagons to the Trump train and its racialism and xenophobia will be dragged down with it. It's a taint that won't clean off.
After decades of this:
under the bus888
Does anyone want more?
**nononono*
-
You're embarrassing yourself, DC.
Your boy Bannon is the Chief of the alt-right: Jew hating, Catholic hating, abuser of women.
I can understand why you wouldn't want that crowd around you, but you got 'em. They say so.
They're sticking like glue to Trump because he needs their votes.
Still won't be enough though.
And DCP is not the only one embarrassing himself.
Trump is showing himself to be the unmitigated fool he is.
I don't believe he's an antisemite or a racist; but it's indicative of HOW POOR his judgment of people that he surrounds himself with bullies, as in Corey Lewandowski; or professional, proud, amoral LIARS and Dirty Tricksters like Roger Stone. And now he's rolling in the muck with the Alt-Right crowd. Does he have a CLUE what they're about?
Does he not CARE? I guess to him it's all about **WINNING** and things like the character of his staff and campaign directors is, to him, immaterial. Because to him, issues, and beliefs, and positions, are all immaterial.
What Trump doesn't know and doesn't seem to care to learn, is that to Republican voters they ARE...VERY material. We see this going on and just wonder how much better he will be than a lying Clinton. Or how much worse.
-
And DCP is not the only one embarrassing himself.
Trump is showing himself to be the unmitigated fool he is.
I don't believe he's an antisemite or a racist; but it's indicative of HOW POOR his judgment of people that he surrounds himself with bullies, as in Corey Lewandowski; or professional, proud, amoral LIARS and Dirty Tricksters like Roger Stone. And now he's rolling in the muck with the Alt-Right crowd. Does he have a CLUE what they're about?
Does he not CARE? I guess to him it's all about **WINNING** and things like the character of his staff and campaign directors is, to him, immaterial. Because to him, issues, and beliefs, and positions, are all immaterial.
What Trump doesn't know and doesn't seem to care to learn, is that to Republican voters they ARE...VERY material. We see this going on and just wonder how much better he will be than a lying Clinton. Or how much worse.
Well, the alt crowd is brash, often profane, and can hide their racism behind the thin veil of 'not being PC'. Naturally Trump would feel comfortable in that environment.
-
I'd agree with that. I think that nearly all of the GOP voters could have stomached any of the other candidates. That's not to say that many would have been pleased if Jeb Bush (for example) had taken it... but GOP voters could have taken a deep breath, sighed, and said, "I can vote for him in November."
Yes. There is not another of the original candidates that I could not vote for against Hillary. Some would be hard to vote for, yeah, but not impossible.
-
I'd agree with that. I think that nearly all of the GOP voters could have stomached any of the other candidates. That's not to say that many would have been pleased if Jeb Bush (for example) had taken it... but GOP voters could have taken a deep breath, sighed, and said, "I can vote for him in November."
Yes. There is not another of the original candidates that I could not vote for against Hillary. Some would be hard to vote for, yeah, but not impossible.
They picked the loser out of the bunch.
The loser who sold himself as New, Different, Greater...a winner.
Who in fact was a lifelong lib and a big donor and social colleague of Her Hillaryness.
That's all too pat to be accidental, IMHO.
-
And DCP is not the only one embarrassing himself.
Trump is showing himself to be the unmitigated fool he is.
I don't believe he's an antisemite or a racist; but it's indicative of HOW POOR his judgment of people that he surrounds himself with bullies, as in Corey Lewandowski; or professional, proud, amoral LIARS and Dirty Tricksters like Roger Stone. And now he's rolling in the muck with the Alt-Right crowd. Does he have a CLUE what they're about?
Does he not CARE? I guess to him it's all about **WINNING** and things like the character of his staff and campaign directors is, to him, immaterial. Because to him, issues, and beliefs, and positions, are all immaterial.
What Trump doesn't know and doesn't seem to care to learn, is that to Republican voters they ARE...VERY material. We see this going on and just wonder how much better he will be than a lying Clinton. Or how much worse.
Come on, man!
I'll see your Lewandowski and Stone and I'll raise you one Huma Abedin, Susan Mills, and the Clinton Crime Family.
...freaking idiots! :whistle:
-
They picked the loser out of the bunch.
The loser who sold himself as New, Different, Greater...a winner.
Who in fact was a lifelong lib and a big donor and social colleague of Her Hillaryness.
That's all too pat to be accidental, IMHO.
Once more, sport.
He kicked the ass of FIFTEEN other so-called candidates. FIFTEEN people who you #nevertrumps swore could have beaten Hillary Clinton.
Have you even seen the size of the crowds Trump is drawing....SINCE the Convention?
You guys need to get over WhateverTF is making you do this. It's suicide.
-
Come on, man!
I'll see your Lewandowski and Stone and I'll raise you one Huma Abedin, Susan Mills, and the Clinton Crime Family.
Clinton's stench doesn't make Trump smell any sweeter. It just reminds me of how Trump invited them to his wedding, spoke glowingly of both Bill and Hitlery, and supported them with cash.
-
Once more, sport.
He kicked the ass of FIFTEEN other so-called candidates. FIFTEEN people who you #nevertrumps swore could have beaten Hillary Clinton.
That is a great point. It is an even better point if you can honestly argue that McCain and Romney were the best GOP candidates out of groups that ran in 2008 and 2012.
Ultimately it comes down to Clinton or Trump will be the next President. I have already determined that neither is worth the effort to vote for. I am still unsure either is worth voting against.
On one hand Clinton is wrong on all most all the issues, on the other hand I trust Clinton to be wrong on all the issues and a GOP congress will have an easier time thwarting Clinton than they will standing in Trump's way.
I want Trump to convince me to vote for him, I really do...I think it is still possible, but I am unsure he wants actually wants to win.
-
Once more, sport.
He kicked the ass of FIFTEEN other so-called candidates. FIFTEEN people who you #nevertrumps swore could have beaten Hillary Clinton.
Have you even seen the size of the crowds Trump is drawing....SINCE the Convention?
You guys need to get over WhateverTF is making you do this. It's suicide.
There is no transitive law of politics. You think if Hillary > Trump in the general and Trump > Kasich in the primary, it follows that Hillary >> Kasich. It doesn't work that way. The GOP chose a candidate that a plurality of the minority likes and a majority of the whole despises.
-
There is no transitive law of politics. You think if Hillary > Trump in the general and Trump > Kasich in the primary, it follows that Hillary >> Kasich. It doesn't work that way. The GOP chose a candidate that a plurality of the minority likes and a majority of the whole despises.
It isn't as if they were not told it would not work. They went ahead anyway, sure that we would compromise our deeply held principles as they compromised their own. Projection. It won't work. I would not vote for either of them at gunpoint. Failure to comply with coercion is not suicide (else one would be able to say that Jesus Christ had committed suicide). If, in the extreme case, one dies as a result of refusing to comply with what they find to be morally repugnant, someone else will have committed murder.
-
I cannot vote for the lesser of 2 liberals.
I was #NeverHillary back before Trump became #ClintonDonor.
I've been watching the Clinton's since 1992.
I won't vote for her or anyone who supported her, at anytime.
-
I cannot vote for the lesser of 2 liberals.
I was #NeverHillary back before Trump became #ClintonDonor.
I've been watching the Clinton's since 1992.
I won't vote for her or anyone who supported her, at anytime.
(http://i.imgur.com/nHejmbm.jpg)
-
That is a great point. It is an even better point if you can honestly argue that McCain and Romney were the best GOP candidates out of groups that ran in 2008 and 2012.
Ultimately it comes down to Clinton or Trump will be the next President. I have already determined that neither is worth the effort to vote for. I am still unsure either is worth voting against.
On one hand Clinton is wrong on all most all the issues, on the other hand I trust Clinton to be wrong on all the issues and a GOP congress will have an easier time thwarting Clinton than they will standing in Trump's way.
Whether McCain or Romney was the best available at the time is not germane.
At best, it's taking us away from the subject. At worst, I'd just be chasing another squirrel for you.
I want Trump to convince me to vote for him, I really do...I think it is still possible, but I am unsure he wants actually wants to win]
Of course he wants...and is going to WIN!! Having Bill and Hillary Clinton attend your wedding reception doesn't translate that they are friends.
He's and ex-POTUS and she was a sitting Senator of his State. They were nothing but trophies to wear at the party.
Yeah...he donated to them. If he wanted to succeed in NYC, he had to. As a major developer....
-
Having Bill and Hillary Clinton attend your wedding reception doesn't translate that they are friends.
He's and ex-POTUS and she was a sitting Senator of his State. They were nothing but trophies to wear at the party.
Yeah...he donated to them. If he wanted to succeed in NYC, he had to. As a major developer....
Uh... wha???
He had a whole country where he could succeed, for much cheaper, and chose the most expensive and corrupt spot in America as his starting point.
Did you invite any former heads of state to your wedding? Or any other complete strangers, for that matter?
Trump and Clinton are buddies. Don't deny it. If Clinton wins, he'll be just fine.
-
There is no transitive law of politics. You think if Hillary > Trump in the general and Trump > Kasich in the primary, it follows that Hillary >> Kasich. It doesn't work that way. The GOP chose a candidate that a plurality of the minority likes and a majority of the whole despises.
I haven't had time to post on TBR for several weeks now, but I will *make* time to say this is extremely cogent and well-stated.
-
There is no transitive law of politics. You think if Hillary > Trump in the general and Trump > Kasich in the primary, it follows that Hillary >> Kasich. It doesn't work that way. The GOP chose a candidate that a plurality of the minority likes and a majority of the whole despises.
Yeah. As much as I dislike Lindsey Graham, Hillary is in no way 17 times greater than he is.
In this case, the turd on the democrat dinner plate doesn't make the one on ours more palatable.
-
I want Trump to convince me to vote for him, I really do...I think it is still possible, but I am unsure he wants actually wants to win.
As harsh as I've been towards Trump, I too recognize the reality that a Clinton presidency won't make anything better, and will just double down on failed policies that hinder growth and promote tribal animus. I'm also offended that Clinton assumes she's got my vote without having to make any effort at pivoting to the center.
