Media Hellbent To Bury Trump

[AuH20]

Compare the 2nd amendment comment to the Mateen controversy. Now imagine the fallout if the father of the Orlando Shooter was sitting right behind DJT at one of his rallies. It would have been absolute pandemonium.

If the new standard is GOTCHA journalism, it must be applied to both candidates. But as we see, that's not the case.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CphgG93UIAAMGG3.jpg

[fcreature]

Obviously. The worst thing is that Trump makes it almost too easy for them. Almost like he's trying to lose the election...

The Trumpkins were told ahead of time that this would happen. Most did not believe it. Those that did, believe (even still) that he's invincible to media attacks. Unfortunatly what they didnt realize was that the media never actually attacked him during the nomination process but instead propped him up, giving him a nomination which he largely did not earn.

I gues we'll see.

[CaptUSA]

They don't want to bury him, but they certainly want to make sure he loses. Which he will.

If they wanted him buried, he would have been buried. They wanted him to destroy the GOP in order to get Hillary elected and get her SC picks for the progressive future. They wanted him to win the GOP nomination. And they want him to damage the GOP down-ballot. But they don't want him to win. He's doing his job.

[kahless]

Obviously. The worst thing is that Trump makes it almost too easy for them. Almost like he's trying to lose the election...

The Trumpkins were told ahead of time that this would happen. Most did not believe it. Those that did, believe (even still) that he's invincible to media attacks. Unfortunatly what they didnt realize was that the media never actually attacked him during the nomination process but instead propped him up, giving him a nomination which he largely did not earn.

I gues we'll see.

When your boy Bush Jr was out the campaign trail he acted like he was functionally retarded and at times made no senses at all. Did the media cover it, no since he is part of the establishment and gets a free pass.

If Rand/Ron got this far and posed a threat to Hillary the media coverage would be just as ridiculous as it is with Trump.

By your definition of the race only media approved establishment candidates should run.

[fcreature]

When your boy Bush Jr

My boy? Is that a joke? Or a lie?


By your definition of the race only media approved establishment candidates should run.

No, what I'm trying to tell you is that the media created Trump during the nomination process and they can just as easily destroy him now. And to make matters worse, he's not equipped to handle the pressure or to even run a real campaign as he was never really tested during the nomination.

[CaptUSA]

When your boy Bush Jr was out the campaign trail he acted like he was functionally retarded and at times made no senses at all. Did the media cover it, no since he is part of the establishment and gets a free pass. they gave their attention to who they wanted Hillary to face.

FTFY.

[AuH20]

They don't want to bury him, but they certainly want to make sure he loses. Which he will.

If they wanted him buried, he would have been buried. They wanted him to destroy the GOP in order to get Hillary elected and get her SC picks for the progressive future. They wanted him to win the GOP nomination. And they want him to damage the GOP down-ballot. But they don't want him to win. He's doing his job.

They tried to bury him twice during the primaries. Once after Iowa and then again after Wisconsin. The scrutiny was relentless.

[kahless]

My boy? Is that a joke?

I could not resist, you really have to stop using the term "Trumpkins", it is really emasculating to those who use the term. :D

[CaptUSA]

They tried to bury him twice during the primaries. Once after Iowa and then again after Wisconsin. The scrutiny amount of air time they gave him was relentless.

Ok, now fixed that for you. They bury you by burying the stories. Not by showing them 24/7.

Ah but hell, you've already bought the con. You can't be convinced of the truth. :rolleyes:

[kahless]

Ok, now fixed that for you. They bury you by burying the stories. Not by showing them 24/7.

Ah but hell, you've already bought the con. You can't be convinced of the truth. :rolleyes:

For those who do not know any better and take the media reports as gospel the media damage is pretty severe. So I am not buying the meme that the media is helping him. It remains to be seen whether he can survive the constant media onslaught.

[Spikender]

Whether or not Trump is a Clinton plant is a debate for another time, but it's obvious the goal of all the media attention on literally everything Donald Trump says or does is to take the attention away from Killary, who has been dealing with medical issues due to her selling her soul to the dark side and been dealing with fallout from her obvious criminal activities. It's so obvious even I see it.

[fcreature]

Whether or not Trump is a Clinton plant is a debate for another time, but it's obvious the goal of all the media attention on literally everything Donald Trump says or does is to take the attention away from Killary, who has been dealing with medical issues due to her selling her soul to the dark side and been dealing with fallout from her obvious criminal activities. It's so obvious even I see it.

My question though is why is Trump so obviously aiding in this effort? Why does he choose to spend 2 weeks talking about a dead muslim soldier when he could be attacking Hillary on the DNC leaks or Obama on the Iranian bribes? Every time there is a scandal or a major issue which could be a blow to the Democrats / Hillary, Trump opens his mouth and doesn't shut it.

I remember one of the big pro-Trump arguments was that he would be super effective and relentless in attacking Hillary and the Democrats. Why is this not happening? Why is he not focusing on this "strength"?

[AuH20]

My question though is why is Trump so obviously aiding in this effort? Why does he choose to spend 2 weeks talking about a dead muslim soldier when he could be attacking Hillary on the DNC leaks or Obama on the Iranian bribes? Every time there is a scandal or a major issue which could be a blow to the Democrats / Hillary, Trump opens his mouth and doesn't shut it.

I remember one of the big pro-Trump arguments was that he would be super effective and relentless in attacking Hillary and the Democrats. Why is this not happening? Why is he not focusing on this "strength"?

He talks extemporaneously at these rallies without a teleprompter. The opposition is extracting 5 seconds worth of soundbites from 45 minute musings.

[CPUd]

Yep. Trump appears to be in on it. Either it's that, or he's unwittingly become a puppet of the Clinton campaign.

[CaptUSA]

For those who do not know any better and take the media reports as gospel the media damage is pretty severe. So I am not buying the meme that the media is helping him. It remains to be seen whether he can survive the constant media onslaught.

Ah, but there are also many people who go the opposite way of how the media reports. About 30% or so of the GOP primary electorate. The media bigwigs know what they're doing. You would do well to follow the $$$ and not the words.

And no - Trump is not going to survive the onslaught. He was never meant to survive it. At least not to win the general. His purpose was to break the GOP to inoculate Hillary against the public who didn't trust her. The same public that chose Obama over her. Mission accomplished. Now, they just want to see how much they can use him to hurt the GOP down-ballot.

[Spikender]

My question though is why is Trump so obviously aiding in this effort? Why does he choose to spend 2 weeks talking about a dead muslim soldier when he could be attacking Hillary on the DNC leaks or Obama on the Iranian bribes? Every time there is a scandal or a major issue which could be a blow to the Democrats / Hillary, Trump opens his mouth and doesn't shut it.

I remember one of the big pro-Trump arguments was that he would be super effective and relentless in attacking Hillary and the Democrats. Why is this not happening? Why is he not focusing on this "strength"?

I've already spoken before on this in the past. I have my own opinions and beliefs that Trump's role in this election was the destruction of the GOP and guaranteeing a Clinton legacy. He is a friend of the Clintons, no matter how much he and others want to cover for that by saying "it was all business".

But I'm keeping my opinions out of this topic and just focusing on the effects of the media on the election. Whether my opinion/belief is true or not, the simple fact is that the media is covering for Hillary by completely focusing on Trump, no matter what he says or does. The longer that the cameras and mics are turned away from Hillary, the better for them.

[CaptUSA]

Yep. Trump appears to be in on it. Either it's that, or he's unwittingly become a puppet of the Clinton campaign.

That's the part I can't decide. I feel like originally he was part of the plan, but then became surprised at how far he went. Now, it's a win/win for him. If Clinton wins, he can say how much he helped her and she should be grateful to him. If somehow he wins, (which he won't) then at least his name will go down in history as being President. That's just my take on it, though. Seems like he's trying to lose and win at the same time. But this is Trump, and it's how he always operates. Plays both sides of every situation.

[fcreature]

He talks extemporaneously at these rallies without a teleprompter. The opposition is extracting 5 seconds worth of soundbites from 45 minute musings.

He should be talking extemporaneously at these rallies about Hillary Clinton being a disaster. Not about a dead muslim soldier.

[AuH20]

He should be talking extemporaneously at these rallies about Hillary Clinton being a disaster. Not about a dead muslim soldier.

I agree. But he rambles on about a multitude of topics. His spontaneity is a double edged sword. His rally speeches are basically impromptu conversations.

[Peace&Freedom]

But I'm keeping my opinions out of this topic and just focusing on the effects of the media on the election. Whether my opinion/belief is true or not, the simple fact is that the media is covering for Hillary by completely focusing on Trump, no matter what he says or does. The longer that the cameras and mics are turned away from Hillary, the better for them.

This was the elite plan all along for WHICHEVER GOP candidate was going to be running against Hillary. Jeb, Waker, Rubio, etc, were all going to be demonized (which is why over the months, Hillary kept grouping the whole Republican field together, saying "they're ALL like that, dangerous, backwards, crazy" and the like), and most of them would be too weak tea or boring to fight back, leading to Hillary coasting to victory.

Rand and Trump were the only two guys who stood a chance to put up a fight against the Hil demonizing machine, so the establishment is working harder to compensate. But the "bury the Republican" campaign was always intended to destroy its nominee during the summer, whoever he was going to be, to clear the path for Hillary in the fall, following the "bury Dole" formula of twenty years ago.

[Mordan]

He should be talking extemporaneously at these rallies about Hillary Clinton being a disaster. Not about a dead muslim soldier.

I agree too. And the Theory that Trump is a Hillary plant is also still valid. We will know after the 1st debate.

I really hope he destroys her. If Trump is a plant, I will have been conned. Nevertheless, that Plant Theory is really risky because it may backfire and destroy his brand. I don't think he would risk that for his dear friend Hillary.

[Spikender]

This was the elite plan all along for WHICHEVER GOP candidate was going to be running against Hillary. Jeb, Waker, Rubio, etc, were all going to be demonized (which is why over the months, Hillary kept grouping the whole Republican field together, saying "they're ALL like that, dangerous, backwards, crazy" and the like), and most of them would be to weak tea or boring to fight back, leading to Hillary coasting to victory.

Rand and Trump were the only two guys who stood a chance to put up a fight against the Hil demonizing machine, so the establishment is working harder to compensate. But the "bury the Republican" campaign was always intended to destroy its nominee during the summer, whoever he was going to be, to clear the path for Hillary in the fall, following the "bury Dole" formula of twenty years ago.

That's the elite plan every election. Make the GOP candidate out to be a dangerous stooge and keep the mics away from the Democrats actual dangerous stooge. It has varying effectiveness depending on the GOP candidate, but what you said bears repeating either way.

Unfortunately Rand is a non-entity in this election at this point, but it's true that Trump is a different beast from the rest of the field. While Rand would've fought back with principles, Trump has the advantage of a strong following that is willing to debate as well as the ability to spin most attacks on him to his advantage. I just don't see how he is going to fight Hillary in the coming months considering the sizable progressive and regressive following she has as well as a pet media that is unwilling to call her out on anything.


I agree too. And the Theory that Trump is a Hillary plant is also still valid. We will know after the 1st debate.

I really hope he destroys her. If Trump is a plant, I will have been conned. Nevertheless, that Plant Theory is really risky because it may backfire and destroy his brand. I don't think he would risk that for his dear friend Hillary.

Yep, just a theory at this point that I subscribe to, and it's a theory that can be disproven or proven as you said once the debates start coming along.

Despite my opposition to Trump, I want to see Killary destroyed as well. She deserves to have her political career smashed and put to bed once and for all. Enough cronyism, warmongering, race and gender-baiting, and horrible foreign policy decisions have come from her camp. Her time needs to be over. I won't support Trump but if he destroys Hillary I can say at least one massive positive came out of the Trump vs Killary fiasco.

[Zippyjuan]

Victimization. "Everybody is out to get Trump!" Trump: "It is all rigged!"

If he is the "winner" he constantly proclaims himself to be, he does not need excuses.

[CaptUSA]

I agree too. And the Theory that Trump is a Hillary plant is also still valid. We will know after the 1st debate.

I really hope he destroys her. If Trump is a plant, I will have been conned. Nevertheless, that Plant Theory is really risky because it may backfire and destroy his brand. I don't think he would risk that for his dear friend Hillary.

Oh no, you don't get it... He will come out of this looking like William Wallace to his supporters. We would have defeated the establishment (English) if only you neocons and liberty folks (nobles) would have gotten behind us. His brand will survive this defeat. It's the only thing that will.

