A jackwad? That's all you have to say? No break down analysis Like you do Clinton?
Lol. You deflected AGAIN. Pointless.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Fox News said what I've been saying for awhile. The White female vote is going to decide this thing. If Trump wants a nail in his coffin, bring up Bill and Hillarys relationship.
Fox News said what I've been saying for awhile. The White female vote is going to decide this thing. If Trump wants a nail in his coffin, bring up Bill and Hillarys relationship.
And yet, the counter to that is to bring up Trumps relationship with his three wives.
Remember, he had an affair, too.
Which by the way, doesn't he fit the stereotype of the typical black dude people like to trash?
Candy, be honest. How do you think conservative wouldve talked about Obama if he had 5 kids from three different baby mamas?
Man oh man....
Last edited by Swish; 07/31/1609:24 PM.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
You can HAVE that and not be married. The dude is a billionaire. He can have a whole bunch of hotties around him. He can have sugar mommas around him with no commitments.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
A jackwad? That's all you have to say? No break down analysis Like you do Clinton?
Lol. You deflected AGAIN. Pointless.
What more do you want me to say?
He's a jackwad.
He hasn't ever held office. hillary has. She's a lying, conniving, give me money and I'll do what you want, 2 faced whore.
Hillary has screwed people in every position she's ever held. Deaths don't matter to her. What difference does it make? I'm smart enough to know just what I can get away with........now, give me money.
Honestly, anyone thinking about voting for hillary is someone that somehow is on the public dole. Deal with it. Sometimes the truth hurts.
the issue is that overall, I don't believe relationships should be a factor. That's just IMO.
I really don't care about trumps stuff. He's a billionaire who likes trophy wives. More news at 11, ya know?
However, to candy's point. This election could very well hinge on who gets the women's vote. Specifically white women.
And if people(they already are) are gonna bring up the clintons marriage, then certainty Trumps marriage should be free game.
Especially since HE, not anybody else, be HE decided he was gonna pander to the base and claim he's a good Christian. Good Christians don't get married three times and cheat on their wives on a regular.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
That's one of the most ignorant post you've ever made.
We literally have a thread talking about poor whites on government assistance voting for trump
You're blind. The truth hurts.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Relarionships aside. Like I said, religious female votes will go to Trump because of Pence. I think that is the only reason they picked him. For the religious vote.
Relarionships aside. Like I said, religious female votes will go to Trump because of Pence. I think that is the only reason they picked him. For the religious vote.
I posted about religious vote because I live in the bible belt. It will be both black and white females voting for him in the southern states. And males as well.
The overall point is solid and pretty much impossible to argue with, just IMO. Nobody is a full on expert, and that's why the president is constantly surrounded by the top of top in any field.
Here my problem when it comes to trump: I'm really uncomfortable with a guy from the business world making government type of judgement calls on this grand of a scale.
As much as I like, in theory, a guy who's a complete outsider running the country, I just can't.
Remember how a lot of you guys said last year that a lot of conservatives don't have a problem with electing the first women president, but the issue was with Hillary, all on her own?
That's how a lot of people feel about trump. The "outsider" is great. The problem is that it's trump.
And sorry, but trump hasn't shown me where he's capable of making judgement calls on people's lives.
I can go down the crap list of things that Hillary isn't MUCH better when it comes to judgement calls, but worse comes to worse, I want her in the war room, never trump. Never....trump.
Hell, even his business decisions scare me, when it comes to his employees.
Trump likes to brag about how many people he's hired.
And that's awesome, to me anyway.
But nobody is asking the question: how many people have lost their jobs because of trump, or trump ran businesses? Add the number of people that went to trump university.
How big is that number? How many people lost their jobs from the Atlantic city mess?
The number of people hired is gonna exceed those fired. However, with these bankruptcies, you can expect more questions to pop up.
Here's another issue with judgement:
Every time Critiscim comes up, has nobody notice that he gives typical corporate answers?
It's an excuse that's protects them legally, as if it's mainly a feel good excuse for stock holders, and then he dodges and never talks about it again. Like a corporation.
Except when he becomes president, no excuses won't fly anymore. People want to know, and will press him, on why he made this decisions that effects this area, or this country, etc.
Corporate answers aren't gonna work. At least not even today's world. Even Fox News and The Blaze is gonna grill him heavy if he becomes president.
And that is where I ask my finals thing on judgement:
Speaking SPECIFICALLYabout trump, no other correlations....I'm suppose to trust him making judgement calls on actual lives?
What track record does he possess that makes me believe he's capable of making good decisions with regards to lives saved or taken?
THATS what scares me about Trump. Yes, when it comes to foreign policy, I don't want an amateur in there. I just can't bro. I can't.
If Gary Johnson doesn't make the cut, and it comes down to Clinton or Trump, I can not in my heart vote for that guy. I can not vote for him to do right by the military. Or civilians around the world in conflict.
Clinton isn't much better. By the slightest. But when it comes to who has the nuke codes, nah man. Never trump.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I'm talking about trump in a presidential election campaign.
Not following you.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Now I dont think Trump is much better, but I at least think he intends to fullfill his promises. He has all the money in the world so he doesnt need to be bed buddies with anyone. .
Not exactly true. You may want to listen to This American Life: Get Your Money's Worth
The episode interviews Doug Deason, son of billionaire Darwin Deason and how they interviewed Trump when he was low on campaign funds and decided to donate to his campaign.
Rocket doesn't want to be young savage life, even though he could.
Last edited by Swish; 07/31/1610:23 PM.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Reagan was an actor and he was fine as President. So I dont buy the not qualified because not a politician arguement I think it makes him a better candidate.
Reagan had governor experience prior to being president.
Why y'all always leave that out?
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
The overall point is solid and pretty much impossible to argue with, just IMO. Nobody is a full on expert, and that's why the president is constantly surrounded by the top of top in any field.
Here my problem when it comes to trump: I'm really uncomfortable with a guy from the business world making government type of judgement calls on this grand of a scale.
As much as I like, in theory, a guy who's a complete outsider running the country, I just can't.
Remember how a lot of you guys said last year that a lot of conservatives don't have a problem with electing the first women president, but the issue was with Hillary, all on her own?
That's how a lot of people feel about trump. The "outsider" is great. The problem is that it's trump.
And sorry, but trump hasn't shown me where he's capable of making judgement calls on people's lives.
I can go down the crap list of things that Hillary isn't MUCH better when it comes to judgement calls, but worse comes to worse, I want her in the war room, never trump. Never....trump.
Hell, even his business decisions scare me, when it comes to his employees.
Trump likes to brag about how many people he's hired.
And that's awesome, to me anyway.
But nobody is asking the question: how many people have lost their jobs because of trump, or trump ran businesses? Add the number of people that went to trump university.
How big is that number? How many people lost their jobs from the Atlantic city mess?
The number of people hired is gonna exceed those fired. However, with these bankruptcies, you can expect more questions to pop up.
Here's another issue with judgement:
Every time Critiscim comes up, has nobody notice that he gives typical corporate answers?
It's an excuse that's protects them legally, as if it's mainly a feel good excuse for stock holders, and then he dodges and never talks about it again. Like a corporation.
Except when he becomes president, no excuses won't fly anymore. People want to know, and will press him, on why he made this decisions that effects this area, or this country, etc.
Corporate answers aren't gonna work. At least not even today's world. Even Fox News and The Blaze is gonna grill him heavy if he becomes president.
And that is where I ask my finals thing on judgement:
Speaking SPECIFICALLYabout trump, no other correlations....I'm suppose to trust him making judgement calls on actual lives?
What track record does he possess that makes me believe he's capable of making good decisions with regards to lives saved or taken?
THATS what scares me about Trump. Yes, when it comes to foreign policy, I don't want an amateur in there. I just can't bro. I can't.
If Gary Johnson doesn't make the cut, and it comes down to Clinton or Trump, I can not in my heart vote for that guy. I can not vote for him to do right by the military. Or civilians around the world in conflict.
Clinton isn't much better. By the slightest. But when it comes to who has the nuke codes, nah man. Never trump.
I will try to get at some of these points tomorrow but I just quickly want to address one thing because you made some points about being in the war room, foreign policy, and the military.
You have to realize this, Hillary is the war hawk in this election. It is not even close. Don't let her sad, lethargic way of speaking compared to Trump's boisterous personality fool you. See all of the interventions that the U.S. were involved in during HRC's time as Secretary of State. See all her saber rattling toward Russia.
I almost think there is a complacency there where people think that no war could ever break out, but you would think that a high level politician would show some respect and decency to an adversary that has thousands of nuclear weapons including many on hair trigger alert. You would think. Stephen Cohen was recently on CNN of all networks and talked about this. They dedicated about 5 minutes to the subject and then scurried him off. If anything it was actually surprising it lasted that long.
That's what is so frustrating about those who talk about fearing Donald Trump as the Commander in Chief. He is really tough on ISIS but I'm far more confident in him having a good, professional working relationship with major powers.
I posted the military numbers some time back and it showed those in the military favored Trump over Hillary by at least a 2:1 ratio. It may have been closer to 3:1. I'll have to dig that one up tomorrow.
I'd be scared if he was boys with them. Hell, we already know he's boys with Putin already.
It's funny because y'all keep saying world leaders, then I ask "who?", and it nevers get answers.
Just like a lot of what trump says. He says things, but he doesn't say how. Incomplete answers.
Last edited by Swish; 07/31/1610:40 PM.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
When I say interesting, I don't mean anything less or more than that. It's something I'm not sure I know how to feel about, and part of that is due to one of the points the speaker brings up: we don't talk about it. A lot of people probably don't even have a clue what he is talking about for that matter.
I just find it funny how there are people who are so afraid of Trump's presidency, when he has mostly only had aggressive things to say about ISIS in the international arena. Yet those very same people ignore the role that Hillary played in destabilizing Libya, Egypt, Syria, and many other places. She is a much bigger threat to world peace and stability than Trump is.
Oh here's a bio about Stephen Cohen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_F._Cohen cliffs: He's a U.S. scholar of Russian studies at Princeton and New York University. He has written extensively about U.S.-Russian relations and has some controversial opinions.
That region was on a rampage of radicalism and civil war. Nobody was fixing that situation at the time.
And yet, somehow you think electing the guy who just said he wants to "bam all Muslims" and "take out their families " is going to make anything better?
Your talking about furthering the divide to catastrophic failure.
Nah bro. No way. I have to go with my instincts. Never trump.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
I liked the article. He made some valid points about delegating out to find experts, and how chance plays a role in outcomes. Here's a paragraph that caused me to think:
Quote:
Lastly, would Donald Trump be willing and able to take advice from experts, or would he ignore them and make his own crazy-Hitler decisions? I think we already have the answer to that in Paul Manafort. We can see with our own eyes that Trump has been following Manafort’s advice. Trump has been using the teleprompter more, and also moderating his extreme policy ideas to the middle. We don’t have to wonder if Trump takes expert advice. He’s doing it right in front of us, and in the most conspicuous way.
Do you remember the time Trump said something under-informed about legal penalties for abortion? Advisors (including his family) probably advised him to change his position on that immediately, and he did. We see Trump taking advice every day. I don’t know how you could miss it.
I've seen exactly what Adams was describing.
At the same time, I also know that before Paul Manafort, Trump was taking his advice from Corey "I'll grab a b*" Lewandowsky before the meltdown that got him canned- which does nothing to bolster my faith in Trump's judgement. Manafort was Trump's second choice (we think), but his first choice was a cannon almost as loose and unfocused as he.
(At this point, it's probably appropriate to also mention that Paul Manafort was also a political advisor to Ferdinand Marcos, Mobutu Sese Seko and Viktor Yanukovych- all deposed dictators and despots)
...so now, Trump's getting his campaign advice from an 'Ultimate DC Political Insider' in the form of Paul Manafort? A person who epitomizes everything that Trump's followers say they abhor?
It was Lewandowsky who orchestrated Trump's initial 'scorched earth' approach to the primaries. Sure, it worked- in a WWE sort of way... but something was NOT being considered at the time:
HOW THIS LOOKS TO THE REST OF THE WORLD.
You see... Trump was perfectly willing to take 'short-game' advice that could get him rabid followers over a few months, but completely lost the fact that this display would follow him into the White House. How is he going to explain this behavior to folks like Netenyahu, Merkel, Holland, Trudeau, Shinzō Abe, NATO, and the rest of the First World nations? "Hey, guys- listen... it was just an act to get me elected. I'm really a much, much different guy. Totally presidential, believe me..."
Which brings us back to the main point that ran throughout my previous post: that of temperament.
Much of Trump's "new face" (as orchestrated by Manafort) is a fresh veneer slapped on a product that we've already seen. "New" "Improved"... but the product in the box is still the same. Evidence of that is how he's handled the Khizr Khan dustup, the disparaging remarks he made about the first responders who freed him from the stuck elevator, and the endless 'attack tweets' that he can't seem to wean himself off.
