What kind of bitch-made shit it that?
Reporting a politics thread to Admins?
That’s taking “Bein’ E-Hard” to pms levels of cowardice.
The ignore button is baby wipes levels of softness.
Man up and mentally choose to block out what you don’t want to confront, people.
Pertho is too good a mod for some people, I swear.
If someone is truly batshit crazy, let them post.
It is the most direct, easiest way to get them banned.
A Purple Heart is given to people who either die or suffer serious injuries during their career in the armed forces. To “want” a Purple Heart isn’t patriotic, it’s asinine. If he’s just joking, that raises another question: Who the fuck jokes about a Purple Heart?
I won’t deny that the Clinton News Network spreads misinformation and propaganda at times, but it doesn’t change the fact that Trump is still a shitty candidate. Even with the propaganda out of the way, he’s still advocated some unbelievably awful ideas:
-Build a large, expensive wall that accomplishes absolutely nothing
-Commit war crimes in the tame of fighting terrorism
-Restricting multiple aspects of the 1st Amendment
No one with respect for the Constitution will vote for Hillary or Trump. It saddens me that the majority of American voters do not understand what they’re throwing away just to win petty fights.
Yea well lets not be dirty about this thing here…
Those are without a question some of the LEAST inflammatory statements made by Trump within this entire thing. So the way in which it was said wouldnt make you question who said it.
Look it all boils down to most people arent even following this election they are just on the hype train for the team the aligns most with their worldview, which is sad but this applies to both side.
But what you cant do, is cherrypick some random Trump quotes that give off the smell of democracy and unification, say Hillary said them, and then ask Hillary supporter who are idiots what they think about it.
Im sure they had to edit that segment and get a lot of footage. Its like they intentionally tried to find people who didnt have a clue to make a fool out of. Bad journalism is what that is.
-Build a large, expensive wall that accomplishes absolutely nothing
Donald Trump has been endorsed by the people who actually protect the American Border, like the actual people on the ground, support it and endorse Trump. The people who are trying to protect your border think the idea is a good one. You should read their statement on the matter, it’s actually quite beautifully written:
-Commit war crimes in the tame of fighting terrorism
America commits war crimes every day. Your country has killed the foreign heads of state. Donald Trump, unlike your current leader, is just being honest about it. Obama will kill Gadaffi and this won’t count as a war crime, but Trump endorses using waterboarding and this is somehow inexcusable. Please. Hillary Clinton is directly responsible, through her actions, as having lead to the current rise of Isis as a global threat.
Oh, and by the way, your president is paying for hostages with hundreds of millions of dollars to countries that support terrorism. This, by the way, flies in the face of all American policy that you do no not negotiate with terrorists.
-Restricting multiple aspects of the 1st Amendment
Which aspects does Donald Trump want to restrict of the 1st Amendment in his policy? Regardless of which, the whole reason for the 1st Amendment is that president cannot effect it, thats why you have the SCOTUS
You seem, genuinely, like a thoughtful person who cares about your election. But you are misinformed on very key, relevant issues.
Democrats welcome illegal immigrants on their convention stage, but now they want go after Melania for possible Visa fraud 20 years ago and strip her of her citizenship and deport her.
Where’s their proof? Can they back up their claim with evidence/facts, or is their idea incompatible with reality?
That does NOT make it any more acceptable than when Barry and his friends do it. You think Trump should get a free pass because he doesn’t bother lying about it? What the hell is wrong with you?
To wit: http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/22/donald-trump-doesnt-understand-libel-laws/
If you want to publish a critical article against someone, just back it up with facts. Be as hateful as you want, as long as you have proof.
When you knowingly publish something false, whether you have malicious intent or not, you deserve to be held accountable.
**Where’s their proof? Can they back up their claim with evidence/facts, or is their idea incompatible with reality? **
There’s no proof because the idea hasn’t been tried yet. Without testing the hypothesis there is no way to determine if it will work. What we do know is that your current policies are completely failing, and a solution has been presented.
**That does NOT make it any more acceptable than when Barry and his friends do it. You think Trump should get a free pass because he doesn’t bother lying about it? What the hell is wrong with you? **
There is nothing wrong with me, I’m not the one committing war crimes. I did not endorse the use of them either.
Trump has been misrepresented by American media as wanting to start committing war crimes, when the truth is they are already happening. So when the president, his staff, and the media condone his statements it is completely hypocritical.
To wit: http://thefederalist.com/2016/03/22/donald-trump-doesnt-understand-libel-laws/
Trump wants to make it easier for an effected party to sue media organizations for misrepresenting the truth, is what he seems to be saying, although it seems difficult to interpret exactly what this means. This seems to be a rather strange statement, I’m guessing one born out of how badly he has been misconstrued by the media.
Donald Trump has made his list of people he wants on the SCOTUS extremely clear. The SCOTUS determines 1st amendment laws, not the president. We know he wants to point ‘originalism’ justices, which is about a pro-free speech and pro-media approach as a president can take.
I’m not trying to paint Donald Trump as a perfect candidate, however, it is difficult to have a conversation if the facts are not clear.
Thats more of an eye for an eye thing.
You know, I’m just an outsider in all of this, but I think there’s something to be said for Americans identifying for/against concepts too strongly for their own good. It just seems like the elections have become less about voting for the ideas you believe in, and more about voting against the stuff you want to hate. Most Republicans/conservatives I’ve heard talk about Trump seem to dislike the guy and think most of his ideas are inane. So instead they focus on how shit Hillary is and how they have to beat her. The identity of voting Republican is more important than supporting a sensible candidate.
Part of it also seems to be the entire two party system, where parties decide who the people are supposed to vote for. I mean, fuck it, vote for any other Republican than Trump. I’m pretty sure even Sarah Palin would be preferable in a presidential position, because as far as I know she hasn’t suggested mass deportations, racial segregation and hostility towards the nation’s primary business partners as her platform. There certainly are Republicans that seem extremely sensible, even if you don’t necessarily agree with their economic policies. But that’s not how the system works. The whole thing just seems rigged to take advantage of the fact that people identify so strongly with either the Democrats or Republicans that they will not so much vote for their party’s candidate, but vote against the other guys.
Which isn’t to say the Democrats don’t have their heads up their asses as well, particularly when it comes to their fairly stupid holier-than-thou rhetoric, but at least Clinton hasn’t done as much blatantly stupid shit as Trump and actually has political experience. It just seems like the difference between herpes and AIDS. Sure, you don’t want either, but only one of them will kill you.
Clinton has political experience in destroying foreign nations. Everything she touches turns to shit.
I’m not saying she seems like the person I’d want in control of the most powerful nation in the world, but she’s preferable to the guy who yells about building walls and deporting all muslims.
This is the future president of the United States, laughing about murdering the head of the state of another country:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlz3-OzcExI
This is really the woman you want leading the country? Because Trump wants to stop illegal immigration and not import thousands of people from countries that hate you?
Claim: Trump called for all Muslims to be deported.
Finding: I rate this, pants on fire.
More of that I hate America spite vote.
I believe Hillary,her ideology and bat shit insane followers are an existential threat to basic human rights. Brown shirts marching on college campus, demons crawling from the earths core etc.
So any criticisms of Trump aside unless he’s eating human babies I’ll cast the pragmatic vote to keep Hillary out of office no matter what even if it was Jill Stein or Pol Pot. If Trump does in fact turn out to be a KGB agent I will say thank you Russia for saving us from the Saudi/China owned asset that is Hillary Clinton.
I don’t fit in either party and I usually can find one thing to like about anyone, but here’s how I see it.
Trump
[list]
[] + Nationalism > Globalism
[] + Defacto bellweather of the populace rebellion, The anti-establishment vote period.
[] +Heavy regulation on immigration/border control.
[] +Opposes TPP,/NAFTA
[] +Opposed Iraq/Libya
[] +Olive branching Russia.
[] -Politically naieve/lacks political experience.
[] = May be exceptional at delegating, which is the advisable route for a President anyways.
[] - Abused imminent domain.
[/list]
Clinton
[list]
[] Globalism > Nationalism
[] - First Amendment.
[] - Second amendment.
[] - Supports TPP/NAFTA, which the newest of contains massive regulation/censorship of the internet.
[] - Open border invasion from third world countries.
[] - Committed to enforcing federal marijuana laws
[] - 24/7 tax payer funded vagina maintenance.
[] - Controlled media validated
[] -Saudi Funded
[] -Wall Street funded
[] -China funded
[] -Supported Iraq war/Libya
[] -Supports NSA spying
[*] -Support civil forfeiture
[/list]
Sanders
[list]
[] +Nationalist
[] +Aggressive civil liberties protections.
[] +Strict constitutionalist, he follows the rules so I don’t have to worry if I agree with him or not.
[] +Voted for a Audit of the federal reserve
[] +Wall Street over site.
[] +opposes civil forfeiture
[] +Supports marijuana legalization
[] +Opposes TPP/NAFTA
[] - Supporters. His supporters would have his feet to the fire which had him flip flopping on his traditional positions against Gun Control and for border control.
[] - Senator Sanders and Primary bernie seem to be two different people so normally I’d have more nice things to say about him but this primary has exposed a lot of kinks in that armor.
[/list]
Wait, what dumbass actually believes that America is on the verge of being invaded?
Hillary wants to import 65,000 Syrian refugees. According to IPSOS 20% of which openly support ISIS and nearly all support Sharia law.
So that’s 13,000 people that wont even hide the fact they want to chop your head off and blow people up, that’s an invasion.
Liberal Equality = If they have to live in a third world country with violent Muslims you will too.