The OFFICIAL Trump/HRC/2016 General Election Thread...

[Tombs]

That sounds like a Trump answer

Who needs to get along with others, huh?

They're going to whine and complain in either situation.

We get Trump, they whine and complain because they don't like him. We get hillary, they whine and complain about being dragged into war with Russia which would be pretty testing for their strong relationship with the Chinese.

Either situation, it's going to upset them... Good lord, look at what they think of our gun policies. Do you think we should throw away our guns to make them happy?

 

[bwframe]

[video=youtube;25A6cI6QPIo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25A6cI6QPIo[/video]

 

[dusty88]

They're going to whine and complain in either situation.

We get Trump, they whine and complain because they don't like him. We get hillary, they whine and complain about being dragged into war with Russia which would be pretty testing for their strong relationship with the Chinese.

Either situation, it's going to upset them... Good lord, look at what they think of our gun policies. Do you think we should throw away our guns to make them happy?

I think we should not elect a president who unnecessarily insults people.

 

[Tombs]

I think we should not elect a president who unnecessarily insults people.

And being a realist, I have to remind you grade school math says there's only 1 of 2 people who will become the next president.

 

[dusty88]

And being a realist, I have to remind you grade school math says there's only 1 of 2 people who will become the next president.

Actually, your math is wrong.

There are 4 people mathematically able to garner enough electoral votes to be president.

The reasons we perceive 2 are because:
-we use polling in a way that makes it unscientific (the test method gives the subject prior information that influences their answer)
-2 parties control the oligarchy

But mathematically, there are 4.

 

[Tombs]

Actually, your math is wrong.

There are 4 people mathematically able to garner enough electoral votes to be president.

The reasons we perceive 2 are because:
-we use polling in a way that makes it unscientific (the test method gives the subject prior information that influences their answer)
-2 parties control the oligarchy

But mathematically, there are 4.

No there's not. There's only 3 on the ballot.

The 3rd exists to pull votes away from republicans to help democrats win elections.

Welcome to the USA, it's not perfect. You can hate the election process all you want but that is how it functionally works.

 

[jamil]

Actually, your math is wrong.

There are 4 people mathematically able to garner enough electoral votes to be president.

The reasons we perceive 2 are because:
-we use polling in a way that makes it unscientific (the test method gives the subject prior information that influences their answer)
-2 parties control the oligarchy

But mathematically, there are 4.

Did Stein get on the ballot in more states? Last I checked if she won every state where she's on the ballot she still couldn't get 270. But even so, to your point, there are more than two candidates who have a mathematical chance of winning. It's unlikely though. Probably we'll get the turd sandwich. She'll nominate another Ruth Buzzy to SCOTUS, and Heller will be overturned as soon as they can get a case bubbled up.

 

[jamil]

And being a realist, I have to remind you grade school math says there's only 1 of 2 people who will become the next president.

I guess if we're going to remind people of stuff, I could remind you that by nominating Trump you guys ensured that even a turd sandwich like Clinton would win. No one except the people who are already not voting for the ***** are even paying any attention to Wikileaks. They don't care. They're numb to her corruption. 67% of voters think she's untrustworthy. So whatever further corruption we learn, it's like so what? People are planning to vote for her anyway. Why? Because they think even that's better than Donald ****ing TRUMP as POTUS!

They care that Trump runs his mouth and acts like he's still in ****ing high school. He acts like NOT being able to talk like an immature ******* = "shackles". His rise in the polls came during his time "shackles". So you watch what happens as DJT acts more like DJT.

You want to talk about realism? Your gonna see just how real it gets in a few weeks. I hope you guys enjoyed your year and a half of your middle finger.

 

[Tombs]

I guess if we're going to remind people of stuff, I could remind you that by nominating Trump you guys ensured that even a turd sandwich like Clinton would win. No one except the people who are already not voting for the ***** are even paying any attention to Wikileaks. They don't care. They're numb to her corruption. 67% of voters think she's untrustworthy. So whatever further corruption we learn, it's like so what? People are planning to vote for her anyway. Why? Because they think even that's better than Donald ****ing TRUMP as POTUS!

They care that Trump runs his mouth and acts like he's still in ****ing high school. He acts like NOT being able to talk like an immature ******* = "shackles". His rise in the polls came during his time "shackles". So you watch what happens as DJT acts more like DJT.

You want to talk about realism? Your gonna see just how real it gets in a few weeks. I hope you guys enjoyed your year and a half of your middle finger.

I voted the best person to fix the mess we're in.

I'm sorry you can't seem to see past the "he said mean things" barrier enough to realize it. Had he never entered this race, it would have been a repeat of 2008 all over again as people want to elect the novelty. In Trump we have a combination of pop culture populist, a non-politician, and someone who is not owned by interests seeking to undermine the country. Thanks to his presence, this has been the most televised, most widely discussed election in our history. He actually stands a fighting chance because he brought enough eyes to the election and made enough people care that the democrats don't get an automatic lock on it.

But of course we have a lot of selfish people who want to throw all gun owners under the bus by voting 3rd party. I held my nose and voted for McCain, who couldn't have been more ideologically opposed to me than anyone else in the country, you can hold your nose and vote for the sake of the supreme court, so that maybe your children might enjoy the liberties you do today.

If you would have got your polished clean and cool politician, he would have been ignored, just like Romney was.

Nobody would have even watched the debates, they would have surrendered themselves to the fact that we couldn't beat a woman trying to become president with a calm, cool, polished conservative. That's not exciting, that's not something that motivates the base to get out and vote. That's not what brings new voters in to help us win elections. But you say you want principles? ideologically driven principles? Did you forget you're in a country that re-elected a man who carried out countless drone strikes on civilians and still won a nobel peace prize? The lowest common denominator decides how you live your life and most likely will until we change the way voting works in this country. So it's best you find someone who can appeal and motivate the lowest common denominator until such time comes that we can change how voting works.

Could be worse, his policies could be terrible. The only real complaint I'm seeing from any conservative is just over his mouth. Are they still going to whine that he isn't hitting hillary hard enough, when he eviscerated her and her disgusting, criminal family in front of the world in the last debate?

You do realize that in the wikileaks emails, they even lament the fact they made the public so dumbed down and complacent because that specifically makes Trump harder to beat. So they have to buy out every media empire and try to destroy his character around the clock to even put a dent in his poll numbers. And in most the polls I'm watching, it's still a neck and neck race.

This man won back sovereignty for the UK:
[video=youtube;DZ6rfxoEFI4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZ6rfxoEFI4[/video]
Do you think he's a childish vulgarian too?

It's called calling things what they are.

 

[Brad69]

Tombs great post said most of what I was going to say.
Yes Jeb or any other of the so called safe GOP candidates would have already lost.
DJT is at least attempting to expose the HRC machines corruption and evil intent.
We should not worry about what any other county thinks of the USA most of them hate us on some level.
Yes most Australians and U.K., Europeans. So we owe them nothing screw them and the holy grail of globalization.

 

[PaulF]

I voted the best person to fix the mess we're in.

No, no you didn't. You voted for a pandering buffoon, and the only candidate that consistently polled lowest against Clinton as far back as pre-primary polls. You voted for a loser...the easiest of all "GOP" candidates for HRC to defeat. Trump is a con man and a phony...a vote for him in the primary is a vote for Clinton in the general.

You chose President Hillary Clinton when you foolishly jumped aboard the Trump trainwreck.

I'm sorry you can't seem to see past the "he said mean things" barrier enough to realize it. Had he never entered this race, it would have been a repeat of 2008 all over again as people want to elect the novelty. In Trump we have a combination of pop culture populist, a non-politician, and someone who is not owned by interests seeking to undermine the country. Thanks to his presence, this has been the most televised, most widely discussed election in our history. He actually stands a fighting chance because he brought enough eyes to the election and made enough people care that the democrats don't get an automatic lock on it.

Trump is a crony statist, and a friend of the Clintons. You think he isn't beholden to anyone else, but he's a shady dealer with a long history of broken promises and bad deals. Trump has left loose ends all throughout his life, and at this point we really don't have any idea who is pulling on them.

I don't care that he "said mean things". I care that he is a morally bankrupt huckster, and I don't believe he has even the desire to do the things he says...let alone the ability.

But of course we have a lot of selfish people who want to throw all gun owners under the bus by voting 3rd party. I held my nose and voted for McCain, who couldn't have been more ideologically opposed to me than anyone else in the country, you can hold your nose and vote for the sake of the supreme court, so that maybe your children might enjoy the liberties you do today.

The GOP generally, and Trump voters specifically threw gun owners under the bus when they chose a pandering egoist for their candidate. I have been saying this from the beginning: Trump loses this race for the Republicans. Thanks.

If you would have got your polished clean and cool politician, he would have been ignored, just like Romney was.

In the primaries, maybe...sure. To perform well in the general you have to present yourself as a moderate and a pragmatist..."The Donald" presents himself as neither. Beyond his cheerleading fanboys very few voters believe he is capable of producing the results he promises, and ever fewer believe he has the will. I think he's a circus freak desperately following the warmth of the spotlight.

Nobody would have even watched the debates, they would have surrendered themselves to the fact that we couldn't beat a woman trying to become president with a calm, cool, polished conservative. That's not exciting, that's not something that motivates the base to get out and vote. That's not what brings new voters in to help us win elections. But you say you want principles? ideologically driven principles? Did you forget you're in a country that re-elected a man who carried out countless drone strikes on civilians and still won a nobel peace prize? The lowest common denominator decides how you live your life and most likely will until we change the way voting works in this country. So it's best you find someone who can appeal and motivate the lowest common denominator until such time comes that we can change how voting works.

The debates were pointless political theater. Only a handful of voters are enamored with Trump's act, the vast majority of us are tuning in to see what he did today to step on his own dick while we wait to vote for someone else (or in my case, not at all) this November. Trump's campaign is a case-study in delusion and manipulation.

It is excellent theater, but we all already know how this show ends: with Hillary in the white house.

Could be worse, his policies could be terrible. The only real complaint I'm seeing from any conservative is just over his mouth. Are they still going to whine that he isn't hitting hillary hard enough, when he eviscerated her and her disgusting, criminal family in front of the world in the last debate?

If that is the only complaint you hear, your hearing is quite selective.

His "policies" are vacuous, nebulous, and laughably costly. He panders to whatever audience he faces, and his supporters lap it up. No one knows what Trump will actually do if he (by some curse) gained access to the levers of power, bit I don't believe for a second that it will benefit anyone but "The Donald".

You do realize that in the wikileaks emails, they even lament the fact they made the public so dumbed down and complacent because that specifically makes Trump harder to beat. So they have to buy out every media empire and try to destroy his character around the clock to even put a dent in his poll numbers. And in most the polls I'm watching, it's still a neck and neck race.

The polls you see? Oh that's rich.

Romney by a landslide...

This man won back sovereignty for the UK:
[video=youtube;DZ6rfxoEFI4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZ6rfxoEFI4[/video]
Do you think he's a childish vulgarian too?

It's called calling things what they are.

The "brexit" is a boondoggle and a farce...political theater gone wrong. The brits got what they asked for, then immediately started trying to undo it. By the time this all plays out it will cost the British taxpayers a fortune, and will end the careers of a generation of politicians...and Britain will still be inexorably tied to their Continental peers.


It's called "pandering"...it is nothing more than telling people what they want to hear in order to advance your own agenda. The British fell for it...and apparently so did Trump supporters.

That's why we are going to end up with Clinton.

 

[Brad69]

You did a great job of bad mouthing DJT !
I have to ask which one of the GOP candidates should have won?
Also why you believe voting is not a good thing?

 

[1DOWN4UP]

burp!

 

[BugI02]

No, no you didn't. You voted for a pandering buffoon, and the only candidate that consistently polled lowest against Clinton as far back as pre-primary polls. You voted for a loser...the easiest of all "GOP" candidates for HRC to defeat. Trump is a con man and a phony...a vote for him in the primary is a vote for Clinton in the general.

Do tell. So what is a friendly fire attack on the nominee after he is the nominee? Sounds like a vote for Clinton to us. And we should heed your side of the divides advice on candidates because; Romney. That's rich

You chose President Hillary Clinton when you foolishly jumped aboard the Trump trainwreck.

And your side has been choosing president Clinton ever since the convention. Keep washing, but I don't think they're getting cleaner



Trump is a crony statist, and a friend of the Clintons. You think he isn't beholden to anyone else, but he's a shady dealer with a long history of broken promises and bad deals. Trump has left loose ends all throughout his life, and at this point we really don't have any idea who is pulling on them.

As opposed to Clinton, who's beholden to practically everybody (might be a good time to review that CF donor list)

I don't care that he "said mean things". I care that he is a morally bankrupt huckster, and I don't believe he has even the desire to do the things he says...let alone the ability.

