Trump

josevolution

BS44325 said:

JimmyV said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

vaggar99 said:

dignin said:

bootlegger10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.

We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.

Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.

The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.

If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.

correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.

Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.

That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.

History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.

I have zero idea if Trump will be an effective President but his campaign strategy warts and all was nothing short of genius. If you want to beat the man then don't underestimate the man.

it wasn't genius. it was normal. clinton's was terrible. she sat on her laurels hoping the media's polls were right.

I wouldn't call it genius but it wasn't normal either. He took his campaign to the gutter in ways we had never seen a nominee do before. He spoke directly to the masses via Twitter in a way we had never seen before. He rejected political norms such as releasing his taxes in a way we had never seen before.

And flipped the rust belt in the process while running against his own party. Many months ago I mentioned on here that I understood his high risk strategy. He was trying to thread a tiny needle which would either be the craziest win of all time or the most epic of disasters. A lot had to go right for it to work and his campaign played it perfectly. You can hate the man and still say what he did was genius.

Along with the FBI dropping the bombshell yeah everyone ignored his putrid message and voted for him ..

PJ_Soul

Posted in Trump economics, but I'll just leave this here too. Food for thought.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-K8bf6dbYt4

bootlegger10

HughFreakingDillon said:

bootlegger10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

bootlegger10 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

His arrogance. Coupled with a public that didn't know or care enough to make him accountable for his words... or loved what he was saying and how he was saying it.

If the left hadn't tried to silence and demean the slightest speech that it didn't agree with Trump's language albeit extreme in some cases wouldn't have been so much of a breath of fresh air (not so much content but the reminder there is some freedom left).

When you tell people they can't have Christmas parties anymore because 1% of the population might be mildly offended, it will eventually catch up with you.

my parents generation would agree with your last statement.

my generation? we like to include people. not tell them to fuck off and breed extremism.

There you go. "Fuck off and breed extremism" because someone wants to say Merry Christmas. Yes, I want to vote for people who think like you. You all are closer to Hitler than you know.

closer to hitler? what the fuck? I don't think Hitler wanted to include everyone to make them feel welcome make everyone happy. Maybe you meant Mr Rogers?

I keep seeing shit every year on facebook and email strings from people my parents age, all saying "fuck happy holidays, I want to say merry christmas, and if you don't like it, go back to wherever it is you came from".

yeah, that's such a sweet sentiment. you're right, that's what we should be promoting in the western world.

So how is it going making everyone feel happy, Mr. Rogers? The left may not care about getting rid of a race like Hitler, but they do care about getting rid of those who don't fall in line with their agenda and ideology.

BS44325

josevolution said:

BS44325 said:

JimmyV said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

vaggar99 said:

dignin said:

bootlegger10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.

We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.

Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.

The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.

If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.

correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.

Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.

That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.

History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.

I have zero idea if Trump will be an effective President but his campaign strategy warts and all was nothing short of genius. If you want to beat the man then don't underestimate the man.

it wasn't genius. it was normal. clinton's was terrible. she sat on her laurels hoping the media's polls were right.

I wouldn't call it genius but it wasn't normal either. He took his campaign to the gutter in ways we had never seen a nominee do before. He spoke directly to the masses via Twitter in a way we had never seen before. He rejected political norms such as releasing his taxes in a way we had never seen before.

And flipped the rust belt in the process while running against his own party. Many months ago I mentioned on here that I understood his high risk strategy. He was trying to thread a tiny needle which would either be the craziest win of all time or the most epic of disasters. A lot had to go right for it to work and his campaign played it perfectly. You can hate the man and still say what he did was genius.

Along with the FBI dropping the bombshell yeah everyone ignored his putrid message and voted for him ..

Absolutely but that is why the democratic party lining up behind her was so insane. Everybody knew she was dirty and that was going to catch up with her eventually. When Bernie beat her in Michigan her party should have seen the writing on the wall. It was easy to choose putrid over putrid.

josevolution

BS44325 said:

josevolution said:

BS44325 said:

JimmyV said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

vaggar99 said:

dignin said:

bootlegger10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.

We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.

Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.

The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.

If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.

correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.

Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.

That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.

History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.

I have zero idea if Trump will be an effective President but his campaign strategy warts and all was nothing short of genius. If you want to beat the man then don't underestimate the man.

it wasn't genius. it was normal. clinton's was terrible. she sat on her laurels hoping the media's polls were right.

I wouldn't call it genius but it wasn't normal either. He took his campaign to the gutter in ways we had never seen a nominee do before. He spoke directly to the masses via Twitter in a way we had never seen before. He rejected political norms such as releasing his taxes in a way we had never seen before.