It seems to me that this guy gets a pass in ways that no other candidate- R or D has ever enjoyed. I've never seen such a lurching, awkward and unprofessionally-run campaign in 40 years as a voter. And yet, his supporters look past it. He's been crude, insulting, boorish and immature... and his followers eat it up. For me, this is a problem, because there is no amount of polish or layers of veneer that will fundamentally change who he is. This is who will represent the most powerful nation on Planet Earth, if the unthinkable should come to pass.
Haus: I've prided myself in trying to be a level-headed, rational person for most of my adult life. I care deeply about many social issues, but have been mostly apolitical as an adult. I've voted for candidates I wanted to see in office, and have been disappointed in some of America's choices. I've lived under Democrat administrations and Republican administrations without either one impacting my personal life very much.
...but in all those years, I've never seen a presidential candidate who has ever scared the crap out of me- until now.
I've been alive (and cognizant) since the Kennedy years, and not a single president or hopeful has been this ill-suited for global politics. And it goes beyond experience. It's about the man himself.
Like I said in an earlier post, I get why folks want something 'different'... but this isnot the person to entrust with the nation.
Some years back, my town had a Mayor who fit Trump's profile to a tee. Dude's name was Carty (Carlton) Finkbeiner. Elected numerous times to office. Said outrageous things. Made off-the-cuff remarks in pressers that made regional news. Remarks that he repeatedly had to walk back, explain, and eventually apologize for. He got some things done, but was no more or less successful than any other mayor who came before or after. Voters and locals loved it, because you never knew what he'd say next, but you knew it would always be controversial, wilder than s*... and great for water cooler talk the next day. I don't know a single local who would seriously consider Carty to be a viable choice for the office of POTUS. Running a good-sized Ohio town is one thing- brokering an agreement between Israel and Palestine, sitting across the table from Russia, as they attempt to annex another freed state? Not a chance in Hell.
The United States of America is the linchpin that holds the entire global system together. Trade. Economics. Regional and Geopoltical Diplomacy. First World/Third World politics. Nuclear war.
And a significant number of people want to entrust Donald (effing) Trump with this responsibility. If they are casting their votes for him because they hate Hillary Clinton, they are fools who will doom us all. Not because Hillary Clinton is The Perfect Choice (or even a desirable choice), but because Donald Trump is not a rational, viable choice at all.
This ain't "Ted Mack's Amateur Hour." Posers and wannabe's could end us all.
I will exercise my vote to make certain that this nightmare scenario NEVER has a chance of happening. Too much is at stake. If that loses me friends here at Dawgtalkers, it's a price I'm willing to pay. And here's why:
Friendships could be mended under a Clinton, Sanders, Bush, Romney, Obama, Cruz, Christie, Kasich, Walker or even Santorum regime. If there's a Trump regime, it's over.
Over.
I refuse to allow Clyde from "Every Which Way But Loose" anywhere near the 'nuclear football.'
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
Here is the real problem that I think most of us can agree on:
Hillary is a crooked political fossil that will bring little to any real change and most likely just continue the Oligarchy's status quo rigged system.
Trump is a mental midget with psychopathic tendencies. His primary strength of business acumen doesn't stand up well to scrutiny, he has zero experience in governing, he is temperamentally unstable and if not a bigot, then at the very least he has serious judgement issues.
The biggest problem here in this election cycle is that once again we are faced with no real choice for what we all desire and that is 'change'. Both sides want to end the corrupt political process controlled by the Oligarchy, but there is no candidate for that change.
Hillary and Trump will both take care of the good ole boys first. The third party candidates will not get traction because the system is rigged against them.
Hillary is the establishment's candidate, the Oligarchy's candidate and with each news cycle that is becoming more apparent. Trump's own party thinks he's a loose canon and the defectors are working against him. The Oligarchy is now starting to work against him, so it's just a matter of time.
If you think for one minute that what YOU or I want is going to happen, you can forget about it. This election has already been decided in the backrooms of the power brokers. Hillary is going to be the next president because she is bought and paid for, will not rock the boat and will be a president we can survive.
Trump has already been deemed a disaster and has zero chance of being elected. His rhetoric about many issues scares the powers that be, so just like Bernie's campaign, the fix is in.