William McGurn's column in today's WSJ hit home with me -
For years, the Dems have for years assailed Republicans as one giant hate group. Each general election, the drill goes like this: After Republicans nominate someone, he immediately finds himself having to prove he's not a hater - of African-Americans, of women, of gays, etc.
This year, Democrats added a twist. Mr. Trump, they claim, represents a break with all those decent and lovable Republicans such as Mitt Romney, John McCain and George W. Bush. Of course, that wasn't what they were saying back when those men were running for President.
No, Hillary Clinton respects me for being #NeverTrump as much as Trump respects his supporters when he brags he could shoot somebody in Times Square and his supporters wouldn't care. Will Clinton agree to work with Republicans, to consider worthwhile policy changes to promote growth and jobs? Will Clinton buck the teachers' unions to help poor kids escape from failure factories? Will she continue to echo BLM's hateful and corrosive blamefest against cops and "white privilege"?
Of course not. She expects my vote because I despise Trump, but she won't make any more effort to earn my vote than Trump will.
So go ahead, Trump, earn my vote. Show me that you want to be President of the whole nation, not just your alt-right supporters. Campaign in black neighbors, in Hispanic neighborhoods, and keep pushing jobs, jobs, jobs. Dial back the hate on the immigration issue and support comprehensive reform along the lines of the Gang of Eight. Put out a real plan to replace ObamaCare. Release your tax returns. Apologize for the bigotry you've promoted and the folks you've insulted and show that you've learned and are willing to listen to wise counsel.
-
There is no transitive law of politics. You think if Hillary > Trump in the general and Trump > Kasich in the primary, it follows that Hillary >> Kasich. It doesn't work that way. The GOP chose a candidate that a plurality of the minority likes and a majority of the whole despises.
Excellent post!
The complete misconception that because Trump beat out other Republicans (when many shared the same voter group) that he can beat Hillary and the others couldn't is a logical fallacy based on false hope.
Trump is, and always will be the choice of a plurality of the minority party. The majority of the party ranges from not liking him to hating him, and the other party almost in its entirety can't stand him.
It took a very bad choice this year to guarantee a loss to the most corrupt woman in the country (barring possibly Nancy Pelosi), but that small group managed to accomplish it.
This election should have been as comfortable a victory as any we have had since Reagan's reelection, and look what we've got ahead of us.
A humiliating loss due to an embarrassing, unqualified candidate.....
-
I haven't had time to post on TBR for several weeks now, but I will *make* time to say this is extremely cogent and well-stated.
I concur! :beer:
-
Of course he wants...and is going to WIN!! Having Bill and Hillary Clinton attend your wedding reception doesn't translate that they are friends.
He's and ex-POTUS and she was a sitting Senator of his State. They were nothing but trophies to wear at the party.
Yeah...he donated to them. If he wanted to succeed in NYC, he had to. As a major developer....
Either you are TOTALLY blind or your brain is in backwards! **nononono*
-
Whether McCain or Romney were the best available at the time is not germane.
At best, it's taking us away from the subject. At worst, I'd just be chasing another squirrel for you.
Of course he wants...and is going to WIN!! Having Bill and Hillary Clinton attend your wedding reception doesn't translate that they are friends.
He's and ex-POTUS and she was a sitting Senator of his State. They were nothing but trophies to wear at the party.
Yeah...he donated to them. If he wanted to succeed in NYC, he had to. As a major developer....
So, how do you explain his donations to Kamala Harris?
-
Once more, sport.
He kicked the ass of FIFTEEN other so-called candidates. FIFTEEN people who you #nevertrumps swore could have beaten Hillary Clinton.
Have you even seen the size of the crowds Trump is drawing....SINCE the Convention?
You guys need to get over WhateverTF is making you do this. It's suicide.
Nearly twice as many voters rejected him as chose him.
And in the end, Kasich was there strictly as a stalking-horse. The way Perot was in the 1992 General to gum up the works and prevent Bush from winning. Remember, Bubba got FORTY-TWO PERCENT of the popular vote in 1992.
That was obviously what was on Stone's and Lewindowski's minds.
Get over it? He's not acceptable. He's repugnant. He's scarcely different than his opponent.
We're not going to "get over it" to make YOUR choice, for YOUR emotional needs.
-
Once more, sport.
He kicked the ass of FIFTEEN other so-called candidates. FIFTEEN people who you #nevertrumps swore could have beaten Hillary Clinton.
Have you even seen the size of the crowds Trump is drawing....SINCE the Convention?
You guys need to get over WhateverTF is making you do this. It's suicide.
He didn't kick anyone's ass.
Twice as many voted against him as for him.
YOU need to get over YOUR mistake. You thought you could float this turd through the primaries and then we'd all vote reflexively, knee-jerk, for YOUR guy.
NO. Doesn't work that way. YOUR guy doesn't seem any better than THEIR guy. BOTH of them are unacceptable.
You cannot hector us into making YOUR choice for needs we don't have. Because we have no emotional or other obligation to nameless, faceless, voters - and the ones who forced this lousy choice onto us.
-
3 points up in that LA Times poll.
-
Uh... wha???
He had a whole country where he could succeed, for much cheaper, and chose the most expensive and corrupt spot in America as his starting point.
Did you invite any former heads of state to your wedding? Or any other complete strangers, for that matter?
Trump and Clinton are buddies. Don't deny it. If Clinton wins, he'll be just fine.
You're obviously not aware of the lyrics of this......
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-ZUXQuFcnw
-
There is no transitive law of politics. You think if Hillary > Trump in the general and Trump > Kasich in the primary, it follows that Hillary >> Kasich. It doesn't work that way. The GOP chose a candidate that a plurality of the minority likes and a majority of the whole despises.
Remind me again, please? How many States did Kasich win? :whistle:
-
He didn't kick anyone's ass.
....and that's as far as I got....with your post. :whistle:
-
Remind me again, please? How many States did Kasich win? :whistle:
Your argument is simply that because Trump won the nomination, we are to behave like good cultists and vote for him without regard whether he's earned our vote. The GOP was the victim of a hostile takeover and we're supposed to bend over and grab our ankles.
Doesn't work that way. Trump's got to earn our votes, and he's done little to do so.
Sorry, just because so many Trumpsters have the uncritical mindsets of cultists doesn't compel the rest of us to drink Trump's poison.
-
Your argument is simply that because Trump won the nomination, we are to behave like good cultists and vote for him without regard whether he's earned our vote. The GOP was the victim of a hostile takeover and we're supposed to bend over and grab our ankles.
Doesn't work that way. Trump's got to earn our votes, and he's done little to do so.
Sorry, just because so many Trumpsters have the uncritical mindsets of cultists doesn't compel the rest of us to drink Trump's poison.
:whistle:
-
Your argument is simply that because Trump won the nomination, we are to behave like good cultists and vote for him without regard whether he's earned our vote. The GOP was the victim of a hostile takeover and we're supposed to bend over and grab our ankles.
Doesn't work that way. Trump's got to earn our votes, and he's done little to do so.
Sorry, just because so many Trumpsters have the uncritical mindsets of cultists doesn't compel the rest of us to drink Trump's poison.
^^ This ^^
And yet, still they bleat on and try to browbeat and insult those opposed to Trump, practically every day. Are they really dumb enough to 'think' that will win us over to their way of "not" thinking? lol
Apparently so.
-
May I suggest to DC to put XenaLee on ignore and stop the personal insults.
-
....and that's as far as I got....with your post. :whistle:
Denial is not a river in Egypt.
And cheerleading is for sporting events and other things of no consequence. Pompoms and shaking gluteals doesn't impress anyone in an ISSUES-oriented choice and contest.
-
Your argument is simply that because Trump won the nomination, we are to behave like good cultists and vote for him without regard whether he's earned our vote. The GOP was the victim of a hostile takeover and we're supposed to bend over and grab our ankles.
Doesn't work that way. Trump's got to earn our votes, and he's done little to do so.
Sorry, just because so many Trumpsters have the uncritical mindsets of cultists doesn't compel the rest of us to drink Trump's poison.
My position, exactly.
-
Failure to comply with coercion is not suicide (else one would be able to say that Jesus Christ had committed suicide).
If your house catches on fire, but you decide to stay in it and let the flames consume you, is that not suicide?
If your plane is going down, but you decide not to use your parachute, is that not suicide?
If you're about to be struck down with an axe, but you don't turn aside from the blow, have you not committed suicide?
This is one reason committing suicide was so popular for early Christians...they recognized Jesus has done so. Remember, it wasn't until centuries after Jesus was gone that the Church politics got involved and reversed things at the First Council of Braga, with the first anti-suicide statement.*
We don't even have to go to Jesus for that, though. Even Augustine admitted that the coerced suicides were...suicides. For example, the virgins who killed themselves to avoid defilement by Roman soldiers or to avoid being forced to offer pagan sacrifice (e.g., Saint Pelagia of Antioch) were suicides, albeit to avoid compulsions.
The bottom line is that we should get angry at those who would try to compel us to action that is repulsive to us.
*this was along with things like excommunicating priests who didn't eat meat broth with their vegetables, so it was more politics than Biblically based.
-
May I suggest to DC to put XenaLee on ignore and stop the personal insults.
Calling me, as a Trump supporter, "DUMB"....and to say that we're sheep and "BLEAT" are insults, too!
Yet, you edited my post more than once, ultimately removing it...and said nothing to 'her'.
**nononono*
-
Pompoms and shaking gluteals doesn't impress anyone in an ISSUES-oriented choice and contest.
Trump has pom-poms for sale on his website for his most gullible supporters. No word if he sells knee-pads also but I'm sure some of his faithful wished he did.
(http://i.imgur.com/BQloFD5.jpg)
-
And yet, still they bleat on and try to browbeat and insult those opposed to Trump, practically every day. Are they really dumb enough to 'think' that will win us over to their way of "not" thinking?
Who does that @XenaLee? Speaking for myself, (although I know MANY who agree) .... the point has been reached where I don't care what you do--and certainly would not waste time trying to "win you over".
So relax, dear, and know when I come across one of your postings that I'm smiling and almost LOL reading how important you think you are in the grand scheme of this election. :laugh:
But bless your heart, @XenaLee. You keep pointing fingers and grumbling.
We'll keep winning.
My best,
RIV ^-^
-
Trump has pom-poms for sale on his website for his most gullible supporters. No word if he sells knee-pads also but I'm sure some of his faithful wished he did.
(http://i.imgur.com/BQloFD5.jpg)
Are those for REAL?? :silly: :silly:
I'll bet some of the zealots on this board have purchased multiple sets of them!
-
I think the most appropriate question to ask is "What happens if/when he drops out in Oct?"
-
I think the most appropriate question to ask is "What happens if/when he drops out in Oct?"
He won't just drop out. He will throw his histrionics out there, he will accuse the GOP of betrayal and sabotage, he will then tell his angry supporters to vote for the Democrats to "send a message" to the corrupt GOP establishment.
and it would be too late to change the ballots anyway
-
He won't just drop out. He will throw his histrionics out there, he will accuse the GOP of betrayal and sabotage, he will then tell his angry supporters to vote for the Democrats to "send a message" to the corrupt GOP establishment.
and it would be too late to change the ballots anyway
yep, if he drops out he'll be the bad guy. If his goal is to discredit the conservative wing he'll need to lose to be able to blame them.
-
yep, if he drops out he'll be the bad guy. If his goal is to discredit the conservative wing he'll need to lose to be able to blame them.
:thumbsup2:
-
yep, if he drops out he'll be the bad guy. If his goal is to discredit the conservative wing he'll need to lose to be able to blame them.
Trump has always relied on a foil to gain votes. I'm glad I'm not the only one who is noticing this.
-
Who does that @XenaLee? Speaking for myself, (although I know MANY who agree) .... the point has been reached where I don't care what you do--and certainly would not waste time trying to "win you over".
So relax, dear, and know when I come across one of your postings that I'm smiling and almost LOL reading how important you think you are in the grand scheme of this election. :laugh:
But bless your heart, @XenaLee. You keep pointing fingers and grumbling.
We'll keep winning.
My best,
RIV ^-^
LMAO! Nice try there, "Election Section Moderator". But no ceegar.
I'm certainly not going to name any names re: who among the Trump supporters are berating us anti-Trump members on an almost daily basis. That wouldn't be nice and might even be against the rules here.
You know who they are and I know that you know damned well who they are.
Oh, and by the way.....your condescending, sticky sweet-syrupy blather isn't impressing anyone other than perhaps yourself.
Just so ya know.
-
I think the most appropriate question to ask is "What happens if/when he drops out in Oct?"
He starts his new reality show "The Lounge Singer"
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v165/crutch999/Trump%20Volare_zpsqocj6a1p.jpg)
-
He starts his new reality show "The Lounge Singer"
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v165/crutch999/Trump%20Volare_zpsqocj6a1p.jpg)
As he has already stated....he will go back to a very nice life and long vacation. With a lot more cash in his coffers and a life-long promise of that quid pro quo and pay for play routine he'll get from the Clintons.
-
LMAO! Nice try there, "Election Section Moderator". But no ceegar.
I'm certainly not going to name any names re: who among the Trump supporters are berating us anti-Trump members on an almost daily basis. That wouldn't be nice and might even be against the rules here.
You know who they are and I know that you know damned well who they are.
Oh, and by the way.....your condescending, sticky sweet-syrupy blather isn't impressing anyone other than perhaps yourself.
Just so ya know.
Nice, ain't she?
Just makes you want to jump on the Trump bandwagon so you can be more like she is. ^-^
-
yep, if he drops out he'll be the bad guy. If his goal is to discredit the conservative wing he'll need to lose to be able to blame them.
@skeeter
You have to be kidding! The one thing in the world Trump fears more than anything else is being identified as a loser. He is a narcissistic sociopath,and his whole life is dedicated to presenting himself as the biggest,the strongest,and the smartest creature on the planet. Hell,he even "knows all the "best" words.
He would literally rather die than lose this big in front of the whole planet and not be able to deny losing.
He has recently started setting the stage for his withdrawal by claiming the election is rigged.
I will admit there is a SLIM possibility his ego MAY convince him that "I am a winner,have always been a winner,and will win now!" and not step down,but I just don't see him even being willing to take a chance of losing on stage and in front of the world.
Losing is for losers,and The Donald is a winner.
-
Nice, ain't she?
Just makes you want to jump on the Trump bandwagon so you can be more like she is. ^-^
I think as has already been mentioned..... some of the behavior by some of the Trump fans has probably turned off more potential voters than Trump himself has. Or maybe it's a toss-up. Either way, they are doing their side no favors.
-
Let's stay on topic.
-
yep, if he drops out he'll be the bad guy. If his goal is to discredit the conservative wing he'll need to lose to be able to blame them.
:thumbsup2:
@skeeter @Suppressed
He has enough love for himself that he doesn't need your love. What he NEEDS is to feel smarter and superior to everyone else,and what better way to accomplish that than to suddenly resign and then spend the rest of his life bragging about how "I COULD have been the president of the US if I had wanted,but I decided the job was beneath me,so I stepped down."
With The Donald,it is all about "Me,me,ME,DAMMIT!" There is no one else of importance.
-
I think as has already been mentioned..... some of the behavior by some of the Trump fans has probably turned off more potential voters than Trump himself has. Or maybe it's a toss-up. Either way, they are doing their side no favors.
Indeed.
And after they have sullied their reputations, as have the pundits who jumped on the Trump bandwagon, stupidly, they won't recover whether he wins or loses.
If he loses, they're losers like he is. If he wins, they have to live with the shame of helping him get elected and ruining what's left of the country.
The pundits and the zealots will both be losers either way.
-
Indeed.
And after they have sullied their reputations, as have the pundits who jumped on the Trump bandwagon, stupidly, they won't recover whether he wins or loses.
If he loses, they're losers like he is. If he wins, they have to live with the shame of helping him get elected and ruining what's left of the country.
The pundits and the zealots will both be losers either way.
We're all going to lose in this round. The only question is how much.
-
@skeeter @Suppressed
He has enough love for himself that he doesn't need your love. What he NEEDS is to feel smarter and superior to everyone else,and what better way to accomplish that than to suddenly resign and then spend the rest of his life bragging about how "I COULD have been the president of the US if I had wanted,but I decided the job was beneath me,so I stepped down."
With The Donald,it is all about "Me,me,ME,DAMMIT!" There is no one else of importance.
I'm afraid you're spot-on there. And the nation be damned, despite his mantra of "Make America Great Again" which he stole from Reagan.
-
Who does that @XenaLee? Speaking for myself, (although I know MANY who agree) .... the point has been reached where I don't care what you do--and certainly would not waste time trying to "win you over".
So relax, dear, and know when I come across one of your postings that I'm smiling and almost LOL reading how important you think you are in the grand scheme of this election. :laugh:
But bless your heart, @XenaLee. You keep pointing fingers and grumbling.
We'll keep winning.
My best,
RIV ^-^
More passive-aggressive crud.
-
Oh, and by the way.....your condescending, sticky sweet-syrupy blather isn't impressing anyone
It sure got your attention @XenaLee. (That's called a bullseye, dear)
Game. Set. Match. 888blackhat
Bah-bye now. :seeya:
-
It sure got your attention @XenaLee. (That's called a bullseye, dear)
Game. Set. Match. 888blackhat
Bah-bye now. :seeya:
Well...yeah. That usually happens when one uses the "mention" feature to call someone to a post you've made.....as you did there (duh).
I don't know what delusion is causing you to imagine victories here, RIV....but I think I'm starting to feel a little sorry for you.
-
We're all going to lose in this round. The only question is how much.
I don't think there's going to be a qualitative difference either way we lose.....
-
I don't think there's going to be a qualitative difference either way we lose.....
There won't be enough difference to make a difference. I've read that there's a 60-80% chance we'll lose the Senate. Game over.
-
If your house catches on fire, but you decide to stay in it and let the flames consume you, is that not suicide?
So you would say those who were fired upon and did not get out of the Waco (Mt. Carmel) Building complex were suicides, not murdered by an overzealous government?
If your plane is going down, but you decide not to use your parachute, is that not suicide?
70% of the planet is covered by water. In much of the rest of it, for most people, only a miserable death remains from the arctic cold, jungle critters, dehydration in the desert, or an alpine death. Some of us would fight to stay alive and quite probably die a miserable death. Others might accept the more rapid outcome. If you're about to be struck down with an axe, but you don't turn aside from the blow, have you not committed suicide?
None of those involves compulsion, only acts of misfortune or violence.
This is one reason committing suicide was so popular for early Christians...they recognized Jesus has done so. Remember, it wasn't until centuries after Jesus was gone that the Church politics got involved and reversed things at the First Council of Braga, with the first anti-suicide statement.*
Actually, the church condemned suicide at the Council of Arles in 452, well before the First Council of Braga in 561. Suicide involves committing an act which leads to one's death.
Even the modern iteration of having to push a button or flip a switch requires an act on the part of the person who kills themself.
Being killed by someone else may on occasion be considered self-sacrifice, but suicide? If a soldier is killed trying to retrieve a wounded comrade under fire, is that suicide? How about being killed in action in a volunteer army? How about a First Responder who is crushed by debris? Would you say the firemen on 9/11 were suicides? The priest who gave last rites to the dead and dying who had jumped? Those in the Pentagon who could not run from the office to safety and maybe looked at the oncoming plane? Your examples are flawed.
We don't even have to go to Jesus for that, though. Even Augustine admitted that the coerced suicides were...suicides. For example, the virgins who killed themselves to avoid defilement by Roman soldiers or to avoid being forced to offer pagan sacrifice (e.g., Saint Pelagia of Antioch) were suicides, albeit to avoid compulsions.
Now you are getting closer, because these involve refusal to be compelled to do something.
The bottom line is that we should get angry at those who would try to compel us to action that is repulsive to us.*this was along with things like excommunicating priests who didn't eat meat broth with their vegetables, so it was more politics than Biblically based.
Oh, I'm plenty angry. I never hired anyone who supported Obama, and now the pool of prospects has thinned considerably. That is just one thing going forward.
But I will not be compelled. You can't make me. You can kill me, but you can't make me. There are limits to the power of any tyrant wannabe if people only refuse to comply.
If I am killed for not complying, that is a definitive act by someone else who would perform an act leading to my death because I refused to be compelled to violate my principles, abandon my God, to sin. Had they not performed that act, I would live. My death is the direct result of their willingness to murder me or get me to submit. Failure to submit is not suicide, my death would be murder. Matt 16:25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
-
I don't think there's going to be a qualitative difference either way we lose.....
Oh, but yes there is:
In one way, the enemy is outside the gate.
in the other, the enemy is within.
-
@skeeter
You have to be kidding! The one thing in the world Trump fears more than anything else is being identified as a loser. He is a narcissistic sociopath,and his whole life is dedicated to presenting himself as the biggest,the strongest,and the smartest creature on the planet. Hell,he even "knows all the "best" words.
He would literally rather die than lose this big in front of the whole planet and not be able to deny losing.
He has recently started setting the stage for his withdrawal by claiming the election is rigged.
I will admit there is a SLIM possibility his ego MAY convince him that "I am a winner,have always been a winner,and will win now!" and not step down,but I just don't see him even being willing to take a chance of losing on stage and in front of the world.
Losing is for losers,and The Donald is a winner.
Oh, he could spin it like a pulsar. You think he wouldn't stand there next to Hillary at the inaugural ball and brag about how he took down those GOP suckers for the first woman president? It'd be Yuuge!!
-
Oh, but yes there is:
In one way, the enemy is outside the gate.
in the other, the enemy is within.
Don't look now....but the enemy has been "within" the WH walls for almost eight years now. And solidly embedded within the halls of Congress for over a decade (some would say multiple decades) now. Our only hope was a true-blue and solid conservative as president and retaining control of the Senate. So much for that.
-
Oh, he could spin it like a pulsar. You think he wouldn't stand there next to Hillary at the inaugural ball and brag about how he took down those GOP suckers for the first woman president? It'd be Yuuge!!
@Smokin Joe
I have no doubt at all he would get sexually excited at the mere thought.
Not sure Bubbette!'s international bankers would let him get away with it,though. IMHO,they ain't quite ready to "go public" yet.
They might let him get away to alluding to having done that,but doing it while standing next to her in front of TV cameras would weaken her grip on her "peeps". Even fools don't like having it pointed out to them they were played for fools.
I wouldn't even be surprised if someone whacked him if he did that. Hell,it would play right into the globalist scheme to ban guns if someone were to shoot him.
-
Don't look now....but the enemy has been "within" the WH walls for almost eight years now. And solidly embedded within the halls of Congress for over a decade (some would say multiple decades) now. Our only hope was a true-blue and solid conservative as president and retaining control of the Senate. So much for that.
Longer than that. Goes back to King Franklin initially,and the next one to take up the globalist banner was Jim-Mah Carter,followed by Poppy Bush. We haven't had a President that wasn't a globalist since Poppy was elected.
@XenaLee
-
Longer than that. Goes back to King Franklin initially,and the next one to take up the globalist banner was Jim-Mah Carter,followed by Poppy Bush. We haven't had a President that wasn't a globalist since Poppy was elected.
@XenaLee
Perhaps. But at least....before the rats took control of Congress in 2007....collapsed the economy and then sleazed Barry into the WH....we had never had an anti-American muzzie-appeaser CIC before.
-
Don't look now....but the enemy has been "within" the WH walls for almost eight years now. And solidly embedded within the halls of Congress for over a decade (some would say multiple decades) now. Our only hope was a true-blue and solid conservative as president and retaining control of the Senate. So much for that.
I was speaking of the Conservative Castle (subliminal intended). Hillary will in no wise be considered to be wearing the Conservative mantle, whereas Trump will. Whatever bull-in-a-china-shop escapades Trump may sally forth upon will be laid squarely at our feet.
If he (or Romney, or McCain, etc) is allowed to define Conservatism, our doom is sealed, as there will be no opposition to liberalism at all, as the past eight years should well define.
Nothing will change without Trump going down in flames, and GOP leadership giving up the levers of power. Until CONSERVATIVES hold the RNC, and the House and senate leadership, all we are doing is arranging the deck chars.
-
@Smokin Joe
I have no doubt at all he would get sexually excited at the mere thought.
Not sure Bubbette!'s international bankers would let him get away with it,though. IMHO,they ain't quite ready to "go public" yet.
They might let him get away to alluding to having done that,but doing it while standing next to her in front of TV cameras would weaken her grip on her "peeps". Even fools don't like having it pointed out to them they were played for fools.
I wouldn't even be surprised if someone whacked him if he did that. Hell,it would play right into the globalist scheme to ban guns if someone were to shoot him.
It has crossed my mind that the stage could be being set for something like that, false flag or not. Some of those skinhead boys don't take being played for a fool lightly. Nothing would sway the Trumpian legions more toward that one more liberal policy than a martyrdom, followed by the inevitable sh*tstorm of legislative proposals and her, sitting at the resolute desk playing with the pen.
-
Perhaps. But at least....before the rats took control of Congress in 2007....collapsed the economy and then sleazed Barry into the WH....we had never had an anti-American muzzie-appeaser CIC before.
@XenaLee
The Dims controlled Congress for more than 75 years before the Republicans took it over. Immediately following the Republican takeover,many Dims deserted the Dim Party and became "instant Republicans" so they could stay in power and so they could subvert the Republicans and take over again with a "R" behind their names. Same critters,same goals,the only difference being the Big Red "R" behind their names.
-
I wasn't aware of that particular Sean BS, but he was already 'dead to me' due to his constant fawning over and paving the way for The Don. It figures that he also has become unethical and underhanded though....now that he's hanging with and stumping for Trump.
Hannity is so sickening with his adoration of Trump on his program that I don't watch it anymore, and that goes for Greta, too. I turn the TV on in the bedroom when I go to bed, (it's on a timer), and last night when I turned it on, there he was telling lies about Clinton, said she likes women to wear Muslim Habibs and Burkas because she met with those women in Saudi Arabia and showed a picture of her sitting with two ladies in that country. However, with Hannity, every word Trump says and what he does, is golden, no questioning anything he does. I switched channels.
-
Hannity is so sickening with his adoration of Trump on his program that I don't watch it anymore, and that goes for Greta, too. I turn the TV on in the bedroom when I go to bed, (it's on a timer), and last night when I turned it on, there he was telling lies about Clinton, said she likes women to wear Muslim Habibs and Burkas because she met with those women in Saudi Arabia and showed a picture of her sitting with two ladies in that country. However, with Hannity, every word Trump says and what he does, is golden, no questioning anything he does. I switched channels.
Jeanne Pirro was screeching that we all have to support Trump after NH.
-
Jeanne Pirro was screeching that we all have to support Trump after NH.
@Cripplecreek
UBER ALLES!
-
He starts his new reality show "The Lounge Singer"
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v165/crutch999/Trump%20Volare_zpsqocj6a1p.jpg)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7JcKKej0DI
Trump is Tony Clifton
-
still campaigning in states he has no shot of winning, this time Washington State
-
@skeeter
You have to be kidding! The one thing in the world Trump fears more than anything else is being identified as a loser. He is a narcissistic sociopath,and his whole life is dedicated to presenting himself as the biggest,the strongest,and the smartest creature on the planet. Hell,he even "knows all the "best" words.
He would literally rather die than lose this big in front of the whole planet and not be able to deny losing.
He has recently started setting the stage for his withdrawal by claiming the election is rigged.
I will admit there is a SLIM possibility his ego MAY convince him that "I am a winner,have always been a winner,and will win now!" and not step down,but I just don't see him even being willing to take a chance of losing on stage and in front of the world.
Losing is for losers,and The Donald is a winner.
That is a very interesting theory. I could see Trump doing that.
-
@XenaLee
The Dims controlled Congress for more than 75 years before the Republicans took it over. Immediately following the Republican takeover,many Dims deserted the Dim Party and became "instant Republicans" so they could stay in power and so they could subvert the Republicans and take over again with a "R" behind their names. Same critters,same goals,the only difference being the Big Red "R" behind their names.
Yeah, and I hate to say it....but.....with the help of Hillary's friend, The Don, they may regain control of Congress for another 75 years. Look at the level of ignorance and apathy among the current crop of younger voters now.
-
Yeah, and I hate to say it....but.....with the help of Hillary's friend, The Don, they may regain control of Congress for another 75 years. Look at the level of ignorance and apathy among the current crop of younger voters now.
Ignorance comes from a Liberal education. Apathy from only having Liberals to vote for...
-
Jeanne Pirro was screeching that we all have to support Trump after NH.
@Cripplecreek
I stopped watching Pirro on the weekends because she is now screeching/yelling all the time, her voice would drown out a nuclear blast, and one would think she is having a love affair with Trump. When she is out on the street in front of his Trump building, interviewing people, she yells even louder and is in love with the gold on the front of the building. She is as sickening as Hannity.
-
More passive-aggressive crud.
@HonestJohn
There is one good thing about RIV, she looks great in "IGNORE".
-
You have to be kidding! The one thing in the world Trump fears more than anything else is being identified as a loser. .....
Actually, that's not quite correct. He talks about it in his books like The Art of the Deal and you can see it all over his history. Trump has absolutely no problem losing a venture, as long as his downside is protected. He goes into losing ventures all the time, including his prior run for President in 2000 knowing full well he was going to lose.
Why does he do it?
Because his real goal isn't winning that venture. It is building the Trump brand. He loses more than he wins, but with every loss, he still is building the Trump brand. That is his downside he is always working towards.
He has two entire chapters dedicated to this in The Art of the Deal- Protecting Your Downside and There is No Such Thing as Bad Press.
-
@Cripplecreek
I stopped watching Pirro on the weekends because she is now screeching/yelling all the time, her voice would drown out a nuclear blast, and one would think she is having a love affair with Trump. When she is out on the street in front of his Trump building, interviewing people, she yells even louder and is in love with the gold on the front of the building. She is as sickening as Hannity.