No, the crux is you couldn't get what you wanted (because your candidate's kung fu was weak) and you cannot accept your defeat and work to make the best of it - which is exactly what you would have expected us to do if the shoe was on the other foot




The GOP generally, and Trump voters specifically threw gun owners under the bus when they chose a pandering egoist for their candidate. I have been saying this from the beginning: Trump loses this race for the Republicans. Thanks.

Would you be under the bus if he won? To me it looks like your side is throwing themselves under the bus. Just like picking those election juggernauts Romney and McCain got us 8 yrs of BHO and the SCOTUS pickle we find ourselves in

In the primaries, maybe...sure. To perform well in the general you have to present yourself as a moderate and a pragmatist..."The Donald" presents himself as neither. Beyond his cheerleading fanboys very few voters believe he is capable of producing the results he promises, and ever fewer believe he has the will. I think he's a circus freak desperately following the warmth of the spotlight.

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results”.
2008 GOP primary 20.929M votes cast, McCain couldn't crack 10M
2012 GOP primary 18.502M votes cast (note the downward trend in that total) Romney couldn't crack 10M
2016 GOP primary 28.584M votes cast, Trump got 13.300M. Trump beat his closest challenger by 5.663M Trump and Cruz together (considered outsider candidates) 20.937M

We love those claims about how he's not the choice of the people because lot's of people didn't vote for him. It's the hypocrisy that destroys the neverTrump (shorthand, not hashtag) wail

The debates were pointless political theater. Only a handful of voters are enamored with Trump's act, the vast majority of us are tuning in to see what he did today to step on his own dick while we wait to vote for someone else (or in my case, not at all) this November. Trump's campaign is a case-study in delusion and manipulation.

It is excellent theater, but we all already know how this show ends: with Hillary in the white house.

Those who claim they can't do something are always right. They'll roll over and claim they had no choice. Then they'll form up for the GOPe in the hope of a few crumbs from the new elite and begin supporting some lackluster, pastel willing tool of a candidate - promptly forgetting that Cruz was also on the list of candidates The Hag wanted to face and Rand Paul was the candidate she was most concerned about. Their masters won't let them back Paul. Maybe JEB! will give it another go



If that is the only complaint you hear, your hearing is quite selective.

His "policies" are vacuous, nebulous, and laughably costly. He panders to whatever audience he faces, and his supporters lap it up. No one knows what Trump will actually do if he (by some curse) gained access to the levers of power, bit I don't believe for a second that it will benefit anyone but "The Donald".

Whereas, alas, we know exactly what The Hag will do. And we find it pathetic that out of one side neverTrump speaks of The Hag being tolerable because congress will keep her in check while the other side is saying Trump will be disastrous for down-ballot races. neverTrump reasoning has quite a few contortions of its own in order to justify its foregone conclusions




The polls you see? Oh that's rich.

Romney by a landslide...



The "brexit" is a boondoggle and a farce...political theater gone wrong. The brits got what they asked for, then immediately started trying to undo it. By the time this all plays out it will cost the British taxpayers a fortune, and will end the careers of a generation of politicians...and Britain will still be inexorably tied to their Continental peers.

Ending the careers of a generation of politicians sounds more like a feature than a bug

It's called "pandering"...it is nothing more than telling people what they want to hear in order to advance your own agenda. The British fell for it...and apparently so did Trump supporters.

That's why we are going to end up with Clinton.

Well. I guess we should all just curl up and die. Oh, woe is us!

Thanks for sharing

 

[1DOWN4UP]

The Republican Party Has Spent $0 on TV Ads for Trump After Spending $42 Million for Romney in 2012 ? Charisma News

 

[jbombelli]

No, no you didn't. You voted for a pandering buffoon, and the only candidate that consistently polled lowest against Clinton as far back as pre-primary polls. You voted for a loser...the easiest of all "GOP" candidates for HRC to defeat. Trump is a con man and a phony...a vote for him in the primary is a vote for Clinton in the general.

You chose President Hillary Clinton when you foolishly jumped aboard the Trump trainwreck.




Trump is a crony statist, and a friend of the Clintons. You think he isn't beholden to anyone else, but he's a shady dealer with a long history of broken promises and bad deals. Trump has left loose ends all throughout his life, and at this point we really don't have any idea who is pulling on them.

I don't care that he "said mean things". I care that he is a morally bankrupt huckster, and I don't believe he has even the desire to do the things he says...let alone the ability.




