Republican Election 2016 - Donald Trump Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[Deleted]

I have no warm feelings towards Trump as his Russia/Crimea/Ukraine comments displayed his profound ignorance for all of us to see but the idea that one would vote for Clinton just because they are #NeverTrump is appalling to me.

Sit it out. I can't imagine how anyone can cast their vote for her. She is indeed Crooked.

[Pangean]

Going with my general opinion of immigrants and illegals and whatnot, I personally don't care if she was illegal at the time or not (she def is legal now, as she's married to a citizen) - but I would find it HILARIOUS if it turned out Trump married an illegal immigrant.

Yeah agreed. Which is kinda of the point of me posting the article.

[Deleted]

Actually it did. Dump only won by 40% of those voting in the primary. If it wasn't divided so much by so many candidates- Dump would've lost.

When it was down to just Trump, Rubio, and Cruz he blew them out of the water. You are so completely wrong. If anything, those early primaries diluted the vote for Trump - he would have even more votes. Just look at New Hampshire or South Carolina.

Regardless - look at Florida:

Trump: 1,077,221
Cruz: 403,640
Rubio: 159,412

He CRUSHED them in the vote. CRUSHED.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epo...ote_count.html

[Deleted]

The foundation of conservatism is the family

You do realize that if you polled random strangers on the street, vast and vast majority of them would say that Number One thing for them is the welfare and safety of their family.
It's universal. To claim that liberals, libertarians or far leftie lunatics have no regard for the family or it's value as a structure on which the society stands is rather silly.

[Deleted]

LOL.

Bigot:

a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bigot

Hey - I made my sig even bigger now, thanks.

BTW - yep, I adhere to the second part of that definition for sure, I despise and have no tolerance for liberals/progressives. And I am definitely intolerantly devoted to placing American Citizens and their concerns over illegal immigrants. Yes, I am extremely prejudiced against criminals that break the laws.

[Pangean]

hey - I made my sig even bigger now, thanks.

Sweet. I guess in your mind that makes you even a bigger bigot.

[PACOX]

Here is what is happening at Trump rallies, just in from CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2...wd-bts-ctn.cnn

Bunch of redneck racism going on at these rallies. They would make the KKK proud. It's embarrassing to watch.

You need the full uncensored version
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/04/us...ters.html?_r=0

[Skroe]

I have no warm feelings towards Trump as his Russia/Crimea/Ukraine comments displayed his profound ignorance for all of us to see but the idea that one would vote for Clinton just because they are #NeverTrump is appalling to me.

Sit it out. I can't imagine how anyone can cast their vote for her. She is indeed Crooked.

How is it appalling?

Before I am a Republican

Before I am a conservative

I am an American.


This election, for the very reason you stated, is no longer Liberal versus Conservative, Democrat versus Republican. It is Hillary Clinton versus Vladmir Putin. It is the American Way of Democracy versus Putinism come to America wrapped in a Trump inc. package. It (less likely) is explicitly, and (more likley) is inspired by the EXACT illiberal democratic model that Vlad the Invader is pushing around the world.

It cannot be allowed to take root in Reagan's "Shining City on a Hill" and the leader of the West.

Conservatism can survive 4 years of Hillary Clinton. Especially since the House is going stay in Republican hands until at least 2020 redistricting unless there is the wave of all wave elections. And if Conservatism can't survive the occasional liberal Supreme Court, it is truly royally screwed in the long term and all the movement is doing is holding on for dear life until a wave big enough drowns us. But Conservatism will be every bit as decimated as Liberalism if Trumpism - an Americanized version of Putinism, like a weed, takes root in America and sees us dismantle what generations of truly great Americans, liberals, conservatives and moderates, have built.

That is why, above all I vote for Clinton, who otherwise, I have long been cool to. The thought of Bill Clinton back in the White House is resulting. There is not a mainstream politician with less integrity and honor alive. Slick Willy deserves the name. His affable demeanor conceals one of the most shrewd, vicious, manipulative and dishonest politicians of the last forty years.

But even that, in this imperfect world, is far less worse than letting Donald Trump be elevated to an office alongside Reagan, Kennedy, FDR, George H.W. Bush, Teddy Roosevelt, Lincoln, Jefferson... Washington! He is unfit.

In this election I'm not voting for a liberal. I'm voting for the American over the man who represents it's dark mirror, it's rejection, it's sins. We can deal with "crookedness" easily - such as voting her out in 8 years. But we'll spend decades recovering from Putinism in America as President Trump, just because the Legion of Losers had a tantrum.

[Deleted]

Sweet. I guess in your mind that makes you even a bigger bigot.

No - it means I couldn't give a fuck about you or your attempt to...ridicule me?

[Aggrophobic]

Damn right - I support him 100%



Nothing but your self-inflated opinion.

I'm pretty sure it's the opinion of 90% of the world.
The guy is nuts, plain and simple.

[Deleted]

I'm pretty sure it's the opinion of 90% of the world.
The guy is nuts, plain and simple.

I really do not give a shit about 90% of the world. The only thing that is of any concern is the AMERICAN PEOPLE and who THEY choose to be their President. If the rest of the world does not like him then too fucking bad.

[Aboubacar]

I really do not give a shit about 90% of the world. The only thing that is of any concern is the AMERICAN PEOPLE and who THEY choose to be their President. If the rest of the world does not like him then too fucking bad.

The U.S. doesn't live in a bubble. Globalization is here whether you and Trump like it or not.

[Skroe]

You do realize that if you polled random strangers on the street, vast and vast majority of them would say that Number One thing for them is the welfare and safety of their family.
It's universal. To claim that liberals, libertarians or far leftie lunatics have no regard for the family or it's value as a structure on which the society stands is rather silly.

No. You misnunderstand, which makes me think you don't know what conservatism is. Most people who call themselves conservatives don't. Because most define themselves in opposition to things, rather than what they are for.

Well conservatism, real conservatism, actually does believe specific things. With respect to family, that isn't a general statement. It refers to something specific (which I bolded bellow). Repost from myself below, should sum it up.

Well for starters... most of the folks who call themselves conservatives and Republicans, aren't. Not really. They appropriated the name. We could be talking most everyday Americans who "identify as conservative" and the people (I'm sure we know who) on this very forum. They say they're conservative, but the fact is, not one of them knows the first thing about the fundamental philosophical underpinnings of conservatism. They don't know their ass from their brain. Especially every day "conservatives". They are not complicated. Typically they overly love their guns or something, and maybe are religious, and there is one or two things that "big government" does that incites them, so start calling themselves "conservative" and backing policies and political positions they scarcely understand.

There is no difference between these people - which by the way account for nearly every self professed "conservative" on this forum - and the moron coat tail grabbers who like what Bernie Sanders has to say so they've started to call themselves "democratic socialists". It's the exact same stupid.

The difference between conservatism (real conservatism) and liberalism (real liberalism) in the American sense starts with a fundamental disagreement on what the most significant-least reducible economic unit in the country is. I don't mean media soundbite cosmopolitan wannabe political philosophy. I mean the real beliefs. For conservatives, that unit is "the family". For liberals, it is "the individual". Every policy and belief difference springs from this. The conservative belief about the strong nuclear family - historically bound by religion (a set of beliefs), stems from the belief that "the family" with one or two producing parents, properly encouraged and protected, will produce the best possible economic and social contributor in their children, when their children grow up and do the same. The family becomes the fuel to the engine of ongoing national economic, social and political well fare. And that individuals removed from the family unit (or something very much like it) are robbed of core advantages that a family provides for advancement. The liberal philosophy believes an in individual can reach their maximum potential without the family unit and it is the role of the state to act as the incubator (instead of the family). I realize this may seem backwards, considering that supposedly Republicans are the party of "individualism", but that is an exaggeration. At it's core the difference between conservatism and liberalism is a difference in opinion on the best way for society to produce productive citizens. The dedication to free markets versus regulation, civil rights beliefs, abortion... that's all one layer ABOVE this at least. Classically for example the philosophical/non-religious objection by conservatives to abortion and gay marriage (positions I DO NOT share, being from Massachusetts and all), has to do with those practices effects on the family unit's potential as an incubator, and what would happen across wider society.

Most conservatives in the world don't know squat about this, but this is real and this is where their self professed beliefs come from, not some ridiculous worship of the Second Amendment that would embarrass and infuriate the founders who didn't revere their own Constitution enough that they saw fit to change it in twelve ways almost immediately (ten of which became the Bill of Rights).

So be very careful when talking about 'conservatives'. They call themselves that, but again, they're the equivalent of the guy calling himself a Democratic Socialist because he likes what Bernie Sanders says. It's not sincere. Unfortunately the Republican Party has been so corrupted by money and made intellectually bankrupt due to it's inability to change with a changing world and society the last twenty years, that the vast majority of "conservatives" are nothing of the sort.

Or let me put it another way: right now, this country has many more liberals who know what liberalism is than it does conservatives who know what conservatism is.

I'm not like any conservative you've talked to because I don't embrace the bullshit just to win and if I'm strongly data driven. I mean look at those clowns in that other thread, embarrassing themselves trying to pin some Benghazi and email nonsense on Hillary Clinton. What fucking frauds. The lot of them. They refuse to learn the lessons of the Iraq War in their zeal to go "kick terrorist ass" in Syria. Hell, as Thomas Ricks, no dove and no liberal, put so well the other day: why is it so many self professed "conservatives" have asked a lot more hard questions about Benghazi in the last three years than they asked about Iraq in the last ten.

