The Trump/Republican Primary/General Election Megathread

[rugertoter]

I can't help but wonder how many of the Trumpkins are going to commit suicide after Hillary wins? They seem too deeply invested in this loser. They should all be on a watch after the election.

How can you tell the future?

 

[ATM]

How can you tell the future?

By learning from the past.

 

[printcraft]

I'll just leave this here........... days before the convention... heading to dallas for the police memorial..... ted couldn't get a ride otherwise?

Selling his soul for a future hitlary cabinet position?

 

[jamil]

You can believe what you want to believe. Tell yourself whatever you want to tell yourself so you can sleep a night with your rock-solid principals. But when you wake up a criminal because some new SCOTUS justices decided that the "Militia" was replaced by the armed forces and you have a right to bear arms as long as you join the Army. You can sit there in your house ignoring the knock on the door.

I don't believe in Trump. I think he's a con man. I haven't arrived at that conclusion because my guy didn't win, or because I have my fingers in my ear. I thought that since the first time I heard him speak after he announced. I listened to what he said, and watched how he acted. If I'm going to vote for Trump, I need to be convinced he's not a democrat pretending to be Republican and conservative just so he can win with the Republican base. That "with us or against us" nonsense isn't going to convince me he's not.

And I get it. You believe I'm wrong. Well, I believe you're wrong. I think you guys have been suckered by Trump. So what now? Be divided? Hate us? Blame us?

What is your strategy for assuring that the supreme court is not stacked with radical progressive judges?

A realistic, achievable strategy that you are willing to go knocking on doors to accomplish. I'm doing my part, so lets hear what you are personally doing.

Given the choices, there is no strategy. And I realize that you believe you have one. I become less and less convinced that voting for Trump will save our rights. I am unconvinced he actually cares about rights. Trump keeps doing the things con men do, and I just think you're being played. I think you guys just wanted to believe in someone who's for what you believe in, and Trump took advantage of that. He told you what you want to hear.

Honestly, I'm not sure how I'm going to vote. I hate all the choices. I certainly won't cast a ballot for Hillary. Doubtful I'd cast one for Johnson. I think his social liberalism is much stronger than his 2A support. I think if it came down to a choice between the two, he'd sacrifice the 2A for the civil liberties he holds with a much higher priority. For example, to get pot legalized, I could see him caving on gun control.

I had sort of made peace with the idea of voting pragmatically for Trump in the hopes that there's a chance he'd do what he said about SCOTUS, but he just keeps confirming my suspicions with just about every action he takes. If he wants to convince me that he's not a con man, he needs to stop acting like one.

As far as how our discussion has turned, I think it is beyond INGO's capabilities to convince me he's not a con man. Trump has to do that. This "with us or against us" divisive crap certainly isn't gonna get it done.

 

[BugI02]

I'll just leave this here........... days before the convention... heading to dallas for the police memorial..... ted couldn't get a ride otherwise?
Selling his soul for a future hitlary cabinet position?

Well, senator Ted is looking pretty burnt down, and I don't think Goldman-Sachs needs directors whose husbands aren't politically connected. Perhaps his possible options have been mathematically reduced

 

[Dead Duck]

Doubtful I'd cast one for Johnson. I think his social liberalism is much stronger than his 2A support. I think if it came down to a choice between the two, he'd sacrifice the 2A for the civil liberties he holds with a much higher priority. For example, to get pot legalized, I could see him caving on gun control.

I actually did think he might do this too.

 

[Dead Duck]

I'll just leave this here........... days before the convention... heading to dallas for the police memorial..... ted couldn't get a ride otherwise?

Selling his soul for a future hitlary cabinet position?

Who's that little man in the spiffy white suit and yellow carnation shadowing Obummer?

 

[printcraft]

Who's that little man in the spiffy white suit and yellow carnation shadowing Obummer?

That's acting president valerie jarrett.

 

[Dead Duck]

That's acting president valerie jarrett.

Oh- It's a chick....

 

[Ericpwp]

I don't believe in Trump. I think he's a con man. I haven't arrived at that conclusion because my guy didn't win, or because I have my fingers in my ear. I thought that since the first time I heard him speak after he announced. I listened to what he said, and watched how he acted. If I'm going to vote for Trump, I need to be convinced he's not a democrat pretending to be Republican and conservative just so he can win with the Republican base. That "with us or against us" nonsense isn't going to convince me he's not.

And I get it. You believe I'm wrong. Well, I believe you're wrong. I think you guys have been suckered by Trump. So what now? Be divided? Hate us? Blame us?

He may be a con man, but what would make that any different then any other politician? I don't think he is. I know HRC is worse than a con man. Trump does not stop talking, and it is all on tape. For a guy like that that can't stop, not to have a slip-up recorded, he would have had to have a brain re-programming. I don't see it possible. His legacy is too big for him to be known as the guy who pulled the biggest con in modern time.

I don't agree with him on everything, and I think shaking the system as much as he says he wants to will be too much for many to handle. I am a fan of managers, not politicians in an administrative position. I would like to see a good manager as the POTUS, not an empty suit.

