#NeverTrump conservatives think the unthinkable: Supporting Hillary Clinton

[Kujako]

Hillary is on the edge of losing to Trump.

Got anything to back that up? Only place Trump is ahead is the white male demographic, and as Romney showed before, that's not enough to get the Presidency anymore.

[Breccia]

No, it's a selective quote out of context, IIRC he was talking about his previous experience not his plans for the economy, the media just twisted/span it to oblivion. The quote was: "I have borrowed, knowing that you can pay back with discounts. And I have done very well, I would borrow, knowing that if the economy crashed, you could make a deal, and if the economy was good, it was good, so, therefore, you can't lose."

Yes, it was, as a direct response to "Do you believe that we, in terms of the United States, need to pay a hundred cents on the dollar, or do you think that there's actually ways that we can renegotiate that debt?" So that was taken very in context.

[unbound]

Don't buy it. At the end of the day, Trump's message remains largely consistent with Republican messages...he is just upfront about his racism, sexism, and bigotry whereas the majority of Republican politicians mask their hatred in code language. Republicans will vote for him come November no matter what they say right now.

[Pangean]

No, it's a selective quote out of context, IIRC he was talking about his previous experience not his plans for the economy, the media just twisted/span it to oblivion. The quote was: "I have borrowed, knowing that you can pay back with discounts. And I have done very well, I would borrow, knowing that if the economy crashed, you could make a deal, and if the economy was good, it was good, so, therefore, you can't lose."

LOL. It was not taken out of context. He has no clue as to Macro Economics and doesn't understand the Constitution. But Deadbeat Donnie's fan don't really care about about that, do you?

[Height]

"Forcing others to accept your views via the heavy hand of a partisan federal government is A-okay - just as long as they're pushing my views and agenda, right?"



The thing is. The supreme court already decided it was unconstitutional for states to decide on giving one set of rules to the majority and another to a minority. So the only person being unconstitutional with their personal wishes is you. Just like we don't let states decide whether they can segregate black people from white people. There are some things states do not get to decide when they hurt the people's individual liberties. Don't want a gay marriage? Don't get one. Gays could get married before marriage equality or after in a church. The only thing now is that the government (not a church) can give them equal protection under the law. So go away with your bigoted self.

[Derecho]

The truth is, you have just proven that you are making baseless assumptions. I am very far from being anti-religion.
I merely do think that religious beliefs have no place in legislation etc. - state and religion have to be seperated entirely.

All we have to go on is your word and what you posted. I could be wrong about you, and if so, I sincerely apologize.

Though, you called Ted Cruz a religious lunatic, which I would argue is a baseless claim. Guess we may both have our hands in the cookie jar on this one!

You're not complaining that Supreme and federal judges are appointed, are you? Because that's been the case for a while now, and it is still true even when they rule in your favor.

Nope, not at all. I think the structure of the government is genius.

My problem comes from any government official who takes an oath to uphold and defend the constitution and does anything but.

[Healing Rain]

Why? Hillary Clinton represents the Democrats who want to turn voters into mindless zombies who vote for them no matter what. Voting for her would be supporting that crap.

[alexw]

Got anything to back that up? Only place Trump is ahead is the white male demographic, and as Romney showed before, that's not enough to get the Presidency anymore.

Which is why this forum and places like it give a false sense of security to the Trumpists. This forum is dominated by white males so most of what they hear is fellow white males who also support Trump. It makes it seem like they are the majority or close to it.

But then there are the ~30% of voters who are non-white, the ~52% who are female, and the ~45% of white males who don't support Trump. So in reality Trump is miles away from the presidency and given his actions since Cruz and Kaisch dropped out is moving further from it every day.

[Deleted]

There really isn't any way Trump even challenges Hillary.

You really do live in your own world, don't you?

Serve the queen been then.

Women like Hilary somehow managed to create an entire race of cuck males who will die for her, and an entire race of warrior males who will kill her enemies unquestioningly.

Welcome to The Void. Some of us were always wise to queen bees like Hilary. She's a demon in human form who will simply force equality on her political enemies until they are all dead (because the wage gap myth is still real in her evil world).

I'm glad these traitors to the Republican party have finally revealed their true colors. Trump won fair and square. They are meant to back their nominee even if he or she isn't 100% perfect, otherwise we don't have a party.

Thankfully, you will soon remember what a true Republic really is.

Is the pussy really worth it? Seriously?

*Laughs evilly*.

[Breccia]

Nope, not at all. I think the structure of the government is genius.

My problem comes from any government official who takes an oath to uphold and defend the constitution and does anything but.

That's completely valid. I guess I would understand the issue if the official's job is to interpret the Constitution they swear to uphold.

[Naxere]

There really isn't any way Trump even challenges Hillary.

Do you disagree with the assertion that Trump puts the Rust Belt into play this election cycle?

[Powerogue]

She should really just put that on her slogan from now on: "Vote Hillary: At least I'm not Trump."

[Kontinuum]

Vote for the Crook. It's important.

[Kujako]

Vote for the Crook. It's important.

Which one?