And flipped the rust belt in the process while running against his own party. Many months ago I mentioned on here that I understood his high risk strategy. He was trying to thread a tiny needle which would either be the craziest win of all time or the most epic of disasters. A lot had to go right for it to work and his campaign played it perfectly. You can hate the man and still say what he did was genius.

Along with the FBI dropping the bombshell yeah everyone ignored his putrid message and voted for him ..

Absolutely but that is why the democratic party lining up behind her was so insane. Everybody knew she was dirty and that was going to catch up with her eventually. When Bernie beat her in Michigan her party should have seen the writing on the wall. It was easy to choose putrid over putrid.

Exactly and now you have a deplorable in the WH as commander in chief, all good though with 4 yrs for him to be under the scope & scrutiny of the nation & press he will have to put up or shut up !

CM189191

PJ_Soul said:

So anyone would assume that this billboard that is said to be in Russia is a fake. I know that was my immediate assumption .... Well, It's real, but is actually in Montenegro, not Russia. Weird and wild times, lol.



http://www.snopes.com/russian-billboard-features-trump-and-putin/

Here's another one, different theme though

CM189191

JC29856 said:

PJ_Soul said:

So anyone would assume that this billboard that is said to be in Russia is a fake. I know that was my immediate assumption .... Well, It's real, but is actually in Montenegro, not Russia. Weird and wild times, lol.



http://www.snopes.com/russian-billboard-features-trump-and-putin/

I'm pissed Obama didn't call out Putin for interfering with our elections

that's rich....like you would have believed it anyways...

HughFreakingDillon

PP193448 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

bootlegger10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

bootlegger10 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

His arrogance. Coupled with a public that didn't know or care enough to make him accountable for his words... or loved what he was saying and how he was saying it.

If the left hadn't tried to silence and demean the slightest speech that it didn't agree with Trump's language albeit extreme in some cases wouldn't have been so much of a breath of fresh air (not so much content but the reminder there is some freedom left).

When you tell people they can't have Christmas parties anymore because 1% of the population might be mildly offended, it will eventually catch up with you.

my parents generation would agree with your last statement.

my generation? we like to include people. not tell them to fuck off and breed extremism.

There you go. "Fuck off and breed extremism" because someone wants to say Merry Christmas. Yes, I want to vote for people who think like you. You all are closer to Hitler than you know.

closer to hitler? what the fuck? I don't think Hitler wanted to include everyone to make them feel welcome make everyone happy. Maybe you meant Mr Rogers?

I keep seeing shit every year on facebook and email strings from people my parents age, all saying "fuck happy holidays, I want to say merry christmas, and if you don't like it, go back to wherever it is you came from".

yeah, that's such a sweet sentiment. you're right, that's what we should be promoting in the western world.

So is it intolerant for someone to insist that Someone else doesn't say Merry Christmas?? Isn't that hypocritical??

nope. no one is saying "don't say merry christmas because I'm not christian/white/north american". it is people who are choosing to say "happy holidays" that are getting attacked by those who insist they say merry christmas.

the inclusives are getting attacked by the exclusives.

PP193448

HughFreakingDillon said:

PP193448 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

bootlegger10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

bootlegger10 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

His arrogance. Coupled with a public that didn't know or care enough to make him accountable for his words... or loved what he was saying and how he was saying it.

If the left hadn't tried to silence and demean the slightest speech that it didn't agree with Trump's language albeit extreme in some cases wouldn't have been so much of a breath of fresh air (not so much content but the reminder there is some freedom left).

When you tell people they can't have Christmas parties anymore because 1% of the population might be mildly offended, it will eventually catch up with you.

my parents generation would agree with your last statement.

my generation? we like to include people. not tell them to fuck off and breed extremism.

There you go. "Fuck off and breed extremism" because someone wants to say Merry Christmas. Yes, I want to vote for people who think like you. You all are closer to Hitler than you know.

closer to hitler? what the fuck? I don't think Hitler wanted to include everyone to make them feel welcome make everyone happy. Maybe you meant Mr Rogers?

I keep seeing shit every year on facebook and email strings from people my parents age, all saying "fuck happy holidays, I want to say merry christmas, and if you don't like it, go back to wherever it is you came from".

yeah, that's such a sweet sentiment. you're right, that's what we should be promoting in the western world.

So is it intolerant for someone to insist that Someone else doesn't say Merry Christmas?? Isn't that hypocritical??

nope. no one is saying "don't say merry christmas because I'm not christian/white/north american". it is people who are choosing to say "happy holidays" that are getting attacked by those who insist they say merry christmas.

the inclusives are getting attacked by the exclusives.

