PDA

View Full Version : Question For Trump supporters [edit]




scm
11-17-2016, 06:41 AM
Now that he's won.
Do any of you still believe the system is rigged?
If so, why did they let him win?

vita3
11-17-2016, 07:11 AM
Muscle & law enforcement helped the guy..

Jesse James
11-17-2016, 07:27 AM
Now that he's won.
Do any of you still believe the system is rigged?
If so, why did they let him win?
I supported Thump over Hillary so I will answer. (though I technically wrote in RP)

Yes, I still believe it's rigged. I think they had to do what they had to do though. Maybe they knew the Hillary supporters will do what they are doing. Maybe Thump won by way more than was shown and they had to give it to him or people would look into the rigging because it would be too obvious. Whatever the case, if we don't go to war with Russia, I will long thank President Thump for not sending me to be drafted.

ChristianAnarchist
11-17-2016, 07:35 AM
Now that he's won.
Do any of you still believe the system is rigged?
If so, why did they let him win?

I have no doubt that it's rigged but rigging can only sway the vote by a certain percentage. It sure surprised the hell out of me as I was expecting Billary to win this one for sure. I guess there were just too many angry voters and their numbers overcame the rigging percentage...

LibertyEagle
11-17-2016, 07:50 AM
Now that he's won.
Do any of you still believe the system is rigged?
If so, why did they let him win?

The system *IS* rigged. To overcome the cheating, you have to overwhelm them with numbers. That is what Trump did. In other words, the leftists undershot their cheating.

And his name is TRUMP; not Thump.

scm
11-17-2016, 08:12 AM
The system *IS* rigged. To overcome the cheating, you have to overwhelm them with numbers. That is what Trump did. In other words, the leftists undershot their cheating.

And his name is TRUMP; not Thump.

THX, But, THUMP is more fitting to the situation.

luctor-et-emergo
11-17-2016, 08:14 AM
(wiki) 2012

Obama 65,915,795
Romney 60,933,504

(NY times) 2016 (still some results being counted apparently)

Clinton 61,917,919
Trump 60,913,096



Trump did just as bad as Romney. Possibly even worse since the amount of eligible voters increased from 2012-2016. Trump didn't win. Clinton lost.

Isaac Bickerstaff
11-17-2016, 08:27 AM
Of course it's still rigged. Wikileaks exposed the collusion between the Clinton campaign and the media to influence the Republican primaries. We all knew something was up then, given their ability to destroy a candidate by ignoring him. They didn't ignore Trump. Hillary was just so horrible that she couldn't beat the guy who threw the fight.

CaptUSA
11-17-2016, 08:31 AM
(wiki) 2012

Obama 65,915,795
Romney 60,933,504

(NY times) 2016 (still some results being counted apparently)

Clinton 61,917,919
Trump 60,913,096



Trump did just as bad as Romney. Possibly even worse since the amount of eligible voters increased from 2012-2016. Trump didn't win. Clinton lost.

They don't get it. They think this election was a mandate for Trump. The reality is that it was a mandate on Clinton is completely lost on them.

In fact, I can't tell you how many people were telling me, "I don't like Trump, but he's the only one who can prevent Clinton from being elected!!!"

Sola_Fide
11-17-2016, 08:31 AM
Of course it's still rigged. Wikileaks exposed the collusion between the Clinton campaign and the media to influence the Republican primaries. We all knew something was up then, given their ability to destroy a candidate by ignoring him. They didn't ignore Trump. Hillary was just so horrible that she couldn't beat the guy who threw the fight.

The true threat was Rand. And the morons of this country couldn't see it.

thoughtomator
11-17-2016, 08:42 AM
They don't get it. They think this election was a mandate for Trump. The reality is that it was a mandate on Clinton is completely lost on them.

In fact, I can't tell you how many people were telling me, "I don't like Trump, but he's the only one who can prevent Clinton from being elected!!!"

When you back out all the election fraud, Trump won the popular vote by 15%, easily.

At least three million illegal aliens cast invalid votes in this election; when you factor in all the vote flipping and account for voting machine fraud as well, I'd wager Clinton got less than 40 million genuine votes total. If the media weren't 100% in her camp, she wouldn't have gotten 10 million.

Trump not only has a mandate, but an overwhelming one - overwhelming enough to overcome the combined might of the establishment and the useful idiots that assist it.

CPUd
11-17-2016, 08:45 AM
Before the rigging, Gary got almost 20 million votes, even after being made fun of on 60 minutes. Almost all those votes were flipped to Hillary.

CaptUSA
11-17-2016, 08:51 AM
When you back out all the election fraud, Trump won the popular vote by 15%, easily..

Source?


At least three million illegal aliens cast invalid votes in this election; when you factor in all the vote flipping and account for voting machine fraud as well, I'd wager Clinton got less than 40 million genuine votes total. If the media weren't 100% in her camp, she wouldn't have gotten 10 million.

Trump not only has a mandate, but an overwhelming one - overwhelming enough to overcome the combined might of the establishment and the useful idiots that assist it.

The mandate is NOT for Trump - it was AGAINST Clinton. Almost nobody was voting FOR her... Even most of her voters were voting against Trump. Trump just got more people to vote against her than she got to vote against him. Even in Trump's closing days, the biggest cheer line from his rallies was, "lock her up!" Much bigger than "build the wall". His campaign used several strategies to depress her vote. And it worked.

The argument leading up to the election was not "Look what Trump will do", it was "we can't let her win!"

JK/SEA
11-17-2016, 09:35 AM
The system *IS* rigged. To overcome the cheating, you have to overwhelm them with numbers. That is what Trump did. In other words, the leftists undershot their cheating.

And his name is TRUMP; not Thump.


this.

JK/SEA
11-17-2016, 09:36 AM
The true threat was Rand. And the morons of this country couldn't see it.


sez the hillary supporter.

AuH20
11-17-2016, 09:43 AM
Bev Harris from blackboxvoting.org will be issuing a report showing that electronic tabulation fraud was employed in specific districts nationwide.

http://blackboxvoting.org/

Todd
11-17-2016, 09:46 AM
They don't get it. They think this election was a mandate for Trump. The reality is that it was a mandate on Clinton is completely lost on them.

In fact, I can't tell you how many people were telling me, "I don't like Trump, but he's the only one who can prevent Clinton from being elected!!!"

Yep. Clinton herself, along with wikileaks spooking enough principled people to cast votes elsewhere, were Clinton's biggest enemies. Enough of that 5 million that turned out for Obama couldn't stomach her.

AuH20
11-17-2016, 09:47 AM
The true threat was Rand. And the morons of this country couldn't see it.

Rand couldn't even make it to the final 4 of the Republican Primary. Low energy I'm sorry to say.

Sola_Fide
11-17-2016, 09:49 AM
sez the hillary supporter.

Think about it JK, wouldn't it have been better for Rand in 20/20 if Hillary won?

CaptUSA
11-17-2016, 09:51 AM
Rand couldn't even make it to the final 4 of the Republican Primary. Low energy I'm sorry to say.

Yeah, had nothing to do with the billions of dollars of advertising the media gave to one of his opponents. :rolleyes:

The Ron Paul treatment was alive and well in 2016 - and it was still directed at a Paul.

luctor-et-emergo
11-17-2016, 09:54 AM
Rand couldn't even make it to the final 4 of the Republican Primary. Low energy I'm sorry to say.

Rand would have won the whole thing if the media hadn't focused on Trump. That's the real corruption that's influencing the elections.

Tod
11-17-2016, 09:54 AM
It is hard to imagine that there are actually any Trump supporters on this forum, unless they are just visiting.

Trump is already backpedaling on some of his campaign promises, as we all knew he would do. However, his campaign was one of anti-globalism. I was wondering if now the Fed will raise rates, collapse the economy and dollar, Trump and anti-globalism gets the blame, and in comes the globalists to save the day. A day later, Rob Kirby's interview with Greg Hunter is headlined:
Globalists Will Crash Markets and Blame it on Trump-Rob Kirby

AuH20
11-17-2016, 09:56 AM
Yeah, had nothing to do with the billions of dollars of advertising the media gave to one of his opponents. :rolleyes:

The Ron Paul treatment was alive and well in 2016 - and it was still directed at a Paul.

Rand wasn't selling anything appealing in comparison to Trump. Scott Adams has wrote numerous essays about this. That's why he lost. Stop crying about the media. Provocative statements vaulted Trump over the field. Boldness beat playing it safe. 2010 Rand would have fared better in the Primary, but I still don't think he could have won.

JK/SEA
11-17-2016, 09:58 AM
Think about it JK, wouldn't it have been better for Rand in 20/20 if Hillary won?

twisted logic, and no.

i'm not willing to accept the fact that a hillary win would be good for this country. Apparently you think the continued erosion of the Constitution with hillary for at least 4 years would be good for Rand....how so?..

so lets say Rand gets elected, assuming he even runs, which i don't think he will, he MIGHT have a republican congress. Big risk. Now he has to resurrect the Constitution, along with all the other shit hillary screwed up...and you think thats a plan?...i want the drugs you're on. I need to escape this rabbit hole.

Sola_Fide
11-17-2016, 09:59 AM
Rand wasn't selling anything appealing in comparison to Trump. Scott Adams has wrote numerous essays about this. That's why he lost. Stop crying about the media. Provocative statements vaulted Trump over the field. Boldness beat safety.

What Rand was selling was definitely not appealing to the average big government, warmongering Republican. But Trump gives them all they could ever ask for.

newbitech
11-17-2016, 10:03 AM
your questions are basically a statement that go something like, "It's impossible to win a rigged game".

the gambit you present to start off this thread is weak if your intent is what I think it is.

No, it's not impossible to win a rigged game. The fact that it's rigged means "they" didn't let him win. He just overcame the rigging, perhaps because he understands how the cheaters cheat and the liars lie.

For instance, one of the more powerful tools "they" have in rigging is the MSM. He utterly destroyed that mechanism. The fall back is stirring up agitation in the minority populations and turning Americans against each other. He actively courted minorities and helped to establish common ground in the face of his blunders violating PC. He spoke to issues that unite Americans and disabled the fear mechanism that would have kept 99% of minorities away from him.

So yeah he did the impossible and beat them at their own game.

Or maybe it's all just a slight of hand and we are all being scammed yet again. So be it if that's the case, doesn't change the fact that the MSM manufactured divisions in this country have been exposed. If Trump is full of shit, then he can thank himself for his own crushing defeat 4 years from now.

The game may be broken now. We'll find out soon enough.

Lucille
11-17-2016, 10:07 AM
Why The Deep State Is Dumping Hillary
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-26/why-deep-state-dumping-hillary


When the governed get tired of Imperial over-reach and expansion, they are willing to take chances just to get rid of the expansionist status quo. In this point in history, Hillary Clinton embodies the status quo. The differences in policy between her and the Obama administration are paper-thin: she is the status quo.

The governed are ready for a period of retrenchment, consolidation and diplomatic solutions to unwinnable conflicts, as imperfect as the peace might be to hawks.

For these reasons, the more adept elements of the Deep State have no choice but to dump Hillary. Empires fall not just from defeat in war with external enemies, but from the abandonment of expansionist Imperial burdens by the domestic populace.

Put another way: drones and proxies don't pay taxes.

The Clinton Collapse - Only The Deep State Is So Precise
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-31/clinton-collapse-only-deep-state-so-precise


I submit another much more powerful dynamic is in play: the upper ranks of the Deep State now view Hillary as an unacceptable liability. The word came down to Comey to act whether he wanted to or not, i.e. take one for the good of the nation/Deep State/Imperial Project.
[...]
The neo-conservative globalists who want Hillary to continue pushing their agenda are the more visible camp, but another less visible but highly motivated camp realizes Hillary and her neo-con agenda would severely damage the nation's security and its global influence. It is this camp that is arranging for Hillary to lose.

The consensus view seems to be that the Establishment and the Deep State see Trump as a loose cannon who might upset the neo-con apple cart by refusing to toe the neo-con line.

This view overlooks the reality that significant segments of the Deep State view the neo-con strategy as an irredeemable failure. To these elements of the Deep State, Hillary is a threat precisely because she embraces the failed neo-con strategy and those who cling to it. From this point of view, Hillary as president would be an unmitigated disaster for the Deep State and the nation/Imperial Project it governs.

Whatever else emerges from the emails being leaked or officially released, one conclusion is inescapable: Hillary's judgement is hopelessly flawed. Combine her lack of judgement with her 24 years of accumulated baggage and her potential to push the neo-con agenda to the point of global disaster, and you get a potent need for the Deep State's most prescient elements to derail her campaign and clear a path to Trump's executive team.

Pieczenik (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Pieczenik) claims there was a deep state countercoup:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ov5kvWSz5LM

scm
11-17-2016, 10:09 AM
And his name is TRUMP; not Thump.

You WON, MAGA, one thread at a time.

THUMP 2016
The sound you'll hear at rock bottom

YAY! 4 Merica'

newbitech
11-17-2016, 10:11 AM
You WON, MAGA, one thread at a time.

are you really going to be a disingenuous thread starter with no purpose for posting other than to flame and troll?

Your e-tone to start this thread was transparent but I'll be waiting to feed you. I have a cookie for you. Come get some.

scm
11-17-2016, 10:14 AM
are you really going to be a disingenuous thread starter with no purpose for posting other than to flame and troll?

Your e-tone to start this thread was transparent but I'll be waiting to feed you. I have a cookie for you. Come get some.

Not sure if Ill be starting more threads if they are just going to be changed to please a few. Whats the point?

newbitech
11-17-2016, 10:17 AM
Not sure if Ill be starting more threads if they are just going to be changed to please a few. Whats the point?

why was your thread changed? did you say something troll-like and inflammatory?

Indeed, what is your point? I answered your couple of questions. are you satisfied with the discussion you started? Are you going to contribute to your topic in any meaningful way?

I look forward to your reply to my comment. I give you the benefit of the doubt. I am also concerned it's not starting out too well.

scm
11-17-2016, 10:20 AM
why was your thread changed? did you say something troll-like and inflammatory?

Indeed, what is your point? I answered your couple of questions. are you satisfied with the discussion you started? Are you going to contribute to your topic in any meaningful way?

I look forward to your reply to my comment. I give you the benefit of the doubt. I am also concerned it's not starting out too well.
I offended someone. His name in my title was changed from THUMP.

scm
11-17-2016, 10:24 AM
Indeed, what is your point? I answered your couple of questions. are you satisfied with the discussion you started? Are you going to contribute to your topic in any meaningful way?

I look forward to your reply to my comment. I give you the benefit of the doubt. I am also concerned it's not starting out too well.

I really just wanted to see the explanations to my questions, I personally wasn't looking for a debate. No one is going to change my mind on this topic, I'm probably not going to change anyone else. More or less just curious.

But, sure I'll contribute since you asked. The system IS rigged and the winner is the one they wanted.

newbitech
11-17-2016, 10:24 AM
I really just wanted to see the explanations. to my questions, I personally wasn't looking for a debate.
But, sure I'll contribute since you asked. The system IS rigged and the winner is the "winner".

do you think "they" let him win?


yeah, it's probably not a good idea to be persistent with name calling. I can see once or twice inside of the post replies as comedy or maybe just a vent, but really serial name calling or labeling has no chance of persuading people to your views, esp. in the title of the thread.

Some of us (me) can look past it but it really starts you off on the low end of respect for your opinion or argument.

What good has ever come out of name calling for you anyways? I mean really? Maybe it builds camaraderie with people who share your views, but do you need that? Is there no other way to build camaraderie without it? Off topic, but just wondering.

luctor-et-emergo
11-17-2016, 10:25 AM
do you think "they" let him win?

Yes.

scm
11-17-2016, 10:27 AM
do you think "they" let him win?
yes but I wouldn't use the word "let", "made" would be more appropriate

luctor-et-emergo
11-17-2016, 10:29 AM
I found this comment on youtube....


surprised that Ron Paul isn't backing Trump. The establishment stole the election from Ron and is now trying to do the same to Trump.

Cognitive dissonance..

Ender
11-17-2016, 10:30 AM
do you think "they" let him win?


YES.

newbitech
11-17-2016, 10:31 AM
Yes.

why did "they" let him win?

newbitech
11-17-2016, 10:32 AM
yes but I wouldn't use the word "let", "made" would be more appropriate

I see. Your question used 'let' so I responded to that.

So you are of the opinion that he was "their" choice all along? Am I reading you right?

luctor-et-emergo
11-17-2016, 10:33 AM
why did "they" let him win?

Because he's considering people like Rudy Giuliani as secretary of state.

JK/SEA
11-17-2016, 10:33 AM
everythings rigged.

this 'reality' you're living in is just an illusion perpetrated by a global cabal of rich, highly intelligent movers and shakers who have connections with the 'grays' from the Andromeda Galaxy, and are preparing for a takeover of the planet, and you're not invited. Good luck.

scm
11-17-2016, 10:34 AM
why did "they" let him win?
I've said it before.
He's ALL ABOUT PEOPLE CONTROL. Thats was his WHOLE campaign platform. Oh and "I'm not Hillary"

newbitech
11-17-2016, 10:35 AM
Because he's considering people like Rudy Giuliani as secretary of state.

Ok. Isn't that after the fact? Or are you saying "they" knew his choices before hand? I don't recall hearing mention of ol' ghouls being SoS prior to election night. Do you? Love to see that link if that's the case.

newbitech
11-17-2016, 10:38 AM
I've said it before.
He's ALL ABOUT PEOPLE CONTROL. Thats was his WHOLE campaign platform. Oh and "I'm not Hillary"

Ok. I am not sure I am connecting the dots on that. I mean no one likes to be controlled against their will. One of the qualities of a good "manager" or "employer" is controlling your people. Of course this is in the sense of working. People submit willingly. I don't necessarily think what you said here is a bad thing with out assuming you mean controlling people against their will. I didn't read what you said before, so some context would certainly help me understand your view.

H. E. Panqui
11-17-2016, 10:44 AM
....yikes...i sense a lot of republican-radio cheerleaders here...republican-radio idiots have been systematically brainwashing people for years now that 'election fraud always favors democrats' :rolleyes:

...but in trump's defense he did tell the truth to the people in bits and pieces during the campaign...for example when he said, 'This election is rigged' and when he said, 'I'm going to win so big'...

...republicrats suck so big...

luctor-et-emergo
11-17-2016, 10:49 AM
Ok. Isn't that after the fact? Or are you saying "they" knew his choices before hand? I don't recall hearing mention of ol' ghouls being SoS prior to election night. Do you? Love to see that link if that's the case.

"Reality TV" is pretty much always scripted.

H. E. Panqui
11-17-2016, 10:58 AM
...anyone not a goddamned fool understands that ANYONE whose ideas threaten thi$ mi$erable financial order will be thoroughly suppressed...puppets/fools no threat to the horrendous exi$ting financial order will be promoted/not be opposed...

JK/SEA
11-17-2016, 11:03 AM
can i start using 'rug biters' again....

need to call ORKIN..asap.

newbitech
11-17-2016, 11:05 AM
"Reality TV" is pretty much always scripted.

yeah i'm not buying the reality tv quip. that was something that was used over and over by the MSM to try and persuade people. I suppose you could argue that the MSM was using reverse psychology but then I'd just point out that the MSM is in full meltdown mode and has been for some time. It's quite clear the commercial TV interests took a huge hit this time around. Hell, even the omnipotent NFL is taking a serious ratings hit.

I'm also not buying the reality tv everything is scripted business because wikileaks. If you think that ALL of this stuff is scripted, I have to wonder at what point in your life do you recognize integrity? Do you step outside your door and immediately immerse yourself in a world of fake bullshit? Is there anything authentic in your life besides your immediate surroundings?

I can see how my comments above may offend, and its not intentional. I just can't believe that someone would think we are all living in one big reality tv show. So this is not really an answer to the question I asked. I'd be more interested in discussing those answers. Otherwise if all you have is something like, "its all fake" well not much else to say is there?

newbitech
11-17-2016, 11:14 AM
...anyone not a goddamned fool understands that ANYONE whose ideas threaten thi$ mi$erable financial order will be thoroughly suppressed...puppets/fools no threat to the horrendous exi$ting financial order will be promoted/not be opposed...

so this is something similar to the Cosmological Argument (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_argument) and/or Thomas Aquinas (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Aquinas) "Argument from Efficient Cause (http://philosophy.lander.edu/intro/cause.shtml)".

