Assassination!!!

[ecduzitgood]

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

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Money, greed and power, throw in lack of ethics and no moral compass and you get Clintons. Pretty simple.

fixed it

[detbuch]

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.

[Slipknot]

The media should do their jobs and report the facts not their opinions, Using their positions to sway personal opinions is morally corrupt.

Trump is not the problem, communists are

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

The media should do their jobs and report the facts not their opinions, Using their positions to sway personal opinions is morally corrupt.

Trump is not the problem, communists are

WOW now its Communists ..

[wdmso]

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

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

WOW now its Communists ..

big supporters of the Clintons...look it up

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

big supporters of the Clintons...look it up

I did. you mean this guy http://www.cpusa.org/authors/john-bachtell/ and his 5000 or so members.....

they are big supporters alright .. with no influence or enough members to change anything

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I did. you mean this guy http://www.cpusa.org/authors/john-bachtell/ and his 5000 or so members.....

they are big supporters alright .. with no influence or enough members to change anything

no...keep going...they like to collect foreign funds

[detbuch]

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.

[Slipknot]

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...s-world-elite/


read it


Soros is one of the meglamaniacs who think he is God http://humanevents.com/2011/04/02/to...-is-dangerous/

POS http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...hopes-to-spur/

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by wdmso

WOW now its Communists ..

especially this communist



http://commieblaster.com/george-soros-fund/

[spence]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

especially this communist



http://commieblaster.com/george-soros-fund/

I hear commieblaster.com is one of the premium web sources for objective commie blasting information.

You guys seriously need to stop feeding your adrenaline addictions with these crackpot conspiracy sites.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.9600e528b2f6

[Slipknot]

more picking and choosing
show me the facts, just the facts
I did not vote for Trump
but I certainly won't vote for Clinton

If Trump put half his money behind Rand Paul, maybe we would have a real choice in Nov.

It is what it is
so vote for who will begin to turn the country around or if you are blind and think all is well, vote for more destruction of our country. It's that simple.

[PaulS]

Come on someone must have a list of communists that they could start waving around.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

You guys seriously need to stop feeding your adrenaline addictions with these crackpot conspiracy sites.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...=.9600e528b2f6

WOW. If you believe this load of (. . . ), does that mean you will stop criticizing Trump? I mean, if you continue to do so, you, according to your article, could actually wind up reinforcing Trump's followers belief in him.

Maybe Trump knows about this supposed syndrome and is masterfully using it--sort of being a mastermind rather than a buffoon. It's (his success) all rather murky, mysterious, contradictory, inexplicable.

Except . . . the brainiacs just don't seem to get the simple explanation that a great segment of Republican supporters are fed up with typical GOP failure to deliver on its promises. The simple reality that many, if not most, Trump supporters exist on the rational basis that he will not be another weak-kneed Romney or nicey-nice McCain or more of the same Republican all-talk-no-action. That he will fight fire with fire. That his tactics are more like the lying aggressive in-your-face tactics the Democrats have successfully used for years. They overlook the simple reality that Tumpers don't adore The Donald because they think he is virtuous and righteous, but they prefer him as an alternative strength to typical Republican weakness.

And the most rational support for Trump is the Supreme Court decisions to be made. Because of that, and because the Republicans have failed to be an effective opposition to the direction the country has been lead, there is a perceived tipping point that we may finally arrive at that place of total transformation, and because of that we don't have the luxury of concern about Trump's character.

The GOP elite thought they were secure in their status quo. So much so that they could destroy their base's desire for someone like Cruz who had no fear of media or Democrats, and represented a radical departure from typical GOP cave-ins to Progressive legislation. Because the party would not support Cruz, the only departure left from the path they had taken was Trump. The GOP created him. Either it supports him now, or suffer worse self-destruction. Perhaps, even a splintering off into the creation of a new party.

But never mind all that. It's easier and more palatable to find some psychological syndrome babble for the Trump phenomenon. Especially if it further discredits the Republican candidate.

BTW, If you insert Hillary's name for Trump's in the article, it would work just as well. The very same phenomenon, if it exists, would perfectly describe Hillary's suck-ups.

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

WOW. If you believe this load of (. . . ), does that mean you will stop criticizing Trump?

A well regarded journalist citing real research...that is a "load?" My own empirical evidence certainly seems to back up the findings.

And the most rational support for Trump is the Supreme Court decisions to be made. Because of that, and because the Republicans have failed to be an effective opposition to the direction the country has been lead, there is a perceived tipping point that we may finally arrive at that place of total transformation, and because of that we don't have the luxury of concern about Trump's character.

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.

BTW, If you insert Hillary's name for Trump's in the article, it would work just as well. The very same phenomenon, if it exists, would perfectly describe Hillary's suck-ups.

That seems to be your go-to these days, that it's all the same. Demographics don't back up your statement...

[basswipe]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

no, if that is his strategy, and it works, then it is fair.
How else do you fight a biased media that falls over themselves to defend a liar,a thief, a traitor, a risk to national security, a morally corrupt individual, a greedy power hungry snake in the grass sorry excuse for a human being and short sighted more than the idiots who want to elect her

If your eyes are closed, I suggest open them

Amazing that the two most blind people on this site can't or won't open their eyes,they know they are in the wrong and yet willingly will still follow that path.That is what is truly sickening.

[Slipknot]

Originally Posted by spence

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.

simple spence, Trump is not a progressive
I'm pretty sure he follows the Constitution, progressives want it removed and want more government in our lives and to be bigger and larger. I thought you were smart

[spence]

Originally Posted by basswipe

Amazing that the two most blind people on this site can't or won't open their eyes,they know they are in the wrong and yet willingly will still follow that path.That is what is truly sickening.

Jim and Scott make two, what about the others?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

simple spence, Trump is not a progressive
I'm pretty sure he follows the Constitution, progressives want it removed and want more government in our lives and to be bigger and larger. I thought you were smart

He sure as hell isn't a conservative. His positions are founded on the last 24 hours news cycle...it's whatever he thinks will get a rise out of people and get air time.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

...it's whatever he thinks will get a rise out of people .

sounds like your posts and positions...you and Trump are a lot alike

[spence]

Originally Posted by scottw

sounds like your posts and positions...you and Trump are a lot alike

Inane.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Inane.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

ok...everything but the hair...

[detbuch]

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.

[ecduzitgood]

The question is, is Hillary well regarded?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Wasn't Hillary originally a Republican? Goldwater Girl in fact...

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.

.

it's really nice that you take the time to explain these simple concepts that he seems incapable if grasping

you'd think those opposed to Trump and the Republicans would cheer his self-destruction and their certain triumph....seems like they are gnashing their teeth hoping, practically encouraging him to become a better candidate or something???

I'm endorsing the Goldwater Girl and looking forward to the impeachment circus ........

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by scottw

it's really nice that you take the time to explain these simple concepts that he seems incapable if grasping

You need to follow it with a Kool-Aid chaser...

[wdmso]

More from you Man let me guess ..he was being metaphorical again

but when he speaks about the constitution he is "Literally speaking"

He is speaking to his uninformed base who already buy into the ISIS founder remark the media is against him Obama is a muslim and voter fraud can impact the election the list is endless


Donald Trump, trailing narrowly in presidential polls, has issued a warning to worried Republican voters: The election will be “rigged” against him — and he could lose as a result.

Trump pointed to several court cases nationwide in which restrictive laws requiring voters to show identification have been thrown out. He said those decisions open the door to fraud in November.

“If the election is rigged, I would not be surprised,” he told The Washington Post in an interview Tuesday afternoon. “The voter ID situation has turned out to be a very unfair development. We may have people vote 10 times.”

[The Dad Fisherman]

I wonder what are Bernie's feelings on those statements.....