The GOP generally, and Trump voters specifically threw gun owners under the bus when they chose a pandering egoist for their candidate. I have been saying this from the beginning: Trump loses this race for the Republicans. Thanks.



In the primaries, maybe...sure. To perform well in the general you have to present yourself as a moderate and a pragmatist..."The Donald" presents himself as neither. Beyond his cheerleading fanboys very few voters believe he is capable of producing the results he promises, and ever fewer believe he has the will. I think he's a circus freak desperately following the warmth of the spotlight.



The debates were pointless political theater. Only a handful of voters are enamored with Trump's act, the vast majority of us are tuning in to see what he did today to step on his own dick while we wait to vote for someone else (or in my case, not at all) this November. Trump's campaign is a case-study in delusion and manipulation.

It is excellent theater, but we all already know how this show ends: with Hillary in the white house.



If that is the only complaint you hear, your hearing is quite selective.

His "policies" are vacuous, nebulous, and laughably costly. He panders to whatever audience he faces, and his supporters lap it up. No one knows what Trump will actually do if he (by some curse) gained access to the levers of power, bit I don't believe for a second that it will benefit anyone but "The Donald".




The polls you see? Oh that's rich.

Romney by a landslide...



The "brexit" is a boondoggle and a farce...political theater gone wrong. The brits got what they asked for, then immediately started trying to undo it. By the time this all plays out it will cost the British taxpayers a fortune, and will end the careers of a generation of politicians...and Britain will still be inexorably tied to their Continental peers.


It's called "pandering"...it is nothing more than telling people what they want to hear in order to advance your own agenda. The British fell for it...and apparently so did Trump supporters.

That's why we are going to end up with Clinton.

Lol.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

https://youtu.be/fTIGU6s1llw. Alice is my candidate....YEA!

 

[IndyDave1776]

Let's be honest here. The only reason Trump is the nominee is that the GOP lacked the means to shut him up and shut him down like they do any other candidate who is not a party apparatchik who will do exactly zero toward correcting the country's problems or serving out interests. By contrast, had the party not used its leverage to marginalize a long list of candidates over time who would remind a person of Rand Paul (or Paul himself for that matter), we could have had a sound candidate that actually appeals to and would work for the people who vote for him or her without the baggage that Trump brings to the table. That said, I will gladly take Trump's baggage over Hillary's, especially considering that while Donald is indeed self-serving, that which he perceives to be in his self-interest is far closer to my own than Hillary's perceived self-interests, coupled with the fact that she has made it clear that she hates us and everything about us. The bottom line is that we have a candidate who is far from ideal whose interests are more or less parallel with our own or else a sworn enemy who, with a SC vacancy, will be in a position to destroy the republic.

All this because the GOP leadership can't get its collective head out from up its ass.

 

[PaulF]

You did a great job of bad mouthing DJT !
I have to ask which one of the GOP candidates should have won?
Also why you believe voting is not a good thing?

Thanks for the kind compliment, but it isn't hard to do...Trump is a trainweck in the same class as Hillary, there is plenty to hate.

I don't think any of the candidates "should" have won. I like Paul Ryan, and think he would be doing better Trump right now...but I don't think the general voting populace would agree.

This election has huge undercurrents of "Identity Politics" driving it. We needed a candidate that could negate Clinton's intangibles...her "checkpoints" on the Hierarchy of Oppression the which the left currently bases its "moral compass".

As cheezy as it sounds, we needed someone like Condi Rice to defeat Hillary. HRC cannot play the "woman" card, nor the "privilege" card against rice. Rice's conservative credentials are sound, and she thinks well on her feet...she's a strong opponent to the BS the left throws out, and there's something in her political portfolio for just about everyone to relate to. She's marketable and relatable...to more than just angry white men.

But she didn't run, and nobody gave Carly the credit she deserved. This Clinton thing is a juggernaut that has been building up speed for years, it requires careful planning and precise execution. The republican party seems has not had a great track record with either, if we're to be honest with ourselves. This was inevitable after a certain point.

A better candidate. Someone relatable to everyone, but holds values that ring true with a shrinking minority of Americans. I think that is a hard job, and the best qualified are probably too smart to take it. Instead we get people driven by ambition and self-image...the people asking to do that job are probably the last people we actually want doing it.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

I wonder how many people will vote Trump,who have their Lib friends thinking they vote the Hag?I wonder how many generational voting Dems are scared and fed up,and push the R too.This voting block is not even considered.