Hoping the Republican Party, which is the cause of the situation, survives is the definition of stupid. The only silver lining in this election is the destruction of the Republican Party and the establishment that controls it.
Assuming Hillary wins Tuesday Night
- Thread starter Musburger1
- Start date
I love the way you guys think you are smart and 13.3MM voters are dumb.
Is it possible to want to reform the party instead of destroying it? I would argue nominating a pro-Choice Democrat TV reality star who continually says outrageous things is far closer to the definition of stupid.
He is not pro-choice and he is not a democrat. Yes, part of his career was as a reality star. I wonder if any other President was once a democrat and also an actor? Hmmm.
Then why did he say he was before deciding to run for President? Did he have a sudden change of heart on abortion when he turned 60? Did the Democratic party leave him in the past 10 years? Good grief.
Last edited:
The comparison might ring true if Trump's record resembled Reagan's. Before running for President, Reagan was a successful governor and showed a strong understanding of the issues. He also knew not to needlessly alienate voters and give away massive amounts of ammunition to the opposition.
69 million voted for Barack Obama. Were they smart to do so?
The 14 million who voted for Trump bought the Pet Rock of politicians.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Reagan and Trump comparisons are crazy. Their background, depth of knowledge and value systems are complete opposite.
Some of you just need to come out of the Hillary closet. The reason someone posted that they were anti-Trump was that he was pro-choice (hell the media crucified in anti-abortion position) and that he was a reality tv star who was once a democrat. I never mentioned Reagan, but you each connected the dots. I agree, no comparison talent wise, but they both were former democrats in the entertainment business.
As opposed to HRC who actively supports and promotes abortion? That sums up the never Trump republican wing and why it cannot be reformed. Basically, put us in office and leave us alone. We could care less who is President as long as we keep our jobs. Yes, we prefer corrupt HRC who is for abortion, for higher taxes, for ultra liberal Supreme Court justices and more and more entitlements than nasty mouth Trump.
You are deflecting. Question still stands. How can you discount Trump's admissions that he was a pro-choice Democrat before he ran for President.
HRC will be able to implement her radical pro-choice agenda and stack the SCOTUS because the Republicans nominated a freakshow. If you voted for Trump in the primaries then you can thank yourself for what is about to happen.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Never is there an acknowledgement that Trump can be and is worse than HRC, warts and all. That is what I lament most about this election. I'm a registered Independent ready to vote for a Republican. Forced to choose between a corrupt politician and a circus clown, I've chosen the former. All of the questioning of my choice points to "HRC is corrupt" but never is the acknowledgment of abhorrence of my alternate option. Yes, I don't agree with 13M who bypassed any and all warning signs to nominating an "R" candidate all with the explicit goal of giving the middle finger to the party elite. Guess what...50M+ people are about to give the middle finger right back at ya.
Though I think we desperately need a viable 3rd party the D's and R's have put rules in place for preventing that. They've worked together to divide up the constituencies. So, the R's need to resolve their internal squabble between the anti-establishment and the party leaders or else John Weaver will be prescient. If the party simply ignores their own fundamental problems and coalesces around being an obstacle to HRC governing then we'll be here again in 4 years.
Though I think we desperately need a viable 3rd party the D's and R's have put rules in place for preventing that. They've worked together to divide up the constituencies. So, the R's need to resolve their internal squabble between the anti-establishment and the party leaders or else John Weaver will be prescient. If the party simply ignores their own fundamental problems and coalesces around being an obstacle to HRC governing then we'll be here again in 4 years.
Please let me know one politician or human being that has never changed their position on one or multiple topics. I voted for Cruz in the primary. However, he did not win nor did any other candidate but Trump. Even Kasich has changed his stances over the years on the second amendment.
So it comes to a binary choice. HRC promotes all of the issues you think Trump flipped on. But you would rather vote for someone with a history supporting and promoting the issues you say you cannot vote for Trump for? I guess because she never lies about it? Just say it - you are a left leaning independent who wants HRC in office.
So it comes to a binary choice. HRC promotes all of the issues you think Trump flipped on. But you would rather vote for someone with a history supporting and promoting the issues you say you cannot vote for Trump for? I guess because she never lies about it? Just say it - you are a left leaning independent who wants HRC in office.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
UTChE96 has shown no signs that he's centrist or "independent" (is that a bad quality?) or a supporter of HRC. Again, make an argument for Trump. Nobody, including Trump has done that yet. At least not one that is convincing. Do it without mentioning HRC, Ryan or anyone but Trump and his positions.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Getting back on topic, I don't see HRC getting impeached if the Senate is neutral or the Dems hold the advantage. She will be stonewalled at every turn. The R's, even the reasonable ones, will be pushed into obstructionism rather than governing again.
I35
5,000+ Posts
You wouldn't have known that at the time. They were still saying a lot of the same things that are being said about Trump right now. All I know is the guy is very successful. Will that translate to running the economy. I don't know but I'd like him working on our economy with his work experience in the public sector vs Hillary who sold out America to get rich off.
Trump has 100% more in common to Reagan than Hillary. I know that's not saying much, but to argue or make points about Trump being opposite of Reagan is idiotic. Hillary is the TRUE complete opposite of Ronald Reagan and the comparisons between who is closer is not even close. Made me laugh when you stated "value system" and thinking about Hillary's values.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Per your first sentence...0% of zero is what? How is Donald Trump close to Reagan? I'd argue he's closer to HRC than to Reagan which makes the invocation of the latter's name laughable.
What is Trump's value system? He's demonstrated he values work ethic and.....and...and..."winning"? What else? Trump is not a religious man unless you believe the conversion malarkey. He's cheated on both of his previous wives thus you can't exactly say family values are at the top of his list. What are they?
I35
5,000+ Posts
Let me just throw one at you because it's kind of a big deal......... He believes in less Government. Do I need to say more? Okay one more. He wants to lower taxes kind of like what Reagan did that was called trickle down economics that worked very well in the 80's.
EDITED: Opps I quoted the wrong thing. Either way Hillary is a Criminal and Donald is not. That's a pretty good value right there. If you disagree then start naming in detail all of Trumps criminal activities and I'll match you by naming ten of Hillary's for every one you can name.
Last edited:
Ok, he is better on the following:
Immigration - HRC wants open borders more than what we already have.
Taxes - Trump wants lower taxes, HRC wants more taxes
SCOTUS - HRC wants liberal activist judges
Government - Trump wants less, HRC wants more
AND drum roll.
Trump wants to repeal and replace Obamacare. HRC wants to add to it. My business just got notified of a 35% increase from AETNA. People will lose their jobs as a result.
I have been accused of deflecting and also hijacking the thread due to responding the UTchem.
And like you, I respect everyone's right to choose their candidate. I just grow tired of people professing to be conservative, but then taking action to put a corrupt liberal into office.
Immigration - HRC wants open borders more than what we already have.
Taxes - Trump wants lower taxes, HRC wants more taxes
SCOTUS - HRC wants liberal activist judges
Government - Trump wants less, HRC wants more
AND drum roll.
Trump wants to repeal and replace Obamacare. HRC wants to add to it. My business just got notified of a 35% increase from AETNA. People will lose their jobs as a result.
I have been accused of deflecting and also hijacking the thread due to responding the UTchem.
And like you, I respect everyone's right to choose their candidate. I just grow tired of people professing to be conservative, but then taking action to put a corrupt liberal into office.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Edit: Thanks for stepping forward. I'd argue his stances on those issues (notable exception is taxes) are merely vapid slogan rather than actual plans but we'll have to agree to disagree.
Last edited:
Yes, you would have known it at the time, because Reagan's record was known at the time and discussed at length. Furthermore, people knew he had a strong grasp of the issues, because he talked about them and sounded like an intelligent adult. Here's Reagan serving on a Firing Line panel debating the Panama Canal deal. Link. Can you imagine Donald Trump discussing any policy issue to that degree of intelligence and nuance? Of course not. If he went on a show like Firing Line, he'd sound almost illiterate.
And you're right. Reagan wasn't considered "book smart" by elites. He went to a fairly unremarkable college and only got a bachelor's degree (economics, I think), and partisan liberals did use that to push a narrative that he was dumb. However, he had the humility and self-discipline to educate himself on policy, which why he could go on a show like Firing Line and look reasonably sharp even next to Harvard-trained lawyers, guys with PhDs, etc. Regardless of what the media and liberal partisans said, the general public could listen to him and know he had a brain. That's why the liberal narrative rang hollow.
Trump sorta did the opposite of what Reagan did. Like Reagan, he only got a bachelor's degree in economics, but he got it from a pretty prestigious college. He should be pretty sharp, but he's obviously arrogant as hell and thinks he knows everything. In fact, he has said that he's too busy to read. It shows, and that's why he sounds like a 6th grader most of the time. It's not just a media or partisan narrative. It's obvious to anybody who listens to him. That's why the narrative rings true.
Newspapers are traditionally written at a 3rd grade reading level, maybe DT speaks more people's language. The whole argument about our POTUS needing to be "smart" as defined by liberal elites is a canard.
I agree with the IIs, you cannot sit here and claim to be against DT because he's not a "true conservative" while helping to elect HRC. I don't hear you.
I agree with the IIs, you cannot sit here and claim to be against DT because he's not a "true conservative" while helping to elect HRC. I don't hear you.
You're missing the point. He doesn't have to be smart as defined by liberal elites. Reagan was not smart as defined by liberal elites. He just had a real grasp of policy and issues. That's really all it takes. If you don't have that, then you won't have any persuasive ability when someone is advocating the opposite position, and it'll be easy for your opponent's claim of your stupidity to stick to you. How many liberals or moderates has Trump convinced on the merits to embrace conservatism or to even err on the side of conservatism? Not many. By contrast, Reagan actually convinced large numbers of people who voted for Jimmy Carter in 1976 to vote for him in 1980.
You gloss over that stuff, but you're part of the choir, not the congregation or even harder to reach, the people out on the street. Trump could shake his nuts in your face, and you'd still vote for him. Others aren't so forgiving, and they need to be convinced on the merits to cast their ballot one way or the other.
Also, it has nothing to do with reading level. It's about the substance, not the reading level. You can say intelligent things on a low reading level, and you can say dumb things at a very high reading level.
Deez, read this. Trump could do facts if he wanted to.
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/152900725676/the-last-confirmation-bias-test-of-this-election
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
I'd argue that Trump attempts to use facts but when he does they are generally made up and easily proven wrong by fact checkers. Why does he make up the facts? Persuasion? Maybe but who is he persuading? His supporters who will simply discount the fact checkers out of hand? The uninformed voter?
Here is the key argument from the Dilbert blog post:
It's a choice to be uninformed, apparently. Persuading a voter is more important than demonstrating capability to make informed decisions. Sounds about right for Trump. Remember, this is the same candidate that exclaims he knows more than the Generals about ISIS.
Here is the key argument from the Dilbert blog post:
It's a choice to be uninformed, apparently. Persuading a voter is more important than demonstrating capability to make informed decisions. Sounds about right for Trump. Remember, this is the same candidate that exclaims he knows more than the Generals about ISIS.
Last edited:
It doesn't matter of he can. He doesn't.
Nash,
To the extent Trump is the "only one" who could have been perceived as a victor in the debate against #HisSilentinBengHazi ... is the extent to which there was really a debate about policy and analysis of that debate was concerned about POLICY and not theater.
Cruz CLEARLY would have mopped the floor with her on policy ... alas, he showed his price for party loyalty. Top two GOP candidates were "outsiders" ... now we have to have party unity!
LOL. Might as well be getting a game face on for a football game. Pomp circumstance ... colors/cheers. We're good you're bad.
It's just our country at stake, but hey, keep reducing the responsibility to vote with some measurable degree of understanding/education about our government to a Saturday afternoon gridiron event. (Not you specifically, Nash, all of us, collectively)
ShAArk,
Big 'like'. No doubt Cruz could have taken her to task on policy, no doubt but, because of the gridiron comparisons you point out I still feel HRC wins no matter the opponent. Just my opinion but the powers that are would come up with sufficient derogatory smutt (true or not) and flood rally's with the kardashian type popular people pleasers.
Yep, our country is at stake, and fools are scoring the touchdowns.
Big 'like'. No doubt Cruz could have taken her to task on policy, no doubt but, because of the gridiron comparisons you point out I still feel HRC wins no matter the opponent. Just my opinion but the powers that are would come up with sufficient derogatory smutt (true or not) and flood rally's with the kardashian type popular people pleasers.
Yep, our country is at stake, and fools are scoring the touchdowns.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
