- This topic has 1,297 replies, 43 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 1 month ago by
Balboa.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 19, 2016 at 11:34 AM #800751August 19, 2016 at 12:14 PM #800752
CoronitaParticipantLol.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/19/politics/indian-man-ejected-trump-rally/index.html
Half-Indian man escorted out of Trump rally
Charlotte (CNN)A man who identified himself as half-Indian was escorted out of a Donald Trump rally on Thursday out of concern that he was a protester, but the man insisted he was a Trump supporter and said he feels that he was racially profiled.
Jake Anantha, an 18-year-old from Charlotte, was approached by a member of Trump’s security team and then ushered out by police. He was told that he resembled another man who had previously disrupted Trump rallies.
“I told him I’ve never been to another rally in my life,” Anantha said. “I’m a huge Trump supporter. I would never protest against Trump.”
Anantha is a registered Republican, according to state voter records, who registered to vote in March. Anantha, who said he’s a student at Central Piedmont Community College, was wearing a pro-Trump shirt with another pro-Trump shirt underneath.Anyone else notice the common mentality from the Trump camp? Try this…Everything that comes from the Trump camp, try to prefix it with
“Well, since all the brown people look the same, so ….”I think that’s the common litmus test for the majority of the thought processes and decision processes that come from the Trump camp….
Lol…
August 19, 2016 at 8:29 PM #800758bearishgurl
ParticipantUm, Dukehorn? Did you actually read and comprehend my most recent post here? In response to Rich’s assertion, I stated, “Trump is not my `buddy.'”
If I took the time to create a “Reasons I cannot vote for HRC thread”. . . SURE, I could come up with a litany of her snafus, recent faux pauxs (is that a word?), sordid backroom deals while in public office, her piles upon piles of dirty laundry, her episodes of ill health, the hilarious guests at her recent convention, her numerous failed attempts at cleaning up her “esteemed partner’s” dirty messes, the Clintons’ shady real estate shenanigans, her two-timing paid speaking engagements, the Clinton’s “laundering” of their foundation donations (and campaign donations) originating from overt “enemies” of the US, her defense of her partner’s impeachment by publicly calling it a “right-wing conspiracy,” blah, blah, blah . . .
And that’s just scratching the surface. The material from just the late ’70’s thru late ’90’s alone of HRC’s history (before she even served in any public office herself) has enough useful material in it to keep a late night talk-show host occupied for 1-2 complete seasons!
Just like Trump, Hill has spent 3-4 decades in the public eye and there is plenty of fodder out there with which to vet her “character” with. Ummm, voters aren’t stupid. The older voting bloc also knows that a person’s inner core doesn’t change much between age 25 and age 65.
But why would I spend an hour (yes one hour at 80+ wpm) typing all that sh!t when the MSM is doing a fine job of informing the public of Hill’s (and Trump’s) long histories for me? One doesn’t even need TV to have all this stuff drop in our laps when we open our e-mail accounts in the morning. Wherever you click, Hill and Trump’s “stories” are all over the internet!
You must know that people “get married” for all sorts of reasons. The reason why Bill and Hill hitched their wagons to one another (as well as the reason why they are still “together” to this day) is now inexplicably clear for all the world to see.
If you want to vote for HRC, that’s your prerogative. If you don’t like Trump as a person, that’s your prerogative, as it is MY prerogative not to like (or respect) HRC as a person. I’m not (by far) the most “political poster” here. Not by a long shot. That dubious honor goes to FlyerInHI/brian. And that’s okay. His posts don’t bother me. Often they’re rather entertaining on a “slow” day or evening :=0
August 20, 2016 at 8:07 AM #800759Anonymous
Guest[quote=Dukehorn]
(a) I can’t support a woman who sticks in a marriage with a serial philanderer, but I can support a serial philanderer on this 3rd marriage. Nice, victim-blaming there…..(b) HRC doesn’t represent my values so I won’t vote for her. So Trump’s birther conspiracy, anti-Islam, anti-Mexican values reflect yours? Oh, yeah, you’re the one who complained back in April about “illegal aliens” waving “Mexican flags” here in California. Ok, getting closer to the truth.
(c) The MSM is “making hay” of Trump’s rhetoric. You’re making hay of Hillary’s marriage yet somehow pointing out Trump’s rhetoric of “using nukes”, “paying supporter’s legal bills for assaulting minorities,” “banning people based on their religion” and “his belief that Obama was born in Kenya” is less substantive???
(d) HRC isn’t living her truth. But Trump’s lack of truth on his charity donations (none), his other financials (tax return, Russian financing), his outsourcing of jobs (the real truth vs the fake I’m bringing jobs to the US) just seems to escape you?
(e) Nice pot calling kettle. You are the most frequent political poster here. The funny thing is if you just typed less, people probably would respect you more. But the more you type out your rationales, the more transparent your real beliefs and motives are.[/quote]
Excellent summary of the thought process of many Trump supporters.
Your mistake was attempting to use objective reasoning when communicating with a Trump supporter.
And you even got the expected nonsensical response: “But I’m not a Trump supporter…”
August 20, 2016 at 10:11 AM #800760scaredyclassic
Participantwe should turn to the wisdom of The Dude, jeff lebowski, who said, “thats just, like, ypur opinion man.”
seems so true. but, thats just like my opinion ma n.
August 20, 2016 at 10:11 AM #800761Participantwe should turn to the wisdom of The Dude, jeff lebowski, who said, “thats just, like, ypur opinion man.”
seems so true. but, thats just like my opinion ma n.
August 20, 2016 at 10:38 AM #800762
svelteParticipant[quote=harvey]
Excellent summary of the thought process of many Trump supporters.
Your mistake was attempting to use objective reasoning when communicating with a Trump supporter.
And you even got the expected nonsensical response: “But I’m not a Trump supporter…”[/quote]
I think one thing this election has shown me more than anything is that those who are hard right will vote Rep no matter what, even if the candidate were Satan himself. Those that are hard left will vote Dem no matter what also.
I kinda knew this before, but with the way that Trump is completely off track with traditional Rep positions, the way my very Christian friends have jumped through mental hoops to justify supporting him, and the way that my Rep friends seem totally unconcerned with his lack of political experience (which they lambasted Obama for just 8 short years ago) I’ve learned just how far folks will go to justify their candidate.
August 20, 2016 at 10:41 AM #800763FlyerInHi
GuestBG, your disparaging of the Clinton marriage is so not consrvative or traditional. Did you hear of the concept of til death do us part?
August 20, 2016 at 10:56 AM #800764svelteParticipant[quote=FlyerInHi]BG, your disparaging of the Clinton marriage is so not consrvative or traditional. Did you hear of the concept of til death do us part?[/quote]
I have no clue why anybody but the Clintons should care who each other screws. I mean, really, if Hillary is OK with it, what is the issue? Maybe she’s doing the same thing!
At the end of the day, who boinks who is nobody’s business but the people doing the boinking.
To think otherwise is to place waaaay to much emphasis on the importance of sex.
August 20, 2016 at 11:53 AM #800765Participantby this std, very few people can run…from fox news:
“About 70 percent of married men admitted to cheating on their wives! Another study found that 2/3 of women are not aware of their husband’s affair. I can relate to that — It took a long time until I found out myself — when I decided to check his phone.
What about the women? Most statistics found that about 50 to 60 percent of women admitted to having an affair. ”
vote for me with confidence. i never cheated. way too lazy to cheat…also, not that into it…
August 20, 2016 at 12:44 PM #800766Guest[quote=svelte]I think one thing this election has shown me more than anything is that those who are hard right will vote Rep no matter what, even if the candidate were Satan himself. Those that are hard left will vote Dem no matter what also.
I kinda knew this before, but with the way that Trump is completely off track with traditional Rep positions, the way my very Christian friends have jumped through mental hoops to justify supporting him, and the way that my Rep friends seem totally unconcerned with his lack of political experience (which they lambasted Obama for just 8 short years ago) […][/quote]
Is there an equivalent of Trump on the left? I’m having a hard time even imagining what such a candidate would be like…
Trump doesn’t really represent the political right as he does represent what the American Republican machine has become in the past few decades. It was never about conservatism, religious values, fiscal restraint or any of the items on the platform. It was about using the media, the political machine, and cultural influences to gain and maintain power.
You’ll always hear the argument that “the left does it too” but the evidence doesn’t support the claim of equivalence.
[quote]I’ve learned just how far folks will go to justify their candidate.[/quote]
The reason we see this extreme is that the right wing media has been training the minds of their listeners to think this way. The message of the American “talk radio” media machine was never about arguing in favor of a particular platform – the issues were just their canvas. The message is that it’s holy and patriotic to ignore objective fact in support of your side. Completely hypocritical stances are valid as long as the stances are in alignment with dogma.
Trump is the perfect representative for the anti-enlightenment movement that the Republican party has become.
August 20, 2016 at 2:12 PM #800767Participant[quote=Dukehorn] . . . (a) I can’t support a woman who sticks in a marriage with a serial philanderer, but I can support a serial philanderer on this 3rd marriage. Nice, victim-blaming there…..[/quote]
I want to address this statement separately. For the record, Bill Clinton had over a dozen affairs (just the ones which became public) PRIOR to being sworn in as POTUS. He could have had as many as two dozen affairs but the other parties never spoke about them. One of Bill’s affairs lasted longer than the Donald’s second marriage.Donald Trump’s first marriage broke up because his spouse voted with her feet after learning of his ongoing affair. They divorced and his first wife got a huge settlement because she worked her a$$ off over the years making the Trump organization what it was at the time of their split. Donald married his affair partner and it only lasted just over 4 years. The reason Maples left him was because he was a consummate workaholic, NOT a “philanderer.” Donald didn’t meet his 3rd spouse until at least seven years after he and Maples split up.
One can’t be a serial philanderer unless they are actually married at the time of “philandering.” I don’t care if one’s “spouse” lives 3000 miles away or in a different country! (And this doesn’t apply to anyone we’re discussing here, but “living together” doesn’t count. “Living together” and “marriage” are two completely different animals. In my mind, “living together” doesn’t mean anything.)
Bill Clinton was/is a classic “serial philanderer” and those types never change. If Hill gets in the White House, I predict he’ll be back to his creepy ways with the female millennial intern set in no time … alas, even in his old age!
August 20, 2016 at 3:01 PM #800768Participant[quote=FlyerInHi]BG, your disparaging of the Clinton marriage is so not consrvative or traditional. Did you hear of the concept of til death do us part?[/quote]Bill’s (short and long-term) “dalliances” (heavily publicized after the fact) occurred at a time prior to the internet, when people couldn’t just join a site to meet prospective affair partners. As such, the current “affair rate” of 70% for men and 50-60% for women (as scaredy posted here) wasn’t true in the ’70’s thru the ’90’s. Most of Bill’s affairs occurred when he served as the AG and Governor (2 terms which were split) for the state of AR. They were are all terribly embarrassing for Hillary and in spite of being repeatedly publicly humiliated, she chose each and every time to stand by her man and even “hire” PI’s and other taxpayer-funded personnel available to Bill’s public office (“investigator types” and other lackeys) to follow some of these women who came forward and attempt to intimidate them at their homes and jobs in (mostly thwarted) efforts to silence them. Bill was even later sued for sexual harassment in the line of duty while occupying a public office in AR! Most of his affairs which became public occurred when there were no laws in place to prohibit sexual harassment at work! I feel sorry for what these women had to go through in order to keep their jobs to feed their families. I have no respect for people who can’t see who their spouse really is and choose to blame everyone else but him/her for their behavior because they don’t have the courage to just walk away. Not only does Hillary NOT have the courage to do what it takes to run the US properly, she does not have the physical and mental stamina necessary for the difficult and strenuous job of POTUS, IMO. She did at one time in her life (’90’s) but not today. I know quite a few people in Hill’s age group (+/- 3 years) and they are ALL in much better physical shape than Hill is. I feel Hill was smart, beautiful and successful in her own right and would have been in much better physical and mental shape than she is today had she not prostrated herself at Bill’s feet in order to remain a Clinton. All her years of “looking the other way” undoubtedly took their toll on her. This is the main reason why she is NOT a good role model for girls and women.
FIH, my opinion on Hill’s fitness for POTUS has nothing to do with “’til death do us part” or even whether Bill and Hill had an agreement to have an open marriage from day one. I don’t even care about that. It’s based upon all the public humiliation over decades that she CHOSE to repeatedly suffer at the hands of Bill and the adverse effect it had on her in every way, shape and form. Her “contemporaries” have lo-o-o-ong memories. Especially Arkansans :=0
And for the record, I’m not a “conservative.” Nor have I ever watched “conservative” channels or listened to “conservative” radio stations. I don’t even have TV.
August 20, 2016 at 4:36 PM #800769GuestBG, maybe Hillary was publicly humiliated. She survived it so don’t you think that makes her a person of very stong character? Do you want spouses do divorce at every hint of social humiliation? Some religions don’t allow divorces.
I was looking at a recipe that called for mirepoix. The Duke of Mirepoix was a nobleman of high rank but little talent. But the Duke’s wife was a favorite of the French king who bestowed favors onto the Duke. Everyone at court knew.
August 21, 2016 at 12:47 PM #800776GuestThis is the kind of hatred Trump is enabling.
I don’t think there’s any kind of equivalence that can excuse it.
Conservatives can argue that NYTimes and Wapo are liberal tools as are our universities. But those institutions are really the political middle of American life.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/08/21/this-couple-didnt-tip-their-latina-server-they-left-a-hateful-message-instead/?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_pn-tip-729am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.c162c8de701f
This couple didn’t tip their Latina server. They left a hateful message instead.The waitress’ family is a typical American Dream family. The grandfather flunked out of college. Taught English in Honduras. Became a lawyer and raised a wonderful mixed family.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.