Printable View
I'll give it to Trump, he hit a home run when he talked about buying politicans, even Hillary. The system is corrupt, but its rare to see someone talk about how they were a part of it.
and huckabee could have done a lot with his comment concerning the military being an object to kill people and break things, if the context wasn't him trying to attack gays serving.
And yet he couldn't name a single serious example where the donations provided results. Incidentally, what's a better way to prove that you don't hate all women than to go after the only female moderator after the debate.
I'm no fan of Trump and never saw the debate, but I'm no fan of tokenism or labels either. The moderator might have been good or bad but her gender ought not play a role in it.
Unless she is Rosie O'Donnell
Uh, what about the wedding that Clinton attended? Trump made it clear he gave her money and then told her to come to the wedding.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
You call that a serious example? Getting a politician to attend your daughter's wedding? What awful corruption. :rolleyes:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/here-a...50256782.html#
I wish i was paid for some weddings I went to, would have made up for the boredom.
'Trump also said she "really bombed," and he retweeted a dozen fans who criticized her hostility and called her a "bimbo."'Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Yeah, I'm not getting how 'ooh, she attended the wedding' is some big political coup. I mean, like, even at lower levels, someone you have a professional/friendly/whatever relationship with invites you to their/the offspring's/ the pet chinchilla's wedding, you go. For some, if you have a really good excuse you can just send a gift and forget about it - but in general, you just suck up your thoughts of 'ugh, wedding' and go.
Really, a list that doesn't include where the big hidden money goes? Useless. Show me what he put into political action committees. And it was Trump's own wedding not his daughters. :bulb:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
So you're agreeing with me that Trump didn't actually say what his donations bought.
Trump made it very clear what he bought with his donations, politicians. You should look back at the transcripts. It led into his tirade about how corrupt our system is. Of course his conclusion is that he can't be bought because he doesn't need the money.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Which politicians did Trump "buy" that did things for him they would have fiercely resisted doing if he hadn't given them money? What laws did he buy? Which contracts? I have no doubt giving lots of money to politicians can be beneficial to those who do so, but it is kinda dumb to pretend that that is the same as buying someone
Are you serious? He did nothing of the sort. He gave a stupid example of having someone attend his wedding.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
The bolded part is his tirade,
Quote:
BAIER: Mr. Trump, it's not just your past support for single- payer health care. You've also supported a host of other liberal policies. Use -- you've also donated to several Democratic candidates, Hillary Clinton included, Nancy Pelosi.
You explained away those donations saying you did that to get business-related favors.
And you said recently, quote, "When you give, they do whatever the hell you want them to do."
TRUMP: You'd better believe it.
BAIER: So what specifically did...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's true.
BAIER: -- they do?
TRUMP: If I ask them, if I need them, you know, most of the people on this stage I've given to, just so you understand, a lot of money.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not me.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not me.
(LAUGHTER)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But you're welcome to give me (INAUDIBLE) Donald if you'd like.
TRUMP: Many of them.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Actually, to be clear...
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: -- he supported Charlie Crist.
TRUMP: Not much.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hey, Charlie...
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: But I...
(CROSSTALK)
TRUMP: -- Donald, if you...
(CROSSTALK) TRUMP: I have good...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: -- this campaign, I hope you will give to me.
TRUMP: Good.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK.
TRUMP: Sounds good. Sounds good to me, Governor.
I will tell you that our system is broken. I gave to many people, before this, before two months ago, I was a businessman. I give to everybody. When they call, I give.
And do you know what?
When I need something from them two years later, three years later, I call them, they are there for me.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So what did you get?
TRUMP: And that's a broken system.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What did you get from Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi?
TRUMP: Well, I'll tell you what, with Hillary Clinton, I said be at my wedding and she came to my wedding.
You know why?
She didn't have a choice because I gave. I gave to a foundation that, frankly, that foundation is supposed to do good. I didn't know her money would be used on private jets going all over the world. It was.
But...
(BUZZER NOISE)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0923c12bd079c Rand, still don't think he's a sexist pig?
He's a disgusting sexist pig - and the Republican base won't give a shit.
He's not supported by the Republican base. Note Trump's attack against Fox News. And his unwillingness to write off an independent run. He's supported by token Republicans who actually hate the party (more so than even the Tea Partyers).
Right, and those outliers are enough to make him win national polls (granted, everything I have read says their polling practices are shoddy).
Still, you forget, the base is not woman-friendly at all. Binders of women. Waste half a billion on women's health.
There is a huge list of reasons Trump is awful. Let's start with:Quote:
Originally Posted by littlelolligagged
"In many cases, I probably identify more as Democrat." Direct quote from Trump. Trump is a pathetic joke and the faster reality comes crashing back down the better. This actually happens quite a bit in the early part of the the Primary season. Remember Howard Dean?
