|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
08-10-2016, 08:08 PM
|
#1
|
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Gloucester Massachusetts
Posts: 2,678
|
Assassination!!!
Who wants hillary assassinated?....not trump, he never mentioned the word...it seems to me that the socialist news media and democrats R using the word assassinate the last couple of days....if they say it enough maybe the news media and dems will encourage some nut case to attempt to carry it out....and what did hillary say in 2008 about maybe obama being assassinated and that is YYYY she would not drop out of race when asked too....
|
"When its not about money,it's all about money."...
|
|
|
08-10-2016, 08:43 PM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Pembroke
Posts: 3,343
|
Let's not forget the John Kerry incident. They twist it to what they want you read and nothing else.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
08-10-2016, 08:49 PM
|
#3
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: On my boat
Posts: 9,698
|
Much speculation she's sick with some illness.
Maybe karma is coming due.
What's the Clinton body count of suspensious deaths/suicides up to now ???
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
08-10-2016, 09:03 PM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Pembroke
Posts: 3,343
|
All just a tremendous coincidence,just wait you'll see the ballwashers defending her here in no time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
08-11-2016, 04:28 AM
|
#5
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,197
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tysdad115
All just a tremendous coincidence,just wait you'll see the ballwashers defending her here in no time.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
Seems the trump ball washing has already started..
No I dont think Trump wants hillary assassinated literally but the comment was metaphorical ... and the vast majority see it that way
and to suggest it was a get out the Vote message is comical
i guess he didn't mean this" either
And I said, 'Man, that’s like big stuff. I always wanted to get the Purple Heart," Trump said. "This was much easier.”
he has a history of saying stuff he dosn't mean cant wait for the debates that should be a show to watch
|
|
|
|
08-11-2016, 05:47 AM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Mansfield
Posts: 4,834
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
Seems the trump ball washing has already started..
No I dont think Trump wants hillary assassinated literally but the comment was metaphorical ... and the vast majority see it that way
and to suggest it was a get out the Vote message is comical
i guess he didn't mean this" either
And I said, 'Man, that’s like big stuff. I always wanted to get the Purple Heart," Trump said. "This was much easier.”
he has a history of saying stuff he dosn't mean cant wait for the debates that should be a show to watch
|
You really have zero sense of humor and are a little selectively, over sensitive.
Funny the guy that earned the Purple Heart and gave it to him wasn't offended .
Hillary says equally "crazy" things almost on a daily basis but those are just "short circuits " 😂
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
08-11-2016, 06:19 AM
|
#7
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman
Funny the guy that earned the Purple Heart and gave it to him wasn't offended .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
isn't that the only thing that matters....libs love being offended for others
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 05:07 AM
|
#8
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,197
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by buckman
You really have zero sense of humor and are a little selectively, over sensitive.
Funny the guy that earned the Purple Heart and gave it to him wasn't offended .
Hillary says equally "crazy" things almost on a daily basis but those are just "short circuits "
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
it was his to give.. I always wanted to get the Purple Heart. This was much easier'
I wont give him My purple Heart .. I never wanted one and easy is not a word i would use for those who have a PH... just another not thought out comment .. Words matter if your in the White house or did we forget President Obama and the ‘red line’ on Syria’s chemical weapons
or does this only apply to Dems
who know what the Trump would say >>> you cant walk back comments on the world stage
|
|
|
|
08-11-2016, 08:55 AM
|
#9
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
No I dont think Trump wants hillary assassinated literally but the comment was metaphorical ... and the vast majority see it that way
|
Do you realize what you're saying here? If the "vast majority" sees the comment as metaphorical rather that literal, what on earth is the beef?
BTW, in my opinion, the vast majority doesn't "see" things that the really "smart" analysts do until the really "smart" analysts point out the subtle (agenda driven) nuances that can be detected in "Conservative" comments and the really "smart" media spread the word. Then the "vast majority" gets their light bulbs turned on and, oh yeah, that must be what the comment means. And I think that it's the "vast majority" is wishful thinking.
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 05:00 AM
|
#10
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,197
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
Do you realize what you're saying here? If the "vast majority" sees the comment as metaphorical rather that literal, what on earth is the beef?
BTW, in my opinion, the vast majority doesn't "see" things that the really "smart" analysts do until the really "smart" analysts point out the subtle (agenda driven) nuances that can be detected in "Conservative" comments and the really "smart" media spread the word. Then the "vast majority" gets their light bulbs turned on and, oh yeah, that must be what the comment means. And I think that it's the "vast majority" is wishful thinking.
|
next f up "I meant that Obama founded ISIS, literally" Not their policy's or actions lead to the development of issis..
Trump was asked by host Hugh Hewitt about the comments Trump made Wednesday night in Florida, and Hewitt said he understood Trump to mean "that he (Obama) created the vacuum, he lost the peace."
Trump objected.
"No, I meant he's the founder of ISIS," Trump said. "I do. He was the most valuable player. I give him the most valuable player award. I give her, too, by the way, Hillary Clinton."
Hewitt pushed back again, saying that Obama is "not sympathetic" to ISIS and "hates" and is "trying to kill them."
"I don't care," Trump said,
I am amazed of the level of support here for this embarrassment and possible Face of America again fact need not apply.. at what point to you take responsibility for your Choice and stop playing the victim you guys are running out of Main stream media excuse.. ( shocking another conspiracy theory )
60.13% Percentage of Donald Trump claims that have been rated False or Pants on Fire.
2.53% Percentage of Donald Trump claims rated True since he started his campaign.
13.33% of claims made by Hillary Clinton rated False or Pants on Fire.
13.33% Percentage of claims made by Hillary Clinton rated True during the 2016 campaign.
Share
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 05:23 AM
|
#11
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
60.13% Percentage of Donald Trump claims that have been rated False or Pants on Fire.
13.33% Percentage of claims made by Hillary Clinton rated True during the 2016 campaign.
|
I don't believe this "factcheck" nonsense but if you are one who does...Hillary is apparently much worse than Trump
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 05:27 AM
|
#12
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
I am amazed of the level of support here for this embarrassment
|
who is defending Trump?.....on the other hand, the Clinton Crime Syndicate enjoys cult-like support and rigorous defense for every misdeed
Last edited by scottw; 08-12-2016 at 05:42 AM..
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 10:38 AM
|
#13
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
next f up "I meant that Obama founded ISIS, literally" Not their policy's or actions lead to the development of issis..
Your first sentence is in quotes. Your second sentence is not in quotes. Is the second sentence your "interpretation"?
Trump was asked by host Hugh Hewitt about the comments Trump made Wednesday night in Florida, and Hewitt said he understood Trump to mean "that he (Obama) created the vacuum, he lost the peace."
Trump objected.
"No, I meant he's the founder of ISIS," Trump said. "I do. He was the most valuable player. I give him the most valuable player award. I give her, too, by the way, Hillary Clinton."
So, by the quoted expressions, Trump is saying that Obama is the founder of ISIS because he was the most valuable player. It seems that Trump has a personal "interpretation" of "founding" which includes being the most valuable player, not necessarily being the one who creates the philosophy and implements it.
From past discussions with you, I take it that you are in favor of personal interpretations when it comes to the far more serious cases of Supreme Court decisions. But when it comes to Trump in an inconsequential discussion . . . no, no, his interpretation of "founder" is a disqualification. You conveniently left out the following quote in his discussion with Hewitt, "The way he got out of Iraq, that was the founding of ISIS." Which also contradicts your interpretation of your first and incomplete quote of Trump in which you said that Trump did not mean that "their policy's or actions lead to the development of issis.." He actually did say the actions led to the development of ISIS.
Hewitt pushed back again, saying that Obama is "not sympathetic" to ISIS and "hates" and is "trying to kill them."
"I don't care," Trump said,
Yeah, I understand that. Regardless of not being sympathetic to ISIS, and is now trying to kill them, "The way he got out of Iraq, that was the founding of ISIS" even though he is not sympathetic to it.