There is something about her voice I just can't stand. Don't know what it is, but it grates on me like nails on a chalk board. Similar to how Sarah Palin's voice got on my nerves when she was trying to speak loudly at rallies.
-
For those who are new and don't know Right in Virginia, a little more than a year ago (before Trump) you all would have counted her as an ally. She is a proud conservative who cares about the future of our country. She has had posted many insightful comments, and usually lets the personal stuff slide off her back because IMO she has a truck load of confidence and self integrity and she is smart as a whip.
We all have our bad days, and we are all on edge because we realize the implications of this election. It takes a lot of guts to express an unpopular opinion to peers you respect and admire. And when those peer are unable or unwilling to see your POV, it is natural to lash out and get angry. That is not the RIV I've come to know, respect and admire.
We have to stop beating up our own guys, and pick up the pieces of this election someday.
There are some posters that deserve to be on ignore. You do yourself a disservice ignoring RiV.
-
We all have our bad days, and we are all on edge because we realize the implications of this election. It takes a lot of guts to express an unpopular opinion to peers you respect and admire. And when those peer are unable or unwilling to see your POV, it is natural to lash out and get angry. That is not the RIV I've come to know, respect and admire.
FWIW, I will be cleaning out my ignore after the season is over... But probably not until.
-
FWIW, I will be cleaning out my ignore after the season is over... But probably not until.
:thumbsup:
-
Actually, that's not quite correct. He talks about it in his books like The Art of the Deal and you can see it all over his history. Trump has absolutely no problem losing a venture, as long as his downside is protected. He goes into losing ventures all the time, including his prior run for President in 2000 knowing full well he was going to lose.
Why does he do it?
Because his real goal isn't winning that venture. It is building the Trump brand. He loses more than he wins, but with every loss, he still is building the Trump brand. That is his downside he is always working towards.
He has two entire chapters dedicated to this in The Art of the Deal- Protecting Your Downside and There is No Such Thing as Bad Press.
What you highlighted is that he is a loser posing as a winner. How is that fundamentally different from what I wrote? He will do ANYTHING to maintain his pose as a winner because losing is for losers,and The Donald is a winner!
-
What you highlighted is that he is a loser posing as a winner. How is that fundamentally different from what I wrote? He will do ANYTHING to maintain his pose as a winner because losing is for losers,and The Donald is a winner!
He gets away with spinning it that way, partly because he dumps properties at more than he paid for them at the bankruptcy. I think the Princess (Kingdom 5 KR) went for over 40 million worth of debt, when he had only paid some 29-30 million for it, and likely wrote it off as a business expense because he used it for entertaining and meetings. He considers that 'winning'. The rest of us pay our taxes, and the bill, even on a rowboat.
If the price of being rich is screwing people over, I'll just stay as I am.
-
There is a losing candidate in every election and many people, pundit or not, hitch themselves to every losing candidate. This is just fear mongering.
Really? How is it fear mongering?
-
It sure got your attention @XenaLee. (That's called a bullseye, dear)
Game. Set. Match. 888blackhat
Bah-bye now. :seeya:
What are you going to do when Donny loses?
Are you going be humble enough to admit Trump really was the dud we warned you he was?
Or are you going to look for a scapegoat for your own mistakes?
-
There is a losing candidate in every election and many people, pundit or not, hitch themselves to every losing candidate. This is just fear mongering.
It is different this time.
In the past,when their chosen candidate lost, the pundits blamed the candidate for not being the right candidate for the times or for not running a strong, well-managed campaign.
This time, if the candidate loses, the pundits are blaming us, the voters, for not adhering to their sage wisdom.
-
[quote author=Smokin Joe link=topic=222660.msg1036469#msg1036469 date=1472641
He gets away with spinning it that way, partly because he dumps properties at more than he paid for them at the bankruptcy. I think the Princess (Kingdom 5 KR) went for over 40 million worth of debt, when he had only paid some 29-30 million for it, and likely wrote it off as a business expense because he used it for entertaining and meetings. He considers that 'winning'. The rest of us pay our taxes, and the bill, even on a rowboat.
If the price of being rich is screwing people over, I'll just stay as I am.
[/quote]
One of the things he is known to do is attach himself to any business he buys into,and then start billing that business for ALL of his personal and corporate expenses,and this is what runs them into bankruptcy. He is doing the same thing with his alleged Presidential campaign. He is billing the RNC for the use of his private jet,private limos,bodyguards,meals,salaries of the employees that fly,drive,protect,and clean for him,etc,etc,etc. He is also making money from selling his Chinese hats by selling them to his campaign. I have no doubt before it is all over that he will bill the RNC for personal appearance fees.
He is in this to make money,period. Part of it from his scams,and part of it as the payoff package from the Clintons after she is sworn in.
Given who and what he is,he might even stay in the campaign to the end,and start ranting and raving like a total idiot 2 weeks before the election in order to throw it. The longer he stays in it the more money he makes from his scams and the more he can squeeze out of the Clintons.
-
What are you going to do when Donny loses?
Are you going be humble enough to admit Trump really was the dud we warned you he was?
Or are you going to look for a scapegoat for your own mistakes?
@txradioguy
When Bubbette! is sworn in,all the Trumpettes will be screaming and wailing,and scratching their eyes out as they blame US for not voting for their lust bunny. It is NEVER their fault they supported a human fart,it is always OUR fault for not sniffing that fart with them.
In many ways they are as narcissistic as Trump and Bubbette!
-
Someone posted an article about Trump selling shares to us "little people" in a casino-resort business, paid himself handsomely as it was run straight into the ground. Sounded like the whole thing was a scam from the start.
-
For those who are new and don't know Right in Virginia, a little more than a year ago (before Trump) you all would have counted her as an ally. She is a proud conservative who cares about the future of our country. She has had posted many insightful comments, and usually lets the personal stuff slide off her back because IMO she has a truck load of confidence and self integrity and she is smart as a whip.
We all have our bad days, and we are all on edge because we realize the implications of this election. It takes a lot of guts to express an unpopular opinion to peers you respect and admire. And when those peer are unable or unwilling to see your POV, it is natural to lash out and get angry. That is not the RIV I've come to know, respect and admire.
We have to stop beating up our own guys, and pick up the pieces of this election someday.
There are some posters that deserve to be on ignore. You do yourself a disservice ignoring RiV.
I agree with most everything you said above with the exception of putting her on ignore. She and a few others here have pulled their masks off and reviled their true selves during this Trump episode and I, for one, will never be able to view them the same as I did before again!
-
Someone posted an article about Trump selling shares to us "little people" in a casino-resort business, paid himself handsomely as it was run straight into the ground. Sounded like the whole thing was a scam from the start.
It's what scam (con) artists do and Trump is a very good one!
-
For those who are new and don't know Right in Virginia, a little more than a year ago (before Trump) you all would have counted her as an ally. She is a proud conservative who cares about the future of our country. She has had posted many insightful comments, and usually lets the personal stuff slide off her back because IMO she has a truck load of confidence and self integrity and she is smart as a whip.
We all have our bad days, and we are all on edge because we realize the implications of this election. It takes a lot of guts to express an unpopular opinion to peers you respect and admire. And when those peer are unable or unwilling to see your POV, it is natural to lash out and get angry. That is not the RIV I've come to know, respect and admire.
We have to stop beating up our own guys, and pick up the pieces of this election someday.
There are some posters that deserve to be on ignore. You do yourself a disservice ignoring RiV.
With all due respect, I haven't seen any Trump supporter here actually try to sell their candidate on the issues. Its all been gloating, browbeating & snide one liners.
-
@txradioguy
When Bubbette! is sworn in,all the Trumpettes will be screaming and wailing,and scratching their eyes out as they blame US for not voting for their lust bunny. It is NEVER their fault they supported a human fart,it is always OUR fault for not sniffing that fart with them.
In many ways they are as narcissistic as Trump and Bubbette!
I think they have gone beyond sniffing. I think they are huffing the jenkem again.
-
It's what scam (con) artists do and Trump is a very good one!
That's just it - he really isn't all that good. I see him coming a mile away, every time.
It is an astonishment to me that so many can't see right through him.
-
That's just it - he really isn't all that good. I see him coming a mile away, every time.
It is an astonishment to me that so many can't see right through him.
Yes! You and I see right through him immediately and are astonished to find so many who don't! That's it in a nutshell! :beer:
-
I agree with most everything you said above with the exception of putting her on ignore. She and a few others here have pulled their masks off and reviled their true selves during this Trump episode and I, for one, will never be able to view them the same as I did before again!
Well then I think you are letting them off easy my friend. You are an absolute terror to argue against! :laugh:
-
With all due respect, I haven't seen any Trump supporter here actually try to sell their candidate on the issues. Its all been gloating, browbeating & snide one liners.
I'm sure you have. I've heard the arguments for Trump many times. The one used most often is Trump is better than Hitlery. It was the same argument I used to support Romney, McCain, Bush, Dole, and Bush Sr. They were all better than the rat candidate. I just can't do it with a straight face for Trump, and both you and I don't find this to be a compelling argument.
There have been other reasons that Trump fans have supported Trump...The Wall...He's a job creator...He can't be bought because he's so rich...He will select good SCOTUS judges...
Oh Lord...I'm getting nauseous trying to remember reasons to vote for Trump...I gotta stop.
My point is the Trump fans have their reasons for supporting Trump and it is a mistake to think they are paid political operatives or nefarious schemers...and it's kind of hard to hear the reasons when we are attacking each other for being terrible people.
Thank you for the opportunity to expand upon my remarks.
-
I'm sure you have. I've heard the arguments for Trump many times. The one used most often is Trump is better than Hitlery. It was the same argument I used to support Romney, McCain, Bush, Dole, and Bush Sr. They were all better than the rat candidate. I just can't do it with a straight face for Trump, and both you and I don't find this to be a compelling argument.
There have been other reasons that Trump fans have supported Trump...The Wall...He's a job creator...He can't be bought because he's so rich...He will select good SCOTUS judges...
Oh Lord...I'm getting nauseous trying to remember reasons to vote for Trump...I gotta stop.
My point is the Trump fans have their reasons for supporting Trump and it is a mistake to think they are paid political operatives or nefarious schemers...and it's kind of hard to hear the reasons when we are attacking each other for being terrible people.
Thank you for the opportunity to expand upon my remarks.
The wall (won't be built, idea from Cruz in 2011), He's a job creator (service jobs, for the most part, and the contractors sometimes didn't get paid. In the end, that kills businesses and costs jobs), He bought politicians in the past, maybe he considers being a politician more lucrative than buying one. SCOTUS judges? Ri-ight.
His words/actions/and the hopes for change his supporters superimpose on him don't flange up, is the only problem I have with all that. Which boils down to him being the 'not Hillary', not necessarily that he is acceptable for the job..
If this was a job tender, and I was HR, I'd re-run the ad.
-
For those who are new and don't know Right in Virginia, a little more than a year ago (before Trump) you all would have counted her as an ally. She is a proud conservative who cares about the future of our country. She has had posted many insightful comments, and usually lets the personal stuff slide off her back because IMO she has a truck load of confidence and self integrity and she is smart as a whip.
We all have our bad days, and we are all on edge because we realize the implications of this election. It takes a lot of guts to express an unpopular opinion to peers you respect and admire. And when those peer are unable or unwilling to see your POV, it is natural to lash out and get angry. That is not the RIV I've come to know, respect and admire.
We have to stop beating up our own guys, and pick up the pieces of this election someday.
There are some posters that deserve to be on ignore. You do yourself a disservice ignoring RiV.
Wow, do I disagree with you here, @Once-Ler !
You obviously haven't had her fangs buried into you personally. There's no way she's the same person she was before Trump. If she is, she was hiding a lot from all of us.
My only permanent IGNORE.
I just wish she'd do me the same favor and not say vile things about me behind my back.
And all because I don't support Trump.
-
The wall (won't be built, idea from Cruz in 2011), He's a job creator (service jobs, for the most part, and the contractors sometimes didn't get paid. In the end, that kills businesses and costs jobs), He bought politicians in the past, maybe he considers being a politician more lucrative than buying one. SCOTUS judges? Ri-ight.
His words/actions/and the hopes for change his supporters superimpose on him don't flange up, is the only problem I have with all that. Which boils down to him being the 'not Hillary', not necessarily that he is acceptable for the job..
If this was a job tender, and I was HR, I'd re-run the ad.
I don't disagree with anything you wrote. I'm just saying the arguments are out there.
-
Completely disagree.
The problem was not with the quality of the field, but with the quantity. There were a number of reasonable prospects, some very strong.......... the strongest field, in fact that we have had in a very long time.
It's just that the rational, conservative vote was subdivided, while the angry, non-thinking vote gravitated toward Trump.
And it's not that he "may be a poor candidate." He is the absolutely worst candidate in our entire lifetimes.
That's why so many conservatives can't vote for him. He has no integrity nor virtue and he has no conservative policy positions.
Plus, Trump is way out of his depth intellectually. He knows next to nothing about conservative principles and doesn't have the right demeanor for a president. He's the drunk but very wealthy boor at the end of the bar with the loudest mouth.
-
Disagree. Trump won because of the convoluted primary season which should be reformed immediately.. Most people were against Trump even in the early primaries. But with 17 candidates, his opposition was divided and diluted. Trump might have been the only candidate a lot of people have ever heard of. He still lost almost 2/3 of the vote in the early primaries. Ted Cruz was a virtual unknown to most people outside of Texas at that point.
The Media elected Trump because every word he spoke was broadcast nationally. He had an early appeal that even I felt because it was refreshing to hear someone so unabashedly politically incorrect. Thinking people immediately realized the downside of Trump. The way, way downside.
Without his name recognition and the free ads by the press, Trump would never have won.
Yes....what you said....uh.... I mean wrote.
-
Wow, do I disagree with you here, @Once-Ler !
You obviously haven't had her fangs buried into you personally. There's no way she's the same person she was before Trump. If she is, she was hiding a lot from all of us.
Well we have to disagree on somethings once in awhile or life would get boring. I remember the back and forth between you two, and as I recall you got in a few zingers too, but your right RIV has never said anything to me that I couldn't forgive as heat of the moment obstinance...but then RIV were never what I would call friends, and correct me if I'm wrong but I thought you and RIV were online buddies before Trump. Barbs and slings sting a lot harder when they come from someone you like. Sometimes those wounds never heal.
-
Well we have to disagree on somethings once in awhile or life would get boring. I remember the back and forth between you two, and as I recall you got in a few zingers too, but your right RIV has never said anything to me that I couldn't forgive as heat of the moment obstinance...but then RIV were never what I would call friends, and correct me if I'm wrong but I thought you and RIV were online buddies before Trump. Barbs and slings sting a lot harder when they come from someone you like. Sometimes those wounds never heal.
Oh, I can zing with the best of them, as you well know......... but this is different. There have been attacks on my looks (actually, I'm quite attractive! 888heartkitty ), and my very person. Really below the belt.
Most of my comments have been that she's mean...... and I doubt that many people here disagree with that.
I think like with you, we were very friendly acquaintances before, but the claws came out when I started saying things against Trump. For the most part, she reacted to things I said about Trump with nastiness about me (starting with a very stupid reference to some teacher she didn't like. Really dumb stuff, and she's still at it. **nononono*).
It's neither here nor there really because nasty words coming from a person who doesn't know you at all don't really hurt, but I think the things she's said and done remove any possibility of reconciliation after this Trump mess is over barring some significant repentance on her part....... and I don't see that coming.
But you're right. You and I have to disagree about something, and I'd rather have it be that you're nicer than I am, than anything else. :patriot:
-
Well then I think you are letting them off easy my friend. You are an absolute terror to argue against! :laugh:
I'm not letting them off at all! It's just that they have these little hidey holes that I'm not allowed to enter! :smokin:
Thanks for the flowers! :beer:
-
I'm not letting them off at all! It's just that they have these little hidey holes that I'm not allowed to enter! :smokin:
Thanks for the flowers! :beer:
Oh, but if you could, you'd give it to 'em good! :laugh:
-
FWIW, I will be cleaning out my ignore after the season is over... But probably not until.
@roamer
My Ignore will stay exactly like it is now. I don't put one on unless it is necessary forever.
-
I don't disagree with anything you wrote. I'm just saying the arguments are out there.
No problem, I have seen those. Funny, they are easy enough to articulate, but are not so often cited.
-
In many ways they are as narcissistic as Trump and Bubbette!
@sneakypete
Nailed it.
-
@Smokin Joe, apologies for the late reply...I've been in the field.
So you would say those who were fired upon and did not get out of the Waco (Mt. Carmel) Building complex were suicides, not murdered by an overzealous government?
70% of the planet is covered by water. In much of the rest of it, for most people, only a miserable death remains from the arctic cold, jungle critters, dehydration in the desert, or an alpine death. Some of us would fight to stay alive and quite probably die a miserable death. Others might accept the more rapid outcome.
Jesus was divine; those in Waco were not.
The theologians' argument is that Jesus chose death, not that it was imposed upon Him...for what human could impose something upon God?
Actually, the church condemned suicide at the Council of Arles in 452, well before the First Council of Braga in 561. Suicide involves committing an act which leads to one's death.
If I recall correctly, the Council of Arles dealt with the treatment of slaves, that the master wasn't condemned if a slave committed suicide. Still, that's hundreds of years before the Church reversed Christian tradition.
Being killed by someone else may on occasion be considered self-sacrifice, but suicide? If a soldier is killed trying to retrieve a wounded comrade under fire, is that suicide? How about being killed in action in a volunteer army? How about a First Responder who is crushed by debris? Would you say the firemen on 9/11 were suicides? The priest who gave last rites to the dead and dying who had jumped? Those in the Pentagon who could not run from the office to safety and maybe looked at the oncoming plane? Your examples are flawed.
Again, the soldier isn't making a choice between survival and suicide, like Jesus did. He can't just wave his hand and deflect the bullets.
Oh, I'm plenty angry. I never hired anyone who supported Obama, and now the pool of prospects has thinned considerably. That is just one thing going forward.
But I will not be compelled. You can't make me. You can kill me, but you can't make me. There are limits to the power of any tyrant wannabe if people only refuse to comply.
Good! My point is merely that the word "suicide" is being demonized.
If I am killed for not complying, that is a definitive act by someone else who would perform an act leading to my death because I refused to be compelled to violate my principles, abandon my God, to sin. Had they not performed that act, I would live. My death is the direct result of their willingness to murder me or get me to submit. Failure to submit is not suicide, my death would be murder. Matt 16:25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
They can't compel me, either. I am fully aware that I will be one of the first dragged out in the middle of the night if tyrants get their way. Even if I could walk free with a single word, I won't break my conscience to do so. The guilt is on them, not on me.
This does bring us back to the topic of the thread. If we look at parallels to Germany in the 20s and 30s, we see a similar split between the alt-right and the leftists in our country. In Germany, the Nazis beat the left. I wonder whether the alt-right thinks they'll prevail in 21st Century USA if it turns even more nasty.
-
@Smokin Joe, apologies for the late reply...I've been in the field.
If we look at parallels to Germany in the 20s and 30s, we see a similar split between the alt-right and the leftists in our country. In Germany, the Nazis beat the left. I wonder whether the alt-right thinks they'll prevail in 21st Century USA if it turns even more nasty.
No problem. Perhaps. Between a few technologies which can be anything from game changers to force multipliers, it is tough to say who, or what philosophies will prevail, and where they will. The other monkey in the birdcage is the question of removing tech from an enemy's toolbox, potentially crippling their capabilities (by forcing them or their population to go low tech). The latter has advantages for factions already adroit in a low tech environment, but could severely impact those forces or even whole populations who are tech reliant.
More complex systems contain key and critical components, without which the system no longer works or is severely compromised. With the right knowledge and relatively little effort compared to conventional military conquest, control over portions of the populace or complete chaos could be accomplished. Those results could be either temporary or, for all practical purposes, permanent. By 'permanent', I mean of sufficient duration the recapture or rehabilitation of the system is moot: the damage is done, the goals met or objective attained.
Whoever is willing and able to break the most eggs will likely have the biggest omelette, whether they use official or clandestine means to accomplish their goals.
-
For those who are new and don't know Right in Virginia, a little more than a year ago (before Trump) you all would have counted her as an ally. She is a proud conservative who cares about the future of our country. She has had posted many insightful comments, and usually lets the personal stuff slide off her back because IMO she has a truck load of confidence and self integrity and she is smart as a whip.
We all have our bad days, and we are all on edge because we realize the implications of this election. It takes a lot of guts to express an unpopular opinion to peers you respect and admire. And when those peer are unable or unwilling to see your POV, it is natural to lash out and get angry. That is not the RIV I've come to know, respect and admire.
We have to stop beating up our own guys, and pick up the pieces of this election someday.
There are some posters that deserve to be on ignore. You do yourself a disservice ignoring RiV.
Thank you for the kind words @Once-Ler
-
Wow, do I disagree with you here, @Once-Ler !
You obviously haven't had her fangs buried into you personally. There's no way she's the same person she was before Trump. If she is, she was hiding a lot from all of us.
My only permanent IGNORE.
I just wish she'd do me the same favor and not say vile things about me behind my back.
And all because I don't support Trump.
FWIW, not supporting Trump has nothing to do with my opinion :shrug:
-
@roamer
My Ignore will stay exactly like it is now. I don't put one on unless it is necessary forever.
:shrug:
Of course, you are welcome to do as you see as fitting.
In my own case, forming an opinion of someone during such an upheaval is certainly valid - Just not always true. It is inherent for me that I forgive, lest the hate that used to govern me gain sway once again. Folks do stupid sh*t under pressure. Hopefully they learn from their error, and there has to be room for that to occur.
On the other hand, another aspect: Those who do not fail under fire... Those whose principles cause them to stand upon solid ground, regardless of fear, regardless of the pied-piper of following the crowd, regardless of the sh*t-storm swirling around them... These have earned my undying respect, as they were able to remain. These are the rock-ribbed (and y'all know who you are) whose word can be taken without mixture or guarantee. They are who they are, in the most adamantine way. These are true Conservatives.
And in that I find priceless value coming out from these troubling times.
-
:shrug:
Of course, you are welcome to do as you see as fitting.
In my own case, forming an opinion of someone during such an upheaval is certainly valid - Just not always true. It is inherent for me that I forgive, lest the hate that used to govern me gain sway once again. Folks do stupid sh*t under pressure. Hopefully they learn from their error, and there has to be room for that to occur.
On the other hand, another aspect: Those who do not fail under fire... Those whose principles cause them to stand upon solid ground, regardless of fear, regardless of the pied-piper of following the crowd, regardless of the sh*t-storm swirling around them... These have earned my undying respect, as they were able to remain. These are the rock-ribbed (and y'all know who you are) whose word can be taken without mixture or guarantee. They are who they are, in the most adamantine way. These are true Conservatives.
And in that I find priceless value coming out from these troubling times.
You're a wise man.
I just wanted to add one more type: those who are so intransigent that once they have formed an opinion they are unable to take new facts into account and maintain their original opinion in spite of changing information. I'm not talking about changing one's belief system, but one's decision based upon known facts.
-
You're a wise man.
I just wanted to add one more type: those who are so intransigent that once they have formed an opinion they are unable to take new facts into account and maintain their original opinion in spite of changing information. I'm not talking about changing one's belief system, but one's decision based upon known facts.
True enough, I would suppose - But then, facts are precious few in this current season. A lot of what purports to be 'known' is nothing more that twitterpated gossip.
-
True enough, I would suppose - But then, facts are precious few in this current season. A lot of what purports to be 'known' is nothing more that twitterpated gossip.
Yes, of course you have to separate the wheat from the chaff as well as possible.
-
You're a wise man.
I just wanted to add one more type: those who are so intransigent that once they have formed an opinion they are unable to take new facts into account and maintain their original opinion in spite of changing information. I'm not talking about changing one's belief system, but one's decision based upon known facts.
If you talk to people who deal with such things regularly they will tell you that one of the hardest things on earth is to convince the victims of a con that they have been conned!
-
If you talk to people who deal with such things regularly they will tell you that one of the hardest things on earth is to convince the victims of a con that they have been conned!
Blues Traveler's 'Hook' is instructive:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdz5kCaCRFM
It doesn't matter what I say
So long as I sing with inflection
That makes you feel I'll convey
Some inner truth or vast reflection
But I've said nothing so far
And I can keep it up for as long as it takes
And it don't matter who you are
If I'm doing my job then it's your resolve that breaks
Because the hook brings you back
I ain't tellin' you no lie
The hook brings you back
On that you can rely
There is something amiss
I am being insincere
In fact I don't mean any of this
Still my confession draws you near
To confuse the issue I refer
To familiar heroes from long ago
No matter how much Peter loved her
What made the Pan refuse to grow
Was that the hook brings you back
I ain't tellin' you no lie
The hook brings you back
On that you can rely
Suck it in, suck it in, suck it in
If you're Rin Tin Tin or Anne Boleyn
Make a desperate move or else you'll win
And then begin to see
What you're doing to me
This MTV is not for free
It's so PC it's killing me
So desperately I sing to thee of love
Sure but also rage and hate and pain and fear of self
And I can't keep these feeling on the shelf
I've tried, well no, in fact I lied
Could be financial suicide but I've got too much pride inside
To hide or slide
I'll do as I'll decide and let it ride till until I've died
And only then shall I abide by this tide
Of catchy little tunes
Of hip three minute diddies
I wanna bust all your balloons
I wanna burn of all your cities to the ground
But I've found, I will not mess around
Unless I play then hey
I will go on all day
Hear what I say
I have a prayer to pray
That's really all this was
And when I'm feeling stuck and need a buck
I don't rely on luck
Because the hook brings you back
I ain't tellin' you no lie
The hook
On that you can rely
-
If you talk to people who deal with such things regularly they will tell you that one of the hardest things on earth is to convince the victims of a con that they have been conned!
Maybe that's because they weren't looking at those new facts as they came in! :laugh:
-
Maybe that's because they weren't looking at those new facts as they came in! :laugh:
No one sees what they refuse to look at! :beer:
-
No one sees what they refuse to look at! :beer:
Even the way the Scientific Method is taught has people starting with and defending preconceived notions, sometimes to the point of completely irrational behaviour (Anthropogenic Global Warming, for instance).
When you don't know the answer, you have to let the data do the talking, let the evidence lead you to the answer.
For those who entered this political season with that mindset, the records, be they private dealings or recorded votes, vetoes or approvals, were there. Assertions one way or another had to be critically analyzed to separate the wheat from the chaff, the story below the misleading headline had to be read, tested against those records or otherwise for veracity, and that information either discarded as bogus or added to the evidence, for good or ill for every candidate.
A lot of people, apparently, just did not do that.
Sound bytes are fun, fast, easy, and unfortunately the weapon of choice for those preying on the lazy and misinformed who just want to believe. But that desire to believe can often belie a prejudice which will mask or discard evidence, leading to the wrong conclusion. Some things are just more complicated than what can be stuffed into a tweet or will likely be read in a Facebook or forum post, and will be hidden behind the "read more" in the comments section.
Some people just won't click on that to see it. All that thinking is just so hard, and they want their instant microwave saviour served up on a sliver platter, sans serious thought.
Add in the conditioning of centuries of cheering on our group/family/tribe/team/sect/faction/army without consideration, and the emotional appeal is strong, concise, and visceral, stimulating the limbic brain and tapping some primordial force within to urge action without thought. The cycle is complete, cut to commercial...a series of 15 to 30 second spots urging you to be one of the first 100 callers to get a 'special deal', or to 'call now before this deal runs out', or telling you you get a second one free (just pay shipping and handling).
But wait! There's more!
Just how much more is something we are going to find out.
-
If you talk to people who deal with such things regularly they will tell you that one of the hardest things on earth is to convince the victims of a con that they have been conned!
Once they're committed they're EMOTIONALLY INVESTED.
How many people have you talked to, who got a bad deal on a car? Very few; and the few who did, either got ripped off so royally a lawyer promised he could make it good; or else the chump is claiming there was fraud or hidden facts.
They have vested need to be right, once they've picked a side. They'll stick with the scam that's ripping them off, long after it's past being funny to onlookers.
-
Even the way the Scientific Method is taught has people starting with and defending preconceived notions, sometimes to the point of completely irrational behaviour (Anthropogenic Global Warming, for instance).
When you don't know the answer, you have to let the data do the talking, let the evidence lead you to the answer.
The proper Scientific Method has NOTHING to do with this Glow Bull Warming hysteria. They don't enter into it with an hypothesis and then test it under controlled conditions.
They burst out of their conferences in a panic, real or feigned, with COMPUTER MODELS, based on JIGGERED ALGORITHMS...as they run around in circles screaming WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!
Science and research has nothing to do with hysteria and spreading panic. It has nothing to do with pointless action to "do something." It has to do with presenting the facts as established through controlled testing of assertions, hypotheses...and then moving on to examine possible corrections.
What is coming from these climate "scientists" is artificial panic and hysteria...purchased by the government so as to panic the populace into allowing the government to grow to take control of the whole of the economy.
-
Once they're committed they're EMOTIONALLY INVESTED.
How many people have you talked to, who got a bad deal on a car? Very few; and the few who did, either got ripped off so royally a lawyer promised he could make it good; or else the chump is claiming there was fraud or hidden facts.
They have vested need to be right, once they've picked a side. They'll stick with the scam that's ripping them off, long after it's past being funny to onlookers.
It is much the same as dealing with a friend whose new infatuation is a slut or a he-ho. Trying to talk them down off of being 'in love' is hazardous duty, and often only cements their resolve to ride the road to perdition and misery.
