Trump just handed Hillary the Presidency

[wizardwatson]

YOu think he is a naive simpleton? Is being an alpha male about being the best fighter? Are you an alpha male, and able to define what an alpha male is?

Are humans packs of dogs?

Wait, don't answer that.

[Brian4Liberty]

YOu think he is a naive simpleton? Is being an alpha male about being the best fighter? Are you an alpha male, and able to define what an alpha male is?

Are all juveniles "naive simpletons"? I didn't say he was stupid. Maybe you can tell us all what an "alpha male" is since you are the expert? Is it someone who insults people all the time? Is it someone who is so insecure he has to keep talking about how great he is all day? Is it someone who is easily distracted and suckered by opposition set-ups that he can't stop talking about them?

He's a used car salesman, a huckster. A guy who thinks the person with the best personal put-downs of others is somehow more qualified at something other than being a dick.

[Zippyjuan]

I see him as an insecure little boy who is used to getting his way or else he will throw a tantrum.

[UWDude]

Are all juveniles "naive simpletons"? I didn't say he was stupid. Maybe you can tell us all what an "alpha male" is since you are the expert? Is it someone who insults people all the time?

Absolutely. Every single time trump has insulted somebody, back up the tape... ..and see who did the insulting first. Never take $#@! form nobody.

Is it someone who is so insecure he has to keep talking about how great he is all day?

But he is. He is the real deal. he is a winner, and he gets things done. He does the impossible. For example, he actually hijacked the GOP with like $450,000, while Jeb shelled out $200M alone. You say he is saying it from insecurity. Nope. He says it, because it is true.

Is it someone who is easily distracted and suckered by opposition set-ups that he can't stop talking about them?

Aww, a weighted question. Chill.

He's a used car salesman, a huckster. A guy who thinks the person with the best personal put-downs of others is somehow more qualified at something other than being a dick.

Rand Paul insulted him first. And Honestly, him saying there is plenty he could insult Rand Paul about was pretty nice. It was a check. You don't let people score hits on you by putting you down. You get them back, hopefully with a dash of jest.

I know many of you have felt my wrath. I rarely insult, (except Zippy cuz I hate him), unless someone says I am whining or some garbage like that. But you don't let somebody insult you to raise their status in a debate or performance.

And he is not a used car sales man. He is a real estate mogul that started with $1 M and a college degree from a military academy.

Now, what is an alpha male?

An alpha male commands respect with his presence. He is a social genius. Women love him because he is genuine, and fun. He isn't trying to sell anything. He is trying to give to everything around him.

I am not having this conversation to convince you trump is God, (although I am starting to wonder),I am just trying to get you guys to analyze your hate, so you can see how illogical it actually is. Because what I am reading is usually just either shock, or envy.

[UWDude]

I see him as an insecure little boy who is used to getting his way or else he will throw a tantrum.

You're voting for Hillary. Your judgment of character sucks anyway.

[osan]

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinto...waco-massacre/

Why stop at snopes?

Lets see your wikipedia cites. May as well throw in revleft too, while you're at it. In for a penny...

[jmdrake]

I guess you forgot about the Ron Paul newsletters. They were used against Ron in both campaigns.

And to what effect? None really. They didn't cause Ron a drop in the polls. Ron lost because the main thing he was known for, being against the war in Iraq, was an anathema to most republican voters. Remember in 2008 that 70% of GOP voters believed with Sarah Palin the ridiculous conspiracy theory that Saddam Hussein was involved in 911. That number had dropped off somewhat by 2012 but by that point idiot Republicans had firmly identified Ron Paul as "liberal" because he was against the war. Some Republicans are so stupid that they haven't figured out yet irony of voting for Trump, who claims (somewhat falsely) to have always been against the Iraq war. Hell, I heard one moronic talk show host who supports Trump still ranting against the Dixie Chicks and saying "They wouldn't be welcome at a Trump rally" when they got in trouble for taking the position that Trump only pretends to take now that it's popular. (The Iraq war was a mistake and George W. Bush is an embarrassment.) Really, I never met a single Republican who said "Gee....I like Ron Paul despite his position on the Iraq war.....but those newsletters make him look racist so I can't vote for him." In fact by 2012 the black democrats that I knew that were bothered by the newsletters got over it.

Again, think through your analysis. It doesn't matter whether or not something gets used. It only matters if it has an effect. Bringing up the newsletters against Paul had no appreciable effect. Bringing up Clinton's womanizing at this point has no measurable effect. If Aquabuddha or the Civil Rights Act was brought up against Rand at this point it would have no measurable effect. Don't you think his democratic opponent in Kentucky right now would be using either issue if it had the possibility of helping him win?

[jmdrake]

I appreciate your support of Rand, and truly wish he was still running. But my larger point had nothing to do with Rand. My point is about a mainstream media that is fully in the tank for Hillary. A media that will lie, cheat, smear, manipulate, black-out, cover-up and do anything they need to push their favored candidates, in this case, Hillary.

Oh sure the MSM is supporting Hillary. But it wouldn't matter if Trump was a halfway decent candidate. Hell, I'm not the one saying it. This week I have heard conservative talk show host after conservative talk show host say "Please vote for Trump. But I don't know why Trump keeps shooting himself in the foot." Even LibertyEagle has on this forum stated that Trump is not a good debater. Well....what the hell happened? He went through like a dozen GOP debates and continuously rose in the polls. Of course that was a different audience and all he had to say was "We're being invaded by Mexico and there are rapists and murders among the invaders so build a wall and make Mexico pay for it." But still, I heard over and over again that Trump was the one to take the fight to Hillary. Well he's 1-1-1, 1 loss (bad), 1 win, 1 draw.

If a republican candidate has to wait on the media to be "fair" in order to win then why the hell are we even involved in politics at all?

As I said, Johnson was effectively eliminated with two simple gotcha questions. Howard Dean was taken out with a simple "yeeeehaaa" clip. My point is about the media and standard election and campaign tricks.

In my book Gary Johnson was eliminated by saying a Jewish baker should have to bake a Nazi cake because....religious freedom. The Alepo question gave Gary Johnson some much needed publicity. Seriously in most years the libertarian candidate doesn't even get mentioned.

[jmdrake]

Snopes

, seriously someone is quoting that left wing site here?

Yeah snopes sucks. Hillary sucks. But that video you posted isn't about Hillary. Why make up stuff to go after Hillary when you have obvious stuff like the fact that she is trying for World War 3 with Russia?

[Brian4Liberty]

But he is. He is the real deal. he is a winner, and he gets things done. He does the impossible. For example, he actually hijacked the GOP with like $450,000, while Jeb shelled out $200M alone. You say he is saying it from insecurity. Nope. He says it, because it is true.

A victory aided by the media, as confirmed by leaked emails.

Rand Paul insulted him first. And Honestly, him saying there is plenty he could insult Rand Paul about was pretty nice. It was a check. You don't let people score hits on you by putting you down. You get them back, hopefully with a dash of jest.

Trump did hit Rand with an underhanded insult. Sure Rand made a mistake by coming out too eagerly with a couple of interruptions at the first debate, but If you love Trump for that, you should be happy that Rand gave it a try. Tim Kaine did it a lot at his one and only debate, and no one liked it.

Now, what is an alpha male?

An alpha male commands respect with his presence. He is a social genius. Women love him because he is genuine, and fun. He isn't trying to sell anything. He is trying to give to everything around him.

I am not having this conversation to convince you trump is God, (although I am starting to wonder),I am just trying to get you guys to analyze your hate, so you can see how illogical it actually is. Because what I am reading is usually just either shock, or envy.

Now you have gone completely off the rails. If your believe all that, then Trump has a bridge to sell you.

The vast majority of people see this as a lesser of evils election, not Satan vs. Jesus. Anyone who has thinks Hillary or Trump are their saviors are in for a rude awakening.

[jmdrake]

So, what black celebrities do you know of that were/are friends of trump? Jesse jackson? Mohammad Ali? Rosa Parks? Yup. trump was doing black charities in the 80's. Look it up. He's hired blacks, latinos, women.... $#@!, he has a record of being decidedly none of the things he is accused of. He also has, as I said, 9 years of a reality show, where he treats people on their performance, not gender or race.

Some of my best friends are.....nevermind. Yes I know that Don King calls Trump "My Nigga". And George W. Bush invited Easy-E to the Whitehouse. You're point? Rand Paul has bona fides at this point for actually proposing joint legislation with one of the most popular black politicians in the country. He could do more than just say "Hillary hasn't done anything but talk."

[goldwater's ghost]

I think Rand would have had to deal with the same BS Trump is dealing with. If Trump can't win so will Rand.

Rand would also need to go as far as Trump to win. That means taking out Clinton dirty laundry and attacking rigging of elections.

He would also not be palatable to Never Trumpers.

You would end up fighting the exact same battle. If Trump wins then Rand just lost at primary stage. If Trump loses it would be for all the reasons why Rand would have lost.

Rand would have won. There are probably thirteen GOP candidates who would have won. The only other one that might have lost is Carson if he continued his incoherence for the general election. Rand would have won, Cruz would have won, Jeb would have won, Rubio would have won, Carly would have won, the New Jersey Blob would have won, the one guy who polled one percent and never got in to a debate would have probably won. Only Republicans could have chosen the one choice out of fifteen that was guaranteed to lose

[jmdrake]

Rand would have won. There are probably thirteen GOP candidates who would have won. The only other one that might have lost is Carson if he continued his incoherence for the general election. Rand would have won, Cruz would have won, Jeb would have won, Rubio would have won, Carly would have won, the New Jersey Blob would have won, the one guy who polled one percent and never got in to a debate would have probably won. Only Republicans could have chosen the one choice out of fifteen that was guaranteed to lose

Exactly! And they've done this three presidential elections in a row. Ron could have beat Obama both times. Rand could have beat Hillary. Good grief what is with people and the ridiculous belief that popularity in the GOP 15 candidate free for all translates to popularity nationwide? The whole time Trump was rising in the GOP polls he was sinking in the national polls.

[silverhandorder]

Rand would have won. There are probably thirteen GOP candidates who would have won. The only other one that might have lost is Carson if he continued his incoherence for the general election. Rand would have won, Cruz would have won, Jeb would have won, Rubio would have won, Carly would have won, the New Jersey Blob would have won, the one guy who polled one percent and never got in to a debate would have probably won. Only Republicans could have chosen the one choice out of fifteen that was guaranteed to lose

You are deluded. The other 16 would have went down like Romney and McCain.

[Zippyjuan]

You're voting for Hillary. Your judgment of character sucks anyway.

I am voting for neither of them. So is Ron Paul.

[mikey]

So, what black celebrities do you know of that were/are friends of trump? Jesse jackson? Mohammad Ali? Rosa Parks? Yup. trump was doing black charities in the 80's. Look it up. He's hired blacks, latinos, women.... $#@!, he has a record of being decidedly none of the things he is accused of. He also has, as I said, 9 years of a reality show, where he treats people on their performance, not gender or race.

[UWDude]

Rand would have won. There are probably thirteen GOP candidates who would have won. The only other one that might have lost is Carson if he continued his incoherence for the general election. Rand would have won, Cruz would have won, Jeb would have won, Rubio would have won, Carly would have won, the New Jersey Blob would have won, the one guy who polled one percent and never got in to a debate would have probably won. Only Republicans could have chosen the one choice out of fifteen that was guaranteed to lose

The press would not let anyone get in the way of crowning their new queen. rand would have had a "rape charge" from college pop up, or some distant friend would step forward and say all he did was say "the n word" for two years. These people fight dirty. And again, Trump has exposed that. the only one that had a chance against Hillary was Jeb, because the press would be nice to jeb. But he would still lose.

Rand would not have beaten the chosen one. He certainly would not have exposed the entire system for what it is. 6 months ago, a vast majority of Americans still thought we had a free and fair press, maybe with a little bias. they did not think it was clearly a homogenous propaganda machine. The know now. And they are even ignoring the media's feeble attempts with the "groping" accusations.

I am voting for neither of them. So is Ron Paul.

Don't believe you.

one of the most popular black politicians in the country

Who?

[Superfluous Man]

If Trump talked the way he talks now six months ago, there would be some other Republican at the top of the ticket. He’d lose, too – but at least we wouldn’t have been Charlie Brown’d again.

I highly doubt it. Hillary is a terrible candidate. Almost any Republican could beat her. Donald is the only one who never stood much of a chance.

[goldwater's ghost]

You are deluded. The other 16 would have went down like Romney and McCain.

read wikileaks. hillary herself was terrified of rand. she felt he would have been the most difficult opponent. they didnt want rand or the establishment candidates. the three they wanted were the "pied pipers" trump, cruz and carson because they felt that they only appealed to a limited segment of the population whereas all the others appealed to a much broader base. why do you think NBC kept the hollywood access tapes until the general election and didnt drop them in the primary? why do you think the mainstream media treated trump like an crazy uncle in the primaries and then waited until the general to compare him to hitler? they wanted trump and the gop gave them trump.

[goldwater's ghost]

The press would not let anyone get in the way of crowning their new queen. rand would have had a "rape charge" from college pop up, or some distant friend would step forward and say all he did was say "the n word" for two years. These people fight dirty. And again, Trump has exposed that. the only one that had a chance against Hillary was Jeb, because the press would be nice to jeb. But he would still lose.