And... his SCOTUS pick have to be confirmed, there would be a mutiny if he did the bait and switch.

 

[Ericpwp]

You can believe what you want to believe. Tell yourself whatever you want to tell yourself so you can sleep a night with your rock-solid principals. But when you wake up a criminal because some new SCOTUS justices decided that the "Militia" was replaced by the armed forces and you have a right to bear arms as long as you join the Army. You can sit there in your house ignoring the knock on the door.

This is not "with us, or against us." It is the D's wet dream.

And it was not pointed at one member in particular.

 

[ATM]

Id rather be a principled criminal than a model subject.

 

[Ericpwp]

[video=youtube_share;3je_CPNWYKE]http://youtu.be/3je_CPNWYKE[/video]

 

[Tombs]

Knocking on doors is not much of a strategy if you've resigned yourself to be ruled by whatever radical judges decree.

Honest question here, what do you do about police who wish to enforce unconstitutional laws on you?

I admire your banter but I have to question how exactly you survive in a climate where you will be murdered for exercising rights the government says you do not have.

 

[PaulF]

Id rather be a principled criminal than a model subject.

Honest question here, what do you do about police who wish to enforce unconstitutional laws on you?

I admire your banter but I have to question how exactly you survive in a climate where you will be murdered for exercising rights the government says you do not have.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...n/12952-posting-about-inciting-civil-war.html

Gentlemen.

Be VERY careful what you post.

We have no tolerance for discussion of insurrection here.

 

[Tombs]

Given the choices, there is no strategy. And I realize that you believe you have one. I become less and less convinced that voting for Trump will save our rights. I am unconvinced he actually cares about rights. Trump keeps doing the things con men do, and I just think you're being played. I think you guys just wanted to believe in someone who's for what you believe in, and Trump took advantage of that. He told you what you want to hear.

Honestly, I'm not sure how I'm going to vote. I hate all the choices. I certainly won't cast a ballot for Hillary. Doubtful I'd cast one for Johnson. I think his social liberalism is much stronger than his 2A support. I think if it came down to a choice between the two, he'd sacrifice the 2A for the civil liberties he holds with a much higher priority. For example, to get pot legalized, I could see him caving on gun control.

I had sort of made peace with the idea of voting pragmatically for Trump in the hopes that there's a chance he'd do what he said about SCOTUS, but he just keeps confirming my suspicions with just about every action he takes. If he wants to convince me that he's not a con man, he needs to stop acting like one.

As far as how our discussion has turned, I think it is beyond INGO's capabilities to convince me he's not a con man. Trump has to do that. This "with us or against us" divisive crap certainly isn't gonna get it done.

If he's a con-man, then he sure has no regard or love for his family.

Because his kids will go far in politics if he doesn't ruin it for them. I don't see how he could be that bad of a person to his own family.

 

[bwframe]

We likely won't be doing any fighting when Hillary uses her executive and judicial sway to kill off the Second Amendment. They will likely use slow methods to pick up the newly appointed criminals, without much drama. Traffic tickets, drivers license renewals, doctor visits, insurance claims, etc. will all be areas where reminders might be passed along about the now defunct 2A. It's possible that LEO's might be sitting at home with your family when you return, but not likely.

No doors kicked down, SWAT teams called out, etc. Those of us quiet self sufficient types who don't create much fanfare will likely die still "owning" our "illegal guns", that we wouldn't dare ever shoot. (No more OCer's for sure though.)

However, our kids won't and their kids won't have any knowledge of what it was like when the old dudes used to own the "weapons of war." They'll be outdone, by lifetime Supreme Court judges and never have the opportunity to vote in changes due to being outnumbered by our new citizens that have came across our open borders. Our children, grandchildren and generations to come will be defenseless. Defenseless among heathens who know they are...

The anti-gun liberals have all the time in the world. They know the longer they wait the more likely the younger generations will fall for their rhetoric, HS/college teaching and the blind following of entertainers. They are happy to wait us out while we fight among ourselves, rather than banding together behind our candidate (regardless,) just as they do theirs.

 

[ATM]

Honest question here, what do you do about police who wish to enforce unconstitutional laws on you?

I admire your banter but I have to question how exactly you survive in a climate where you will be murdered for exercising rights the government says you do not have.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...n/12952-posting-about-inciting-civil-war.html

Gentlemen.

Be VERY careful what you post.

We have no tolerance for discussion of insurrection here.

I have no intention of inciting violence, rather, an obligation to defend against those who do. I do not advocate for civil war, merely an obligation to refuse to convict anyone charged with an unconstitutional "crime".

If discussion of the limits of dutiful obedience to government overreach (surely there are limits) fall into the category of forbidden insurrection, I'll stop here.

 

[jbombelli]

I've been infracted for saying that if somebody killed a certain person that did a certain thing (wasn't even a politician), and I ended up on the jury, I'd vote to acquit.

 

[Expat]

I've been infracted for saying that if somebody killed a certain person that did a certain thing (wasn't even a politician), and I ended up on the jury, I'd vote to acquit.

Was it one member killing another one?