I used to wonder why so many movies centered on the high school years with almost fetishistic certainty. For a while I figured the appeal was just to a money spending demographic, but them I realized so much of America has never outgrown those years at a much deeper level.
It is that JV fervor that sways far too many people in all sorts of decisions, and makes them easy marks for con men, the whole while they insist they got a good deal.
-
The proper Scientific Method has NOTHING to do with this Glow Bull Warming hysteria. They don't enter into it with an hypothesis and then test it under controlled conditions.
They burst out of their conferences in a panic, real or feigned, with COMPUTER MODELS, based on JIGGERED ALGORITHMS...as they run around in circles screaming WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!
Science and research has nothing to do with hysteria and spreading panic. It has nothing to do with pointless action to "do something." It has to do with presenting the facts as established through controlled testing of assertions, hypotheses...and then moving on to examine possible corrections.
What is coming from these climate "scientists" is artificial panic and hysteria...purchased by the government so as to panic the populace into allowing the government to grow to take control of the whole of the economy.
I fully agree. Start with a (testable) hypothesis and conduct experiments to see if it holds up.
Not: Start with a foregone conclusion and massage/edit the data or presentation methods to support it.--which is what appears a lot any more, not solid research.
-
there will be blood sweat and tears on TV the Radio and probably in the streets when the devotees finally understand that the donny was never in it to win it!!
(http://i.imgur.com/p6hTh9K.gif)
-
there will be blood sweat and tears on TV the Radio and probably in the streets when the devotees finally understand that the donny was never in it to win it!!
(http://i.imgur.com/p6hTh9K.gif)
The only thing that feels worse than being a sucker is having your nose rubbed in it.
-
Blues Traveler's 'Hook' is instructive:
Indeed!
-
How many people have you talked to, who got a bad deal on a car? Very few; and the few who did, either got ripped off so royally a lawyer promised he could make it good; or else the chump is claiming there was fraud or hidden facts.
They have vested need to be right, once they've picked a side. They'll stick with the scam that's ripping them off, long after it's past being funny to onlookers.
I have a great many faults, but this is one I either never picked up -- or I learned to suppress. I suspect the latter. My parents were both very logical and scientific, so being wrong and modifying one's view was perfectly acceptable...even encouraged.
When I wanted a new toy my friends wanted, they would ask me to recall previous toys and whether they were like what was shown in ads.
And to this day, Mom loves to tell how I asked, "Mommy, why are we the only people who don't believe what's on TV?"
This isn't to say I'm immune to advertising, but I think it illustrates that people can be taught to resist it.
-
I have a great many faults, but this is one I either never picked up -- or I learned to suppress. I suspect the latter. My parents were both very logical and scientific, so being wrong and modifying one's view was perfectly acceptable...even encouraged.
When I wanted a new toy my friends wanted, they would ask me to recall previous toys and whether they were like what was shown in ads.
And to this day, Mom loves to tell how I asked, "Mommy, why are we the only people who don't believe what's on TV?"
This isn't to say I'm immune to advertising, but I think it illustrates that people can be taught to resist it.
You mean people can be taught critical thinking? Yes, I think they can. Which means the converse is also true: people can be taught to emote and suppress thinking. Which is what our school systems now encourage and teach.
-
You mean people can be taught critical thinking? Yes, I think they can. Which means the converse is also true: people can be taught to emote and suppress thinking. Which is what our school systems now encourage and teach.
Yep. When I was a kid there was an ad in the comic book for a hundred army guys and tanks and planes and all the goodies for (I forget how much) something cheap. I was all excited when I showed it to my mom. She just smiled and said "How big is the box?" When I figured out the box they came in was smaller than a box of kitchen matches, my enthusiasm waned. Since then, I look for the catch.
-
It is much the same as dealing with a friend whose new infatuation is a slut or a he-ho. Trying to talk them down off of being 'in love' is hazardous duty, and often only cements their resolve to ride the road to perdition and misery.
I used to wonder why so many movies centered on the high school years with almost fetishistic certainty. For a while I figured the appeal was just to a money spending demographic, but them I realized so much of America has never outgrown those years at a much deeper level.
It is that JV fervor that sways far too many people in all sorts of decisions, and makes them easy marks for con men, the whole while they insist they got a good deal.
Boy do I have the scars to prove the truth of that! Long story for another time!
-
Yep. When I was a kid there was an ad in the comic book for a hundred army guys and tanks and planes and all the goodies for (I forget how much) something cheap. I was all excited when I showed it to my mom. She just smiled and said "How big is the box?" When I figured out the box they came in was smaller than a box of kitchen matches, my enthusiasm waned. Since then, I look for the catch.
And, that probably contributes towards a tendency to be conservative: preferring to operate by thinking over feeling and having learned HOW to think.
-
And, that probably contributes towards a tendency to be conservative: preferring to operate by thinking over feeling and having learned HOW to think.
I was quite fortunate. Both parents, and my grandparents are (were, in the case of my grandparents) critical thinkers, politically aware, and would examine things for not just face value but for other implications and consequences. My uncle taught me chess at an early age, and while far from being a master, thinking moves ahead changes the game. Yes, they were all conservatives.
-
Boy do I have the scars to prove the truth of that! Long story for another time!
Yep, both sides of it.
-
I fully agree. Start with a (testable) hypothesis and conduct experiments to see if it holds up.
Not: Start with a foregone conclusion and massage/edit the data or presentation methods to support it.--which is what appears a lot any more, not solid research.
@Smokin Joe
If you are going to go to that much trouble,go with the sure-fire method and create a new religion that promises people a life of luxury and comfort free from worry for an eternity. All they have to do to enroll in the process is to make small or large (large works better) monthy payments to the leaders,and become their slaves for the rest of your Earthly life.
Well,you might be required to kill a few non-believers in order to "Save them",but that's a minor thing to do and it really benefits them in the long run,right?
-
And, that probably contributes towards a tendency to be conservative: preferring to operate by thinking over feeling and having learned HOW to think.
@Sanguine
Probably,but my best GUESS is that is a lesson that needs to be learned while you are a child,or it won't stick. If you still believe in dreams when you become an adult,chances are you will be a dreamer until the day you die because for all of your life the lie has been the dream that you learned to believe beause it comforted you and it's not easy to give up dreams as an adult.
-
@Smokin Joe
If you are going to go to that much trouble,go with the sure-fire method and create a new religion that promises people a life of luxury and comfort free from worry for an eternity. All they have to do to enroll in the process is to make small or large (large works better) monthy payments to the leaders,and become their slaves for the rest of your Earthly life.
Well,you might be required to kill a few non-believers in order to "Save them",but that's a minor thing to do and it really benefits them in the long run,right?
Well, I was talking about scientific experimentation, for research.
Not government, not "social engineering".
The people who are massaging data to pull off the 'climate change' scam are living large on our dime, pretty much through highly questionable "research", and seriously affecting our liberty to do what we will.
We're already slaves. If you look under the hood of your vehicle and go look under the hood of one 50 years older, you're paying thousands more for stuff designed to stop emissions which allegedly cause the temperature of the planet to change. From the bulbs in your light sockets to the amount of water your toilet flushes, to the refrigerant in your refrigerator, you're in thrall to the people who are saying the planet will heat up, the seas rise, and the world turn into a cinder if you don't do what they say--all based on bunk.
-
@Sanguine
Probably,but my best GUESS is that is a lesson that needs to be learned while you are a child,or it won't stick. If you still believe in dreams when you become an adult,chances are you will be a dreamer until the day you die because for all of your life the lie has been the dream that you learned to believe beause it comforted you and it's not easy to give up dreams as an adult.
I don't know, @sneakypete. I suspect it may be possible to learn, though hard to break all of those lifelong mental habits.
-
@Sanguine
Probably,but my best GUESS is that is a lesson that needs to be learned while you are a child,or it won't stick. If you still believe in dreams when you become an adult,chances are you will be a dreamer until the day you die because for all of your life the lie has been the dream that you learned to believe beause it comforted you and it's not easy to give up dreams as an adult.
That wasn't really my experience. I was a pretty optimistic fellow up through college. Then cold, hard reality hit as I graduated and the recession it—and I became a hardened, embittered cynic.
-
That wasn't really my experience. I was a pretty optimistic fellow up through college. Then cold, hard reality hit as I graduated and the recession it—and I became a hardened, embittered cynic.
Now, J.Myrle, I hope you're not equating cold hard cynicism with conservatism?
-
I was quite fortunate. Both parents, and my grandparents are (were, in the case of my grandparents) critical thinkers, politically aware, and would examine things for not just face value but for other implications and consequences. My uncle taught me chess at an early age, and while far from being a master, thinking moves ahead changes the game. Yes, they were all conservatives.
My heart weeps that my father is no longer around... He is the one, above all others that taught me to think critically.
And it didn't matter what subject matter one would choose. Anything and everything was subject to dissection to find the working mechanisms behind the thought.
It is so very hard to find folks willing to do that at all, not to mention being willing to tear apart their long held and beloved tenets to find out if they are indeed TRUE... In as much as it is hard to find, when one does find such people, they are always a treasure.
-
I don't know, @sneakypete. I suspect it may be possible to learn, though hard to break all of those lifelong mental habits.
I think you are right @Sanguine - Such explains the fact that many are liberal in their youth, but become Conservative with age. Perhaps not to the level obtained by one trained to think critically, but life can be a cruel mistress - One will necessarily learn, by way of pain, that all that glitters is not gold... And in that failure occurs where thought is false, therein the basics of critical thinking are laid bare, for the very least to discover.
-
My heart weeps that my father is no longer around... He is the one, above all others that taught me to think critically.
And it didn't matter what subject matter one would choose. Anything and everything was subject to dissection to find the working mechanisms behind the thought.
It is so very hard to find folks willing to do that at all, not to mention being willing to tear apart their long held and beloved tenets to find out if they are indeed TRUE... In as much as it is hard to find, when one does find such people, they are always a treasure.
You are so right - they are rare and they are a treasure.
-
Now, J.Myrle, I hope you're not equating cold hard cynicism with conservatism?
No, actually, I was pretty identifiably conservative even as a high-schooler, which is when I really started paying attention to politics.