[Derecho]

"Forcing others to accept your views via the heavy hand of a partisan federal government is A-okay - just as long as they're pushing my views and agenda, right?"



The thing is. The supreme court already decided it was unconstitutional for states to decide on giving one set of rules to the majority and another to a minority. So the only person being unconstitutional with their personal wishes is you. Just like we don't let states decide whether they can segregate black people from white people. There are some things states do not get to decide when they hurt the people's individual liberties. Don't want a gay marriage? Don't get one. Gays could get married before marriage equality or after in a church. The only thing now is that the government (not a church) can give them equal protection under the law. So go away with your bigoted self.

I would argue that the federal government shouldn't have had anything to do with heterosexual marriage, as well.

The constitution doesn't speak to marriage. For matters not specifically addressed in the constitution, the states were given authority to make laws (10th amendment). If the people wanted marriage (and same sex marriage) to be controlled by the federal government, then amend the constitution to address it. That's how our constitutional system is supposed to work.

Instead, what happened, was the case was taken to the Supreme Court. They then make a ruling that effectively creates a law, instead of interpreting it. Bigotry plays no part in this, nor does the word even come close to offending me.

I'm all about upholding the constitutional government that was established. No matter how worthy a cause, it ought to go through the proper channels. It's not easy, but then again, it shouldn't be easy. That's the whole point of the constitution limiting federal powers to begin with.

We live in a world where we expect things to be fixed immediately, and we're willing to sacrifice principle or break laws to do so. I believe that America isn't always the first one to get things right, but if you let things play through the system that was established, we'll get to the right answer. Our system was set up to weigh multiple sides of an argument and arrive at something everyone can live with.

The fact that Trump and Clinton don't believe in this system makes me not want to vote for either of them.

[Shadowmelded]

I mean Bernie is still an option.

True indeed. And he will be getting my vote no matter what.

As someone who would vote for Bernie if I had a vote, I'd recommend against this. You'd be better off voting for Jill Stein as 7 states outright don't allow write-ins and of the 43 that do allow write-ins, barring 8 they all require a candidate registers (which Bernie is unlikely to do). If you write in a candidate in any of the 42 states that either don't allow write-ins or require them to be registered, your vote will be tossed away, including your down-ballot votes. If you want to protest vote, vote Jill Stein and progressive down-ballot.

[caervek]

LOL. It was not taken out of context.

Yes, it was, as a direct response to "Do you believe that we, in terms of the United States, need to pay a hundred cents on the dollar, or do you think that there's actually ways that we can renegotiate that debt?" So that was taken very in context.

No it wasn't, it was taken out of context and span by the media, the mistake you two seem to be making is assuming that just because he spoke after being asked a direct question that he was somehow attempting to address that question or subject, most humans work that way but not him lol.

It's quite clear from the interview that he isn't answering the question, he's deflecting from it by instead bragging about his personal achievement's/experiences, however because he was talking about them in the past tense various media outlets were able to quote it out of context and make it appear like he was using future tense and addressing the question.

I can assure you one thing Donald Trump will never do is directly address a straight question XD

He has no clue as to Macro Economics and doesn't understand the Constitution. But Deadbeat Donnie's fan don't really care about about that, do you?

Lmao dude I'm not American, I don't give a crap about your election as long as Trump doesn't win. I think your blind hatred has driven to the point where you're starting to see unbiased people as pro-Trump XD.

[Hooked]

Got anything to back that up? Only place Trump is ahead is the white male demographic, and as Romney showed before, that's not enough to get the Presidency anymore.

I think trump has a good chance to flip the black vote.

[Sky High]

so what? there are so few of them I doubt it would make much of a difference, in case you forgot the whole Trump obliterating everyone else in the GoP race. really it only highlights the disconnect from the establishment and the base. if the GOP didn't run with losers like Rubio or Cruz there may have been a chance to stop him, but no. so they get to deal with the consequences of that. wish the same woudl happen tot he Dems...

[Pangean]

No it wasn't, it was taken out of context and span by the media, the mistake you two seem to be making is assuming that just because he spoke after being asked a direct question that he was somehow attempting to address that question or subject, most humans work that way but not him lol.

It's quite clear from the interview that he isn't answering the question, he's deflecting from it by instead bragging about his personal achievement's/experiences, however because he was talking about them in the past tense various media outlets were able to quote it out of context and make it appear like he was using future tense and addressing the question.

I can assure you one thing Donald Trump will never do is directly address a straight question XD




Lmao dude I'm not American, I don't give a crap about your election as long as Trump doesn't win. I think your blind hatred has driven to the point where you're starting to see unbiased people as pro-Trump XD.

The context was provided. He answered to a question. ""Do you believe that we, in terms of the United States, need to pay a hundred cents on the dollar, or do you think that there's actually ways that we can renegotiate that debt?"

To which he replied:"I have borrowed, knowing that you can pay back with discounts. And I have done very well, I would borrow, knowing that if the economy crashed, you could make a deal, and if the economy was good, it was good, so, therefore, you can't lose."

If you want to say that he didn't know what he was talking about and spewing nonsense yet again feel free.

Oh if you aren't pro-Trump I apologize. You just posted like you were.