90% of Chicago Cops Support Trump

[Deleted]

So, an oppressive force likes another oppressive force?
What a surprise.

[Ghostpanther]

So, an oppressive force likes another oppressive force?
What a surprise.

It is not oppressing someone who is breaking the law and the police act according to the law. The number of police who act illegally is extremely low.

[Ehrenpanzer]

he's basically a typical republican in most regards.

only thing he's done differently is propose a wall at the border and temporarily blocking non-us citizen muslims from entering the country. people like to ask "what about muslims leaders who are our allies" which is stupid, because obviously he doesn't mean someone in an important position, just random people you don't know shit about.

trump's better than cruz, honestly. if you want a real nightmare running the US, you elect a monstrosity like cruz.

I'll take a batshit crazy christian fundamentalist over Adolph Trump any day.... and that's coming from as much an anti-religion atheist as you could ever meet. When your PUBLICLY announced strategy for fighting ISIS is to murder their families you are a fucking psychopath, and anyone who supports him should be quarantined....

- - - Updated - - -

Have family and friends in the military. They should have top of the line protection, armaments, and support any time they may need it.

Can't support a side that wants to reduce any of those things and increase risk to my family members.

See, if you'd simply stop invading everyone in the name of "democracy" (ironically, you don't even have that yourself, also hypocritically, the West sucks the balls of Saudi Arabia, who has an even worse record then say, Syria or Iran but they sell us cheap oil so killing people for "sorcery" is cool) You wouldn't NEED all that military gear and spending and risking your family

[Ghostpanther]

I'll take a batshit crazy christian fundamentalist over Adolph Trump any day.... and that's coming from as much an anti-religion atheist as you could ever meet. When your PUBLICLY announced strategy for fighting ISIS is to murder their families you are a fucking psychopath, and anyone who supports him should be quarantined....

- - - Updated - - -

Sounds like something Hitler would say.

[Ehrenpanzer]

Sounds like something Hitler would say.

If you are willing to support the genocide of innocent civilians, then yes, you have serious mental health issues and you need to be segregated from the rest of society...like compulsive rapists and the people that hear messages in the Beatles records telling them to kill

[Manhands]

I'll take a batshit crazy christian fundamentalist over Adolph Trump any day.... and that's coming from as much an anti-religion atheist as you could ever meet. When your PUBLICLY announced strategy for fighting ISIS is to murder their families you are a fucking psychopath, and anyone who supports him should be quarantined....

- - - Updated - - -



See, if you'd simply stop invading everyone in the name of "democracy" (ironically, you don't even have that yourself, also hypocritically, the West sucks the balls of Saudi Arabia, who has an even worse record then say, Syria or Iran but they sell us cheap oil so killing people for "sorcery" is cool) You wouldn't NEED all that military gear and spending and risking your family

Anonymity on the internet is fun. I get that. But I don't get the point of this post at all. Did you think this would be persuasive to those that support Trump? Do you think that hyperbole and being hypocritical (claiming that we should unlawfully detain people for supporting someone who wants to unlawfully attribute crimes to family members) is persuasive?

I agree with the gist of your post, and here I am scowling and distancing myself from how you said it. So not only is it likely not persuasive for those who support Trump, but it's alienated those that do!

[Ehrenpanzer]

Anonymity on the internet is fun. I get that. But I don't get the point of this post at all. Did you think this would be persuasive to those that support Trump? Do you think that hyperbole and being hypocritical (claiming that we should unlawfully detain people for supporting someone who wants to unlawfully attribute crimes to family members) is persuasive?

I agree with the gist of your post, and here I am scowling and distancing myself from how you said it. So not only is it likely not persuasive for those who support Trump, but it's alienated those that do!

1) No. If Trump supporters were capable of intelligent thought and reason, they wouldn't BE Trump supporters. Also, not to nitpick, but... its not "unlawfully detain people for supporting someone who wants to unlawfully attribute crimes to family members" as much as it is "lawfully detain under the Patriot Act, those and those who willfully and knowingly support, the acts, the planning and/or the intention(s) to engage in terrorism or other activities intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population" Which, like it or not, murdering the families of those you THINK might be related to terrorists IS in fact an act of terrorism.

2) Truth often is not popular, that's why politicians lie, you want to hear the nice things that make you happy, not reality...see also: why religion is still around

[Manhands]

1) No. If Trump supporters were capable of intelligent thought and reason, they wouldn't BE Trump supporters. Also, not to nitpick, but... its not "unlawfully detain people for supporting someone who wants to unlawfully attribute crimes to family members" as much as it is "lawfully detain under the Patriot Act, those and those who willfully and knowingly support, the acts, the planning and/or the intention(s) to engage in terrorism or other activities intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population" Which, like it or not, murdering the families of those you THINK might be related to terrorists IS in fact an act of terrorism.