Oh, my mistake. I thought you meant vice versa. Yeah, that's very narrow minded indeed. Happy holidays, Hugh!! And Merry Christmas if you prefer!!

BS44325

josevolution said:

BS44325 said:

josevolution said:

BS44325 said:

JimmyV said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

vaggar99 said:

dignin said:

bootlegger10 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

dignin said:

JC29856 said:

If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.

We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.

Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.

The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.

If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.

correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.

Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.

That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.

History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.

I have zero idea if Trump will be an effective President but his campaign strategy warts and all was nothing short of genius. If you want to beat the man then don't underestimate the man.

it wasn't genius. it was normal. clinton's was terrible. she sat on her laurels hoping the media's polls were right.

I wouldn't call it genius but it wasn't normal either. He took his campaign to the gutter in ways we had never seen a nominee do before. He spoke directly to the masses via Twitter in a way we had never seen before. He rejected political norms such as releasing his taxes in a way we had never seen before.

And flipped the rust belt in the process while running against his own party. Many months ago I mentioned on here that I understood his high risk strategy. He was trying to thread a tiny needle which would either be the craziest win of all time or the most epic of disasters. A lot had to go right for it to work and his campaign played it perfectly. You can hate the man and still say what he did was genius.

Along with the FBI dropping the bombshell yeah everyone ignored his putrid message and voted for him ..

Absolutely but that is why the democratic party lining up behind her was so insane. Everybody knew she was dirty and that was going to catch up with her eventually. When Bernie beat her in Michigan her party should have seen the writing on the wall. It was easy to choose putrid over putrid.

Exactly and now you have a deplorable in the WH as commander in chief, all good though with 4 yrs for him to be under the scope & scrutiny of the nation & press he will have to put up or shut up !

I'm with you on that but the democratic party needs to prepare for his potential stumble now by learning the right lessons. They need to get rid of the old guard like Pelosi and push for Tim Ryan as speaker. They should resist Keith Ellison as DNC chair and find someone who would be palatable to a broader swath of the electorate. They have to move away from identity politics and develop an actual platform. These aren't easy things to do but they must be done if they want to capitalize in 2018 and 2020. Focusing on Trump's general idiocy will be a losing battle.

PJfanwillneverleave1

JimmyV said:

Any Russian interference in our elections was done covertly. I would expect our response to be as well.

Is this sarcasm?

Go Beavers

bootlegger10 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

His arrogance. Coupled with a public that didn't know or care enough to make him accountable for his words... or loved what he was saying and how he was saying it.

If the left hadn't tried to silence and demean the slightest speech that it didn't agree with, Trump's language albeit extreme in some cases wouldn't have been so much of a breath of fresh air (not so much content but the reminder there is some freedom left in this country to have an opinion).

When you tell people they can't have Christmas parties anymore because 1% of the population might be mildly offended, it will eventually catch up with you. It is a small example but when the left will go after something that small than you know what they will do when something more important comes along.

You basically outline trump's manipulation of a segment of the population that somehow are afraid that their way of life was somehow slipping away. Religion was used, as in your example, along with race and other spooky cultures.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).

I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.

I accept your apology.

You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?

I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.

Lol

You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?

No.

You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.

So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?

Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.

Fair enough with regards to your personal position on Trump. Thanks for the clarification.

If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.

When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base.

Ahhhh....so I guess the beat down has been called off. Ok. Now in terms of your point I do take exception to how you describe his supporters (if you can call them that because many of his voters did not think highly of him) because they did a calculation compared to the other candidate. Some people on here have failed to come to grips with how terrible and corrupt of a candidate Hillary Clinton was. There are voters who felt they would be sacrificing values in voting for her. My argument is and always has been there is no point in trying to argue which candidate is more terrible as it is pretty much irrelevant in a "change" electorate. The voters are not stupid or lacking in values by selecting one candidate over the other...they are simply making a calculation as to whether they want "change" or more of the same. Voters new which way a Clinton administration would go and they didn't like it. They may not have had an affinity for Trump but they felt he at least gave them the possibility of something different. Don't demean that choice.

Possibility of something different? Lol.

That's for sure: a con man sex offender with promises that had no substance.

Again... take exception all you want. I'm right.

Enjoy your rightness all the way to continued electoral defeats.

I'm just calling it as I see it. I'm not providing the solution to the problem other than suggesting you can say a lot of things that might appeal to the non discerning types and they'll eagerly buy in.

And what I'm saying is that to describe the average voter as " the non discerning type" or to suggest that they were fooled into "buying in" to something is the wrong lesson. It is in fact the backward lesson.

You really seem eager to give the general population a lot of credit.

Facts meant nothing to a lot of people. Decorum meant nothing either. What 'sold' people were fancy campaign slogans, empty promises and slur tactics. Let alone the very unfavourable character of the chosen candidate (tax fraud and sex offences pending)... and you think there is nothing to be learned from that?

BS44325

This is a smart democratic party member

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/307071-after-trump-meeting-gabbard-says-we-cant-let-divisiveness-destroy-our

Work with Trump in order to beat him later.

BS44325

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).

I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.

I accept your apology.

You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?

I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.

Lol

You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?

No.

You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.

So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?

Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.

Fair enough with regards to your personal position on Trump. Thanks for the clarification.

If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.

When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base.

Ahhhh....so I guess the beat down has been called off. Ok. Now in terms of your point I do take exception to how you describe his supporters (if you can call them that because many of his voters did not think highly of him) because they did a calculation compared to the other candidate. Some people on here have failed to come to grips with how terrible and corrupt of a candidate Hillary Clinton was. There are voters who felt they would be sacrificing values in voting for her. My argument is and always has been there is no point in trying to argue which candidate is more terrible as it is pretty much irrelevant in a "change" electorate. The voters are not stupid or lacking in values by selecting one candidate over the other...they are simply making a calculation as to whether they want "change" or more of the same. Voters new which way a Clinton administration would go and they didn't like it. They may not have had an affinity for Trump but they felt he at least gave them the possibility of something different. Don't demean that choice.

Possibility of something different? Lol.

That's for sure: a con man sex offender with promises that had no substance.

Again... take exception all you want. I'm right.

Enjoy your rightness all the way to continued electoral defeats.

I'm just calling it as I see it. I'm not providing the solution to the problem other than suggesting you can say a lot of things that might appeal to the non discerning types and they'll eagerly buy in.

And what I'm saying is that to describe the average voter as " the non discerning type" or to suggest that they were fooled into "buying in" to something is the wrong lesson. It is in fact the backward lesson.

You really seem eager to give the general population a lot of credit.

Facts meant nothing to a lot of people. Decorum meant nothing either. What 'sold' people were fancy campaign slogans, empty promises and slur tactics. Let alone the very unfavourable character of the chosen candidate (tax fraud and sex offences pending)... and you think there is nothing to be learned from that?

Yes I am giving the general population a lot of credit. You should step back think of what they actually voted for and give them credit as well even if you disagree. People who voted for him weren't exactly "sold" on anything he said other then the "possibility" of blowing up the system. The data shows that Trump was not liked or even trusted by those who voted for him. People were just sick of the status quo and decided "change" had to come even if nobody was sure what that meant. That is not being "sold" or duped. In my opinion the most powerful line Trump had in the whole campaign, which was pretty much laughed at by everyone, was "What do you have to lose?". I bet many voters looked around and said "fuck it...what do I have to lose." It is that voter the dems have to offer something to.

vaggar99

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

vaggar99 said:

At some point in my life I was told. Its not about winning or losing, it's about how you play the game. ESP is a just plain rotten player.

That thing they told you at some point in your life is usually what they tell some who traditionally loses.

really. I certainly hope you are only saying this in the context of politics. Otherwise I guess I'm raising my kids to be losers.

There are no losers in this world except for those who call others that maybe.

Go Beavers

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).

I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.

I accept your apology.

You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?

I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.

Lol

You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?

No.

You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.

So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?

Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.

Fair enough with regards to your personal position on Trump. Thanks for the clarification.

If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.

When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base.

Ahhhh....so I guess the beat down has been called off. Ok. Now in terms of your point I do take exception to how you describe his supporters (if you can call them that because many of his voters did not think highly of him) because they did a calculation compared to the other candidate. Some people on here have failed to come to grips with how terrible and corrupt of a candidate Hillary Clinton was. There are voters who felt they would be sacrificing values in voting for her. My argument is and always has been there is no point in trying to argue which candidate is more terrible as it is pretty much irrelevant in a "change" electorate. The voters are not stupid or lacking in values by selecting one candidate over the other...they are simply making a calculation as to whether they want "change" or more of the same. Voters new which way a Clinton administration would go and they didn't like it. They may not have had an affinity for Trump but they felt he at least gave them the possibility of something different. Don't demean that choice.

Possibility of something different? Lol.

That's for sure: a con man sex offender with promises that had no substance.