Like let me tell you why I want single payer healthcare. It's the same reason that say, having a "privatized military" where the government had armed forces provided competitively on contract (and I mean much bigger than Blackwater and little operations like that, I mean the real deal), would be a terrible idea. Because there are some things that government does in the public good more efficiently and more practically than the private sector. Case in point, any lover of free markets can't say they "love free markets" then want to burden private industry with employee health care. Imagine the long term economic boon if employers in this country never had to worry about health care ever again. The old joke about GM pre-2008 was that it was actually a healthcare and retirement plan that just happened to make Cars. That is the point that bullshit market driven approaches to easy problems got us.

Hell there was a wacky fucking thread the other day with self professed conservatives here railing against torrenters and downloaders for "stealing IP" from companies. You want to see how un-conservative those conservatives are? Maybe they should stop and think for a second on how all those wildly popular streaming services, or services like iTunes, arose in direct response to a superior distribution method in the form of the illegal internet download to brick-and-mortar movie and music sharing, arriving on the scene. And the data doesn't lie: streaming services have dramatically slowed illegal file sharing, because what's better than anything you want on demand? Not having to store it on your own hardware and being able to access it on any device you own. That's the market at work. And those casual conservatives didn't have a clue.

The point is, you're not typically arguing against real conservatives, either here or on the national stage. You're arguing against people who like their guns, and dislike some things Obama has done or big government stuff, but know about as much about conservatism as they know how to write in Sanskrit.

It probably will. THe problem is that there are far too many people, even among the rank and file (see the other threads here) who call themselves conservatives who really aren't. They're anti-progressive reactionaries. Sure they have some conservative overlap, but they believe a lot of things that damn well aren't conservative.

The foundation of philosophical conservatism is the family as the most significant social and economic unit. This may seem paradoxical with respect to conservative emphasis on individualism over "collective action" of the left, but the most important unit in conservatism is not the individual. The empowered individual and an emergent property from something more fundamental. The simple, forum-friendly version of the belief is that a well formed family unit produces the most optimal citizen in terms of morality, education, economic potential and their ability to better the country, society and themselves. And that citizen in turn will create their own family, and carry on the positive feedback loop. Thus government fundamentally should be about supporting and empowering and defending the creation and perpetuation of well formed family units. When something as quixotic as conservative statements against divorce pop up, at some level, this is where it originates (to be clear: I am not against divorce if it is indeed, in the best interest of the family and children).

I firmly believe in that. I came from a family exactly like that. The government should absolutely encourage society to be based around that model. Everything else tacked onto conservative is on one level of abstraction above this foundation: family matters most. Now I don't want to change topics, but I completely reject social conservatives refusal to define gay parents as suitable heads of that family. That's the Massachusetts Republican part of me. A mom a dad... two moms two dads... whatever. The parents and their kids, living moral, decent, productive lives and working hard is what will make them thrive as people, and this country thrive as a whole.

Now let's look at the two conventions. Last week Republicans barely talked about family and had a man on stage who cheated on his wives, fathered children from different women, and had a reputation for getting remarried to attractive trophy wives. What does Donald Trump represent about family, other than the utter degradation of the idea? By contrast we have Joe Biden's family and Barack Obama's family. We even have Hillary and Bill Clinton, which in it's own way is meaningful, because despite Bill Clinton being a cheating piece of garbage, made it work and their daughter now has a family of their own. Which, in 2016, is the party of family? It's a no-brainer. Those fake conservatives cavorting around here, mouthing off about Social Justice Warriors or Black Lives Matters don't have a clue about what Conservativism really is because what is important to conservativism - the family - isn't their primary politically motivating engine. Rather, they define themselves by what they're against - against social movements like BLM, against gun control, against Obama liberalism, or whatever else. That's not a platform. That's a list of complaints. What specifically will Donald Trump do for the family?

Will the Republican Party make it? Who knows. If it gets back to the party of family and appeals to families of all sorts, colors and make ups, absolutely. America is first and foremost about families. But it will need to rid itself of these frauds who think they're conservatives because they love the 2nd Amendment more than the other 26, and support Donald Trump because they were incited by protesting liberals or something equally unimportant in the big scheme of things.

Did you speed read my post or something?

I certainly am not a social conservative. I haven't even been to church (aside from weddings) since I was 13. I'm pro-Abortion, pro-Gay Marriage. Things like that are one level of abstraction up from the core of conservatism, which is the family, and as I specifically said, that family can take many shapes. Opposition to those were tacked on by mostly religious interests.

But government should play a role in shaping and encouraging morality in society. There is absolute right and wrong, good and evil. Moral relativism is an abomination.

Massachusetts conservatives are the way forward for the Republican Party. Pro-Free Trade, Socially moderate, Strong on Defense with an emphasis on government that isn't too big, but not "so small to be drowned in a bathtub" as the odious Grover Norqvist put it, but an efficient and effective humming machine.

But that's the sequel. The current episode is about defending the American Way - Conservative and liberal alike - from far right extremism, in the form of Donald Trump, abetted by his Putinista allies. It's damn easy to side with progressives when the campaign is against a foreign enemy and his useful American idiot. I may disagree with progressives on basically everything, but they've fought, and fought well, against Donald Trump and what he represents, while so-called-but-not-really conservatives in the really-reactionary far right laid down for him because in their warped logic, winning 2016 sullying themselves was more important than losing 2016 but maintaining their dignity.

As I said, at this point, especially (but not nearly exclusively) after the past two weeks of events, if you stand with Donald Trump you're not someone to be bargained with or understood. You're something to be defeated and thrown down. There is no such thing as a conservative movement or Republican Party worth saving that is populated by people who would demean minorities, gays and women, who would disparage American democracy promotion and our valued friends around the world, and make common cause with one of America's most vile enemies.

Conservatives standing with Hillary is conservatives standing with America against a foreign enemy and his American patsy.

[Gaexion Ramza Beoulve]

I am also in this thread.

Infracted - please post constructively

[Noxx79]

I really do not give a shit about 90% of the world. The only thing that is of any concern is the AMERICAN PEOPLE and who THEY choose to be their President. If the rest of the world does not like him then too fucking bad.

OK, but where is your evidence that THE AMERICAN PEOPLE (lol whatever caps means there) is behind Trump?

[Pangean]

No - it means I couldn't give a fuck about you or your attempt to...ridicule me?

Uhuh that's why you keep replying.

And I am just posting your own words, if that ridicules you so be it.

Oh and look what appeared in my Inbox from you:

"Kinda of my way of telling you point blank to kiss my fucking ass - and to go fuck yourself."

[Grogo]

Let's be honest here, brutally honest. Trump supporters are not known for their high education levels, in fact quite the opposite. Even above that, they may not be educated but to top it off they are low intelligent voters. It is like arguing with monkeys. Just go vote and show them what the real world is like. When Trump is crushed in the general election they will skulk back to their trailers and we wont have to hear about them for another 4 years hopefully. They don't get it, they never will, they do not have the "throughput" or "capacity" to get it. Many of them are blatant racists (not all) but enough for it to very alarming. There are Republicans (while flawed are infinitely better than Trumpicans) and then there are Trumpicans. The Trumpicans just don't know better. They also tend to shit on the carpet if not constantly monitored.

[DeadmanWalking]

Going with my general opinion of immigrants and illegals and whatnot, I personally don't care if she was illegal at the time or not (she def is legal now, as she's married to a citizen) - but I would find it HILARIOUS if it turned out Trump married an illegal immigrant.

Having Married a european for 19 years there is more to citizenship than just being married, for one you have to prove you are really married and not just living in the same residence pretending to be married. Furthermore you are not a citizen just because you are married to a citizen, rather you are classified as a Resident. Residency will cut a lot of red tape for you to become a Citizen but you still must apply and complete the process of becoming a citizen. I was there the day my wife was sworn in as a citizen of the United States, she had to take the test and an oath, a test by the way most American adults couldn't pass because they don't really know anything about the country they live in. Residents don't get to vote or have all the benefits of being a citizen of the United States. Residents are offcially still citizens of where they came from, and Citizens can maintain duel citizenship if they chose.

So no, Marrying Donald does not make her a citizen.

[Thepersona]

You're saying that Trump's first lady could potentially be... illegal?

Oh please be true. Please please be true. Holy shit, that's almost too perfect. It would be the singularly most perfect thing to happen to Cheeto Jesus and the Legion of Losers yet in this campaign.

now, that would be an epic firestorm to the trump campaign, and the flak that would ensue would be glorious

[Cthulhu 2020]

LOL. Newt has not bailed on him - he criticized him, sure - but point out ONE FUCKING ARTICLE that has a quote from Newt saying that he has "bailed" on him. Sorry, that is nothing but YOUR typical bullshit conclusion that you somehow think is a reality (like pretty much every single thing you ever say on this board.)

You have NO FUCKING idea whether or not his "petty fights aren't winning him votes.' That is NOTHING but your opinion - and the bullshit narrative pushed by liberals/democrats. Tell a lie enough times and it becomes the truth, eh? His "petty fights" got him the GOP NOMINATION.

Like I said - I will just sit here and LAUGH at responses like yours and the other typical bullshit pushed by the Left.

Hey dude, keep defending him all you want. Say what you want. Believe what you want. Just PLEASE keep Trump in the race. As it goes on he will keep wrecking the republican vote, losing elections lower down the ballot for democrats to win.

You can stick it to those "establishment cucks". You can insult those RHINO traitors. You got your voice heard. Trump us gonna lose. But at least you got to insult people on national television and that's what counts.