Not only are "they" not God or God's, "they" still derive "their" powers from consent of the governed. Meaning "they" still have to operate within a framework that is fairly restrictive. Yes I know it doesn't appear that way, and there be plenty of arguments and examples against that, but I'm sure its a topic for another debate. Suffice to say, "they" are not that powerful.

luctor-et-emergo
11-17-2016, 11:24 AM
If you think that ALL of this stuff is scripted, I have to wonder at what point in your life do you recognize integrity?

Right about at this point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AD7dnFDdwu0

scm
11-17-2016, 11:39 AM
Right about at this point.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AD7dnFDdwu0


You can't "solve" integrity.

scm
11-17-2016, 11:42 AM
Ok. I am not sure I am connecting the dots on that. I mean no one likes to be controlled against their will. One of the qualities of a good "manager" or "employer" is controlling your people. Of course this is in the sense of working. People submit willingly. I don't necessarily think what you said here is a bad thing with out assuming you mean controlling people against their will. I didn't read what you said before, so some context would certainly help me understand your view.
OK lets start with some basic questions.
What is the "establishment"?
Do they have any goals?

newbitech
11-17-2016, 11:49 AM
Right about at this point.

Great moment, the point Ron made here turned a light bulb on for a LOT of people. Unfortunately it also went over a LOT of people's heads. Since this moment, I could also say to a person, everyone I know that didn't understand this when it was live understands it now.

The truth will always come out. I think Trump's foreign policy will be no different than Roodies. Yet that truth remains and the people I know who voted for Trump now understand why we are interventionist, why we have blow-back and most importantly that we need to get the fuck out the middle east as quickly as possible.

How do we square that with the idea that this whole shit and fuck is scripted? We don't. People made a choice based on more than this one issue. Fact is we are there and if we are gonna get out of there we'll need MORE people to believe this point.

We don't do that by telling everyone that it's all a scripted bullshit story being told. We do that by continuing to press this point. We do that like was done when Obama tried to get support to bomb Assad in Syria. We need ALL sides to agree to gtfo the middle east. We need to work on that by being realistic about what a Trump victory means, not just simply writing it off as some scripted made for tv nonsense.

newbitech
11-17-2016, 11:54 AM
OK lets start with some basic questions.
What is the "establishment"?
Do they have any goals?

The establishment is bipartisan politicians, crony capitalist (large corp CEO's), media moguls, MIC, universities, basically the structure and network of people, businesses, and institutions that have control and influence over policy, laws, economics, and culture of our neighborhoods, towns, cities, states, country and world.

The establishment has one goal and that is to hold on to that power to remain, "established".

Does that help you in this discussion at all?

CPUd
11-17-2016, 11:58 AM
why did "they" let him win?

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/2iha1umZ9hw/maxresdefault.jpg

scm
11-17-2016, 12:00 PM
The establishment is bipartisan politicians, crony capitalist (large corp CEO's), media moguls, MIC, universities, basically the structure and network of people, businesses, and institutions that have control and influence over policy, laws, economics, and culture of our neighborhoods, towns, cities, states, country and world.

The establishment has one goal and that is to hold on to that power to remain, "established".

Does that help you in this discussion at all?

You don't believe they have plans of making sure nothing hinders them from maintaining that goal?
You don't believe the establishment won't cheat or deceive in maintaining that goal?
Do you doubt their power?

newbitech
11-17-2016, 12:01 PM
some doctored image

am i supposed to know what that means?

luctor-et-emergo
11-17-2016, 12:03 PM
Great moment, the point Ron made here turned a light bulb on for a LOT of people. Unfortunately it also went over a LOT of people's heads. Since this moment, I could also say to a person, everyone I know that didn't understand this when it was live understands it now.
I don't think I believe the same thing but if it were to be true that would be great.



The truth will always come out. I think Trump's foreign policy will be no different than Roodies. Yet that truth remains and the people I know who voted for Trump now understand why we are interventionist, why we have blow-back and most importantly that we need to get the fuck out the middle east as quickly as possible.

Just for clarification, you're saying you think Trump and Giuliani are more or less on the same page when it comes to foreign policy or am I reading your post wrong here ? I agree with you on the first part. That people understand what blow-back is ? Some maybe.



How do we square that with the idea that this whole shit and fuck is scripted? We don't. People made a choice based on more than this one issue. Fact is we are there and if we are gonna get out of there we'll need MORE people to believe this point.

We most certainly need to educate more people.



We don't do that by telling everyone that it's all a scripted bullshit story being told. We do that by continuing to press this point. We do that like was done when Obama tried to get support to bomb Assad in Syria. We need ALL sides to agree to gtfo the middle east. We need to work on that by being realistic about what a Trump victory means, not just simply writing it off as some scripted made for tv nonsense.
I'm keeping an open mind. For sure.

CaptUSA
11-17-2016, 12:03 PM
The establishment has one goal and that is to hold on to that power to remain, "established".

And they constantly fight amongst themselves for that power. But they will never return it to the people. This whole Trump thing is just an establishment civil war where one faction is fighting a different faction. They're all establishment.


The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty. - G.W.

scm
11-17-2016, 12:09 PM
And they constantly fight amongst themselves for that power. But they will never return it to the people. This whole Trump thing is just an establishment civil war where one faction is fighting a different faction. They're all establishment.
Those "fights" are probably just distractions.

CPUd
11-17-2016, 12:10 PM
am i supposed to know what that means?

No, you're just supposed to vote for it.

Occam's Banana
11-17-2016, 02:14 PM
why did "they" let him win?

If by "they" and "them" we mean "globalist hegemons," then I have no idea whether "they" let him win. But I am sure that some of "them" wanted him to win, for reasons Lucille identified in post #27 above (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?504227-Question-For-Trump-supporters-edit&p=6363717&viewfull=1#post6363717). The influence of China and Russia is waxing, and American bellicosity is wearing thin. The "coalition of the willing" ain't so willing anymore, and some of "them" realize this fact. Hillary's hyper-aggressiveness represented a "doubling down" on an investment that is not only returning lower and lower dividends, but which is becoming a serious liability ...

Athan
11-18-2016, 08:43 AM
Now that he's won.
Do any of you still believe the system is rigged?
If so, why did they let him win?

It IS rigged you dumbass. If you were around as a delegate in 2008 and 2012 you would have seen the bullsh*t they pulled on us. ANY serious reform candidate since Ross Perot, and Ralph Nader, and Ron Paul is met with media collusion and party rule breaking and sabotage.

That on top of Republican candidates in general having to deal with voter fraud such as video of democrats stuffing ballot boxes, voting machine rigging through vote flipping algorithms, voter intimidation, and other behavior.

That Trump won likely means WAY more people voted for him than they could handle. A county for instance of 100,000 can't have 120% voter turn out. So they can only rig it to a certain percentage before being caught with irregularities.

Athan
11-18-2016, 08:50 AM
Rand would have won the whole thing if the media hadn't focused on Trump. That's the real corruption that's influencing the elections.

Uh, yeah it was confirmed by Wikileaks that the Clinton cartel told the media to focus on Trump and Cruz because he was to extreme to get elected.

Carlybee
11-18-2016, 08:55 AM
Now that he's won.
Do any of you still believe the system is rigged?
If so, why did they let him win?

Hillary too tainted. Fear of more expansive leaks.

H. E. Panqui
11-18-2016, 09:02 AM
That on top of Republican candidates in general having to deal with voter fraud such as video of democrats stuffing ballot boxes, voting machine rigging through vote flipping algorithms, voter intimidation, and other behavior.

That Trump won likely means WAY more people voted for him than they could handle. A county for instance of 100,000 can't have 120% voter turn out. So they can only rig it to a certain percentage before being caught with irregularities.

...ugh...turn off the radio, republican cheerleader...

Athan
11-18-2016, 01:14 PM
...ugh...turn off the radio, republican cheerleader...

You realize libertarians and ANY other third party need to deal with the same sh*t right? Do you think they are going to say "nah, don't do it to third party candidates"? Stop being naive.