Again... take exception all you want. I'm right.

Enjoy your rightness all the way to continued electoral defeats.

I'm just calling it as I see it. I'm not providing the solution to the problem other than suggesting you can say a lot of things that might appeal to the non discerning types and they'll eagerly buy in.

And what I'm saying is that to describe the average voter as " the non discerning type" or to suggest that they were fooled into "buying in" to something is the wrong lesson. It is in fact the backward lesson.

You really seem eager to give the general population a lot of credit.

Facts meant nothing to a lot of people. Decorum meant nothing either. What 'sold' people were fancy campaign slogans, empty promises and slur tactics. Let alone the very unfavourable character of the chosen candidate (tax fraud and sex offences pending)... and you think there is nothing to be learned from that?

Yes I am giving the general population a lot of credit. You should step back think of what they actually voted for and give them credit as well even if you disagree. People who voted for him weren't exactly "sold" on anything he said other then the "possibility" of blowing up the system. The data shows that Trump was not liked or even trusted by those who voted for him. People were just sick of the status quo and decided "change" had to come even if nobody was sure what that meant. That is not being "sold" or duped. In my opinion the most powerful line Trump had in the whole campaign, which was pretty much laughed at by everyone, was "What do you have to lose?". I bet many voters looked around and said "fuck it...what do I have to lose." It is that voter the dems have to offer something to.

I think you might be overgeneralizing all trump voters into one motivation to make it rosier than it actually is.

vaggar99

I don't care what he does. He can have a cure for cancer. He can mail us all checks for a million dollars. Hes an ESP. Not a president

PJfanwillneverleave1

vaggar99 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

BS44325 said:

vaggar99 said:

At some point in my life I was told. Its not about winning or losing, it's about how you play the game. ESP is a just plain rotten player.

That thing they told you at some point in your life is usually what they tell some who traditionally loses.

really. I certainly hope you are only saying this in the context of politics. Otherwise I guess I'm raising my kids to be losers.

There are no losers in this world except for those who call others that maybe.

Hillary Clinton lost.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

BS44325 said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).

I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.

I accept your apology.

You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?

I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.

Lol

You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?

No.

You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.

So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?

Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.

Fair enough with regards to your personal position on Trump. Thanks for the clarification.

If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.

When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base.

Ahhhh....so I guess the beat down has been called off. Ok. Now in terms of your point I do take exception to how you describe his supporters (if you can call them that because many of his voters did not think highly of him) because they did a calculation compared to the other candidate. Some people on here have failed to come to grips with how terrible and corrupt of a candidate Hillary Clinton was. There are voters who felt they would be sacrificing values in voting for her. My argument is and always has been there is no point in trying to argue which candidate is more terrible as it is pretty much irrelevant in a "change" electorate. The voters are not stupid or lacking in values by selecting one candidate over the other...they are simply making a calculation as to whether they want "change" or more of the same. Voters new which way a Clinton administration would go and they didn't like it. They may not have had an affinity for Trump but they felt he at least gave them the possibility of something different. Don't demean that choice.

Possibility of something different? Lol.

That's for sure: a con man sex offender with promises that had no substance.

Again... take exception all you want. I'm right.

Enjoy your rightness all the way to continued electoral defeats.

I'm just calling it as I see it. I'm not providing the solution to the problem other than suggesting you can say a lot of things that might appeal to the non discerning types and they'll eagerly buy in.

And what I'm saying is that to describe the average voter as " the non discerning type" or to suggest that they were fooled into "buying in" to something is the wrong lesson. It is in fact the backward lesson.

You really seem eager to give the general population a lot of credit.

Facts meant nothing to a lot of people. Decorum meant nothing either. What 'sold' people were fancy campaign slogans, empty promises and slur tactics. Let alone the very unfavourable character of the chosen candidate (tax fraud and sex offences pending)... and you think there is nothing to be learned from that?

Yes I am giving the general population a lot of credit. You should step back think of what they actually voted for and give them credit as well even if you disagree. People who voted for him weren't exactly "sold" on anything he said other then the "possibility" of blowing up the system. The data shows that Trump was not liked or even trusted by those who voted for him. People were just sick of the status quo and decided "change" had to come even if nobody was sure what that meant. That is not being "sold" or duped. In my opinion the most powerful line Trump had in the whole campaign, which was pretty much laughed at by everyone, was "What do you have to lose?". I bet many voters looked around and said "fuck it...what do I have to lose." It is that voter the dems have to offer something to.

So in other words... I'll choose a serial liar, woman molesting, tax evading, entitled orange guy given the alternative of the establishment.