trump

[T.Lex]

More talk of replacing Trump with a rational candidate at the convention.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/talk-grows-replacing-trump-convention-000000790.html

Awesome. Let's take a sh** sandwich and turn it into a sh** buffet.

 

[jamil]

Awesome. Let's take a sh** sandwich and turn it into a sh** buffet.

Replacing Trump at the convention at this point would just flip the people who will stay home. The #trumpers will stay home. The #nevertrumpers will vote. Ether way, they'll lose.

 

[IndyDave1776]

This sounds like the logic behind a purge. Are you equating "the left" with "evil" that has caused bloodshed because of "our tolerance and good will"?

If one can't attend a peaceful political rally and expect his blood to stay on the inside of his body, we need to do some purging.

 

[T.Lex]

If one can't attend a peaceful political rally and expect his blood to stay on the inside of his body, we need to do some purging.

Ok, I'll play.

How do we decide who needs purging?

 

[bwframe]

The Donald sure does irritate the race-baiters and establishment R's doesn't he?

I imagine only temporarily. In November, in all probability, his supporters are going to have the sad face.

That's been the fantasy all along hasn't it?

 

[T.Lex]

Replacing Trump at the convention at this point would just flip the people who will stay home. The #trumpers will stay home. The #nevertrumpers will vote. Ether way, they'll lose.

I don't think its that simple - and even if it is, let's remember that MORE people voted for Trump than any other single Republican. So, accepting your premise at face value, a majority of Rs would probably stay home. That's not exactly a strategy for success.

If the convention rejects the candidate who got a majority of the votes, then the system is bad - either at the primary level or the convention level. If the Republican system is bad, then it'll lose structural support. IMHO.

ETA:
It is one thing for me to reject Trump for my own reasons. It is another for me to reject the Republican system because I have no more faith in it.

 

[foszoe]

Ok, I'll play.

How do we decide who needs purging?

Psalm 51

 

[bwframe]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46RVSmT94DA

I believe it is his victory speech after winning NJ.

It is obvious Trump just can't help himself. I know he's a smart man, but his egocentrism is uncontrollable. I'm still astonished some people find that appealing.

Haven't inner city blacks been the shills of the Obama administration? Haven't their employment and welfare numbers increased substantially in the past 7 years? Isn't this what Trump is talking about?

 

[IndyDave1776]

Ok, I'll play.

How do we decide who needs purging?

I would say the ones that the San Jose police chief didn't see fit to stop from harming other citizens are a good example. The ones who want to disrupt my right, or that of any other non-aggressor, to keep his blood inside his body need bullets in their heads.

 

[T.Lex]

Psalm 51

We're going to need more bulls.

I would say the ones that the San Jose police chief didn't see fit to stop from harming other citizens are a good example. The ones who want to disrupt my right, or that of any other non-aggressor, to keep his blood inside his body need bullets in their heads.

So, throwing eggs - which are unlikely to cause bloodletting - is an example of behavior that is not purge-worthy?

And you reference to "bullets in their heads" suggests the targets of the purge deserve immediate death - do I have that right?

 

[jamil]

I don't think its that simple - and even if it is, let's remember that MORE people voted for Trump than any other single Republican. So, accepting your premise at face value, a majority of Rs would probably stay home. That's not exactly a strategy for success.

If the convention rejects the candidate who got a majority of the votes, then the system is bad - either at the primary level or the convention level. If the Republican system is bad, then it'll lose structural support. IMHO.

ETA:
It is one thing for me to reject Trump for my own reasons. It is another for me to reject the Republican system because I have no more faith in it.

Of course rank and file R's would completely lose faith in the party. I'm just talking about how it would impact this election. And I didn't say the swap was equal. It's certainly not. But I will say that of the people who will vote for Trump, many are doing so pragmatically because it's the only choice. If the Republican Convention did replace Trump, I'd still vote for the Republican candidate THIS ELECTION. And in the future I would vote for which ever party crops up to become the next opposition part to the Democrats after the Republican party ceases to exist.

Haven't inner city blacks been the shills of the Obama administration? Haven't their employment and welfare numbers increased substantially in the past 7 years? Isn't this what Trump is talking about?

Of course they've been shills of the Democrat, Obama or otherwise, because the Democrats "take care of" them. And the Democrats enslave them in perpetual government dependence. So what does Trump mean by "taken care of"? Even more dependence?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Haven't inner city blacks been the shills of the Obama administration? Haven't their employment and welfare numbers increased substantially in the past 7 years? Isn't this what Trump is talking about?

Oh, I didn't know it was just the inner city blacks....

Kut (sees you making excuses)

 

[pudly]

Congratulations NeverTrumpers. You can now enjoy an open alliance with Hillary Clinton who has launched the web site: Republicans Against Trump.

Paid for by Hillary for America

 

[Jludo]

Congratulations NeverTrumpers. You can now enjoy an open alliance with Hillary Clinton who has launched the web site: Republicans Against Trump.

I guess that's a smart move on the part of the Clinton campaign? She might not get those votes but anywhere she can hit trump helps her.

 

[printcraft]

Congratulations NeverTrumpers. You can now enjoy an open alliance with Hillary Clinton who has launched the web sitePaid for by Hillary for America: Republicans Against Trump.

#NeverTrumpersForHillary

 

[IndyDave1776]

We're going to need more bulls.



So, throwing eggs - which are unlikely to cause bloodletting - is an example of behavior that is not purge-worthy?

And you reference to "bullets in their heads" suggests the targets of the purge deserve immediate death - do I have that right?

You are deflecting. I seem to recall specifying blood loss as a metric, of which there has already been an unacceptable amount, with or without de facto official permission.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

We're going to need more bulls.



So, throwing eggs - which are unlikely to cause bloodletting - is an example of behavior that is not purge-worthy?

And you reference to "bullets in their heads" suggests the targets of the purge deserve immediate death - do I have that right?

What do you suggest is an appropriate response to individuals who attack you or a companion and draw blood while police stand by and watch? At what point should you feel "in fear of your life" and respond with lethal force?

 

[Tombs]

This sounds like the logic behind a purge. Are you equating "the left" with "evil" that has caused bloodshed because of "our tolerance and good will"?

Beating your neighbor senseless because he attended a rally for his party's nominee is evil. When that violence is not only condoned but promoted among the leftist media, that's not simple evil we're talking about, that's a party with one thing on their mind, blood.

Think of it like a dog who has gotten so violent it's a risk to your children, do you tolerate it running around your streets and homes?

Ok, I'll play.

How do we decide who needs purging?

How do you decide which dog to put down when one of them has become so violent it's a threat to your family's safety?

 

[T.Lex]

You are deflecting. I seem to recall specifying blood loss as a metric, of which there has already been an unacceptable amount, with or without de facto official permission.

What do you suggest is an appropriate response to individuals who attack you or a companion and draw blood while police stand by and watch? At what point should you feel "in fear of your life" and respond with lethal force?

Self defense is not purging. Responding to an attack (or imminent attack, etc.) is self defense. Attacking everyone who has the ability to attack is a purge.

Beating your neighbor senseless because he attended a rally for his party's nominee is evil. When that violence is not only condoned but promoted among the leftist media, that's not simple evil we're talking about, that's a party with one thing on their mind, blood.

Think of it like a dog who has gotten so violent it's a risk to your children, do you tolerate it running around your streets and homes?

How do we figure out the dogs? If you see a media van in the neighborhood, do you attack it?

If someone says they support the people who beat the Trump supporters, do you attack that person?

Just trying to figure out where you personally draw the lines. Not rhetorical, the actual lines.

 

[printcraft]

The anti-trumpers don't mean to kill you.... just beat and bloody you up a bit until you are silent.
You deserve it for supporting a racist or something so stop *****ing and take your medicine.