Question for Trump supporters

Ladewig said:
OK.

I am baited by this one.

How does my making a joke about the Trump campaign prove your point that Team Trump has a more adult view of the world than Team Clinton and Team Obama?
Click to expand...
I wasn't making a joke about the right being the adults in the room, you can come on here and clearly see they're the more serious adults.

I was responding to your post, which was certainly beneath you, IMO. If you need direct proof, see the post above. Or below would work too.
 
Last edited:
logger said:
I also like that Trump is a fighter. Our party has never seen this before and it is sorely needed.

To most people paying attention, Killery is the one with a track record of starting wars, so this fear leftist have about the Donald is ridiculous. Of course remember how Long leftist stayed under the desk when Reagan was in office?
Click to expand...

Trump is a coward.

His supporters are cowards.

Anyone with even a passing interest in reality knows this.
 
The question is, if Trump is so stupid, why does he gather such amazing support? If the answer is "because people, masses, Republicans, whatever, are also stupid", what's the difference with a kid calling his mates stupid because they don't want to play what he's asking them to play? Besides, how stupid can people be if they think that the stupidity classifier is their voting intention? That's just a thin veil trying to cover plain bigotry.

This is just another thread cornered by silly anti-Trumpists that cannot bear the anxiety of waiting until November to see what happens and obsessively fall into ritual behaviour to propitiate the outcome they're expecting. There's a pretty lame excuse surrounding all this that supposes the existence of some lurkers who may be convinced by the sound :rolleyes: arguments they vomit.
 
aleCcowaN said:
The question is, if Trump is so stupid, why does he gather such amazing support? If the answer is "because people, masses, Republicans, whatever, are also stupid", what's the difference with a kid calling his mates stupid because they don't want to play what he's asking them to play? Besides, how stupid can people be if they think that the stupidity classifier is their voting intention? That's just a thin veil trying to cover plain bigotry.

This is just another thread cornered by silly anti-Trumpists that cannot bear the anxiety of waiting until November to see what happens and obsessively fall into ritual behaviour to propitiate the outcome they're expecting. There's a pretty lame excuse surrounding all this that supposes the existence of some lurkers who may be convinced by the sound :rolleyes: arguments they vomit.
Click to expand...

You do realize this SOP for leftists every election year? We have all the ism's for Trump in this election just like every election since Reagan.
 
You two don't get it. There has never been a candidate like Trump. Every meaningful white-supremacist group is in his corner.

These are the dregs of society.

He lies like a rug - see his asinine "Medical Report" for that.
 
Trump is not stupid - he's a salesman.
And as any salesman can tell you, knowing your product just gets in the way. Trump is selling himself as president, and Americans, conditioned by decades of sale-pitches, lap it up.
He knows what we want to hear ( none of this is your fault / I can fix it for you / someone else will pay for it).

So for everyone who ever bought something from a charismatic guy and later regretted it: you are Trump's target group of voters.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Retired General Michael Hayden was interviewed by MSNBC about Trump's curiosity on using nuclear weapons, and he made clear that there is nothing in the chain of command that would stop the president from ordering a nuclear launch.
Click to expand...

You probably misspoke above, but the important issue isn't "ordering" a launch. It is having it happen.

If you meant actually having the launch happen, then you are mischaracterizing the interview, if this is it here. Hayden actually says at one point the issue for him isn't nuclear weapons, but rather the relationship between the military and the civilian leadership. He thinks that Trump's erratic behavior might fray the deference that the military must pay to the civilian leadership under our system. That's a legitimate position, but you shouldn't misrepresent it. At the end of the interview, Scarborough asks Hayden point blank how the process worked between the President ordering a nuclear strike and actual launch. Hayden demurred, as was proper since the information is almost certainly classified. All Hayden said was that the system was built for speed and decisiveness. Whether true or not, we certainly want our adversaries to believe that, so he said the right thing. But it means little for our discussion here.
 
aleCcowaN said:
Yeah, yeah! Everyone that doesn't think like you is stupid.
Click to expand...
First you don't seem to comprehend very well. That's not what he said.
Second, you seem completely uninformed on Trump. I suggest rather then composing pseudo clever prose, you spend that valuable time researching Trump. Educate yourself on what he's said and done since he decided to run for President. It may provide insight into the posts about him. Or a the very least provide a substantive opinion about him.
 
aleCcowaN said:
Yeah, yeah! Everyone that doesn't think like you is stupid.
Click to expand...

White supremacists are stupid. There are plenty of people who don't think like I do who aren't white supremacists, as it turns out.

But that subset of people, and Trump as their leader, are not only stupid, but as far as I'm concerned can sit in a *********** gas chamber instead of the peaceful people they'd rather put in there.
 
logger said:
I also like that Trump is a fighter. Our party has never seen this before and it is sorely needed.

To most people paying attention, Killery is the one with a track record of starting wars, so this fear leftist have about the Donald is ridiculous. Of course remember how Long leftist stayed under the desk when Reagan was in office?
Click to expand...

Reagan? You are going to bring up Reagan in a discussion about Trump? Ronald Reagan knew more about government than than Donald "I will support the 12th article of the Consititution" Trump will ever know.

If your side had nominated a Ronald Reagan, it would have been a slaughter. Tens of millions of people would have stepped forward and voted Republican. Ronald Reagan would have trounced Crooked Hillary. Reagan was an experienced leader who understood the importance of nuance in a campaign. Ronald Reagan would never have said "I was being sarcastic, but I really wasn't." Ronald Reagan would never have mocked a reporter's handicap (which most people from every point on the entire political spectrum see as unforgivably inappropriate).

But your side didn't nominate a Ronald Reagan. Your side nominated a Donald Trump.

Ronald Reagan would never had said that John McCain is not a hero. John McCain fought his captors so hard that they brutally tortured him. He still bears a physical handicap from the beatings he received. Donald "bone spurs" Trump isn't qualified to shine the shoes of John McCain.


WILLIE GEIST: What about what you told Chris Matthews a few weeks ago, which is that women who get abortions should be punished? Do you still believe that to be true?

TRUMP: No, he was asking me a theoretical, or just a question in theory, and I talked about it only from that standpoint. Of course not. And that was done, he said, you know, I guess it was theoretically, but he was asking a rhetorical question, and I gave an answer. And by the way, people thought from an academic standpoint, and, asked rhetorically, people said that answer was an unbelievable academic answer! But of course not, and I said that afterwards.​

I listen to that and I do not hear an adult speaking. And I certainly don't hear Ronald Reagan, in his prime, speaking. Does anyone here want to support the notion that Ronald Reagan would have said something like that while campaigning against Jimmy Carter?

And as for Team Trump putting adults in charge. Maybe I was wrong, maybe they will put adults in charge .... for 30 days. Then another set of adults will be in charge for 30 days, then another set.

I may not agree with Sunmaster14, but I can respect his position: he sees this thread as a place to use evidence to discuss political differences, not as a place to childishly taunt liberals.
 
Last edited:
NoahFence said:
White supremacists are stupid. There are plenty of people who don't think like I do who aren't white supremacists, as it turns out.

But that subset of people, and Trump as their leader, are not only stupid, but as far as I'm concerned can sit in a *********** gas chamber instead of the peaceful people they'd rather put in there.
Click to expand...

What if one of the white supremacists is peaceful? Do you still want him to be executed in a gas chamber? Should you join him?
 
NoahFence said:
White supremacists are stupid. There are plenty of people who don't think like I do who aren't white supremacists, as it turns out.

But that subset of people, and Trump as their leader, are not only stupid, but as far as I'm concerned can sit in a *********** gas chamber instead of the peaceful people they'd rather put in there.
Click to expand...

Whatever ... I'm sure some groups are proposing for transsexuals to enjoy a lifelong pension with health benefits because of their problems in life, and those groups are supporting Clinton.