2) Truth often is not popular, that's why politicians lie, you want to hear the nice things that make you happy, not reality...see also: why religion is still around

It's disappointing that you missed the general idea behind my post and instead found some inaccuracy to jump on. Oh yeah, and then doubled-down on insulting the opposition.

Truth may not be popular, but I've never seen change happen with your method of reasoning or discussion.

[enragedgorilla]

Trump is the candidate that panders to whatever is in front of his face the most. He's the least consistent and could contradict himself within the same hour, he'll cater to whatever audience he's speaking to in order to stir up emotion (which he does incredibly well obviously). Not surprising, considering he's a silver spoon fed brat that's never had to actually man up to anything in his life. He's that kid that talks smack and then goes and runs behind his dad. That's who he is, and he feels entitled to run the country, and is paving his road to get there out of stupid people that fall for his shtick.

Actually, Hillary is pretty much the same, so he might not be the most. It could be a tie.

Yeah, Was going to ask what do you think Hillary is? You covered her ....contempt for people so...leaving it alone.
The real difference between her and Trump....well, other than the ...obvious, Hillary waits for her focus groups and PAC's to tell her how to respond...Trump just says whatever is on his ...chest....hair...w/e at the moment.

[sarahtasher]

Does it strike you that telling to the military suppliers ''we are never to let go down the military budget'' give them a very clear picture ?

''Hey, dude, I'm patriotic, so I'm going to increase the defence budget no matter what ! For America ! No need to control costs ! ''

[Ghostpanther]

If you are willing to support the genocide of innocent civilians, then yes, you have serious mental health issues and you need to be segregated from the rest of society...like compulsive rapists and the people that hear messages in the Beatles records telling them to kill

If they really are innocent, then I agree. However harboring and aiding terrorists removes you from the innocent list.

[sarahtasher]

Therefore, the hated British were completely in the right of torching down whole villages ?

[Ghostpanther]

I think the number of torture victims was around 200, 57 of them were recently awarded compensation for the crimes committed against them.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...id-reparations
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Burge

That is too many. And it appears the victims where paid for their suffering, as they should be. But if you compare that to how many arrests and such in total over the 20 years span, I am sure it represents a very small minority. And as a rule you cannot label the Chicago police dept of being a oppressive and abusive organization based on the actions of a very small part of their officers. Those officers who are clearly been found to be guilty, should have been fired and jailed for their crimes. If not, then that is a serous flaw of those in charge.

[Venziir]

Well in that case; 90% of Chicago cops are idiots.

[Ghostpanther]

Therefore, the hated British were completely in the right of torching down whole villages ?

What? When? Depends a lot on the circumstances. The allies and axis powers too, in WW2, killed a ton of innocent civilians when they bombed each others cities. Even knowing there would be innocent lives lost. It is one of the horrible costs of waging a war.

[derpkitteh]

I'll take a batshit crazy christian fundamentalist over Adolph Trump any day.... and that's coming from as much an anti-religion atheist as you could ever meet. When your PUBLICLY announced strategy for fighting ISIS is to murder their families you are a fucking psychopath, and anyone who supports him should be quarantined....

a vote for ted cruz is a vote for the christian version of the ayatollah of iran.

no thanks.

[sarahtasher]

Well, I mean, if a bunch of terrorists revolt against the lawful King Georges III, conspire with the damn French to revoke his rules and even throw merchandise in harbour of Boston, therefore it's must be okay to deal with them harshly. Burning their villages, they are all traitors.

What ? It does not count when it's not Iraqis civilians but Americans ?

[Ehrenpanzer]

If they really are innocent, then I agree. However harboring and aiding terrorists removes you from the innocent list.

Sure... and who decides just how much Uncle Achmed knows about his nephews activities? You? Some CIA OP? The marine that got to the house 3 seconds ago? The guy flying the drone? How far is too far? What defines "aiding"....

So much potential for abuse and thinly veiled genocide in the name of "protection"....
"Everytime someone tries to win a war before it starts, innocent people die."

[RickJamesLich]

No you said: "If he wants to meet with blacks and make it look respectable," lol. The relevance is obvious. lol

Meeting with Al Sharpton is like if Donald Trump wants to impress Italian Americans and decides to hang out with a mob boss lol.

[Pangean]

Meeting with Al Sharpton is like if Donald Trump wants to impress Italian Americans and decides to hang out with a mob boss lol.

So Al Sharpton is the same as a crime boss lol? If you are going to troll try putting more effort into it lol. And its amusing that you mentioned Trump and the mob:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wi...rticle/2569496
http://articles.philly.com/1992-01-0...ino-executives
http://www.nationalmemo.com/21-quest...-donald-trump/