I am amazed of the level of support here for this embarrassment and possible Face of America again fact need not apply.. at what point to you take responsibility for your Choice and stop playing the victim
You could very well be speaking of Hillary with this comment. Of course, you would not like that interpretation.
you guys are running out of Main stream media excuse.. ( shocking another conspiracy theory )
60.13% Percentage of Donald Trump claims that have been rated False or Pants on Fire.
2.53% Percentage of Donald Trump claims rated True since he started his campaign.
13.33% of claims made by Hillary Clinton rated False or Pants on Fire.
13.33% Percentage of claims made by Hillary Clinton rated True during the 2016 campaign.
Share
|
These percentages by not completely objective "analysts" have a hard time deciding the full context of various quotes. Sometimes, especially when it comes to Trump, they miss important personal or contextual circumstances. As Trump asked "Don't they get sarcasm?"
Last edited by detbuch; 08-12-2016 at 11:34 AM..
|
|
|
|
08-11-2016, 05:41 AM
|
#14
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Libtardia
Posts: 21,591
|
I've said this before and I will say it again. Trump has zero intentions of actually becoming president. This is all a publicity stunt. He carefully words things like this to dominate the news cycle.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 07:44 AM
|
#15
|
Also known as OAK
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Westlery, RI
Posts: 10,369
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fly Rod
Who wants hillary assassinated?....not trump, he never mentioned the word...it seems to me that the socialist news media and democrats R using the word assassinate the last couple of days....if they say it enough maybe the news media and dems will encourage some nut case to attempt to carry it out....and what did hillary say in 2008 about maybe obama being assassinated and that is YYYY she would not drop out of race when asked too....
|
Trump knew exactly what he was saying. Does he want Hillary assassinated, of course not, but he throws some red meat as a '2A solution' and knows the press will run with it.
He can't help himself. If he just stuck to a message and debated on the issues, he would be better off. Instead, he sees the press and folks on both sides get riled up, and he doubles down and pushes the issue.
Does he actually want to be president? That is becoming less clear....
|
Bryan
Originally Posted by #^^^^^^^^^^^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 07:53 AM
|
#16
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
Trump knew exactly what he was saying. Does he want Hillary assassinated, of course not, but he throws some red meat as a '2A solution'
and knows the press will run with it.
he sees the press and folks on both sides get riled up, and he doubles down and pushes the issue.
.
|
this is what a good community organizer strives for....
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 07:54 AM
|
#17
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,242
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
Trump knew exactly what he was saying. Does he want Hillary assassinated, of course not, but he throws some red meat as a '2A solution' and knows the press will run with it. Of course he knew what he was saying. He was talking about AFTER Hillary got elected. What would a 2nd Amend. supporter do after she was elected - well you and I will admit what he meant.
He can't help himself. If he just stuck to a message and debated on the issues, he would be better off. Instead, he sees the press and folks on both sides get riled up, and he doubles down and pushes the issue.
Does he actually want to be president? That is becoming less clear....
|
I don't think he wants to get elected either. I think he ran bc he thought it would help his businesses. Now he knows he is in over his head.
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 07:55 AM
|
#18
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS
I don't think he wants to get elected either. I think he ran bc he thought it would help his businesses. Now he knows he is in over his head.
|
maybe he can get a book deal and buy another expensive vacation home like Bernie
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 08:20 AM
|
#19
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,231
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
Does he actually want to be president? That is becoming less clear....
|
Of course he doesn't, he just wants the glory of winning.
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 08:39 AM
|
#20
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
Of course he doesn't, he just wants the glory of winning.
|
and Hackery wants to exploit the office for her benefit(her track record)....I wonder which is worse?
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 09:47 AM
|
#21
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,231
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw
and Hackery wants to exploit the office for her benefit(her track record)....I wonder which is worse?
|
Who are you talking about?
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 10:09 AM
|
#22
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,242
|
I really mean it.
I really, really mean it.
I slept on it and I really, really mean it.
I really, really mean it.
I slept on it again and I was being sarcastic.
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 03:43 PM
|
#23
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,242
|
Spence is just afraid that if Trump wins he will order him held at Gitmo.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
08-12-2016, 04:35 PM
|
#24
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS
Spence is just afraid that if Trump wins he will order him held at Gitmo.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
one can only hope
|
|
|
|
08-13-2016, 07:02 AM
|
#25
|
time to go
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,318
|
I can't imagine why anyone would proudly support Hillary. The people you associate with speak volumes about your own character in my opinion.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barb...ficant?ref=yfp
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
08-13-2016, 10:38 AM
|
#26
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
Money, greed and power, throw in lack of ethics and no moral compass and you get failure. Pretty simple.
Thats Trump in a nut shell..
In regards to your description of Trump here, I quote you: "again feelings over facts I have never seen someone so dirty as you suggest and yet no one can connect the dots the past 30 years"
As for Hillary, many have connected the dots in her past for more than 30 years and have revealed her greed for money and power, her lack of ethics or moral compass, and her failures.
Still not sure why the right continually buys in to this The media is the enemy .. Sounds like something Putin believes do you all support a State run media? because thats what you all suggest is whats happening now
Opposition media in American history has always been the "enemy." What's so new and disturbing about that? In the early American years, opposition commentary was more vicious than now. But, fundamentally, the differences were not as great as they are now. We are now at a point where one side is increasingly more open about its opposition to our foundational constitutional order. Its opposition is not about some issue here or there, it is about establishing and entrenching a fundamentally different governmental order. In that respect, it has to support every effort its Progressive politicians and bureaucrats and judges wish to impose on the old order.
And, in that respect, we have as close to a State run media as we ever had.
Because all I see is supporters of Trump who do nothing but blame the media Not him Trump speaks like a fortune cookie then when he gets Blow back he backs down then blame the media Hate Hillary but seeing him as a better choice???
Trump supporters are suffering from Stockholm syndrome,
capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captor(TRUMP) sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with TRUMP These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims
|
You're starting to fall off the deep end.
|
|
|
|
08-13-2016, 12:49 PM
|
#27
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,197
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
You're starting to fall off the deep end.
|
Sorry detbuch I may be falling but you have already fallen much farther then I
|
|
|
|
08-13-2016, 11:01 PM
|
#28
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
Sorry detbuch I may be falling but you have already fallen much farther then I
|
Were you speaking literally or "metaphorically" (as you once described a Trump quote) when you said this:
"Trump supporters are suffering from Stockholm syndrome,
capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captor(TRUMP) sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with TRUMP These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims"
Is this nonsense grounded in fact, or is it some deep end of your imagination?
And are you able to respond to the rest of my post, or only to the last sentence with this ridiculous assertion? Or are you able to answer my previous post in which I discredited your interpretation of Trump's saying that Obama was the founder of ISIS?
You once accused some of us of "cherry-picking." But you do it a lot.
And if you believe I have gone off the deep end with my assertion that Progressives are about replacing our founding constitutional order with their notion of an administrative State, then you are ignorant of the history of Progressivism in this country, and are unaware of what its proponents have actually, "literally," said.
|
|
|
|
08-14-2016, 11:34 AM
|
#29
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,242
|
Come on someone must have a list of communists that they could start waving around.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
|
|
|
08-14-2016, 09:48 PM
|
#30
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
A well regarded journalist citing real research...that is a "load?"
So that's all it takes? Being well regarded by some makes your opinions golden? No chance, if you're well regarded by some, that you're full of it? You're such an elitist. No wonder you're a Progressive.
It's a load because the "real" research he cites didn't mention Trump. It was not about Trump. It was various research articles why people in general, persist in misjudgments. And it can so easily be applied to just about any political campaign--and applied very much so to Hillary's campaigns, political or otherwise, from her unethical involvement in the Nixon impeachment, through Whitewater, Travelgate, futures shadiness, various other Whitehouse scandals while First Lady, covering for Bill's misadventures with the narrative of a vast right wing conspiracy, Benghazi, the emails, Clinton foundation controversy. Your well regarded journalist could easily have changed the title of his article "Why facts don't matter to Hillary's supporters."
Your well regarded journalist could have equally rewritten his "When critics challenge false assertions — say, Trump’s claim that thousands of Muslims cheered in New Jersey when the twin towers fell on Sept. 11, 2001 — their refutations can threaten people, rather than convince them" . . . he could have rewritten that by replacing Trump's claim with various untrue Hillary claims. Would work just as well.
And many of Trump's comments HAVE been deliberately misrepresented (falsely "interpreted)--for example those that have been discredited on this forum.
My own empirical evidence certainly seems to back up the findings.
That's an even bigger load.
That's scary. I don't understand the Supreme Court argument at all. The guy is a Dem most of his life, loved the Clinton's and suddenly in the span of a few years takes Jesus as his savior and you think that's an indicator of predictability on his picks...makes no sense.
Wasn't Hillary originally a Republican? You also don't understand that quite often there is a spontaneous taking of Jesus as savior by someone who has led a long life of dissolution, or of being a Democrat.
I suspect that you don't understand the Supreme Court argument because you don't want to. It is not at all difficult to understand. When I said that I supported Trump because I knew what Hillary would do or what kind of Judges Hillary would nominate--something to that effect--but I didn't know what Trump would do, you responded with "I can't believe you said that."--or something to that effect. It's like what a talk radio host posed with having to make the choice of opening two doors--one labeled savage, man-eating tiger, the other labeled possibly a savage man-eating tiger or possibly a harmless kitty. (Inexactly quoted from memory). Which door would you open?
Actually it isn't even that drastic a choice. You choose to believe some things that Trump says, or believe that some things he has done, are the true Trump. Other things you discount because you don't Trust him. That seems to be a contradiction . . . but no matter. It is to be expected that you will only profess that which can be considered "bad" about him because you support Hillary.
It's not about predictability. It's about possibility. Is that difficult to understand?
That seems to be your go-to these days, that it's all the same. Demographics don't back up your statement...
|
No, I didn't say it's ALL the same. I said the article, like so many that you cite, is a load. I've explained why in the above. And I have said previously that this election is not about character. Neither candidate can rightly claim to be, shall we say, impeccable. We have had many Presidents in the past who would not, today, be considered honorable, but who were deemed by historians to be great because of what they did in office. I would not agree what some did was great, I would even say it was destructive. But historians are just as biased as the rest of us. The historians deemed men, who would not be "well regarded" in terms of their character, great because of the consequences resulting from their election.
This election is not about character. It is about consequences.
You agree with Progressive style government. I assume you want a continuance and growth of the administrative State. That you agree with expanding the scope of government power. Ultimately, with a "benevolent" State that cannot be hindered from governing in any manner it chooses. Hillary is for you, in spite of what you consider negligible human faults, the ideal, self-professed, Progressive with a supposedly tremendous resume who will continue that "trajectory" of government growth. Because, after all, we are a product of history, and for a Progressive history is intrinsically and inevitably constant progress. But that natural historical progress must be shepherded and protected by expert administrators who constantly organize society in a way that is consonant with history. Ordinary people left to their own devices create a fustercluck.
I don't agree with that style of government. I believe that we are not a product of history, but that history is a product of our actions and beliefs. And that it has upheavals and reverses as well as improvements due to human endeavors. We create history, it doesn't create us. Our constitutional system of government was not historically inevitable. It was consciously created, and is still among the most advanced systems which promote individual freedom and responsibility. I believe that centralized systems such as the various forms of Socialism, including Progressivism, are semi-advanced forms of control over individuals which replace old monarchs and religions with more modern forms of dictatorial control.
I would open the door that might still allow us guarantees against government intrusion and control in every aspect of our lives. And, yes, the Supreme Court appointments will have a lot to say about that.
BTW, if you and others on the forum continue to criticize Trump, that will be an indication that you don't believe the article you posted here.
Last edited by detbuch; 08-14-2016 at 10:20 PM..
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:51 PM.
|
| |