You can find groups with outrageous ideologies or outrageous demands supporting both candidates just because there are just two of them. Thank the perverted electoral system of the United States for that and stop campaigning in a site about scepticism on the basis of cherry picking.

Feelings like "I'm worried all day long because Trump (or Clinton) could win" are symptoms that demands a visit to the physician, not a logical analysis in a site devoted to promote scepticism.
 
DavidJames said:
First you don't seem to comprehend very well. That's not what he said.
Second, you seem completely uninformed on Trump. I suggest rather then composing pseudo clever prose, you spend that valuable time researching Trump. Educate yourself on what he's said and done since he decided to run for President. It may provide insight into the posts about him. Or a the very least provide a substantive opinion about him.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't help. In addition to knowing little or nothing about Trump, aleC pretends to know America and Americans better than we do. It seem to be a Southern Hemisphere thing - some of the ozzies and kiwis do the same thing.
 
logger said:
I wasn't making a joke about the right being the adults in the room, you can come on here and clearly see they're the more serious adults.

I was responding to your post, which was certainly beneath you, IMO.
Click to expand...

Beneath me?
The guy who refers to Hillary Clinton as Killery is going to tell me what is mature and what is not [snerk]
 
Last edited:
Ladewig said:
Beneath me?
The guy who refers to Hillary Clinton as Killery is going to tell me what is mature and what is not [snerk]
Click to expand...

Because you endorse what she's gotten away with? I won't snerk.
 
Last edited:
Jrrarglblarg said:
It wouldn't help. In addition to knowing little or nothing about Trump, aleC pretends to know America and Americans better than we do. It seem to be a Southern Hemisphere thing - some of the ozzies Aussies and kiwis do the same thing.
Click to expand...

I guess the dizzying levels of knowledge goes both ways....
 
Ladewig said:
Reagan? You are going to bring up Reagan in a discussion about Trump? Ronald Reagan knew more about government than than Donald "I will support the 12th article of the Consititution" Trump will ever know.

If your side had nominated a Ronald Reagan, it would have been a slaughter. Tens of millions of people would have stepped forward and voted Republican. Ronald Reagan would have trounced Crooked Hillary. Reagan was an experienced leader who understood the importance of nuance in a campaign. Ronald Reagan would never have said "I was being sarcastic, but I really wasn't." Ronald Reagan would never have mocked a reporter's handicap (which most people from every point on the entire political spectrum see as unforgivably inappropriate).

But your side didn't nominate a Ronald Reagan. Your side nominated a Donald Trump.

Ronald Reagan would never had said that John McCain is not a hero. John McCain fought his captors so hard that they brutally tortured him. He still bears a physical handicap from the beatings he received. Donald "bone spurs" Trump isn't qualified to shine the shoes of John McCain.


WILLIE GEIST: What about what you told Chris Matthews a few weeks ago, which is that women who get abortions should be punished? Do you still believe that to be true?

TRUMP: No, he was asking me a theoretical, or just a question in theory, and I talked about it only from that standpoint. Of course not. And that was done, he said, you know, I guess it was theoretically, but he was asking a rhetorical question, and I gave an answer. And by the way, people thought from an academic standpoint, and, asked rhetorically, people said that answer was an unbelievable academic answer! But of course not, and I said that afterwards.​

I listen to that and I do not hear an adult speaking. And I certainly don't hear Ronald Reagan, in his prime, speaking. Does anyone here want to support the notion that Ronald Reagan would have said something like that while campaigning against Jimmy Carter?

And as for Team Trump putting adults in charge. Maybe I was wrong, maybe they will put adults in charge .... for 30 days. Then another set of adults will be in charge for 30 days, then another set.

I may not agree with Sunmaster14, but I can respect his position: he sees this thread as a place to use evidence to discuss political differences, not as a place to childishly taunt liberals.
Click to expand...

Reagan certainly knew more, can you guess why? :rolleyes:


I also never compared him to Reagan, I only mentioned him. Your knee jerk reaction was also not wanted but expected.

I'm not concerned with who you respect and it's telling that you think I'm taunting you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom