-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
PoliGAF 2016 |OT13| For Queen and Country
- Thread starter aspiegamer
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
I shouldn't bag on Jill Stein too much for this "Lincoln was a third-party candidate!" thing since it's accepted as true (despite being clearly false with the GOP controlling congress in 1858) by all third-parties.
I have no idea how the myth that Lincoln was a third-party candidate got started though. Do people really think the Whig Party survived up until 1860?
They were effectively done by the early 1850s. Most of the northern Whigs were Republicans by the mid-1850s. Interestingly, Stein would have found a perfect party to fit her in the 1850s - the "Know Nothings".
You have to read between the lines with Trump..
NO
That's basically an argument that he is unfit for office because he can't articulate his actual beliefs and plans.
EmCeeGramr
Member
He's wrong about global warming and part of me hopes it's him trying to get some of those crazy extreme conservative votes by making statements like that. He was a democrat for decades. He's like...not religious...at all. He's not a Ted Cruz type of "devout" nutjob. He's a hustler and he's trying to hustle votes. I really think he's more reasonable than that and would understand the majority of Americans agree GW is legit and the scientific evidence is indisputable. He clearly reads up on the news a lot (or has one of his monkeys compile a bunch of articles every morning and show it to him) so he's not the type of person that wouldn't believe evidence like that once it's shown to him.
His plans of unlocking "$50 trillion" of energy reserves in the U.S. may contribute to global warming but it needs to be done, IMO. We can't rely on the middle east for oil anymore. The sooner we have energy independence, the sooner corrupt middle eastern governments will lose their hold on us. Less wars will be fought, less drama overall. Oil is the key. Hopefully in (however many) years, alternative energy tech will continue to improve and oil will be phased out and the effect on GW can be curtailed. Until then, we need to unlock those reserves and stop reliance on foreign oil.
Do you really think someone as smart, articulate, and educated as KellyAnne Conway truly believes global warming is a myth and the other conspiratorial shit Trump said in that tweet a couple years ago? Of course not. That's just one example. I really believe it's just one of those statements to get votes from those extreme nutjob conservatives.
The GOP will need an incredible turnout of republicans to win this election so you have to pander to everyone.
We don't know that.
So basically what you're saying is he's not an experienced politician. That's very true. I wasn't a Trump supporter until he changed his stance on the full out Muslim ban into "extreme vetting". Banning all Muslims from those countries wouldve been insane as well as logistically impossible. I'm happy he's willing to change some of his clearly ill informed stances.
David Duke and whoever else would've supported any other republican nominee. Maybe not as loudly as he has DT but that group of nutters will always vote republican. As for the retweets...do you really think he checked out their twitter history before retweeting? The guy tweets at like 3am and he's 70 years old. This stuff won't happen anymore and hasn't since, now that he has smarter people around him like Conway to tell him to be careful when doing things of that nature.
"Openly calls an entire race of people rapists, murderers and drug dealers".... you just made my point, like perfectly. I couldn't have wrote a better example myself. When I read that part of your post I didn't want to reply to it all, but you took the time and effort to write it out so I am.
Someone asked me this via PM:
As you may have noticed, some of his policies have become more "reasonable" since first announcing them, like the Muslim ban that doesn't even exist anymore...it's "extreme vetting". First of all, it would be impossible to deport 12 million illegal immigrants even if he says that's what he wants to do. Half of that or a quarter? I think that's reasonable and something I support because I want the law upheld. Someone like you would not be a part of that group...splitting up a mixed family that includes US citizens or the baby example...that's just not gonna happen. The deportation stance will evolve as time goes on. Like I mentioned before, he's got to pander to virtually every statistically significant portion of the republican voting base because the GOP needs a higher turnout than the dems to win this election. That's why we kept getting those polls/stats of Romney vs Trump in terms of percentage of republican voters intending to vote for him. I forget the exact number but it needs to like over 90%. Look at what happened when he softened his deportation stance...people like Anne Coulter almost disavowed him. He needs to cater to every statistically significant portion of his base to win.
Unrelated but I want to mention this... I really don't think he is a racist, not anymore. I don't believe he's a white supremacist. You have spammed that extreme statement so much that it's basically become one of the ten commandments on this site. I've mentioned this before in a post a month or two ago but for example...the Reddit post people keep linking, every example is from decades ago...like 20-30 years ago such as the renting in his apartments that Hillary mentioned in the debates. He's not that man anymore. The only racist thing he's said that's not ancient (and I'm aware that "the only racist thing he's said" sounds terrible) is about the Mexican judge and to me that was because he was backed into a corner with the overwhelming evidence of Trump U being a scam.
Sir this is a McDonald's drive through
You have to read between the lines with Trump...we've never had a candidate more sarcastic and more "New York City" than this guy. People aren't used to it.
I was watching CNN yesterday and they showed clips of the rally he had that day where he said (paraphrasing)..."I will support who wins the election...if I win" and the crowd went WILD. Pandemonium. He was laughing and excited afterward.
The Clinton News Network treated this like some super serious breaking news and had anchors acting like it was the most shocking thing ever.
Then they had a guy come on via satellite and mention that Trump did start the very next sentence with "But seriously..." which of course CNN didn't play because it wouldn't fit the narrative. Trump is a showman...he loves that kind of reaction from the crowd. What I just described has lead to many threads here over the past year, btw. He's a New Yorker.
So he's just a jokester who is fit for office. He just goes out and says these things for the lulz?
America truly has fallen.
Oh we absolutely know how illegal immigrants get in the US, how Secure Fence Act was a bust, and how Mexican president has denied paying for the multi-billion dollar wall, and that Donald Trump has in no way clarified how it will be constructed or maintained.We don't know that.
Usually Brexit comparisons are don't fit, but this absolutely reeks of "We'll give £350m back to NHS" and there is no way you can deny that.
You do not get bonus points for backing down on obvious insanity. You never did and never will.Banning all Muslims from those countries wouldve been insane as well as logistically impossible. I'm happy he's willing to change some of his clearly ill informed stances.
"He got backed into a corner, so his only retort was to call the the judge from Indiana a mexican, and apparently unfit for his job because of thisThe only racist thing he's said that's not ancient (and I'm aware that "the only racist thing he's said" sounds terrible) is about the Mexican judge and to me that was because he was backed into a corner with the overwhelming evidence of Trump U being a scam.
Not racist tho"
Just keep spinning, keep spinning, at this point he could call Obama a nigger and you'd still defend him. People have been rightfully accused of racism for far less than what Trump has done.
You have to read between the lines with Trump...we've never had a candidate more sarcastic and more "New York City" than this guy. People aren't used to it.
How do we read between the lines of him saying "Grab em by the pussy?" Is that just a "New York City" quality as well?
Also, what happened to the whole admirable trait of him being a guy that always says what he means? Was that a bunch of bull as well?
I just wish Trump supporters would let us in their secret Trump translator that apparently only they have access to.
TheOfficeMut
Unconfirmed Member
Guys and gals, the sooner you ignore Barack, the better. Every time you quote him and I see his posts I am immediately reminded of why he's on my ignore list.
I'll gladly be intolerable toward people defending Trump. Sod off.
I'll gladly be intolerable toward people defending Trump. Sod off.
You have to read between the lines with Trump...we've never had a candidate more sarcastic and more "New York City" than this guy. People aren't used to it.
I was watching CNN yesterday and they showed clips of the rally he had that day where he said (paraphrasing)..."I will support who wins the election...if I win" and the crowd went WILD. Pandemonium. He was laughing and excited afterward.
The Clinton News Network treated this like some super serious breaking news and had anchors acting like it was the most shocking thing ever.
Then they had a guy come on via satellite and mention that Trump did start the very next sentence with "But seriously..." which of course CNN didn't play because it wouldn't fit the narrative. Trump is a showman...he loves that kind of reaction from the crowd. What I just described has lead to many threads here over the past year, btw. He's a New Yorker.
GURL.
#ByeFelicia.
IceBringer
Banned
Did you just use Clinton news network seriously? Lol
Barack Lesnar
Banned
YES! Simply put... I don't believe there's any way a republican candidate can win in today's society unless they pander to every statistically significant portion of their base because the GOP is shrinking. In 50-75 years, the majority population will be hispanic. To win today you have to pander to every significant portion. That Ann Coulter thing I mentioned was a good example. As soon as he softened the deportation stance, she lashed out and stopped supporting him and I promise you a good portion of conservatives did as well, so he went back to it. This is what you have to do as a republican candidate.I didn't want to actually respond to all that but these two things really caught my eye...
So you believe that pandering to the alt right conspiracy crazies is a viable strategy for a presidential nominee? Increasing your voter support shouldn't require pander to anti science people, the President should firmly be rational enough to know what the truth is and isn't. Should he pander to the anti-vaxxers as well since he needs more votes?
Imagine if Hillary wasn't a politically corrupt, lying, wholly unlikable candidate...imagine if the Dems had someone even half as good as Barack Obama as their nominee. This would be a double digit blowout.
Trump makes a big speech today and the headlines is he going to sue those women who accused him.
As awful as that is what I find more troubling than the kind of shit we kind of already saw coming was his all out war against the environment.
Yes, and it's fantastic, mostly for Huma's facial expressions as her dipshit now-ex-husband does another dipshit, trust-destroying, campaign-destroying thing that she could see coming from a mile away.
That documentary about Weiner is insane in terms of how much access they had; Abedin clearly did not support the decision and there are multiple points where she is very visibly uncomfortable with it all. After a certain point even the filmmaker himself can't believe what is happening and he straight up asks Weiner "Dude, why are you letting me film all of this?" Weiner has some mental issues.
Shit looks hilarious, like a Will ferrell movie. I will either watch that or gods of egypt. Looks like a train wreck either way
Guys and gals, the sooner you ignore Barack, the better. Every time you quote him and I see his posts I am immediately reminded of why he's on my ignore list.
I'll gladly be intolerable toward people defending Trump. Sod off.
Eh, sometimes you want to see the spin live. And since we don't have access to Kellyann, we make do.
But I'm done. It's the same word salad and pivot that I've seen before.
If USA isn't ready for such a New Yorker, dread the day when he has to deal with foreign politiciansYou have to read between the lines with Trump...we've never had a candidate more sarcastic and more "New York City" than this guy. People aren't used to it.
Trump makes a big speech today and the headlines is he going to sue those women who accused him.
Tells you all you need to know about Trump and the fact that his supporters defend literally anything he does or says is the reason they don't have a better candidate and why he's losing.
YES! Simply put... I don't believe there's any way a republican candidate can win in today's society unless they pander to every statistically significant portion of their base because the GOP is shrinking. In 50-75 years, the majority population will be hispanic. To win today you have to pander to every significant portion. That Ann Coulter thing I mentioned was a good example. As soon as he softened the deportation stance, she lashed out and stopped supporting him and I promise you a good portion of conservatives did as well, so he went back to it. This is what you have to do as a republican candidate.
Imagine if Hillary wasn't a politically corrupt, lying, wholly unlikable candidate...imagine if the Dems had someone even half as good as Barack Obama as their nominee. This would be a double digit blowout.
So he needs to pander to racists to win, and you cool with that?
Imagine if Hillary wasn't a politically corrupt, lying, wholly unlikable candidate...imagine if the Dems had someone even half as good as Barack Obama as their nominee. This would be a double digit blowout.
Who's gonna tell him?
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
The 1860 election is most interesting in that the Democratic party was fraying apart so badly over whether or not to start a Civil War to protect slavery and how far slavery should be expanded that they ran three different candidates for president.
Pro-slavery candidates got 60% of the vote, Lincoln got 40%... And Lincoln won in an electoral landslide because of how divided the pro-slavery vote was.
The Democrats in 1860 were so mad that Stephen Douglas didn't want to expand slavery to states whose people did not want slavery that they thought he was a racist in name only. They ended up destroying the party over this. Sad!
Pro-slavery candidates got 60% of the vote, Lincoln got 40%... And Lincoln won in an electoral landslide because of how divided the pro-slavery vote was.
The Democrats in 1860 were so mad that Stephen Douglas didn't want to expand slavery to states whose people did not want slavery that they thought he was a racist in name only. They ended up destroying the party over this. Sad!
So he needs to pander to racists to win, and you cool with that?
He's only pandering sarcastically.
gutter_trash
Banned
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dona...=clicksource_4380645_1_hero_headlines_bsq_hed
The headlines across all news sites: Trump vows to sue women
Trump is his own worst enemy
The headlines across all news sites: Trump vows to sue women
Trump is his own worst enemy
jokes on you, i was only pretending to be racistHe's only pandering sarcastically.
WHY ARE YALL DOING THIS
WHY
Bored waiting for oppo to drop the beat.
So he needs to pander to racists to win, and you cool with that?
This is why it's so hard not to be comfortable generalizing Trump supporters as being racist, stupid, ignorant, or all of the above. There's just too much evidence at this point.
WHY ARE YALL DOING THIS
WHY
GURL!
The world is falling apart because Gaga's new album ia terrible. We need to redirect the sadness in some way
YES! Simply put... I don't believe there's any way a republican candidate can win in today's society unless they pander to every statistically significant portion of their base because the GOP is shrinking. In 50-75 years, the majority population will be hispanic. To win today you have to pander to every significant portion. That Ann Coulter thing I mentioned was a good example. As soon as he softened the deportation stance, she lashed out and stopped supporting him and I promise you a good portion of conservatives did as well, so he went back to it. This is what you have to do as a republican candidate.
Imagine if Hillary wasn't a politically corrupt, lying, wholly unlikable candidate...imagine if the Dems had someone even half as good as Barack Obama as their nominee. This would be a double digit blowout.
I have some bad news for you
WHY ARE YALL DOING THIS
WHY
I need to do something while my rubber sheets are shipping.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
Assange forgot the (((.))))
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/789882885742419968
The new sober cover of the Economist, which is controlled by Lynn de Rothschild, Clinton's "loyal adoring pal"
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/789882885742419968
Y'all stop replying to that. Nothing anyone if you say will change anyone's mind and you're only serving to get yourself worked up.
If someone uses the defense "read between the lines." That's someone intentionally blinding themselves to vote for someone they know is pure shit.
If someone uses the defense "read between the lines." That's someone intentionally blinding themselves to vote for someone they know is pure shit.
Jesus H. Christ, these Wikileaks tweets
Leak early, leak often: If WikiLeaks had obtained Clinton emails earlier, US voters could have chosen Sanders v Trump. So do it. Do it now.
Atomic Playboy
Member
So the GOP base is shrinking and rather than changing their stance on certain issues to stay in sync with society, they should pander to racists and bigots? That's the worst excuse for voting Trump I've heard yet.YES! Simply put... I don't believe there's any way a republican candidate can win in today's society unless they pander to every statistically significant portion of their base because the GOP is shrinking. In 50-75 years, the majority population will be hispanic. To win today you have to pander to every significant portion. That Ann Coulter thing I mentioned was a good example. As soon as he softened the deportation stance, she lashed out and stopped supporting him and I promise you a good portion of conservatives did as well, so he went back to it. This is what you have to do as a republican candidate.
Imagine if Hillary wasn't a politically corrupt, lying, wholly unlikable candidate...imagine if the Dems had someone even half as good as Barack Obama as their nominee. This would be a double digit blowout.
Barack Lesnar
Banned
Of course I'm not cool with that but as a republican that wants a republican as President and not Hillary, what option do I have? I support most of his policies.So he needs to pander to racists to win, and you cool with that?
Btw... (yet another) example of the pandering thing I mentioned was having Mike Pence as his VP. I bet you anything Trump wanted someone else, but Pence was a perfect choice to get some of that "devout" conservative vote. There's no way Trump supports the crazy shit Pence was on with that transforming LGBTQ people into straight.
This is the type of shit a republican candidate has to do simply because we need a higher % turnout of republicans than democrats do of their base. The GOP base is shrinking.
GURL!
The world is falling apart because Gaga's new album ia terrible. We need to redirect the sadness in some way
I keep trying to tell myself Gaga's gonna come back and leave everyone #SHOOK...
...but that day will never come.
Sad!
Aaron Strife
Banned
So afraid of what your enemies will do to you,http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dona...=clicksource_4380645_1_hero_headlines_bsq_hed
The headlines across all news sites: Trump vows to sue women
Trump is his own worst enemy
You're the only enemy you ever seem to lose to,
You know why Hillary gets to do what she wants?
She doesn't justify schoolyard taunts with a response
SO YEAH, congratulations!
WHY ARE YALL DOING THIS
WHY
Georgia is DEAD HEAT per Clinton News Network!
And I sorta like Joanne.
And I want some oppo!
I really dont post here but wanted to share something I saw this morning on my way to work, I saw two houses one next to the other in which one ha a Hillary sing on the lawn and the other had a trump sign on it, they were literally no more than 5 steps away from each other. I not only found it funny, I wonder about if there is any interaction between those neighbors.
TestOfTide
Banned
Imagine if Hillary wasn't a politically corrupt, lying, wholly unlikable candidate...imagine if the Dems had someone even half as good as Barack Obama as their nominee. This would be a double digit blowout.
I don't have to imagine because all of those things don't describe Hillary (excluding the issue of her likability).
Hillary has given REAL plans to tackle the issues our country faces, but because you have been taught to hate Hillary Clinton, you are desperately trying to justify voting for the fascist, bigoted, orange dipshit instead.
Now please answer my question: Which of the 8 categories of "deplorable" do you identify with?
Barack Lesnar
Banned
This is the main stream media at work. Trump gives a great speech that's 99% filled with specifics on policies and the media will focus on that one comment.http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dona...=clicksource_4380645_1_hero_headlines_bsq_hed
The headlines across all news sites: Trump vows to sue women
Trump is his own worst enemy
You're 100% right though...his own worst enemy. Whoever wrote that part for him screwed up, if it wasn't an improvisation.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
Once you synthesize the entire post, there's basically just one argument being made.
1. Trump is a lying scam artist.
2. Therefore nothing Trump says or does reflects the real Trump.
The problem is that you lack a conclusion. That's not evidence for something, let alone an argument about why someone *should* vote for Trump. If anything that's a pretty strong argument for why someone shouldn't vote for Trump since you're admitting he's a liar who will say or do anything.
I mean, you've literally set up a great illustration of Kant's maxim about lying. If Trump always lies to get he wants, then no one would ever believe what he says, which in turn annihilates the very purpose of the lie.
And even if we do accept that Trump always lies, all that does is put you in a position of not knowing anything about who the real Trump is. If nothing Trump does has any truth-content or validity, then every statement or position is as suspect as the next. An extremist position from Trump is just as much a lie as the most moderated or liberal position from Trump.
You've given no reasons or evidence to justify why Good Trump is the real Trump and not Bad Trump. You've given no framework for analyzing whether certain actions or statements from Trump are 'real' or 'false'. All you've done is presuppose that Trump is good, therefore anything bad that Trump does is the lie. But why assume Trump is good? If Trump is a lying scam artist, the real conclusion is that he'sunknowable bad because scam artists are bad.
1. Trump is a lying scam artist.
2. Therefore nothing Trump says or does reflects the real Trump.
The problem is that you lack a conclusion. That's not evidence for something, let alone an argument about why someone *should* vote for Trump. If anything that's a pretty strong argument for why someone shouldn't vote for Trump since you're admitting he's a liar who will say or do anything.
I mean, you've literally set up a great illustration of Kant's maxim about lying. If Trump always lies to get he wants, then no one would ever believe what he says, which in turn annihilates the very purpose of the lie.
And even if we do accept that Trump always lies, all that does is put you in a position of not knowing anything about who the real Trump is. If nothing Trump does has any truth-content or validity, then every statement or position is as suspect as the next. An extremist position from Trump is just as much a lie as the most moderated or liberal position from Trump.