[CPUd]

https://i.imgur.com/O4uvaa2.jpg

[fcreature]

Oh no, you don't get it... He will come out of this looking like William Wallace to his supporters. We would have defeated the establishment (English) if only you neocons and liberty folks (nobles) would have gotten behind us. His brand will survive this defeat. It's the only thing that will.

^ Exactly what I'm thinking.

If/When Trump loses, his supporters will never admit it was due to a failed candidacy and a weak , non-serious campaign. It will be due to everyone being out to get him. It will probably be a wash for his brand. Maybe a small loss. He'll have new people who love him but also plenty of new people who now hate him.

[afwjam]

Maybe now is the time to set up a Trump safe space for his supporters, a victim zone to protect them from their own stupidity.

[Mike4Freedom]

^ Exactly what I'm thinking.

If/When Trump loses, his supporters will never admit it was due to a failed candidacy and a weak , non-serious campaign. It will be due to everyone being out to get him. It will probably be a wash for his brand. Maybe a small loss. He'll have new people who love him but also plenty of new people who now hate him.

My prediction is that he will start his own PAC. Most of the money that his PAC will receive will go to administrative costs, 10% to actuall candidates. Something like the "Make America Great Again PAC"

The long con will continue.

[Ender]

Despite my opposition to Trump, I want to see Killary destroyed as well. She deserves to have her political career smashed and put to bed once and for all. Enough cronyism, warmongering, race and gender-baiting, and horrible foreign policy decisions have come from her camp. Her time needs to be over. I won't support Trump but if he destroys Hillary I can say at least one massive positive came out of the Trump vs Killary fiasco.

Pretty much my position- would love it if somehow they destroyed each other. ;)

[Mike4Freedom]

Pretty much my position- would love it if somehow they destroyed each other. ;)

Maybe the light fixtures hanging above them will collapse onto them and henry kissinger has a massive heart attack and dies. Would be an solid day.

[liveandletlive]

the terrorist dad has not actually committed a crime, as far as i know. cant wait for this sh*t show to be over, where both political wings claim some sort of moral highground over the other.

[Peace&Freedom]

Oh no, you don't get it... He will come out of this looking like William Wallace to his supporters. We would have defeated the establishment (English) if only you neocons and liberty folks (nobles) would have gotten behind us. His brand will survive this defeat. It's the only thing that will.


^ Exactly what I'm thinking.

If/When Trump loses, his supporters will never admit it was due to a failed candidacy and a weak , non-serious campaign. It will be due to everyone being out to get him. It will probably be a wash for his brand. Maybe a small loss. He'll have new people who love him but also plenty of new people who now hate him.

Both of these responses sound like many critics of Ron Paul supporters, who say the same things about us. Maybe Trump and Paul should be assessed by the same standard, with blame for their successes or losses laid to whatever their internal strengths and weaknesses are, or to whatever opposition they both faced. But that's not the case here.

The Trump-grumpers want to blame ONLY the media and leadership for Paul's losses, instead of for strategic paths he did not take, BUT want to blame ONLY Trump for any loss he encounters, instead of the relentless opposition he faced from the media and leadership. They want a blame-free Paul, while projecting that unbalanced assessment on others by accusing them of wanting a blame-free Trump.

It's the same old story, of the bashers wanting to believe Paul did nothing wrong, despite losing three times, while it's all Trump's fault if he fails, despite his doing much better by winning the nomination. They simply don't want to learn anything from the 2008-2016 races, if it strategically deviates an iota from the Paul playbook.

[fcreature]

Both of these responses sound like many critics of Ron Paul supporters, who say the same things about us. Maybe Trump and Paul should be assessed by the same standard, with blame for their successes or losses laid to whatever their internal strengths and weaknesses are, or to whatever opposition they both faced. But that's not the case here.

The Trump-grumpers want to blame ONLY the media and leadership for Paul's losses, instead of for strategic paths he did not take, BUT want to blame ONLY Trump for any loss he encounters, instead of the relentless opposition he faced from the media and leadership. They want a blame-free Paul, while projecting that unbalanced assessment on others by accusing them of wanting a blame-free Trump.

It's the same old story, of the bashers wanting to believe Paul did nothing wrong, despite losing three times, while it's all Trump's fault if he fails, despite his doing much better by winning the nomination. They simply don't want to learn anything from the 2008-2016 races, if it strategically deviates an iota from the Paul playbook.

Sorry, no. I'm happy to admit the faults in RPs campaigns in 2008/2012. 2008 wasn't even close to a serious attempt. Nice try at misdirection though.

With that being said, RPs campaigns have borne far more fruit than whatever it is Trump is doing. So far at least.

[JK/SEA]

Trump is doing a good job separating the NEOCONS from true Conservatives. Just like in here.

[Ender]

Trump is doing a good job separating the NEOCONS from true Conservatives. Just like in here.

The QUESTION is: who's who? ;)

[TheCount]

After an entire campaign built around saying crazy shit to get people to pay attention to him, now it's unfair that they're paying attention to his crazy shit?


Also :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: at "terrorist dad"

[Antischism]

Nah, the media is just reflecting Trump's clown show. On the one hand, Trump supporters say he's doing it to get attention and stay in the media because "there's no such thing as bad publicity," on the other, apparently the media is being "unfair" for criticizing him when he's prone to diarrhea of the mouth and outright lies like it's going out of style. This is almost entirely on Trump.

[Peace&Freedom]

Sorry, no. I'm happy to admit the faults in RPs campaigns in 2008/2012. 2008 wasn't even close to a serious attempt. Nice try at misdirection though.

With that being said, RPs campaigns have borne far more fruit than whatever it is Trump is doing. So far at least.

Since the topic of the thread is about the media being hellbent to bury Trump, my talking about that (and how Trump has fared better in battling the media burying than did the Pauls) is not misdirection. The misdirection is coming from those blaming Trump, instead of the media hellbent on burying Trump and the Pauls. And by most objective election metrics (winning primary contests, winning the nomination, attracting large voting blocs, pushing back against the media, etc) Trump's campaign has borne far more fruit.

[JK/SEA]

The QUESTION is: who's who? ;)

NEOCONS

bush family
bill kristol

assorted CNN hacks
The 50-75 petitioners



so on and so forth

[AuH20]

Trump has never been a neocon. If anything he's an old time democrat with nationalist leanings.

[JK/SEA]

Trump got tons of coverage during the debates, then when he won the nom, and it became apparent he would be up against the 2 pronged horn of the liberal media, and the clinton/DNC crowd...you do the math...

[LibertyEagle]

He got coverage, because he played the media successfully. Most of it was negative press. People were so fed up, they didn't buy it.

Then, there are some here who appear to be drooling for Hillary to win. And others who are supporting TPP-supporting Johnson and gun-grabber Weld. Anything to keep Trump from winning, seems to be the goal. It's rather sickening, but it is what it is.

Enjoy your slavery. You have earned it.

[r3volution 3.0]

So...where can I chip in to buy them a shovel?

[jmdrake]

Obviously. The worst thing is that Trump makes it almost too easy for them. Almost like he's trying to lose the election...

The Trumpkins were told ahead of time that this would happen. Most did not believe it. Those that did, believe (even still) that he's invincible to media attacks. Unfortunatly what they didnt realize was that the media never actually attacked him during the nomination process but instead propped him up, giving him a nomination which he largely did not earn.

I gues we'll see.

This. Trump seems hellbent to bury himself. Attacking a Gold Star family? Stupid. Just plain stupid. Absolutely positively no reason for that.

[Peace&Freedom]

This. Trump seems hellbent to bury himself. Attacking a Gold Star family? Stupid. Just plain stupid. Absolutely positively no reason for that.

Yes, a stupid mistake on Trump's part, as was Hillary's in attacking several Gold Star families by lying to them about Benghazi, then asserting they were lying about what she told them. One mistake, that he was egged into making under follow-up questioning by a Clinton surrogate attempting to draw him into that trap, versus multiple instances of Hillary willfully lying to the same type of families that Trump took the heat for confronting.

The MSM have over-covered Trump's mistake for weeks, while giving Hillary's lying and calling the families liars a near total pass. That shows the media is hellbent to bury Trump, not Trump being hellbent to bury himself.

[angelatc]

B
It's the same old story, of the bashers wanting to believe Paul did nothing wrong, despite losing three times, while it's all Trump's fault if he fails, despite his doing much better by winning the nomination. They simply don't want to learn anything from the 2008-2016 races, if it strategically deviates an iota from the Paul playbook.

I think that although their messages are much much different, neither one is a good messenger.

[AuH20]

If he takes this type of strategy into the debates, he'll be fine. Hillary has been shielded for awhile in regard to her Wall St. ties.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2016/08/Trump-KISSIMMEE-FL-Gregg-Newton-Getty-640x480.jpg

[CPUd]

If he takes this type of strategy into the debates, he'll be fine. Hillary has been shielded for awhile in regard to her Wall St. ties.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2016/08/Trump-KISSIMMEE-FL-Gregg-Newton-Getty-640x480.jpg

He'll get ridiculed for trying that. Trump's "economic advisors" AKA main donors are stacked with hedge fund managers:
Trump unveils economic policy team, includes John Paulson (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?499048-Trump-unveils-economic-policy-team-includes-John-Paulson)

[AuH20]

He'll get ridiculed for trying that. Trump's "economic advisors" AKA main donors are stacked with hedge fund managers:
Trump unveils economic policy team, includes John Paulson (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?499048-Trump-unveils-economic-policy-team-includes-John-Paulson)

It means very little.

Sheer money sealed the transaction. 49 million dollars vs. 19,000 dollars. Which candidate has more freedom?

[CPUd]

It means very little.

Sheer money sealed the transaction. 49 million dollars vs. 19,000 dollars. Which candidate has more freedom?

19,000 is an incorrect number. Neither candidate means more freedom.

[Mordan]

https://i.imgur.com/O4uvaa2.jpg

you are a shill CPUD. not a real RP supporter. As real RP supporters know, the game is rigged. and its true. And DNC email hacks shows it yet once again.
Trump was right to call for fairness. Ron Paul couldn't defend himself and call for fairness. Trump does it.
You are like liberal who can't stand a logical argument and start calling people Trumpkins.
Some posters on this board have strong cognitive dissonance. The same kind of people who said Trump would never win the nomination. Liberal wishful thinking. As another poster wrote, Enjoy your Slavery.

[CPUd]

<commits ad hominem>
<complains about others he thinks is doing the same>


I didn't create that image.

[luctor-et-emergo]

Media Hellbent To Bury Trump

Nope, Trump does it on purpose. It's the business model for his campaign.
Whenever coverage is not about him, he'll say something weird, horrible or stupid to force coverage of his campaign.
It's the ultimate, 'bad press is press as well' example..

[Mordan]

I didn't create that image.

you joyfully post it. and the image isn't even witty. He run against 16 republican and won. Now he is running against Hillary and the corrupt media. That image is just a liberal insult.

[TheCount]

It means very little.

Sheer money sealed the transaction. 49 million dollars vs. 19,000 dollars. Which candidate has more freedom?

Are you suggesting that the candidate who directly selected bankers to be his economic advisers will somehow be less influenced by bankers?

[CPUd]

you joyfully post it. and the image isn't even witty. He run against 16 republican and won. Now he is running against Hillary and the corrupt media. That image is just a liberal insult.

LOL joyfully? Do you need a safe space?

[juleswin]

Nope, Trump does it on purpose. It's the business model for his campaign.
Whenever coverage is not about him, he'll say something weird, horrible or stupid to force coverage of his campaign.
It's the ultimate, 'bad press is press as well' example..

Yup, any press is good press strategy has reached the point of diminishing returns and Trump is way too stupid to realize that. Considering how horrible and disliked Hillary is as a politician, Trump should be running away with this if he wasn't too busy tripping himself up.

The saddest part is the people who still support him. Talk about sh*t for brains

[AuH20]

Are you suggesting that the candidate who directly selected bankers to be his economic advisers will somehow be less influenced by bankers?

Money has hooks attached to it. Hillary is pinned to Wall St.

[CPUd]

Are you suggesting that the candidate who directly selected bankers to be his economic advisers will somehow be less influenced by bankers?

Not just bankers, he picked hedge fund managers who were some of his biggest donors. Seems like to be in Trump's inner circle, you've gotta pay to play.

[TheCount]

Money has hooks attached to it. Hillary is pinned to Wall St.

Your argument is nonsensical. Trump's advisers are also donors (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trumps-economic-advisers-are-also-his-biggest-donors-226758). Instead of influence, he just let them directly write his economic policy.

They're both owned by wall street. It just so happens that Trump's price is evidently much cheaper.

[AuH20]

Your argument is nonsensical. Trump's advisers are also donors (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trumps-economic-advisers-are-also-his-biggest-donors-226758). Instead of influence, he just let them directly write his economic policy.

They're both owned by wall street. It just so happens that Trump's price is evidently much cheaper.

I have 49 million reasons why you're wrong. Secondly, Wall St. en masse rejected the RNC convention in Cleveland while attending the DNC convention. That's all you need to know.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/donald-trump-wall-street-convention-225441

http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/15/news/economy/donald-trump-wall-street/

[JK/SEA]

lot of Bush family shills in here...

[adissa]

lot of Bush family shills in here...
and Hillary (by default.) They won't like that I've said that, but it's true.

[adissa]

you joyfully post it. and the image isn't even witty. He run against 16 republican and won. Now he is running against Hillary and the corrupt media. That image is just a liberal insult.
+rep

[JK/SEA]

and Hillary (by default.) They won't like that I've said that, but it's true.

yep...gotta laugh at that one. This notion that if you bash trump, you somehow get your 3rd party guy elected or make 'a statement' by doing that, or not voting, you somehow make things better...geez..just the fact the next prez will get to select a SCOTUS is enough for me to vote trump...not my idea to have 14 million people vote for him in the primary's, but LETTING hillary win because one thinks trump is this or that is just idiocy....

the beat goes on. Some people you just can't reach...

[Mordan]

this election at least roots out the covert Hillary/liberals on this board and elsewhere.

there are also the sore losers from the Cruz camp and of course the Purists who will never achieve anything

[fcreature]

there are also the sore losers from the Cruz camp and of course the Purists who will never achieve anything

Where? On these boards or elsewhere?

[LibertyEagle]

So...where can I chip in to buy them a shovel?

You have already made your position in all of this completely clear. You are the enemy.

http://i63.tinypic.com/zkldhl.png

[Ender]

You have already made your position in all of this completely clear. You are the enemy.

http://i63.tinypic.com/zkldhl.png

Isn't that your 4th time of posting his HYPOTHETICAL statement?

[luctor-et-emergo]

yep...gotta laugh at that one. This notion that if you bash trump, you somehow get your 3rd party guy elected or make 'a statement' by doing that, or not voting, you somehow make things better...geez..just the fact the next prez will get to select a SCOTUS is enough for me to vote trump...not my idea to have 14 million people vote for him in the primary's, but LETTING hillary win because one thinks trump is this or that is just idiocy....

the beat goes on. Some people you just can't reach...

There will always be similar reasons to vote for the least bad candidate.. That's one of the ways the establishment rigs the game. Make no mistake, this is divide and conquer in practice.

[Zippyjuan]

and Hillary (by default.) They won't like that I've said that, but it's true.

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/ron-paul-wont-vote-donald-trump/2016/05/04/id/727244/


Ron Paul: I Won't Vote For Trump

Ron Paul says he won't vote for presumed Republican nominee Donald Trump in the presidential elections, even if it meant it would hand the election to Democratic front-runer Hillary Clinton.

The former Republican congressman who ran for president with the Libertarian Party in 1988 said that it would not matter who won when he was asked in an appearance on the Morning with Maria Bartiromo Program on Fox Business Network.

Paul, who was also a candidate in the Republican primaries of 2008 and 2012, said neither candidate offers any solutions to the serious problems that the country faces and that "control of the system is much bigger than the political parties."



I guess he is supporting Hillary too?

[CPUd]

http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/ron-paul-wont-vote-donald-trump/2016/05/04/id/727244/



I guess he is supporting Hillary too?



The press keeps asking him why he supports Hillary:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Png0Zwu_JA

[LibertyEagle]

Isn't that your 4th time of posting his HYPOTHETICAL statement?

I thought it was the 5th. ;)

Nothing hypothetical about it. He clearly stated his good all under feelings about world government.