Rand would not have beaten the chosen one. He certainly would not have exposed the entire system for what it is. 6 months ago, a vast majority of Americans still thought we had a free and fair press, maybe with a little bias. they did not think it was clearly a homogenous propaganda machine. The know now. And they are even ignoring the media's feeble attempts with the "groping" accusations.
Don't believe you.



Who?

dont confuse trump with assange. all of this media bias was known to ron paul supporters for ages and the public got a good inside look because of wikileaks not trump. rand wouldve destroyed hillary. there is nothing in his past that would compare with trump, jeb wouldve destroyed hillary although i would have to vomit if we had him for the next four to eight years

[Occam's Banana]

Only Republicans could have chosen the one choice out of fifteen that was guaranteed to lose

Exactly! And they've done this three presidential elections in a row.

They've done it the last five times, actually: Dole, Bush II, McCain, Romney and (now) Trump.

But Bush II accidentally won by a hair (if even that much).

Maybe they were counting on that "humble foreign policy" stuff to be a big flop.

(If so, it was a mistake from which they easily recovered - with a little help from 9/11 ...)

[Origanalist]

that is because you still don't understand him.

You know, trump told his supporters, when he first started, and the media was saying he had no chance, he said, "we're gonna win, we're gonna win more than anybody has ever won, we are gonna win so hard your face is going to hurt from smiling from winning so much, and then you are going to ask me to stop winning, because we are winning so much it is starting to hurt, and I'll say no, we aren't done winning"

If he had failed to clinch the republican nomination, then, sure... ...he sucks.

But he delivered, didn't he?

Trump is not in this for the Clintons, by the way. He does nothing for anybody but himself. He thinks he can be the best president ever. He might be right. I am not doubting him at this moment. I am very impressed with the way he handled the media. it is simply unbelievable to me.

This has got to be trolling.

[John F Kennedy III]

Snopes has no credibility when it comes to politics. Snopes is run by a naive birkenstock wearign hippies who don't have a clue how much corruption, murder and cover ups there can be in a government. I am quite sure Snopes says JFK was assassinated by Lee harvery Oswald, and everything else is false, although there is really no way to know.

Piss off with snopes.



You are delusional. In no time, in history, did a president ever threaten to have the other jailed.

So you watched one minute out of 270 minutes of debate. Good for you.

[John F Kennedy III]

The likelihood of a Clinton ever being indicted let alone booked,tried or jailed is damn near nill.

This kind of BS is salesmanship intended to inspire the dim-witted and maybe garner headlines.

She deserves to be disemboweled on the public square right along side the countless DA's and USA's who abuse their positions but in today's political/social climate it'll never happen.

There was zero chance ever of Hillary facing charges under a Trump presidency. Obama will just give her a full pardon on his way out.

[Danke]

dont confuse trump with assange. all of this media bias was known to ron paul supporters for ages and the public got a good inside look because of wikileaks not trump. rand wouldve destroyed hillary. there is nothing in his past that would compare with trump, jeb wouldve destroyed hillary although i would have to vomit if we had him for the next four to eight years

Trump has actually "destroyed" Hillary. But the public does not understand the background of his attacks and the press does not follow through and report on that background. They do just the opposite, if mentioned at all, it is to "debunk" conspiracy, etc. Those damn Russians!

[UWDude]

There was zero chance ever of Hillary facing charges under a Trump presidency. Obama will just give her a full pardon on his way out.

He can't, she hasn't been convicted yet. A president can grant pardons, but it can't grant immunity.

[TheCount]

He can't, she hasn't been convicted yet. A president can grant pardons, but it can't grant immunity.

Nope.

The Constitution provides that the President 'shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offences against the United States, except in cases of impeachment.'

The power thus conferred is unlimited, with the exception stated. It extends to every offence known to the law, and may be exercised at any time after its commission, either before legal proceedings are taken, or during their pendency, or after conviction and judgment.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/71/333.html


See also: Nixon, Richard

[John F Kennedy III]

He can't, she hasn't been convicted yet. A president can grant pardons, but it can't grant immunity.

Interesting. To that I'd say 1. Obama never even proven he was eligible to be president. 2. If Hillary was an average citizen she'd be doing life in prison for even 10% of what we know she has done. These aren't people that play by the rules.

[Danke]

After her blanket pardon, just extradite her to The Hague for her war crimes.

[UWDude]

Nope.



http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/71/333.html


See also: Nixon, Richard

If he dares to grant immunity for the at least 30 or 40 possible corruption and murder charges, there will still be more.