You've given no reasons or evidence to justify why Good Trump is the real Trump and not Bad Trump. You've given no framework for analyzing whether certain actions or statements from Trump are 'real' or 'false'. All you've done is presuppose that Trump is good, therefore anything bad that Trump does is the lie. But why assume Trump is good? If Trump is a lying scam artist, the real conclusion is that he's
So this Trump speech is a nightmare. He first sounded like he's dropping out, and now he's essentially laying out not the first 100 days in office, but the 100 days after he loses where he sues everyone.
http://www.theonion.com/article/trump-maps-out-plan-first-100-days-not-conceding-e-54230
Jesus H. Christ, these Wikileaks tweets
yeah they aren't even hiding it anymore.
metalslimer
Member
This is the main stream media at work. Trump gives a great speech that's 99% filled with specifics on policies and the media will focus on that one comment.
You're 100% right though...his own worst enemy. Whoever wrote that part for him screwed up, if it wasn't an improvisation.
The fact that you think that was a great speech is telling. No offense you should just accept that it's over.
elvisaintdead
Member
Donald Trump, what a jokester. In that rally yesterday, he was just being sarcastic about possibly not accepting the results of the election, after repeatedly claiming that the election will be rigged.
He was joking about envisioning a possibility for himself to come out on November 8th and tell 30-40% of voters who will believe him that Hillary Clinton is an illegitimate president.
He's just joshing around with his supporters who have repeatedly called for an armed revolution if Hillary is elected.
He's just goofing on the media when he says he's going to start interfering in their company's mergers as revenge for how they covered his campaign.
Oh, man! Remember those humorous jabs against the hispanic community when he claimed that Mexico is sending drugs, crime, rapists and murderers. Some, he assumes, are good people, what a jest!
The biggest satire of them all was on that bus with Billy Bush, where he described how he sexually assaults women! What a gas!
He was joking about envisioning a possibility for himself to come out on November 8th and tell 30-40% of voters who will believe him that Hillary Clinton is an illegitimate president.
He's just joshing around with his supporters who have repeatedly called for an armed revolution if Hillary is elected.
He's just goofing on the media when he says he's going to start interfering in their company's mergers as revenge for how they covered his campaign.
Oh, man! Remember those humorous jabs against the hispanic community when he claimed that Mexico is sending drugs, crime, rapists and murderers. Some, he assumes, are good people, what a jest!
The biggest satire of them all was on that bus with Billy Bush, where he described how he sexually assaults women! What a gas!
I think you mean the corrupt Lamestream media owned by the (((global bankers))).This is the main stream media at work. Trump gives a great speech that's 99% filled with specifics on policies and the media will focus on that one comment.
You're 100% right though...his own worst enemy. Whoever wrote that part for him screwed up, if it wasn't an improvisation.
Voysa Reezun
Banned
In general, I have seen people argue that Trump has to pander to lunatics to win their votes.
The question always arises as to why Trump, or Republicans in general, can't just win over blocs of voters that otherwise might vote for Clinton or the Dems with superior ideas and policies?
I mean, conservative ideas always work best in the real world. That's what Paul Ryan's Twitter feed says, at least. Why can't Trump win on ideas without having to pander to lunatics? Why would he need to try and intimidate voters? Why would the GOP sue to try and do so? KKK-style techniques should be unnecessary.
The question always arises as to why Trump, or Republicans in general, can't just win over blocs of voters that otherwise might vote for Clinton or the Dems with superior ideas and policies?
I mean, conservative ideas always work best in the real world. That's what Paul Ryan's Twitter feed says, at least. Why can't Trump win on ideas without having to pander to lunatics? Why would he need to try and intimidate voters? Why would the GOP sue to try and do so? KKK-style techniques should be unnecessary.
Barack Lesnar
Banned
Save for the global warming part (which I missed but you guys said he said that), it was a great speech laying out specific policies. It wasn't vague, he laid it all out detailed. I loved the part about limiting terms for congress and lobbying restrictions. That's the type of thing only a candidate that isn't firmly implanted into Washington's butt would say.The fact that you think that was a great speech is telling.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.