Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why should I vote for Trump?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • T. A. Gardner
    replied
    The reason the GOP insiders are upset with Trump is largely the same reason the Democrat insiders are upset with Sanders.

    In both cases the party relies on their headliners, in this case Presidential candidates, to fund raise heavily and fill party coffers. This is not so much for the Presidential race as it is for down ticket races that are often unable to raise significant funds locally for a candidate for say, a state legislature, or even congress.

    That's why the Shrill one has rounded up virtually all the Democrat super delegates. That's party payback for her fundraising for the DNC. Sanders got kicked to the curb because he wasn't playing that game.
    Trump is the same way. He's paying for his own campaign for the most part. That he's doing so well on a mere fraction of what the other candidates are spending should have the Democrats very worried. He ramps up spending massively, he could swamp most media outlets with ads and such that so far he really hasn't run.

    Leave a comment:


  • The Exorcist
    replied
    Originally posted by lodestar View Post
    Just to address the above matters the commentator I was referencing earlier was Tom Switzer (Uni of Sydney's United States Studies Centre) writing in 'The Australian' this weekend.

    He defines the development in the GOP as follows:
    "For decades now, American politics has been democratizing - going from "smoky" backroom deals and arcane convention floor procedures to primaries and caucuses.
    The process has devolved to the point where front runner Trump is effectively running against his own party - or at least it's leadership.

    The Republican establishment may well be wringing its hands at what the primary system has wrought, but the situation is almost out of its hands."


    Sound like a good summary?
    Yes, and no.
    While the outward image of politics here and elsewhere would make it appear that the process is more open, the opposite is true. THe first act Obama signed coming into office was a p[romise to be more transparent, and this has been the most secretive administration in our history, in practice.
    And that goes for the entire Govt structure.
    Right down to the local level-
    http://badcounty.com

    Yes, Trump's biggest enemy is the GOP good 'ol boys, who were glad to take his money in the past but are screaming bloody murder about the idea of actually including him in their little club.


    Originally posted by lodestar View Post
    Another thing worth considering Exorcist is that the disenchanted, disaffected and disenfranchised on the right and the disenchanted, disaffected and disenfranchised on the left may, in some ways, have more in common with each other
    than they do with the mainstream political parties that purport to represent them under their party umbrella.

    Regards
    lodestar
    I'd say that goes without saying. Once you factor out the fringe kooks, folks is just folks. They want to be represented, and once they are not, the continued existence of the old order becomes a very precarious thing.
    Sure, the fringe and the establishment can keep trying to lead the public around by the nose, and the node-ring they are using now is called Political Correctness.
    That only lasts as long as people don't have to think too much, a sitiation that is clearly not going to last.

    The scary part is how deaf the aristocrats at the top tend to be, all through history. They might pretend to make changes for the better, indeed they have made it an art-form in recent decades... but that trick has been done do death.
    They won't do what they really have to, they won't give up one iota of stolen power and money, not until some mob rises up and rips it from their dying clutches.
    And this time, thanks to Globalization, it could happen everywhere at the same time.
    Interesting times...

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    And about the chances of Hillary to win the election : the figures given by Breitbart indicate that she is weaker than in 2008 :in the Democratic primaries she got more than 200000 votes less than in 2008,and this against a much weaker opponent = Sanders .

    Leave a comment:


  • 101combatvet
    replied
    Originally posted by ljadw View Post
    No, no : journalists and foreign experts = Washington Post, NYTimes, CNN, ...
    thus the Liberal gang .

    Better is : Hillary supporters call out Trump's "Completely Uneducated " "Baffling " Foreign policy .

    One of these "experts " ,Christiane Amanpour, is a Soros creature.
    That's pretty funny when you consider that any foreign policy issues that Hillary has been directly involved in has screwed the US of A. Trump doesn't have to have this on his resume to win against a total failure.

    Leave a comment:


  • 101combatvet
    replied
    Originally posted by VinceW View Post
    My opinion is that Hillary will break the law and abuse her power a little bit less than Trump would as he's expressed he would in his campaign nomination race.
    She's the lesser of two evils.
    Any basis for this besides opinion? Hillary has a proven track record for breaking the law.

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Originally posted by MarkV View Post
    It was on Broadcasting House this morning - best I can do is this link to the whole programme. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006...pisodes/player
    Thanks for the link

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Originally posted by MarkV View Post
    No because as I said it was on the wireless not the Internet
    I'm wireless now and on the Internet.

    Maybe radio would be a more up to date word to use.

    Leave a comment:


  • ljadw
    replied
    Originally posted by MarkV View Post
    Interesting analysis from the guy who called every US state correctly in 2012 on the wireless this AM. Apparently the polls show that in a Clinton Trump contest she at the moment has a 3:1 advantage but if it were Clinton Cruz she would be the underdog. It seems that it has nothing to do with policies but is simply a case of who is the most disliked by the people at large. No one is in a positive state on scores for liked!
    Why would any conservative vote for a man who supported the Iran Deal (= Cruz) and the TPP ( = Cruz ) ?
    Last edited by ljadw; 01 May 16, 07:29.

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkV
    replied
    It was on Broadcasting House this morning - best I can do is this link to the whole programme. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006...pisodes/player

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkV
    replied
    Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
    Could you provide a link to that analysis?
    No because as I said it was on the wireless not the Internet

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Originally posted by MarkV View Post
    Interesting analysis from the guy who called every US state correctly in 2012 on the wireless this AM. Apparently the polls show that in a Clinton Trump contest she at the moment has a 3:1 advantage but if it were Clinton Cruz she would be the underdog. It seems that it has nothing to do with policies but is simply a case of who is the most disliked by the people at large. No one is in a positive state on scores for liked!
    Could you provide a link to that analysis?

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkV
    replied
    Interesting analysis from the guy who called every US state correctly in 2012 on the wireless this AM. Apparently the polls show that in a Clinton Trump contest she at the moment has a 3:1 advantage but if it were Clinton Cruz she would be the underdog. It seems that it has nothing to do with policies but is simply a case of who is the most disliked by the people at large. No one is in a positive state on scores for liked!

    Leave a comment:


  • lodestar
    replied
    The attraction of Trump and Sanders

    [QUOTE=The Exorcist;3210026]
    I have read it before, and if you are just going to keep pasting it until everyone here has answered it, well, here is my contribution.
    [See The Exorcist most recent post]

    So, what have you got to answer MY thoughts on the matter?
    A Demi-God address an ant?
    Have yourself committed my dear fellow as you are quite clearly living in a delusional fantasy world!

    Naw...just messin' with ya
    Thanks for replying.
    I wish I had more time to address all your issues as you obviously care deeply about developments in your country (so do many of those on the left by the way - they just love different things about the US) and express those concerns quite articulately.

    Regarding the split in the Republicans Party (not to be confused with the republic itself);
    It's encouraging to see the collapse of the collaborator class, namely, the Republican Party, where honest opinion was not merely unacceptable but a sure sign of some deeper defect. Integrity, perhaps.

    In time we came to understand them as just another DC club, just as obedient, just as annoyed by the peasants and just as dismissive.
    Just to address the above matters the commentator I was referencing earlier was Tom Switzer (Uni of Sydney's United States Studies Centre) writing in 'The Australian' this weekend.

    He defines the development in the GOP as follows:
    "For decades now, American politics has been democratizing - going from "smoky" backroom deals and arcane convention floor procedures to primaries and caucuses.
    The process has devolved to the point where front runner Trump is effectively running against his own party - or at least it's leadership.

    The Republican establishment may well be wringing its hands at what the primary system has wrought, but the situation is almost out of its hands."


    Sound like a good summary?

    Another thing worth considering Exorcist is that the disenchanted, disaffected and disenfranchised on the right and the disenchanted, disaffected and disenfranchised on the left may, in some ways, have more in common with each other
    than they do with the mainstream political parties that purport to represent them under their party umbrella.

    Regards
    lodestar

    Leave a comment:


  • The Exorcist
    replied
    Originally posted by lodestar View Post

    A cripped summary is below AGAIN!!!
    THIS TIME PAY ATTENTION!!:
    ...
    I have read it before, and if you are just going to keep pasting it until everyone here has answered it, well, here is my contribution.

    First of all-
    Our greatest fear is not that it will all end in fire and horror, but that nothing will ever change, and that we will continue our slow descent into third world conditions, kill off all that remains of Western culture and genetics, slowly becoming a perpetual Mexico or Brazil. For those who can see clearly, its apparent were already basically there. The protests at Trump rallies reveal the tension between keeping things the way they are to the benefit of the parasite, and the knowledge that the West not only doesn't want the Other in its midst, but that we'd be better off without them.
    http://www.amerika.org/politics/mode...ok-forward-to/

    THAT was just the appetizer, now on to the main meal-

    Regarding the split in the Republicans Party (not to be confused with the republic itself);
    It's encouraging to see the collapse of the collaborator class, namely, the Republican Party, where honest opinion was not merely unacceptable but a sure sign of some deeper defect. Integrity, perhaps. They warned us if we didn't support them the other party would win. We did, but whether they won or didn't, it was the same track, different pace. Odd, that. In time we came to understand them as just another DC club, just as obedient, just as annoyed by the peasants and just as dismissive.




    The liberals have a rule, "no enemies to the left", meaning when they can't speak well of the hard left they won't speak of it at all. The Republican "conservative movement" has fallen all over itself to disown its equivalent, largely with acerbic purges, sometimes career-ending, always about fringe issues or outright trivia. Over these many years that's a lot of bath water and a lot of babies.


    The Republican Party has conducted itself as a reliable franchise of its alleged opposition, betraying the trust and support of a generation. Events have confirmed those they expelled for being "too right" had the better claim to legitimacy, and in doing so, it has unwittingly run a bulletproof selection process for their own replacement. It's gotten to where credibility and rejection by the Republican Party are pretty much the same thing. Cuckservatism is what some call it, in a fit of politeness.
    (no, that isn't what it means, babies)

    But why this and why now? A while back there was a serious uprising against professional voters and their enablers, so widespread and so well founded it was embarrassingly indefensible even by DC. Yes, it all came thisclose to hitting the fan.
    They panicked. It was blindingly clear they'd lost control of their own narrative. The groundwork they'd laid in the '30s had become boring and irrelevant, worse, the '60s attempt at renewal was spectacularly discredited by the violence and insanity of its practitioners... but they still imitate them and uphold all of those failures as heroes.

    The Leftists still champion the clunky, antique economic blather of their Marxist grandparents, and spice it up or cover for it by exhuming old grudges and inventing new ones- in with mobilizing their freeloader thugs on campus, in with mandatory perversion and the outrage of the week, in with nonstop demographic slander which, as White Privilege, criminalizes the middle America they hate so deeply.

    You do understand, if we decline to cheerfully roll over for White Privilege and it's pseudo-evidence we were crypto Darth Vaders all along, eh?

    And if only one candidate appears to even understand all of this, then he's our man.
    End of rant.

    So, what have you got to answer MY thoughts on the matter?

    Leave a comment:


  • Tuebor
    replied
    Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
    Low information voters suck. Best if they stayed home...
    Are they "low information voters," or merely so p***ed off they no longer care?

    Tuebor

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X