Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > What will the GOP do if Trump gets nominated?

What will the GOP do if Trump gets nominated? (Page 5)
Thread Tools
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 8, 2016, 09:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
WTF?! No, it doesn't "increase enforcement", it's just more ink (without any clues as to where he's going to get the funding), and that's the main problem.
Sure it does. Again, individual sellers do NOT have to perform a background check nor require that the purchaser obtain one prior to making a firearms sale AT ALL. This is a loophole you can drive a freaking Mack truck through! Making this a requirement most definitely increases enforcement because as it stands now it is solely up to the potential illegal firearms purchaser to essentially self-incriminate to stop the sale in this scenario. Imagine if an individual seller instead had to perform a background check or at least see one performed by a sheriff department before LEGALLY making the sale. Perhaps even submit a copy of it to the government along with documentation of the sale itself. That's a game changer because now they are on the hook for something. Even at these gun shows they would be a lot more inclined to dot all the I's and cross all the T's because they would never know if that guy looking to buy a firearm was an undercover ATF agent.

The bottom line here is that as it stands now there is no requirement whatsoever for an individual firearms seller to VERIFY that a potential purchaser can legally buy a firearm. All the Executive Order does is make this a requirement. So let's say the status quo of no requirement was still in place. What would you suggest as an appropriate enforcement mechanism in this scenario?

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
I never said it eliminates any laws. Geez, your head's like marble.
You see this is a prime example of these weak-ass semantic games you like to play. I never said that YOU SAID it "eliminates" any laws. What you said was ....

CTP: Fine, there's another law, at least until the courts knock it down, and it won't be enforced either.

So "ANOTHER law" is basically a "NEW law" right? To which I replied ....

OAW: Because the Executive Order does NOT add, modify, or eliminate any EXISTING LAW ... quite contrary to your "there's another law" claim. Jeez ... do you even know what an Executive Order is?

So I was refuting your claim that the EO was a "another" or a "new" law when I used the word "add" above. A claim you did in fact make. And then I tossed in "modify" and "eliminate" simply for good measure just to reiterate the point that an EO does NOT change EXISTING LAW in any way, shape, form, or fashion. But you see this is a typical CTP tactic. When you get backed into a corner on one point you latch onto some tangent, twist what was said, and toss in a personal insult in order to deflect attention away from the issue at hand. In this paricular instance, instead of just manning up and acknowledgeding that you were WRONG when you said "there's another law" ... instead you falsely accuse me of QUOTING you when I used the word "eliminate". It's just sorry and tired. And clearly designed to send the discussion off on yet another tangent because that's what you do when direct questions are posed to you that you don't want to address because a credible answer would undermine your position.

And speaking of "yet another tangent", here's a case in point ...

[Cap'n Tightpants]
What past events would they have prevented? If anything, this has propelled even more gun sales, they tripled since the announcement. He must own S&W and Ruger stock. [/QUOTE]



OAW
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 8, 2016, 09:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
WTF?! No, it doesn't "increase enforcement", it's just more ink (without any clues as to where he's going to get the funding), and that's the main problem.
Sure it does. Again, individual sellers do NOT have to perform a background check nor require that the purchaser obtain one prior to making a firearms sale AT ALL. This is a loophole you can drive a freaking Mack truck through! Making this a requirement most definitely increases enforcement because as it stands now it is solely up to the potential illegal firearms purchaser to essentially self-incriminate to stop the sale in this scenario. Imagine if an individual seller instead had to perform a background check or at least see one performed by a sheriff department before LEGALLY making the sale. Perhaps even submit a copy of it to the government along with documentation of the sale itself. That's a game changer because now they are on the hook for something. Even at these gun shows they would be a lot more inclined to dot all the I's and cross all the T's because they would never know if that guy looking to buy a firearm was an undercover ATF agent.

The bottom line here is that as it stands now there is no requirement whatsoever for an individual firearms seller to VERIFY that a potential purchaser can legally buy a firearm. All the Executive Order does is make this a requirement. So let's say the status quo of no requirement was still in place. What would you suggest as an appropriate enforcement mechanism in this scenario?

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
I never said it eliminates any laws. Geez, your head's like marble.
You see this is a prime example of these weak-ass semantic games you like to play. I never said that YOU SAID it "eliminates" any laws. What you said was ....

CTP: Fine, there's another law, at least until the courts knock it down, and it won't be enforced either.

So "ANOTHER law" is basically a "NEW law" right? To which I replied ....

OAW: Because the Executive Order does NOT add, modify, or eliminate any EXISTING LAW ... quite contrary to your "there's another law" claim. Jeez ... do you even know what an Executive Order is?

So I was refuting your claim that the EO was a "another" or a "new" law when I used the word "add" above. A claim you did in fact make. And then I tossed in "modify" and "eliminate" simply for good measure just to reiterate the point that an EO does NOT change EXISTING LAW in any way, shape, form, or fashion. But you see this is a typical CTP tactic. When you get backed into a corner on one point you latch onto some tangent, twist what was said, and toss in a personal insult in order to deflect attention away from the issue at hand. In this paricular instance, instead of just manning up and acknowledgeding that you were WRONG when you said "there's another law" ... instead you falsely accuse me of QUOTING you when I used the word "eliminate". It's just sorry and tired. And clearly designed to send the discussion off on yet another tangent because that's what you do when direct questions are posed to you that you don't want to address because a credible answer would undermine your position.

And speaking of "yet another tangent", here's a case in point ...

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants
What past events would they have prevented? If anything, this has propelled even more gun sales, they tripled since the announcement. He must own S&W and Ruger stock.


OAW
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 8, 2016, 10:00 AM
 
Doctor-Patient confidentially means the doctors don't have to tell schools, employers, or police that the patient is a wack job. Makes the background checks pretty worthless.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 8, 2016, 10:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
You're the idiot.

Background checks are not only constitutional, but they are what assures that your incredibly sacred amendment is not challenged, as if guns were issued legally to legally, registered owners and were even traceable maybe there would be less of these horrific shooting sprees.

The whole question is idiotic to me really, to not mince words. Are you guys okay with registering vehicles? There seems to be far more sophistication to how vehicles are registered and stored in a database than there is guns, which is beyond crazy to me.

I'm sure you won't like this analogy either, but I'm just seeing which of the many sane, valid vantage points you won't turn your nose up at.

Again, I think the main problem is that you guys get waaaaayyyyyy too emotional about this stuff, and conflate background checks with some sort of infringement upon your right to own a gun. Why is registering your car, your home renovation, your personal info needed for a passport, etc. not an infringement that you complain about but registering your gun is something you go apeshit about?

The constitution? Argue for an amendment for banning background checks then, as these are perfectly legal and within the jurisdiction of what our govnement should be doing.
WHAT IN THE HELL ARE YOU RESPONDING TO?????

I went through the worthless background check when I got both my guns. Doctor-Patient confidentially means the doctor doesn't have to tell police, schools, employers etc that the patient is a wack job. So tell me again what you THOUGHT YOU READ? It SURE WASN'T WHAT you quoted. Talk about IDIOTS!
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 8, 2016, 01:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by OAW View Post
Sure it does. blah, blah, blah...
Nope.

You see this is a prime example of these weak-ass semantic games you like to play.
Pot, Kettle called about these weak-ass semantic games you like to play.

BTW, my local gun store ran out of guns and ammo. Seriously, they ran out. Good job, Barry. The owner said he feels like he owes you a sales commission.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 8, 2016, 03:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Thinking Cruz is "unelectable" is a big mistake for the Left. He's far more likeable than they want to admit.
In related news, Jeb!s favor ability is negative, and Cruz' remains reasonable.

I'm not that surprised - Jeb! Is so uninspiring he makes Romney look gregarious.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 8, 2016, 05:03 PM
 
Jeb's a tw*t, not as much of one as Trump, but a tw*t none the less. I'd vote for Cruz over Lewinsky's ex-BF's wife, not sure if I would over Sanders (I don't have my Pros and Cons spreadsheet with me), but maybe, they're both about on the same level, but for wildly different reasons, obviously. Clinton had better hope Rubio doesn't get the nom, otherwise she's done.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 8, 2016, 06:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Jeb's a tw*t, not as much of one as Trump, but a tw*t none the less. I'd vote for Cruz over Lewinsky's ex-BF's wife, not sure if I would over Sanders (I don't have my Pros and Cons spreadsheet with me), but maybe, they're both about on the same level, but for wildly different reasons, obviously. Clinton had better hope Rubio doesn't get the nom, otherwise she's done.
Andrew Breitbart was a Rubio fan.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 8, 2016, 06:02 PM
 
But didn't you hear, Cruz is Canadian! I mean, I heard someone say he was... I hope it's not true, but someone's looking into it... that he's Canadian, I mean. Did you hear?

What a slimeball.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 8, 2016, 06:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by andi*pandi View Post
But didn't you hear, Cruz is Canadian! I mean, I heard someone say he was... I hope it's not true, but someone's looking into it... that he's Canadian, I mean. Did you hear?

What a slimeball.
And McCain is a Panamanian
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 8, 2016, 06:29 PM
 
Hillary is from Uranus.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 8, 2016, 06:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
I'd vote for Cruz over Lewinsky's ex-BF's wife, not sure if I would over Sanders
This is why your liberal leanings get called out from time-to-time. You don't get much more conservative than Cruz.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 9, 2016, 05:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
This is why your liberal leanings get called out from time-to-time. You don't get much more conservative than Cruz.
You don't understand the conservative scale, he's downright moderate compared to the people I see on a daily basis. Everyone seems to think they inhabit the ideological middle ground, that's rarely the case.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 9, 2016, 12:05 PM
 
And just in case you thought the polls I cited earlier about the rampant Islamophobia among Trump supporters being stoked by the Trump campaign was a joke ...

A Muslim woman wearing a hijab was escorted out of Donald Trump's campaign event on Friday by police after she stood up in silent protest during Trump's speech.

Rose Hamid, a 56-year-old flight attendant sitting in the stands directly behind Trump, stood up Friday during Trump's speech when the Republican front-runner suggested that Syrian refugees fleeing war in Syria were affiliated with ISIS.

Trump has previously called for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the U.S.

Despite her silence, Trump supporters around her began chanting Trump's name -- as instructed by Trump campaign staff before the event in case of protests -- and pointed at Hamid and Marty Rosenbluth, the man alongside her who stood up as well.

As they were escorted out, Trump supporters roared -- booing the pair and shouting at them to "get out." One person shouted, "You have a bomb, you have a bomb," according to Hamid.

"The ugliness really came out fast and that's really scary," Hamid told CNN in a phone interview after she was ejected.


Major Steven Thompson of the Rock Hill Police Department told CNN Hamid was kicked out of the event because the campaign told him beforehand that "anybody who made any kind of disturbance" should be escorted out.

The Trump campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment asking why Hamid was escorted out of the venue.

After Hamid and three others, all wearing stars reminiscent of those worn by Jews during the Holocaust, were escorted out by police and Trump campaign officials, Trump commented on the disturbance.

"There is hatred against us that is unbelievable," Trump said. "It's their hatred, it's not our hatred."

Soon after the incident, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a leading Muslim civil liberties group, called on Trump to apologize.

"The image of a Muslim woman being abused and ejected from a political rally sends a chilling message to American Muslims and to all those who value our nation's traditions of religious diversity and civic participation," CAIR National Executive Director Nihad Awad said in a statement. "Donald Trump should issue a public apology to the Muslim woman kicked out of his rally and make a clear statement that American Muslims are welcome as fellow citizens and as participants in the nation's political process."


Before the event, Hamid told CNN that she didn't plan to shout or disrupt the event -- she simply wanted to give Trump supporters a glimpse of what Muslims are like.

"I figured that most Trump supporters probably never met a Muslim so I figured that I'd give them the opportunity to meet one," she said, wearing a shirt that read "Salam, I come in peace." "I really don't plan to say anything. I don't want to be disrespectful but if he says something that I feel needs answering I might -- we'll just see what strikes me."

Hamid joined a group of people -- some friends, others strangers -- who wanted to silently protest Trump's proposals, which are viewed by some as anti-Muslim.
Silently protesting Muslim woman ejected from Trump rally - CNNPolitics.com

OAW
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 9, 2016, 12:16 PM
 
"Islamophobia" is such a made-up bunch of shit. Of course people are scared of Islam, it's the single most destructive manmade force in the world today. Still doesn't excuse Trump's actions, he's becoming America's Hitler. It's a good thing he's more polarizing and worse at public speaking.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 9, 2016, 12:34 PM
 
Brigitte Gabriel reads from the Muslim Brotherhood's plan for North America. The document was part of the "Holyland Foundation" trial in which CAIR was named as in unindicted co-conspirator. CAIR is one of many Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the US, including the the Muslim Student Association.

Full presentation.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 9, 2016, 01:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
"Islamophobia" is such a made-up bunch of shit. Of course people are scared of Islam, it's the single most destructive manmade force in the world today. Still doesn't excuse Trump's actions, he's becoming America's Hitler. It's a good thing he's more polarizing and worse at public speaking.

I think I get where you're coming from now, but your approach is absolutely terrible, and I hope you'll be open to my explaining why.

What is destructive, and what I agree with you on is that it is very easy to use the religion as a foundation for inspiring terror. I personally think that all organized religion is destructive, but I accept the notion that Islam is the worst of the lot in terms of the resulting human actions that have come out in its name.

The approach is terrible because you cannot call out Muslims with a broad brush and expect good results. You can expect inevitable wars and conflicts with a population this large, which serves against our interests to eradicate these horrible, dangerous ideologies.

The better approach is to attack specific beliefs, rather than populations.

I know that you believe that gay marriage should be legal, we share that belief. Since the belief that gays should not marry is often backed by Christianity, many in the past went at this issue by attacking Christianity in a not too dissimilar way to how you are attacking Muslims now. It didn't work, but what did work was chipping away at the specific belief system slowly, and over time this won (including with many Christian populations) and it is now legal and those that believe that it shouldn't be are often viewed as dinosaurs and a relic of the past, especially by younger populations.

This approach takes an extreme amount of focus and patience, and if you're like me you often lack that patience (I lack it with belief systems that background checks with guns should not be a thing that exists and is experimented with). However, it really is the only way to deal with this issue. We can't simply eradicate the entire Muslim population to try to get to the subset of this population with these offensive belief systems. And, I use the word "subset" because obviously common sense would dictate that not literally 100% of the Muslim population is not 100% onboard with the stuff that we are 100% offended by. No mass population is 100% onboard with anything.

I suspect that you agree with everything I've said here, I just think you need a better rhetorical approach.
     
BadKosh
Professional Poster
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Just west of DC.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2016, 02:37 PM
 
Islam is much more than religion. Their behavior worldwide is disgusting. Destruction and turning every place they inhabit into a chaotic craphole isn't s good trait. Reasoning isn't their strong suit either.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2016, 02:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by BadKosh View Post
Islam is much more than religion. Their behavior worldwide is disgusting. Destruction and turning every place they inhabit into a chaotic craphole isn't s good trait. Reasoning isn't their strong suit either.
Islam is a political system masquerading as a religion.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2016, 03:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
You don't understand the conservative scale, he's downright moderate compared to the people I see on a daily basis. Everyone seems to think they inhabit the ideological middle ground, that's rarely the case.
Just because you happen to live in a very conservative area of the country doesn't change where Cruz falls nationally.

Edit: You dodged the point anyway. What 'moderate' stances of his is it you find appealing?
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2016, 05:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Just because you happen to live in a very conservative area of the country doesn't change where Cruz falls nationally.

Edit: You dodged the point anyway. What 'moderate' stances of his is it you find appealing?
He's not ultra conservative compared to just about anywhere in the country, he's what I'd call a moderate Republican. Also, I didn't say they're moderate stances. I like many of his fiscal ideas (and his foreign policy), but despise most of his social. Essentially the reverse of Sanders.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2016, 05:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
He's not ultra conservative compared to just about anywhere in the country, he's what I'd call a moderate Republican. Also, I didn't say they're moderate stances. I like many of his fiscal ideas (and his foreign policy), but despise most of his social. Essentially the reverse of Sanders.
The guy that shut down the government is moderate?
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2016, 06:04 PM
 
Obama? No.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 11, 2016, 09:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Obama? No.
For someone alleged to have such a massive IQ you think (and say) some stupid things.

Ted Cruz looks odd. Like his face is made of plastic and its been ever so slightly dissolved in a weak acid so his features are rounded at the edges and he's quite shiny.
If I'm being brutally honest, he has a kind of child molester vibe about him.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 12, 2016, 01:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
For someone alleged to have such a massive IQ
It's not bad, but "massive"? If it was "massive" I would have made my career in the sciences not the liberal arts and finance.

you think (and say) some stupid things.
Aawwww... You'd be stupid to think he's not the most divisive US President in living memory. He's an imperious d-bag, and liar (butchering our civil liberties like few before him), who's tried to run this country like a monarchy. He's set very dangerous precedent, unbalanced power in DC, made the gov't even less transparent, and driven a deeper wedge between classes and races in this country, while spending us to >$18T in debt (that we'll never recover from). If Dubya's presidency was a disaster (it was), this one has been a waking nightmare.

Ted Cruz looks odd. Like his face is made of plastic and its been ever so slightly dissolved in a weak acid so his features are rounded at the edges and he's quite shiny.
If I'm being brutally honest, he has a kind of child molester vibe about him.
Says the guy whose PM is a pig ****er.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 12, 2016, 05:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
It's not bad, but "massive"? If it was "massive" I would have made my career in the sciences not the liberal arts and finance.
I seem to recall you claiming it was top 1% or better.
Theres not that much money in being a scientist as a rule.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Aawwww... You'd be stupid to think he's not the most divisive US President in living memory. He's an imperious d-bag, and liar (butchering our civil liberties like few before him), who's tried to run this country like a monarchy. He's set very dangerous precedent, unbalanced power in DC, made the gov't even less transparent, and driven a deeper wedge between classes and races in this country, while spending us to >$18T in debt (that we'll never recover from). If Dubya's presidency was a disaster (it was), this one has been a waking nightmare.
He's divisive alright, but not because he's an asshole. Its because nearly half your population and more than half the senate are assholes.



Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Says the guy whose PM is a pig ****er.
Its not like Cruz can really help the way he looks. No such excuses for how he acts of course.

To be fair we didn't know about the pig until long after we elected him.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 12, 2016, 11:05 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
He's not ultra conservative compared to just about anywhere in the country, he's what I'd call a moderate Republican. Also, I didn't say they're moderate stances. I like many of his fiscal ideas (and his foreign policy), but despise most of his social. Essentially the reverse of Sanders.
There's some fantastic mental gymnastics going on here. He's a moderate conservative but his stances aren't moderate.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 12, 2016, 11:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
There's some fantastic mental gymnastics going on here. He's a moderate conservative but his stances aren't moderate.
Talk about mental gymnastics? Didn't you ask "What 'moderate' stances of his is it you find appealing?" It isn't his moderate stances that I find appealing, I like his more hardcore Right-wing stances WRT the economy and foreign policy. His more moderate ideas about immigration and national defense I don't agree with (I'm pretty far Left on both).

I think what confused you is the language I used, calling him a moderate Republican.

The scale I commonly use:

Conservative Repub - Moderate Repub - Liberal Repub - Centrist - Conservative Dem - Moderate Dem - Liberal Dem

There's bleed-over, and some issues are tricky to nail-down on the political spectrum, like Sanders strong support of gun ownership.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 12, 2016, 11:56 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
I seem to recall you claiming it was top 1% or better.
Theres not that much money in being a scientist as a rule.
I can't recall ever saying that, and money isn't everything.

He's divisive alright, but not because he's an asshole. Its because nearly half your population and more than half the senate are assholes.
Yes, he's an asshole, and he tries to run the country like his personal monarchy. In fact, he acts like more of a monarch than countries that have real monarchs.

Its not like Cruz can really help the way he looks. No such excuses for how he acts of course.

To be fair we didn't know about the pig until long after we elected him.
I just find it interesting that the most, supposedly, inclusive of people are the ones who are bashing Cruz for his looks. Have you actually seen Sanders? He's perfectly nailed the "creepy grandpa" vibe.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 13, 2016, 07:51 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
Yes, he's an asshole, and he tries to run the country like his personal monarchy. In fact, he acts like more of a monarch than countries that have real monarchs.
Like many on your side of the political spectrum you seem to struggle with cause and effect when it comes to Obama. The Republicans have gone out of their way at every fraction of an opportunity to stop him from doing anything. Even things they probably agree with, just to try to make him look bad. If he gives in, he's weak or ineffective; If he overrules them he's a tyrant; Its a good tactic from a strictly party political perspective, but when you factor in they are ****ing up a country and screwing with the lives and well being of hundreds of millions (not to mention the knock-on to global economics), its grossly irresponsible and if Republican voters weren't predominantly either imbeciles or scumbags or both, they wouldn't forgive the party for the way they have behaved since Obama took office. As it is it seems possible or even probable that if they keep fielding asshats like Trump and Cruz is the best they can do, they'll die out anyway when the next generation of Americans who are more interested in connecting with diverse peoples from all over instead of segregating themselves amongst the like-(or lack) minded refuse to vote for hate mongers and bigots any more.



Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
I just find it interesting that the most, supposedly, inclusive of people are the ones who are bashing Cruz for his looks. Have you actually seen Sanders? He's perfectly nailed the "creepy grandpa" vibe.
I never meant the comment to be more than a side note. I think you'll find that most old men are creepy in the cold light of day. Age will do that to us all sooner or later.
I think Cruz always looks uncomfortable. I can't tell whether its just "resting uncomfortable face", things aren't going as well as he'd like, or his shirt and tie are just too tight round his neck.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 13, 2016, 03:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Like many on your side of the political spectrum you seem to struggle with cause and effect when it comes to Obama. The Republicans have gone out of their way at every fraction of an opportunity to stop him from doing anything.
I hate to break it to you, but this has been the case with both parties since the beginning. Other presidents have found a way to communicate and compromise to get things done, Obama doesn't. He's a spoiled child; he kicks his heels, cries about racism and the meanies across the aisle, then writes orders that undermine congressional power. That's his MO. American gov't needs a leader, not a ruler.

I never meant the comment to be more than a side note. I think you'll find that most old men are creepy in the cold light of day. Age will do that to us all sooner or later.
I think Cruz always looks uncomfortable. I can't tell whether its just "resting uncomfortable face", things aren't going as well as he'd like, or his shirt and tie are just too tight round his neck.
I get it, but it doesn't compare with Hillary's "resting bitch face". You know it has to give Bill nightmares.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 22, 2016, 09:41 AM
 
Not the GOP but the national review just released an anti-trump issue. I definitely see this raising his numbers.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 22, 2016, 09:56 AM
 
Oh yeah the GOP kicked the NR out of whatever debate they were cohos ting. Fair, but still lolworthy that they're siding with Trump.
     
OAW
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 22, 2016, 05:53 PM
 
As I said before, Trump ... who has no history of conservatism ... has skillfully elbowed his way to GOP frontrunner status by brazenly appealing to ... as in not dog whistling ... the racist and xenophobic sentiments within segments of the GOP base.



Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on Friday retweeted what appears to be a neo-Nazi Twitter account that posted a photoshopped picture mocking rival Jeb Bush.

The tweet by user “@WhiteGenocideTM” featured an image of Bush dressed as a panhandler outside Trump Tower with a “Vote Trump” sign.

WhiteGenocideTM’s profile picture is an image of George Lincoln Rockwell, the infamous founder of the American Nazi Party, with the caption “The Man Who Wants To Be Hitler.” His listed location is “Jewmerica.”

An additional banner image on his profile reads: “GET THE F— OUT OF MY COUNTRY.” Recent tweets and retweets from the account include anti-Semitic imagery, quotes from Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels and tweets deriding Martin Luther King Jr. The profile also listed a link to a website promoting a biographical documentary of Adolf Hitler, including a section that casts doubt on whether the Holocaust actually occurred.

Trump, whose Twitter account is a central piece of his messaging operation, with more than 5 million followers, has passed on tweets from users who espouse white supremacist and openly racist causes in the past. Most infamously, he retweeted phony crime statistics in November that falsely claimed black Americans committed 81% of murders against white victims — in fact, 82% of white murder victims were killed by white attackers in 2014, according to FBI data.

Trump never deleted the crime statistics tweet and defended his decision to spread the racially inflammatory hoax online.
He did, however, issue an apology in October after retweeting a user who mocked Iowans for eating too much corn, which Trump said was the fault of an intern.

Bush’s spokesman reacted on Twitter. “The Godwin’s Double: Trump’s anti-Jeb retweets now include one from a Nazi’s account and another calling Jeb a Nazi,” he wrote.

A spokesperson for Trump did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.
Do trust and believe there is a method to the madness here.

Donald Trump tweets apparent neo-Nazi supporter | MSNBC

OAW
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 22, 2016, 10:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
I hate to break it to you, but this has been the case with both parties since the beginning. Other presidents have found a way to communicate and compromise to get things done, Obama doesn't. He's a spoiled child; he kicks his heels, cries about racism and the meanies across the aisle, then writes orders that undermine congressional power. That's his MO.
Parties have always traditionally blamed each other for everything that goes wrong. Now and then they take an opportunity to make each other look bad. The Republicans defaulted on America's loan repayment causing your credit rating to be downgraded for the first time in history, despite Obama presenting them with numerous compromise offers. That is not an accurate description of a cry baby crying racism and throwing his toys out of the pram. That is an entire party throwing their toys out of the pram and the people who elected them under the bus because the black man democrat was making them look bad by cleaning up their mess too quickly.


Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
American gov't needs a leader, not a ruler.
If you think Obama is more of an egomaniac than Trump, you are completely insane.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2016, 12:08 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Parties have always traditionally blamed each other for everything that goes wrong. Now and then they take an opportunity to make each other look bad. The Republicans defaulted on America's loan repayment causing your credit rating to be downgraded for the first time in history, despite Obama presenting them with numerous compromise offers. That is not an accurate description of a cry baby crying racism and throwing his toys out of the pram. That is an entire party throwing their toys out of the pram and the people who elected them under the bus because the black man democrat was making them look bad by cleaning up their mess too quickly.
Complete horseshit. If you aren't even going to bother with any facts at all, there's no reason to talk with you.

If you think Obama is more of an egomaniac than Trump, you are completely insane.
Where did I say that? They're both absurdly egotistical.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 23, 2016, 09:10 PM
 
Maybe Obama and Trump are both egomaniacs. Here is the difference though:
Obama is looking to boost his ego by leaving a legacy of work he can be proud of. Improving healthcare, fixing the economy etc. Doing good.
Trump will line his own pockets, then those of his friends then he'll save himself a million bucks a year not having to pay his own security bills any more courtesy of a Secret Service detail.
Has anyone checked the company registry for a Trump Giant Wall Builders Inc?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2016, 04:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Maybe Obama and Trump are both egomaniacs. Here is the difference though:
Obama is looking to boost his ego by leaving a legacy of work he can be proud of. Improving healthcare, fixing the economy etc. Doing good.
His inflated ego predated the White House, getting that much power made it much worse. "Doing good"? He's damaged the office, unbalanced power in DC, and sunk us an additional $11T in debt. For what? 5% more of the country on the insurance rolls?

Trump will line his own pockets, then those of his friends then he'll save himself a million bucks a year not having to pay his own security bills any more courtesy of a Secret Service detail.
Has anyone checked the company registry for a Trump Giant Wall Builders Inc?
His pockets are already well-lined. Electing him would be a nightmare, make no mistake, but he isn't running to get more money.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2016, 06:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
His pockets are already well-lined. Electing him would be a nightmare, make no mistake, but he isn't running to get more money.

People like Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Steve Jobs and even Zuckerberg know that once you have a certain amount of money, you don't need any more. Thats because they have a certain amount of class.

People who plaster their names in huge writing all over their expensive penis-extensions and order everything they can in gold, don't know the meaning of the word "enough". Trump has no class. He's the guy who orders the £50k Scotch to impress someone, then tops it up with coke.

The question is, can Trump or Cruz beat Clinton? I suspect Bernie is a little too left wing too soon, they might be able to beat him. I really hope that neither Trump nor Cruz stands a real chance of winning the White House. This is something that definitely cannot be judged from this far away though. What say you?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 24, 2016, 06:20 PM
 
I don't think any of us can really account for the size of the crazy Republican population that would support one of them vs. the saner population that would be more inclined to support another Republican candidate.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 25, 2016, 01:20 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
People like Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Steve Jobs and even Zuckerberg know that once you have a certain amount of money, you don't need any more. Thats because they have a certain amount of class.

People who plaster their names in huge writing all over their expensive penis-extensions and order everything they can in gold, don't know the meaning of the word "enough". Trump has no class. He's the guy who orders the £50k Scotch to impress someone, then tops it up with coke.

The question is, can Trump or Cruz beat Clinton? I suspect Bernie is a little too left wing too soon, they might be able to beat him. I really hope that neither Trump nor Cruz stands a real chance of winning the White House. This is something that definitely cannot be judged from this far away though. What say you?
You're right, he has no class, he's one of the worst sorts of people, but he's learned what all wealthy people learn; money only gets you so far, if you want real power and influence, you have to run for office.
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 25, 2016, 01:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants View Post
You're right, he has no class, he's one of the worst sorts of people, but he's learned what all wealthy people learn; money only gets you so far, if you want real power and influence, you have to run for office.

Or just hire lobbyists. I think he's in it for the fun and to satisfy his ego.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 25, 2016, 04:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
The question is, can Trump or Cruz beat Clinton? I suspect Bernie is a little too left wing too soon, they might be able to beat him. I really hope that neither Trump nor Cruz stands a real chance of winning the White House. This is something that definitely cannot be judged from this far away though. What say you?
Cruz can't. He's a fairly traditional Republican but with no allies inside the party, far out on the right wing and the EC is against him - we discussed this in the Cruz thread early on. Trump is much more of an unknown. He will pick up votes in previously secure blue states, but lose moderates in the traditional battlegrounds. I don't think he can win, but it is extremely hard to predict.

I think that the bigger problem for the GOP with one of them is that they will lose other races as moderate republicans stay at home, while any right wing conservatives that come out for Cruz will do so in safe districts, and any independents that might decide to go with Trump won't vote Republican otherwise. Remember, the GOP had their best Senate results in recent memory in 2010, and those seats are up for reelection now.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Cap'n Tightpants
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Shaddim's sock drawer
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 25, 2016, 05:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Or just hire lobbyists. I think he's in it for the fun and to satisfy his ego.
There are far more lobbyists and wealthy people than there are gov't officials to go around, hence you're always going to run into others with conflicting interests with equally deep pockets. The only way you can truly guarantee what you want is by becoming "the Man" (or Woman, ATCMB). Example: Bloomberg in NYC (whom I believe is the example Trump looked at in the first place). No one does a damned thing in NYC now without Bloomberg's direct permission, the city is his toy and he has the power as well as the finances to fully impose his will (and he does).
"I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a
nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin,
but by the content of their character." - M.L.King Jr
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2016, 09:52 AM
 
We've spoken a bit about Nate Silver and his failure to explain why Trump isn't going away. He is making another stab at this, which includes the following theory - originally from a NYT piece:

Of course, this willingness to accommodate Mr. Trump is driven in part by the fact that few among the Republican professional class believe he would win a general election. In their minds, it would be better to effectively rent the party to Mr. Trump for four months this fall, through the general election, than risk turning it over to Mr. Cruz for at least four years, as either the president or the next-in-line leader for the 2020 nomination.
This seems a bit conspiratorial. Basically party elites think that Cruz is even worse for the party, so they want to embrace Trump for now, expecting him to lose, and then work with Clinton for four years while they prepare for a rematch in 2020. Is anyone buying this? It seems far fetched, but for whatever reason, GOP leaders seem more afraid of Cruz than of Trump.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2016, 12:16 PM
 
Its fun because the theories are endless. But I think a Trump victory is less damaging to those in power than Cruz because Trump is an outlier while Cruz is an ideologue.

Alternatively, this could be a rare case of choosing the demon you don't know over the devil you do know.

I've also seen theories that Trump will need their help once he goes into office because he's in over his head, whilst Cruz will definitely ignore them.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2016, 12:20 PM
 
Jerry Fallwell, Jr. Has endorsed Trump. If you've been doubting Trump, getting evangelical endorsements seems like his final hurdle to the nomination.

Sam Wang was tweeted a stat that all candidates to go over 40% polling in Iowa so nice 1980 have won the state. If Trump locks up Iowa and NH I have to think the nom is his. I can't believe this is really happening.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2016, 03:37 PM
 
Would a half decent independent be able to leach votes away from Trump in the election?

Maybe Hillary/dems should bankroll someone? Vote Schwarzenegger!
( Last edited by Waragainstsleep; Jan 27, 2016 at 05:09 AM. )
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2016, 03:46 PM
 
Bloomberg is making noise he will do that, if it's Bernie vs the Donald.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jan 26, 2016, 04:02 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
Would a half decent independent be able to leach votes away from Trump in the election? Maybe Hillary should bankroll someone?
If you think Trump is crazy, all you do is split the sane vote.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:32 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,