• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
My personal observation from time(s) in uniform are that a vast majority of military persons are deep old-soil conservatives who don't like being lied to, jerked around or played. Military is a very self-selecting population and their 1% of the US poorly represents the US ideological spectrum as a whole.

{Edit to add}
And all the Democrats in uniform own guns.
I've never been in uniform, so my opinion is worth less than yours. I hope you're right.

I'd like to know what polls show, if there are any appropriate ones.
 
Is it particularly newsworthy, no? Would George Stephanopoulos have sandbagged Hillary with a question about Patricia Smith? I doubt it. Chris Wallace actually asked Hillary about Patricia Smith, and I she gave what I thought was an offensive answer after mouthing the politically correct platitudes. She also lied, claiming that other family members of those killed in Benghazi disputed Smith's story. In fact, family members of two out of the three others who were killed (in addition to Sean Smith) corroborated Smith's story.

"Sandbagged"? Stop acting like people are being unfair. Do you hear yourself? A professional politician would have handled those questions with ease. All Trump had to say was I feel for the Khans and the loss of their heroic son

The harder question was the one about sacrifice.

He should own up to having sacrificed little. "Certainly, not what the Khans have given
And this is one of the reasons I'm running. This country has done so much for me and now I must repay it. "

Not hard. And the story ends. You diffuse a bomb, you don't add dynamite to it and push down on the plunger.
 
I predict the only people who vote for trump in November will be blood relatives and morons.

I predict that Trump will get at least 45% of the vote.

In addition to the two tiny categories you list, there will be GOP loyalists, and Not-Hillary voters.
 
I agree wholeheartedly with your assessment regarding Trump.

I just doubted your poll prediction and thought that if we were serious, we should agree on a poll.

I'm afraid that I'm quite pessimistic and think that Trump has a real chance. Frankly, if it's greater than a 25% chance, that's a real shame and threat to the nation.

The polls will swing. They are still soft. I wouldn't really start thinking they mean all that much until maybe after the first debate. I have a strong belief based on the news as we know it now that Trump will be slaughtered like most November turkeys.

What we don't know is if there other bombs that might shake up public opinion. Is there a September or October surprise? It's kind of like concluding that a 7 - 0 football team will win the Super Bowl. You like your chances, but there is still a hell of a lot left in the season.
 
Last edited:
I predict that Trump will get at least 45% of the vote.

In addition to the two tiny categories you list, there will be GOP loyalists, and Not-Hillary voters.

I figure Clinton 45 to Trump 40 with other candidates being the other 5 percent
 
I'm just happy the Democrats found one soldier they didn't think was a baby-killing mercenary rapist.

Too bad Hillary Clinton voted to kill him.
 
Many influential Republicans have come out strong against Trump over this. Yet anonymous Internet posters dig in harder. Fascinating.

And they've even been given their payback with free nudie lesbo pics of Melania.

Way to deflect the public!
 
There's still 10% left over.

Oooops.. I meant 15 percent. I figured a higher than average third party vote.

I just checked the last 2 elections the Democrats have won.


Barack H. Obama Democratic 332 65,446,032
W. Mitt Romney Republican 206 60,589,084

Barack H. Obama Democratic 365 69,456,897
John S. McCain Republican ** 173 59,934,814
 
I suspect that Hillary had Mr. Khan speak at the convention in order to bait Donald. And Donald took the bait! What a complete *********** dumbass. If for no other reason, he shouldn't be President because he is an idiot who is very easy to manipulate.
 
Eleven? Out of 6685 such families for soldiers killed since 9/11? I read that as only a teensy, weensy minority of Gold Star families are willing to taint their status as patriots by getting involved in a partisan smear campaign.

:rolleyes:

I look forward to your attempt to handwave away the VFW.
 
:rolleyes:

I look forward to your attempt to handwave away the VFW.

Well, I look forward to your explanation why this guy, Brian Duffy, the head of the VFW, has any kind of special moral authority. He is an advocate for veterans. It is to be expected that he fights to preserve the taboo against criticizing the families of veterans.
 
Well, I look forward to your explanation why this guy, Brian Duffy, the head of the VFW, has any kind of special moral authority. He is an advocate for veterans.

I think you answered your own question there, hoss.

Handwave rating: 2/10. You've done better.
 
Well, I look forward to your explanation why this guy, Brian Duffy, the head of the VFW, has any kind of special moral authority. He is an advocate for veterans. It is to be expected that he fights to preserve the taboo against criticizing the families of veterans.

I'm koo koo for Cocoa Puffs! Keep it up Sunmaster. Puuuhhleeease.

Many in the military, which has given Trump a lot of support, are also questioning whether Trump is fit to be president. “I loathe Donald Trump with every fiber of my being,” one retired Army officer wrote on Facebook as the controversy took off.

A group of Gold Star families organized by VoteVets.org wrote in an open letter published Monday: "When you question a mother's pain, by implying that her religion, not her grief, kept her from addressing an arena of people, you are attacking us. When you say your job building buildings is akin to our sacrifice, you are attacking our sacrifice." Read more at http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...ld-trump-joseph-mccarthy-welch-decency-214128

Edited by Agatha: 
Edited for rule 4 and to make it clear that the text was a quote and not the poster's own words.
Please ensure when quoting articles etc that the text is enclosed in quote tags and is no more than one or two paragraphs, and ensure that you include a link to the original even if the link is given in another post.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is it particularly newsworthy, no? Would George Stephanopoulos have sandbagged Hillary with a question about Patricia Smith? I doubt it. Chris Wallace actually asked Hillary about Patricia Smith, and I she gave what I thought was an offensive answer after mouthing the politically correct platitudes. She also lied, claiming that other family members of those killed in Benghazi disputed Smith's story. In fact, family members of two out of the three others who were killed (in addition to Sean Smith) corroborated Smith's story.

So let's see, even if Clinton had made comments to Smith that Smith found offensive, why were they offensive? Because the GOP has gone to great lengths to prove it was some kind of cover up. They failed to demonstrate any coverup occurred. They failed to find evidence Clinton interfered with or was negligent in terms of the safety or getting help to the men.

What did Smith say, she blamed Clinton anyway. So you have a grieving mother who blames Clinton despite no evidence Clinton was to blame.

You got nothing here except a grieving mother.

What did the Kahn's say: Trump was a bigot and it was not consistent with the American values they hold, the values their son died for.

Trump's response was childish, pissed at being insulted.

There is no comparison here except that showing the stark difference between a normally empathetic Clinton and a pathologically narcissistic Trump.
 
Trump asking for support from Capitol Hill Hearing only crickets.

Rob Wasinger, a onetime congressional candidate who has been working for the Trump camp on congressional outreach, sent an email to senior Senate aides saying, "We want to get several member statements out today on this, and would really appreciate your help."

A similar appeal was made to Republicans in the House of Representatives, according to a senior aide.

Attached to the appeal were talking points lawmakers could use to try to tamp down the controversy growing since last week's appearance at the Democratic convention by the Khans, the parents of U.S. Army Captain Humayun Khan, who was killed by a bomb in Iraq 12 years ago.

The Trump campaign did not respond to requests for comment, and Wasinger refused to comment when contacted by telephone.

So far the response from the hill has been anything but support.

Several Senators including get McCain have rebuked Trump, but the overall response is crickets. No one want to get involved in what is seen as a **** storm.
 
And the Khans are now being asked to do interviews everywhere. And they're perfect. They are asking for peace and unity and Trump just keeps on the attack. When does he understand that he needs to SHUT UP? Trump is damaging himself more than they are.


Exactly.
The BBC interviewer asked if they think an apology is in order and they pointedly said no. They also acknowledged the importance of the First Amendment right to free speech.

Mr. Khan summed up the entire campaign very succinctly. He said that Trump lacks any sort of empathy and that empathy is required to be president. A good leader must be able to empathize with the people he is leading.

..............
Trump claims he was viciously attacked. Just out of perverse curiosity I wonder what Trump would say if a reporter asked him for an an example of a criticism of Trump that is not a vicious attack. I think Trump might be baffled by the question. He sees the tiniest criticisms as an affront to his dignity and self-worth.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom