I've been independent for a long time, because I don't see the point in giving away my vote ahead of time. That's the best way to go, as far as I'm concerned, and I really don't have much partisan loyalty in the first place.
8/6 Republican Debate Thread
- Thread starter Quetzal
- Start date
I've been independent for a long time, because I don't see the point in giving away my vote ahead of time. That's the best way to go, as far as I'm concerned, and I really don't have much partisan loyalty in the first place.
He speaks to the angry base. And that base consists of well-meaning Americans who are alarmed at the modern world we find ourselves trying to navigate through.
He has a LOT of support, as I see it. He's not polite and does not mince words. I am sure those who sit captivated by FOX "News" and ideological Internet and printed sources are less-than-polite themselves when they are in private or among the like-minded.
I voted for both Ross Perot and Ralph Nader. And since then I have immersed myself a bit deeper in American history.
The original Tea Party in 1773 was a nonviolent protest against the East India Tea Company, the closest thing back then to a true global corporation that was squeezing the life out of the economy of the colony.
We have a long history of standing up to and doing something about the crony capitalism we see in our so-called "leaders." That's why Donald Trump, the Tea Party, Bernie Sanders and the Occupy Wall Street movement are all on the same page.
More power to them!
The original Tea Party in 1773 was a nonviolent protest against the East India Tea Company, the closest thing back then to a true global corporation that was squeezing the life out of the economy of the colony.
We have a long history of standing up to and doing something about the crony capitalism we see in our so-called "leaders." That's why Donald Trump, the Tea Party, Bernie Sanders and the Occupy Wall Street movement are all on the same page.
More power to them!
Men should ask the questions (Prov. 21:19). :sibbie:
| MEGYN KELLY STARTS A WAR WITH DONALD TRUMP AT THE DEBATE | |
In other words, you protest both sides. That's fine, as far as it goes, but real change is only going to come within the established parties or it won't come through the political process at all.
Trump is actually the epitome of crony capitalism. Did you hear his statement about getting Hillary Clinton to come to his wedding? Aside from being essentially incoherent, it was an admission that he bought influence with the Clintons knowingly and deliberately. Beyond that, he's basically loud and obnoxious, and not afraid to say something bluntly idiotic, which some feeble-minded people think is a refreshing rebuke to "political correctness". Sanders is really far more subversive to the established power structures in the country.
child-killer (Pr 8:36).
Last edited:
Someone hand him some Quench gum.
Loony tune like his dad, Satanist. :dizzy:
Last edited:
When RePublicans :cigar: keep sending us liberals (Eccl 10:2, Jn 10:10) why do people blame third party candidates?
Laura Ingraham said he spent time building his new house rather than running for an open Senate seat that would have helped him to be properly positioned now.
What's with the Buick reference? :idunno: Subaru? Dodge?--Buick? :AMR:
I understand. You are right on. I am aware of your point of view because I entertain the same info as well. And feel discouraged.
But Trump, Perot and Nader are all focused on crony capitalism and what it has done to our country.
I often use the metaphor of ripples in a pond and the potential effect they might have. I also see reality as a dandelion fuzz ball where the wind scatters the seeds everywhere. So I don't give up hope. After all, it just takes the weight of one more tiny snowflake to send the entire load on the tree branch crashing to the forest floor.
First off, I don't see how rubbing shoulders with Hilary makes one a crony capitalist. For the first time in history everyone is basically in the same huge room and we all interconnect these days.
He IS "loud and obnoxious" but I see that as a positive.
I see him as an American businessman & capitalist who plays by the rules that are laid down already--however imperfect. I don't think he deliberately breaks the law and treats us like common sheep the way the big banksters do.
But your point is certainly well taken. We should never take any candidate's word for anything these days.
Bottom line though: He is definitely attractive to a certain type of ideological conservative. I would like to see him win.
Ross Perot's candidacy is given a lot of credit for splitting Bush's vote and electing Clinton.
America IS a liberal nation, like it or not. Most of the things we deserve and yet take for granted today are the result of liberal fringe groups that kept at it and changed things. For the better I think.
But conservatism has its rightful place.
Conservatives build barriers between things that need to be separated, while I see liberals as tearing down walls that should have never been erected in the first place.
Both forces are needed in my opinion.
Who's that guy who's acting like a guy?
I can see by their expressions that I will have no use for them or anything they might say (or actually, yell about).
I don't want to ruin my day.
Maybe he said it because its a brand that will stick in one's mind.
In an old Woody Allen movie he was supposedly killing a spider in a bathtub for his girlfriend and he said "My God it's as big as a Buick!"
If :bow: Woody Allen said it--it must be right. :freak:
One in the same.
The Bermudians don't care for Perot by the way.
Were you a fan of Sodom and Gomorrah, too (Ge 13:13).
I can understand that. There is much reason to be discouraged. But unless those of us who don't approve of the situation organize around effective action, and avoid actions that are ineffective, we might as well be howling at the moon.
I think it's a little hard to state what Trump is really focused on. The only thing I've heard him say about crony capitalism is at once a rebuke and an endorsement of it.
As far as Nader goes, I actually find him to be very entitled. He ran for President under the Green Party banner, unwilling to succumb to major party endorsement games, and ended up deciding the election of 2000 in favor of probably the least qualified candidate in several generations. And that's how third-party and independent candidates are under our system of elections. They can't win under normal circumstances, but they can spoil things for their nearest ideological peers. It takes a lot of ego to really believe that it was worth the statement that it makes to garner a few percent of the votes. Nowadays, he writes silly books like Return to Sender.
http://www.amazon.com/Return-Sender-Unanswered-President-2001-2015/dp/1609806263
Paying her what was, by his own description, a bride, does, however.
Why? He gives loud and obnoxious a bad name, which is actually something of an accomplishment.
Along the way, he mistreats women, and either fails to see or ignores the damage he does as he goes. And it's not like he is a self-made man. His father gave him a bunch of money to start out, which is really just an illustration of what is to come for this country: a future where vast inherited fortunes dominate our political and social institutions.
That wasn't my point, although I do think that the actions are more telling than the words, and I couldn't take Trumps word for granted if I wanted to, because I can't figure out what it is from one moment to the next.
Win the Presidency? What on earth for? So that we can listen to more of his retrograde opinions about women and how great it is to be rich and how his wealth proves that he's just better than the rest of us? More snide comments about Rosie O'Donnell in a completely inappropriate forum?