Considering some people kill the babies in the womb when they learn the gender is female you have to wonder which party does more to help women.Quote:
Originally Posted by littlelolligagged
That being said its clear that liberals are often in support of bad policies that do favor females over males (example sports). So I guess if you think "treating people equally" is "not woman-friendly" and "giving bias to women" = 'woman friendly' then you might have a point.
Sports is the example you use, seriously?
I don't think I see any need to engage with you again - if one of the other conservatives we have around wants to take it up, I'll play.
:picard: Throwing my name around is a lame and tiresome way to avoid answering the real questions, or addressing the real problems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
That's really no better than Lewk using a sports analogy to rail against women's rights.
Yes, those are the same people who voted for Perot. Only 68% of Republicans have a positive view of the Republican Party. Incidentally, about a fifth of Trump's support comes from Democrats. He gets the angry white male crowd, particularly those who think they've been hurt by trade and those who are racist. They have no one else to support from the GOP field. The grassroots favorites are Rubio and Walker (by a large margin). Cruz is the Tea Party darling. Bush is supported by the establishment. The libertarians support Paul (note how Paul lost most of his anti-establishment support to Trump, retaining only the libertarian hardcore). The evangelicals like Cruz, Huckabee, and to a lesser extent, Walker. Silicon Valley probably supports Fiorina. So who does that leave for Trump?Quote:
Originally Posted by littlelolligagged
The problem, according to you, is that we're a democracy. If a substantial portion of Americans support Trump, it's downright stupid to not give him a seat at the debate.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
I'm not convinced that the best way to "winnow" the field is by using early caucus states in the first place. Iowa and New Hampshire aren't very good representatives of the nation as a whole. Neither is Florida, or the Carolinas, or Ohio for that matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
One good thing Trump has highlighted.....is how fucked up our election processes are, and that our two-party political system isn't working so well in the 21st century.
Another dumbdumb post. Just so much facepalmQuote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
No, the "problem" is that our representative democracy has been infected by monied interests (special interest groups, paid lobbyists, powerful industries) to the point that our two-party political process dominates, but isn't working.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I'm not affiliated, or registered, with any political party. That means I can't vote in any closed state primary that makes political party membership paramount. :rolleyes: It's crazy to think my vote doesn't matter unless I declare myself a (R) or (D) first.
They don't need to be good representatives of the nation as a whole. No state is a good representative of the nation as a whole. Pennsylvania certainly isn't. But if you can't draw up a decent run in either of those two rather soft states, how are you supposed to do so elsewhere? Anyway, as I have repeatedly tried to explain to you in the past, none of this is actually a working of the US government or its election system. It's an activity by and for political parties, private (albeit quite large) organizations of people around loose collections of political ideas working together to try and collectively get each others views eventually made into public policy.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Our "two party system" isn't a formal system. It's an ad-hoc arrangement. A long-lasting one, but one that has no formal status. If people don't like it, they're free to stop participating and apply themselves to some other route.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...uation-comment
It's interesting to me to see where the lines are drawn.
I've repeatedly tried to say the same thing. But when I lament the use of Big Money and its control over the political process, it's no consolation when "compromise" is used as a dirty word.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
What alternative "route" do you mean?Quote:
Our "two party system" isn't a formal system. It's an ad-hoc arrangement. A long-lasting one, but one that has no formal status. If people don't like it, they're free to stop participating and apply themselves to some other route.
I thought it was a natural consequence of your electoral system
Never said he's not a sexist pig. I said attacking a woman doesn't by itself make you a sexist pig.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Two of the four candidates to be Labour party leader are female. Oddly enough they are the two I think would be the least-worst potential leaders Labour are offering but if either of them win then she'd be the only non-male major party leader in England and I'd dislike them. Not because she's female, but because she's Labour. The SNP's new leader is female, the only female major party leader in the UK and I dislike her. Not because she's female but because she's a shit-stirring, extreme, far-left, bandwagon-jumping, flip-flopping, hypocritical Nationalist extremist. Her gender plays no role in it.
Who is railing against women's rights? The only 'right' I'm railing against is the right to kill babies. And sports isn't an analogy it is an actual fact that men's sports team have been cut due to Title IX.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
In the eyes of a liberal if you call a woman a fat pig you're a sexist asshole.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
In the eyes of a liberal there is nothing wrong with calling Chris Christie a fat pig you're just stating the truth.
Liberals love double standards.
Why didn't you make this a poll?
Why would this be a poll?
Wraithy, can you edit the OP to include a poll asking whether or not the thread should be a poll??
A poll for what?
Please, don't mess up my thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
There should first be a poll to ask if there should be a poll to ask if the thread should be a poll. You're moving too fast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless