moonbattery logo

Jul 13 2016

Number 1 Reason I Cannot Support Donald Trump, Hillary or No Hillary

It looks like a word of explanation is necessary regarding posts critical of Donald Trump.

His supporters are of the opinion that every other degenerate left-wing authoritarian is fair game for exposure, but not the Donald, who must have our unalloyed support. Space does not permit me to list the reasons that I would never support Trump under any circumstances, so I will just give one. If it does not suffice, nothing will.

In the March 3 primary debate in Detroit, Bret Baier asked Trump how he would get agents of the US government to obey illegal orders to torture alleged terrorists and murder their family members, needless to say without due process, in accordance with his repeated campaign promises. Trump responded, “They won’t refuse. They’re not gonna refuse me. … If I say do it, they’re gonna do it.”

Like hell. We’re Americans, not Nazis. At least, I hope we still are.

This theme continues to recur. Just last week, Trump praised the brutal tactics of genocidal dictator Saddam Hussein. Previously he had said it “would have been a wonderful thing” if George W. Bush had been impeached for removing Saddam from power.

To judge from his long public history, Trump is a left-of-Hillary Democrat by inclination, despite his recent Michael Bloomberg–style conversion of convenience to the Republican Party. But he is running as a fascist. If you vote for a dictator, you deserve one — and it won’t be long before you get one.

We are endlessly clubbed with the jejune argument that if you do not support Trump, you are supporting Hillary. This is like being told that if you don’t want it in the belly, you must want it in the head. It is not an argument that Trump supporters are wise to keep pushing.

Hillary Clinton is corrupt, incompetent, and ideologically malevolent — as I had been documenting for years back while Trump was still praising her, announcing that she would make a “great president,” and shoveling large amounts of money at her Senate and presidential campaigns. After his nomination gets her elected, she will be a terrible president — just like Obama (who Trump said Americans are too racist to appreciate), except venal and shrill.

But Hillary is not explicitly running on a campaign of torture, murder, and rule by unlawful decree. Voting for her does not mean overtly endorsing and accepting the horrors of dictatorship.

Also, she would leave the Republican Party intact as a means of resistance against progressive authoritarianism, rather than subverting and/or destroying it from within.

If someone put a gun to my head and demanded I vote for one or the other, the decision would not be between Hillary and Trump; it would be between Hillary and the bullet.

Clarification:

By “torture,” I am not referring to waterboarding. Trump has repeatedly made it clear that he intends to inflict, in his words, “a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding.”



  • Tom

    Oh, those beloved principles….tossed aside to vote for McCain, and Romney, but now that we as a nation are facing the decline and destruction of America…all of a sudden it’s all about your “principles” and your fellow-citizens be damned.

    Forgive me for saying that you are looking more and more like a Pro-Hillary shill….you are rightfully disgusted by what Hillary has done bit you would pull that lever for her in a heartbeat if it meant that that mean old Trump – who said such AWFUL things about Lyin’ Ted Cruz – loses. Trump insulted Cruz, therefore he must lose…Who gives a shit about all you (insert arrogant anti-Trump BS here) morons, anyway?

    You’re putting your oh-so-conveniently-put-aside-in-2008-and-2012 principles above the good of America, and apparently in large part because Trump hurt poor widdle Ted’s (and his father’s) feelings and trounced him in the primaries.

    How else to explain your (literal) “I would DIE before I vote for the successful capitalist over the corrupt socialist” “so-called “principles”?

  • Tom

    “New swing-state polls released Wednesday by Quinnipiac University show Trump leading Clinton in Florida and Pennsylvania — and tied in the critical battleground state of Ohio. In three of the states that matter most in November, the surveys point to a race much closer than the national polls, which have Clinton pegged to a significant, mid-single-digit advantage over Trump, suggest.
    The race is so close that it’s within the margin of error in each of the three states. Trump leads by three points in Florida — the closest state in the 2012 election — 42 percent to 39 percent. In Ohio, the race is tied, 41 percent to 41 percent. And in Pennsylvania — which hasn’t voted for a Republican presidential nominee since 1988 — Trump leads, 43 percent to 41 percent.”

    Remember how, just a few weeks ago, you were all crowing and blowing about how there’s absolutely, positively NO WAY Trump can win ‘cuz the polls all say so!?
    Remember that? Good times, huh?

  • Tchhht!!!

    Who gives a shit? Apparently you do or you wouldn’t be here running off at the mouth.

  • Tom

    yes, you’re right…I DO “give a shit” about America.
    That’s something bad in your book?

  • MAS

    And their off! Branch Trumpians, predictably…Breittrump/Trudge off line Trump bots?

  • Occam’s Stubble

    Romney and McCain were RINOs to be sure but they were not a couple of fascists and neither had a history of siding with the Democrats other than McCain’s “reach across the aisle” crap (at least he recognized there was an aisle).

  • Tom

    “But Hillary is not explicitly running on a campaign of torture, murder, and rule by unlawful decree. Voting for her does not mean overtly endorsing and accepting the horrors of dictatorship.”

    Oh, give me a break…So let’s be clear…you are AGAINST waterboarding terrorists, you are all “pro-life” when it comes to terrorists’ families, and you take one line from one speech from Trump as the Hill To Die On, the ONE thing that is apparently behind your “principled stand” is your fondness for, and concerns about the due-process rights of terrorists?

  • Occam’s Stubble

    I am as appalled by Trump as you are, Dave. However, I can’t in good conscience, whether through action or inaction, help Hillary become president.

    Trump is a buffoon and a braggart. He may talk like a fascist but I doubt very seriously he even knows what that word means. Hillary, on the other hand, knows full well that she’s a fascist and can’t wait to get the reins of power so she can put her fascist plans into place. Trump’s brand of fascism is over the top, probably impossible to implement, and will not live long beyond his presidency. Hillary’s will be the new normal.

    Trump, for all his flaws, will likely have a few conservatives around to help pull him back from the brink. Hillary will be surrounded by dyed-in-the-wool socialists and communists.

  • Texas12

    I love your site Dave but for me the choice is clear. One candidate degrades our military, refuses to defend our southern border and will nominate extremely liberal Supreme Court judges. The other candidate supports our military, will defend our southern border and will nominate Scalia quality Supreme Court justices. I will give him a chance to keep his word.

  • Tom

    So Romney – the architect for what we now call “Obamacare” – didn’t “side with the democrats”?

    McCain, who stopped his campaign dead in its tracks so he could return to Washington to “work with the president” didn’t cave in to Democrats?

    “John McCain asked the Presidential Debate Commission on Wednesday to postpone Friday’s scheduled debate with Barack Obama so that he can work on the financial crisis bailout plan now on Capitol Hill.”

    Quite the selective memory you have there…

  • Stephen

    White males are far and away the most conservative demographic in the country, meanwhile immigration policies for the last 50 years have favored everyone but white males. Democrats and Republicans alike are demographically displacing any future hope of a *conservative* society by marginalizing white males in the electorate.

    Anybody who doesn’t recognize this is too disconnected from reality to share a seat at the table. Anybody who thinks they’re going to turn Mexican fruit pickers and Syrian refugees into conservative voters one day is completely delusional.

    And what do Conservatives have to say about this demographic transformation that is wiping them out? They applaud it with extra vigor.

    And how do Conservatives respond to being demographically driven from power? By rigidly adhering to principles which have no bearing on the demographic transformation that is evermore driving the county leftward.

    Conservatism is a darwinian dead end.

  • Tom

    Kinda early to be so drunk, isn’t it?

  • Torcer

    To those who support Trump.
    Those of you who support Trump and still consider yourselves to be patriotic have a duty to carefully consider the evidence at hand on what is going on in the party.
    First of all, you need to carefully think about why up to 12 Million Democrats temporarily crossed over to support Trump during the primaries. And you have to consider why a hostile press supported Trump with free airtime during this time period.
    Think about it: Why would the Democrats desperately want Trump to be the nominee?
    Second, you also have a duty to thoughtfully reflect on the fact that most polls and analysis shown Trump losing in an electoral bloodbath.
    Why are some not bothered by this reality?
    Third, There is also the very strange case of a presidential candidate taking action against his own interests.
    Again, Why are some not alarmed by this circumstance?
    These are very dangerous aspects that should serve as a big flashing WARNING sign to Trump supporters – if they were interested in winning. And yet some dismiss these items without a second thought – Why?
    The purpose of this is to plead with those who support Trump to consider the evidence at hand and help avoid setting a temporary mistake in stone that very well could be the grave marker for the party.. and the nation as constituted…
    The evidence I have presented should be the impetus for you to reconsider your support for Trump.
    There is no rational point to supporting a candidate who will lose and take down the rest of the party with him. As previously stated, there are some in the Trump movement who are immune to facts and reality. Thus, there is only one logical conclusion for their actions and that is to have him lose and help Comrade Clinton win.

    Those of you in the formerly Conservative media can find redemption in what you do now. You along with every other true patriots in the Trump camp should be taking the following steps:
    1. Be mindful of the distinct possibility of a down ballot apocalypse IF Trumps remains on the ticket.
    2. Implore Trump to drop out of this farce and let someone qualified take over in his stead.
    You are at a crossroads, stay with Trump down the dark path and you will be marching off to oblivion. Because if he is nominated your fate will be tied to his and those who cannot dwell in reality or worse yet, those who want a Trump disaster.
    It is your choice.
    It will not be easy, but doing the right thing never is.

  • Tom

    Your concerns for the mental well-being of terrorists (no waterboarding!) and the due-process rights of their non-citizen, foreign-living families…..These are your deep-down, most-intimately-held beliefs that absolutely preclude you from ever voting for Trump, even if someone held a gun to your head?

    So all that hoo-haw about “Free Trade!” and how pissed you were when Trump said he didn’t care which restroom Caitlyn Jenner used, and your bleatings about “He’s no conservative!”, and the repeated over and over and over “Trump’s a LIAR!” hysteria…that was all just BS, and what REALLY concerns you is that terrorists families might not get to appear in federal court, or that terrorists might be distressed because they get waterboarded?

    Thanks for letting us know that all this crap you’ve been flinging at Trump was just BS, and your TRUE concerns are not for Americans, but rather terrorists and their families….

    Yep, those are some mighty impressive “principles” you have there.

  • Chronos Z. Wonderpig

    Trump in a landslide carrying the downstream votes. Republicans hold super majority’s in House & Senate……………..you heard it here first!

  • Bob Elfers

    I’ll vote for him- warts and all. I respect your decision to abstain, but feel the consequences are too critical to sit this one out.
    The damage Hillary will cause will be long term and fundamental.

    I will be ready to run for the hills before the wheels come completely off.

  • Tom

    Wondering why no attribution for this but then I see that you wrote it yourself!
    You sure do get around, don’t you Tor? Torcer?

    Here’s one reply to this post on floppingaces:
    “Tor, next to being piss poor journalist and and true socialist…
    Tor, did you buy your degree?…”

    Here’s another reply to your floppingaces column, from May…

    “No more doubt in my mind. Tor is a propaganda spammer for the #NeverTrump movement.”

    Posting here, posting there, providing anti-Trump “tips”…almost 42,000 disqus posts in less than 11 months!…posting columns at floppingaces, all of them slamming the only hope we have to avoid a Hillary presidency…almost like you’re getting paid for all your work and effort in decrying, demeaning, and demonizing Trump.

    So who signs your paychecks?

  • Occam’s Stubble

    Romney signed a piece of legislation into law, legislation passed by a body completely controlled by Democrats. The fact that he got something even resembling the plan from The Heritage Foundation is amazing. Also, what states do is fine by me. Trying to force that sort of thing on everyone else is where I draw the line.

    When McCain wanted to “work with the president,” that president was George W. Bush. The last time I checked, he was not a Democrat.

  • Occam’s Stubble

    I have no doubt Trump will support our troops. However, his plans for “defending” our southern border are likely not going to happen and his support of touch-back amnesty would have people howling with derision if it were any other candidate. As for SCOTUS, picking a good conservative like Scalia is a crapshoot for any president. How are you so sure Trump will get us another Scalia? If he was promising to nominate Cruz, that would be one way but he put out his list and Cruz was not on it.

  • JeffersonSpinningInGrave

    Hope you are right. Not optimistic, though.

  • MAS

    If it bothers so much you should try cutting back…

    But hey thanks for stopping by to remind us how much you Branch Trumpians want us to convert. So much you constantly attack anyone who does not agree to worship at the altar of The Donald. How’s that working out for y’all?

  • JeffersonSpinningInGrave

    This is how I see it right now. If Hillary wins, we are screwed beyond redemption (assuming we haven’t hit the iceberg already). And I’m starting to think that the election has already been decided, unless we get an insane turnout for Trump. Traditionally, the Democrats have been able to cheat for a couple percent worth or so. I think they’ll cheat bigger this time around.

  • Tom

    Better than Lyin’ Ted worked out for you, I guess….

  • Torcer

    Fallacies of Argument
    A fallacy is a flaw in logic that occurs when making an argument. These happen frequently and can not only destroy an argument, but harm the credibility of the person making the argument.

    Loaded Question:
    Here, the writer asks a question in such a way that an unjustified or unfound assumption is a part of the question. The questions usually imply something negative about their subjects, though they might be used to suggest a positive answer about the subject if the writer wants the reader to be favourably disposed towards the subject.
    Ex. At what point did the oil company decide it wanted to destroy our beautiful wilderness?
    https://cstudies.ubc.ca/student-information/services/self-directed-writing-resources/argument/fallacies-argument

  • Xavier

    Well then who do we vote for?

  • Texas12

    At least Trump has a plan to defend our southern border. Hillary does not. Trump has, at least, indicated that he will nominate conservative justices. Hillary definitely will not. We agree that Trump will support our troops. Hillary holds our military in contempt. Trump may not be perfect but Hillary is a known quantity whose administration is guaranteed to deeply harm our country.

  • Torcer

    SMOD 2016.

  • Torcer

    What if Trump’s goal is really a Clinton victory?
    All indications now are that the billionaire businessman will not become the 24th GOP president, despite his fans’ fervor and a record number of primary votes. The indications include a wide range of consistent national and state polls showing him almost universally behind the Democrat with even greater unfavorables.
    [..]
    What seems unlikely to change, however, is Trump’s unpredictable, usually counterproductive behavior. So the growing question is: What if Trump’s idea of winning is electing Hillary Clinton? And devastating the GOP in the process?

    We suggested 13 months ago that Trump was a Clinton stalking horse: Whether intentional or not, Trump’s candidacy will focus attention on him and elect the Democrat whom he’s long supported. Nothing has happened since to change our mind, save that another Clinton White House could be an unintended consequence of an enormous Trump ego that expands faster than the universe.

    Trump and Hillary Clinton are longtime friends and supporters of liberal causes. He’s contributed generously to her campaigns and family foundation. Trump conferred with her husband just before announcing his candidacy.
    [..]
    Since locking up the requisite delegates to hijack the GOP, Trump has done everything possible to torpedo his campaign as a serious candidate – and help Clinton’s stumbling candidacy.

    His fundraising is tardy and halfhearted. He’s being battered by millions of dollars’ worth in unanswered negative ads like the ones that bloodied Mitt Romney beyond repair in 2012. His campaign staff turmoil dominated June news.

    Trump’s done little to unify a fractured GOP riven with suspicions over his conservative credentials and with fears for its own political survival inside his Nov. 8 ballot blast zone. After a Friday meeting House Republicans said sound bites distorted how personable Trump was. So why not show the good side if he really wants to win?

    But now that Clinton has serial setbacks, Trump routinely steps in to divert attention back to himself. Whether it’s his uncontrollable spotlight addiction or not, the result is to protect the Democrat he allegedly wants to defeat.
    http://www.mcclatchydc.com/opinion/article88823407.html

  • Texas12

    Are not the latest polls much more favorable for Trump particularly in battleground states?

  • Torcer

    Trump is making a real mess of his campaign
    For example: When Hillary Clinton found herself at the wrong end of a scathing report about her email practices delivered by FBI Director James Comey last week, Trump would have done well to, literally, talk about nothing other than that for the rest of the week — and maybe even the rest of the month!
    ….
    Then something snapped. He threw away the notes and lit into the media — and society, more generally — over two recent controversies: (1) his campaign tweeting out and then removing an image that looked suspiciously like the Star of David, and (2) his comments about how late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was “so good” when it came to dealing with terrorists.

    What happened this past week is far from an isolated incident. Think back to the end of May. The State Department released a brutal report lambasting Clinton for her email practices. It was an absolute gift for Trump and Republicans, a perfect illustration of the narrative of corruption and pocket-lining they had been telling about Clinton. Less than 48 hours later, Trump went to San Diego and delivered an 11-minute rant against a federal judge named Gonzalo Curiel, who the real-estate mogul said was biased against him because of Curiel’s Mexican heritage. (Curiel was born in Indiana, but his parents hail from Mexico.)

    Malpractice is a harsh word. But there’s no other word for taking a good day and turning it not only into a bad day but potentially a bad week or a bad month. Winning campaigns play up their strengths and play down their flaws. Trump seems committed to doing just the opposite.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-is-making-a-real-mess-of-his-campaign/2016/07/10/a3cf0d62-46ad-11e6-ae8d-93aef685158e_story.html

  • Torcer

    Which polls and analysis do you believe?
    Or are you selective on the issue?

  • Torcer

    A comment from over on flopping acres on how the left feels about Lyin’ Donald:

    Ajay42302

    If I were one of today’s so-called conservatives, I too would be concerned. You guys let ole Mitch paint your sorry asses in a corner. You’re so screwed. You are correct that you’ll have to concede the WH. Ain’t much way out of that. Thing is, as goes the WH, so goes the SCOTUS, especially with pretty much a Dem lock on the upper chamber. Damn the bad luck.

    As a Democrat, I’m all for Trump. With Trump, we have a real shot at the House as well as countless down ballet seats.

    In the end, Trump lickers will ultimately be the best thing Dems and the working man has seen for years.
    July 12th, 2016 at 5:36 PM
    http://www.floppingaces.net/2016/07/12/an-open-letter-to-those-who-support-trump-and-we-all-you-know-who-you-are-guest-post/comment-page-1/#comment-503995

  • Andy

    Hope he uses hot water.

  • Stosh

    Only if he picks for VP —
    Just Stab Me in the Eye with a Habanaro coated Ice Pick…..

  • Stosh

    Trump’s plan is to let them go home and immediately return as “presto” legal immigrants…we don’t even need a wall with a plan like that.

  • SteveMGD

    ‘Voting for her does not mean overtly endorsing and accepting the horrors of dictatorship.’
    No, voting for someone does for the most part endorse their behavior and views, which means that voting for either Trump or Hillary is unethical.
    In fact, they are both so far beyond unacceptable that I’m even getting tired hearing about them.

  • Stosh

    “Hold your nose” voting worked very well for the 8 years of the McCain administration, followed closely by the 8 years of the very “Conservative” Romney administration. If we can just keep the election close for Chump, it will herald massive change….

  • OldSailor

    “Hillary Clinton is corrupt, incompetent, and ideologically malevolent” and has proven she has no problem at all with endangering this country, it’s armed forces and civilians simply for her own convenience.

    I’d rather vote for Sanders but he isn’t the (D) nominee, the Harridan from Hope is. I spent most of my Navy career dealing with classified material, much of it Top Secret S.A.P. I KNOW the kind of damage her incompetence (if that’s ALL it was) exposed us to. She should be in jail awaiting trial, not running for President.

    Asking anyone to do anything that puts her in the Oval Office is, in my opinion, unconscionable and inexcusable. That would be like knowingly handing Al Capone the keys to Fort Knox.

    On election day I will hold my nose, vote for Trump and pray for the best.

  • OldSailor

    I know what you are saying Steve, I don’t like the choices either. We truly have an election where we are asked to choose between the lesser of two evils.

    The only response I can think to give is “Hillary should have been indicted, arraigned and be sitting in jail as a flight risk pending trial, not running for President.”

    As bad an alternative as Trump is, I don’t see him as being quite that bad.

  • Tom

    Flaws In Reasoning

    …When we cannot answer the questions, then our position is weaker. If, however, we avoid the question altogether, then our reasoning process itself is revealed as possibly weak.

    It is unfortunately common that many important questions and challenges go unanswered — but why do people do this? There are surely many reasons, but a common one may be a desire to avoid admitting that they might be wrong. They might not have a good answer, and while “I don’t know” is certainly acceptable, it may represent an unacceptable admission of at least potential error.

    Another possible reason is that answering the question might lead one to the realization that their position isn’t valid, but that position plays an important role in their self-image.

    See? I can cite internet stuff about logic, too – just like you!

    But you’e still avoiding the question, aren’t you?

    When someone asks you, “So what do you do for a living?”, do you tell them: “I’m a proud, multi-platform, 24x7x365, WAY-more-than-100-posts-per-day purveyor of anti-Trump propaganda to supposed conservative websites.”?
    If you were honest, that’s what you would say.

    Who signs your paychecks, tor/cer?

  • Tom

    Here’s the one we’re talking about…try to keep up:

    http://www.qu.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/2016-presidential-swing-state-polls/release-detail?ReleaseID=2365

    The headline…”July 13, 2016 – Clinton Losing On Honesty In Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania,…”

    Now, as I recall, weren’t you one of the ones banging the “Trump can’t win – the polls all agree!” drum just a few weeks ago?
    Pretty sure you were…

  • OldSailor

    “If Hillary wins, we are sunk (assuming we haven’t hit the iceberg already).”

    Even if we have “hit the iceberg” there are still things that can be done to mitigate the damage and bring the situation under control. Sailors know this as “damage control.” You identify the problem, isolate the damage to prevent it spreading (i.e. flooding or fire) and then apply corrective actions to save the ship or, in this case Nation.

    I for one do not intend to give up the ship until the water gets up to the whistle.

    And I agree, the Democraps will go all out to turn the entire nation into Chicago 1960 where “Boss” Richard Dailey manufactured the votes necessary to hand the election to JFK.

  • OldSailor

    Fingers crossed and praying.

  • Torcer

    Try acting like an adult and dispense with the loaded questions and spewing falsehoods.

    Fallacies of Argument
    A fallacy is a flaw in logic that occurs when making an argument. These happen frequently and can not only destroy an argument, but harm the credibility of the person making the argument.

    Loaded Question:
    Here, the writer asks a question in such a way that an unjustified or unfound assumption is a part of the question. The questions usually imply something negative about their subjects, though they might be used to suggest a positive answer about the subject if the writer wants the reader to be favourably disposed towards the subject.
    Ex. At what point did the oil company decide it wanted to destroy our beautiful wilderness?
    https://cstudies.ubc.ca/student-information/services/self-directed-writing-resources/argument/fallacies-argument

  • geeknerd

    Having a horrible alternative like Hillary is no excuse for the GOP to field a slightly less horrible candidate. It’s also no excuse for having increasingly bad candidates over time, such as Romney, McCain, and Trump. What kind of monster will they field next time? Assuming of course there is a next time for the GOP.

    The Libertarian candidate is actually trumpeting his high ACLU ratings to Comrade Sanders’ betrayed supporters. He running to the Left of Hillary! The Libertarian ticket is also pro-abortion and in favor of the redefinition of marriage.

    The Constitution Party is virtually unknown, so I’ll suppress my gag reflex and vote for Trump, and regardless of the outcome spend the next 4 years working for the Conservative Party, in the hope that it will do to the GOP what the GOP did to the Whig Party. Otherwise, it will be apparent that God has taken His lamp-stand away from the USA, and left us to our own perversions (Romans chapter 1).

  • Tom

    You’re sounding desperate…The Washington Post?

    Post after post after post of anti-Trump propaganda…do you have a staff working on getting these posts all queued up?

    You were able to recall, edit, and post these 2- and 3-day old editorials – with ellipses and bold print – just like that, huh? And you do this all on your own, no financial interest in pretending to be just an average Joe, just postin’ stuff to keep y’all informed fellow on disqus?

  • Torcer

    Tom

    Now, as I recall, weren’t you one of the ones banging the “Trump can’t win – the polls all agree!” drum just a few weeks ago?
    Pretty sure you were…
    http://moonbattery.com/?p=74242#comment-2781200272

    Where did I state that?

  • Tom

    And you base this knowledge of exactly what Trump would do on what, exactly? Tweets?

  • Stosh

    On what he has stated publicly, as one of his ever changing positions….

  • Torcer

    Tom

    You’re sounding desperate…The Washington Post?

    http://moonbattery.com/?p=74242#comment-2781221919

    And once again you can’t get your facts straight.

  • Chronos Z. Wonderpig

    over the next 8 years Trump appoints 4+ Supremes. Liberals never recover. The alternative is that Hillary appoints 4+ to the Supreme Court……must be what Dave Blount wants.

  • Troll Magnet

    Hillary = Amnesty = 30+ MILLION new democrat voters = NO GOP IN W.H. EVER

    Tell me how this isn’t so? Tell me how after Hillary and her amnesty a republican will ever have a chance of being elected POTUS?

    Seriously, I’m waiting…

  • Tom

    So you’re blaming Trump – the anti-Establishment guy, the non-politician – for the idiocies and inadequacies of the GOP D.C. crowd?

    You’re blaming Trump – the anti-PC, no-BS guy – for the GOP’s quavering collapse anytime the Dems called them sexist or homophobic or whatever got them running to the mic to feverishly apologize for offending anyone?

    So not technically “blaming” Trump, but taking your frustration with the GOP out on him and punishing him by not voting for him – the guy who’s trying to shake things up, who’s trying to make things different – doesn’t sound wise to me.

  • Torcer

    Here we have a example of someone posting supposdely in support of Trump but then makes the admission that this is not the case:

    Heh, you do realize that all the polling data during the 1980 and 1984 campaigns kept insisting Reagan would lose, don’cha?

    My emphasis:

    I am NOT a Trump supporter. Never was.

    This should be an object lesson for you who truly support Trump and why you should steer clear of such people

    Note that at first they spout the usual Trump supporter talking points and then drop them once it is seen they are not of this mindset.

    Note the commonality of a number of key tactics and methodology use by these alleged Trump supporters.

    1. Extensive use of Alinsky type tactics.
    2. The utilization of childish invective as and aggressive method to try and silence the opposition.
    3. The making of claims that are never verified – and the use of the ‘wild goose; chase scam when they are called on their lack of factual underpinnings. They make a claim and demand others to verify them.

  • Torcer

    This is why many are very bothered by the situation and are worried about the candidacy of the presumptive nominee.

    Consider that millions of Democrats supported him in the primaries along with the national socialist media.

    And consider the polling and analysis that predicts and electoral bloodbath and the bewildering case of the presumptive nominee failing to capitalize on golden opportunities with all of Comrade Clinton’s illegalities.

  • JeffersonSpinningInGrave

    If Hilary appoints 4+, the SCOTUS won’t even pay lip service to the Constitution anymore.

  • Troll Magnet

    we’re simply using leftist tactics against the enemy, and it’s working 🙂

    TRUMP showed us the way to defeat the leftist media 🙂

  • Troll Magnet

    So I ask again, how, after Hillary and amnesty, will ANY republican ever become president?

  • Tom

    Try acting like a real person and stop pretending that you’re just some average joe, posting hundreds, thousands, tens, SCORES of thousands of posts…

    Who signs your paychecks, tor/cer?

  • Torcer

    IF she gets in, it’s doubtful that will ever happen again.

    That issue and the supreme court are just two reasons that this situation is so dangerous and that we avoid a down-ballot apocalypse.

    IF she gets in, for all intents and purposes, it will be the end of nation as constituted.

    After that who knows what will happen next..

  • Walter.R

    1) Why did 12 million democrats vote for Trump? Is it confirmed? Is there a consensus on that number like that with all scientist and global warming? If it is then of course it is obviously a conspiracy. On the other hand, didn’t 20% of Democrats polled say they would be willing to cross over for Trump in the general election?
    As for free air time, was it possibly the fact that the media was forced to carry Trump’s responses to the never ending attacks by media, leftist and so called conservatives and that he did not back down, therefore drawing a positive response from the ignorant masses, that offends you? Is that what you consider free air time…Trump’s responses to never ending attacks actually getting played and getting a positive response? For the record, what you saw was definitely not “a hostile press supporting Trump with free airtime”.
    2) Your reality of polls telling us that Trump will lose in an electoral bloodbath:
    Why do we always see that, in any thoughtful analysis of those bloodbath polls, we find that they are terribly skewed…to the left? Why are you not bothered by this reality? Is it because you want Trump to lose?
    You do realize that you have a duty to thoughtfully reflect on those polls and the so called “analysis” and to dissect the polling data and the motivations of those preparing those polls, correct?
    3) Your claimed purpose is to “plead” with us who support Trump’s election and wonder why we are not “alarmed”. Your whining (sorry, I mean pleading) is that we should “consider the evidence at hand and help avoid setting a temporary mistake in stone that very well could be the grave marker for the party.. and the nation as constituted”
    Question; where on earth have you been? And
    Your goal and that of all like you, is to make a Trump loss a self-fulfilling prophecy; that is why you harp on skewed polls, etc.
    So in response, let us start with why I support Trump:
    A) I voted for Cruz in the primary. If he had not been there and Fiorina had I would have voted for her. What first got me to notice Trump was his saying he would protect our borders and stop the Muslim invasion (wow; he believes we are a sovereign nation!). What got me to take a second look was the sheer vitriol, the absolute hatred, expressed by the so called conservative elite against Trump and his supporters. The only thing close to the hatred from that group, that I have ever seen, was the viciousness of the leftist attacks on Dan Quayle, when it was announced he was the 1988 VP candidate. Please believe me when I tell you that I have nothing but absolute contempt for republican elites (whether politicians or media) who are nothing but greedy pseudo aristocrats with nothing but contempt for the average American.
    B) I have read Trump’s policy positions (very conservative) and whom he has proposed as supreme court nominees. Add to that the fact that he says he will protect our borders (who else has) which means he will protect our sovereignty and the American people and tell me, what’s not to like? And please don’t go down the path of he “walks back positions” when he gets absolutely no support from either the left or the right (you clowns are united in your hatred), and don’t waste my time calling him a liar when 98% of the nominees, for any position, provided by the republican party, are useless hacks.
    C) I could walk through each of the republican presidential nominees and electees since Reagan and how much they have each done to advance the leftist agenda (whether as president or in their congressional roles) at the expense of this country but then I would never finish. But you would surely agree that there has never been such a set of useless hacks who have done nothing but betray the American people and conservative principals.
    D) The author calling Trump a “fascist” would be laughable if it wasn’t such a typical elitist debasement of reason. What is Obama? What is Hillary? As an aside I remember, back in around 1992, a WSJ editorial describing the fascist structure of hillarycare. One of her defenders wrote back that yes it was a fascist structure but Hillary was so much smarter than Mussolini. I guess you feel Hillary is so much smarter than Trump.
    E) The author and you, have absolutely no credibility when you support the rights of jihadis over those of the American people. You do understand jihad right? You do understand that we live in the dar-al harb right? You do understand that the absolute goal of islam is world domination by any means necessary and that war will never end right? You have read the Jefferson/Adams correspondence back to John Jay after meeting with Tripoli’s ambassador to London right? You do realize jihad never changes and neither will the murder, rape and enslavement, right? And you do remember that Hillary hugs terrorists’ wives and has the family members of terrorist on her staff right?
    Yet with all this, you and the author want Hillary. You pretend to be a thinker and reasonable, only trying to save the country; but you are not. You are just another sneaky Hillary hack.

  • Torcer

    Perhaps you are not comprehending my point – the person in question was only putting forward the pretense of supporting Trump as they admitted.

    Now, ask yourself – why are some many Leftists supporting Trump?

  • You’re an idiot.

  • Torcer

    And you just pile more falsehoods on falsehoods..

  • Torcer

    Perhaps you can explain why I’m trying to WARN people of the issues with Trump when it would be far easier to not bring them up?

  • Walter.R

    You mean you stand alone as a light in the darkness trying to protect America? Please! As for an explanation, I have provided it above (read it carefully).
    No matter how you want to describe it, It is a binary choice; hillary or Trump. You have come down on the side of hillary and want other to also. There is nothing more to say.

  • Torcer

    We tried to inform you that the national socialist left desperately wanted Donald to be the nominee to lose to Comrade Clinton

    ‘Proof there is a God’? Jim Messina senses divine intervention in GOP race http://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2016/05/04/proof-there-is-a-god-jim-messina-senses-divine-intervention-in-gop-race/ via @twitchycom

    Hoyer: Trump nomination would bring Dems ‘substantial’ gains http://thehill.com/homenews/house/273931-hoyer-trump-nomination-would-bring-dems-substantial-gains

    Report: 46,000 Pa. Democrats Become Republicans Due To Trump
    http://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2016/03/10/report-46000-pa-democrats-become-republicans-due-to-trump/

    Trump doing better in ‘open’ primaries; Cruz sees success in GOP-only contests
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/03/07/trump-doing-better-in-open-primaries-cruz-sees-success-in-gop-only-contests.html?

    AMAZING! 60,000 Democrats Voted in Virginia Republican Primary http://disq.us/9albit

    20,000 Massachusetts Democrats switch parties before Super Tuesday http://washex.am/1oMiSTH via @DCExaminer

    Jimmy Carter: I’d pick Trump over Cruz http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/jimmy-carter-donald-trump-ted-cruz-218707

  • Torcer

    This Harvard study is a powerful indictment of the media’s role in Donald Trump’s rise
    I’ve written repeatedly — and self-righteously — about my belief that ascribing the rise of Donald Trump in the Republican primary race to media complicity is ridiculous. And I believed every word.

    But, a new study by Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard University casts serious doubts on my position as it documents not only the outsized coverage Trump received — from TV and digital media — in the early days of his campaign but also how overwhelmingly positive that coverage was.

    Let’s go through a few of the most important findings from the study, which is based on “an analysis of thousands of news statements by CBS, Fox, the Los Angeles Times, NBC, The New York Times, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post” during 2015.

    First, it notes that Trump received considerable media coverage during 2015 despite the fact that he was neither a leader in polls or in the fundraising chase — two indicators of uneven media coverage of candidates in past races, according to the Shorenstein study. As the study reports:

    When his news coverage began to shoot up, [Trump] was not high in the trial-heat polls and had raised almost no money. Upon entering the race, he stood much taller in the news than he stood in the polls. By the end of the invisible primary, he was high enough in the polls to get the coverage expected of a frontrunner. But he was lifted to that height by an unprecedented amount of free media.

    That analysis offers a direct correlation between the amount of media attention Trump received in the early days of the race with his ability to rise in the polls. And not only that. It also puts a price tag on just how much Trump’s free media attention was worth to his campaign — and how it compared with the free media his rivals received.
    https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2016/06/Screen-Shot-2016-06-14-at-2.16.13-PM.png&w=1484
    But wait, you say (and I said): All coverage isn’t positive! Counting negative coverage about Trump as free coverage misses the mark! Except that the chart above doesn’t include negative coverage. It only tabulates positive and neutral coverage; “Positive coverage is always ‘good news’ for a political candidate, but so, too, is neutral coverage in the pre-primary period because it elevates the candidate’s profile,” the study’s authors conclude.

    There’s more in the study about the tenor of the coverage on Trump. This chart in particular is hard to ignore.
    https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2016/06/Screen-Shot-2016-06-14-at-2.24.14-PM.png&w=1484
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/06/14/this-harvard-study-is-a-powerful-indictment-of-the-medias-role-in-donald-trumps-rise/

  • Torcer

    Walter.R
    You are just another sneaky Hillary hack.
    http://moonbattery.com/?p=74242#comment-2781294184

    That was in response to this false allegation by you.

    Now, please explain why I would take the time to WARN people of the danger of his candidacy?

    Why would I be enduing this abuse for you people were that the case.

    Were that falsehood true I would be sitting back in silence saying nothing of the matter, or worse yet denying the evidence at hand.

  • Torcer

    We tried to inform you that Donald isn’t a Conservative…

    Trump: I Believe in Raising Taxes on the Rich
    http://patterico.com/2016/04/22/trump-i-believe-in-raising-taxes-on-the-rich/

    4 Signs From The Last 24 Hours That Trump Suckered Conservatives http://www.dailywire.com/news/5486/4-signs-last-24-hours-trump-suckered-conservatives-ben-shapiro

    NOT KIDDING: Donald Trump just attacked Scott Walker for NOT RAISING TAXES in Wisconsin! http://therightscoop.com/not-kidding-donald-trump-just-attacked-scott-walker-for-not-raising-taxes-in-wisconsin/

    Donald Trump: The Chameleon http://www.glennbeck.com/2016/02/11/donald-trump-the-chameleon/?

    Trump’s growing list of apostasies puts him at odds with decades of Republican beliefs http://wapo.st/25ktCK3?tid=ss_tw

    Mark Levin: What Are the Three Top Responsibilities of the Federal Government? http://www.cnsnews.com/video/mark-levin-what-are-three-top-responsibilities-federal-government

    Trump Says Cruz’s Father Shouldn’t Be ‘Allowed’ To Say Mean Things About Him http://www.dailywire.com/news/5409/trump-says-cruzs-father-shouldnt-be-allowed-say-hank-berrien

  • Walter.R

    So what is your bottom line because I find your conspiracy theories tiresome. What I read is you want hillary to win. Your analysis of Trump is weak (this is from someone who worked in finance, always turned down opportunities to finance Trump projects and laughed at those who actually did and got burned).
    If you are blind enough to be convinced by your own conspiracy theories that we need hillary as president then you not really a thinker…but simply a paranoid.

  • Torcer

    Repeating a lie doesn’t make it true – now answer my question:

    Please explain why I would take the time to WARN people of the danger of his candidacy?

    Why would I be enduing this abuse for you people were that the case.

    Were that falsehood true I would be sitting back in silence saying nothing of the matter, or worse yet denying the evidence at hand.

  • Torcer

    Walter.R 3) Your claimed purpose is to “plead” with us who support Trump’s election and wonder why we are not “alarmed”.

    Please cite in your long diatribe where you addressed the issues I raised.

    Walter.R Your goal and that of all like you, is to make a Trump loss a self-fulfilling prophecy; that is why you harp on skewed polls, etc.
    http://moonbattery.com/?p=74242#comment-2781294184

    Where did I state any of that?

  • Torcer

    BTW, did you even read what was stated about that study?

  • Walter.R

    So you still won’t come out and admit you want hillary to win. You just do it in a round about way by attacking Trump. How come? Admit it! Be free! By the way, you never responded to any of my legitimate comments and questions (not that I would expect it).
    What I get from the above is “babble babble repeating a lie, babble babble”.
    I had answered your question but let’s try again on another tack
    What abuse? I am simply responding. However, why would you endure this “abuse”; I don’t know…is it because you want hillary to win so you attack trump? is it because you exist in some paranoid little world full of conspiracies against you? Only you can answer your own question?

  • Dave,

    Thank you for this post in reply to my letter. I have always respected your political intellectual acumen however in this case your flawed premise that you KNOW that Trump will preside more destructively than Hillary is fallaciously untrue and impossible.

    You yourself have mocked many times people you call “thought Nazis” for claiming they KNOW what the other person is thinking or going to do. Yet you are hypocritically are being a Thought Nazi and false prophet by claiming you KNOW what Trump will do as President.

    It’s bunk and while I don’t believe you’re doing it to bolster traffic I can’t think of any other reason since you are obviously a smart man. Applying your logic to yourself one could easily claim that you are not who you claim to be.

    You also fail to admit that even if Trump is so diabolically liberal that he as POTUS doesn’t make law, only Congress makes law. A Republican Congress would not write leftist laws and could defend them.

    Even worse, your indirect support of a Hillary presidency would result in lifetime appointments of leftist activist supreme Court justices who would dismantle the 1st, 2nd and 5th amendments and overrule illegal immigration and Obamacare single payer laws.

    Therefore since you have no imperical evidence for your assumption, since Trump has never held a public office you are simply using emotive, unproven reasoning (another hypocritical yet justifiable claim you make against leftists) to conclude Trump is really a leftist.

    Virtually every position and proposed by Trump is based on conservative values. No POTUS has ever fulfilled every promise not even your lying idol Ted Cruz (who I happened to originally favored).

    Finally as every true patriot knows a turncoat like you and Romney are worse than the enemy because you are using the trust and knowledge of your compatriots against your own compatriots to not only demoralize your side but embolden and provide bullets to the enemy.

    You can’t be half pregnant in politics. You win or lose. You are either part of the solution or the problem…period.

    Admit that you have no proven evidence that Trump is a lying Manchurian candidate and come back from the dark side Dave.

    You’re only strengthening the enemy that has explicitly and emphatically stated their leftist, socialist plans to destroy this Nation.

    Respectfully,

    DaddyOD

  • Walter.R

    Yeah…I already sent that response to one of your other rants. And you still have not explained to me how your WARNING about Trump is anything more than campaigning for hillary. Those are our choices right? You really don’t think there could be anyone else right?

  • Torcer

    Again: Repeating a lie doesn’t make it true – now answer my question:

    Please explain why I would take the time to WARN people of the danger of his candidacy?

    Why would I be enduing this abuse for you people were that the case.

    Were that falsehood true I would be sitting back in silence saying nothing of the matter, or worse yet denying the evidence at hand.

  • Walter.R

    One more time; these are the choices.
    You either stand with Trump and hope that some of his written positions and supreme court nominees and promises to protect our sovereignty are true or you get hillary. To me those are the choices; we have what we have and nothing matters but defeating hillary and the left. If Trump turns out to be leftest but less so than hillary we still win. If he turns out to back his written positions we have a home run.

  • Torcer

    And I already posted the facts in response to yours.
    Why are you dismissing the facts I’ve presented?
    And why do you keep repeating the same falsehoods?

  • Torcer

    1. Not until he’s the nominee.
    2. There are other choices – are you denying this fact?

    Try acting like an adult and drop the use of false accusations and answer my question.

    Please explain why I would take the time to WARN people of the danger of his candidacy?

    Why would I be enduing this abuse for you people were that the case.

    Were that falsehood true I would be sitting back in silence saying nothing of the matter, or worse yet denying the evidence at hand.

  • Walter.R

    I already said (more than once) why an abuser like you would be posting this garbage; because you are either a hillary hack or live in a paranoid world of conspiracy theories. I see you have also embraced the leftest practice of victimhood (I am abusing you by responding and you probably need to retreat to a safe space).
    So keep typing and warning and warning and typing…its been fun but I am not going to play anymore; goodbye.

  • Troll Magnet

    Either they have also lost faith in the system, and are going after an outsider, or, a repeat of “Operation Chaos”. Who knows…

  • Torcer

    So I take I you cannot answer that question and you are now trying to deflect onto some new falsehood.. sad..

  • Troll Magnet

    We finally agree 😉

  • cryandhowl

    Soooo … that’s it? You’re against torture. Holy Moly, stay the hell home then. You’d rather put Hillary in office as Commander in Chief of the U.S. military and let her appoint up to possibly 3 Supreme Court Justices, sell more favors to our enemies and on and on. With all due respect, you’re a damn fool. Please stay home in November. Trump, regardless of how unsavory he might seem, (at least to some sanctimonious phony conservatives) hasn’t been responsible for the deaths of countless Americans like Hillary is and will continue to be.

  • Torcer

    I’m theorizing it’s the later instance – their own version of “Operation Chaos”.

    Part of my point is that if that’s the case at least some of the people acting like the SJW’s really are SJW’s..

  • Torcer

    Yes, I can see things going from bad to worse….

    ..if she gets in the left will.. I don’t really want to contemplate what they will want to do.. But I dare say that I do not see the nation staying in one piece…. Texit, COxit, etc.

  • Troll Magnet

    funny you say that, i’m in FL now, and i told wife that the second TX leaves we’re packing 🙂

  • Troll Magnet

    no, i believe it’s the former. i think people are finally waking up to just how corrupt the government insiders really are, on both sides of the political spectrum. or so i hope at least…

  • Torcer

    Some perhaps, but those who are true Trump supporters need to distinguish themselves from the SJW’s with better behaviour.

  • IslandLifer

    You’re a pussy

  • Torcer

    I’m doubting it will just be TX…. In some ways it would be nice to just kick out of a few of the bad states.. and they can experiment with the wonders of socialism all by their lonesome.

    There could be the People’s republic of Kalifornia and New York and the rest could form their own little enclave and leave the rest of US alone in peace..

    Of course, there would have to be walls of some sort to control those borders.

  • Chronos Z. Wonderpig

    that’s my point – how can anyone help elect Hillary with that looming over our heads!

  • J.j. Cintia

    So Dave, who pays the bill for this site? Obviously not you right? I suppose being an employee you just have to toe the line of your boss, just like all those jokers in Congress like Crybaby Boehner and Lyin Ryan who made a big show of standing up to Obamao in their elections, but rolled over like drunken whores to give him everything Obamao wanted without even trying to stop it.
    We all know whats going on Dave. You’re all kidding yourselves. The cats out of the bag now. They’re all political whores. Bought and souled out. You and the others are paid to support scumbags like Little Jebbie and Cubano Cruz with his Wall Street Insider Globalist wife and Castro supporting Father, cause they’re system guys LIKE YOU.
    TRUMP isn’t conservative, but that label is meaningless. It might as well be fat free soda pop. Trump cannot be bought cheap like the others. And that’s what its about. Not the politics, or the policies or even that so-called “civility”. There has never been civility in politics. Mudslinging goes all the way back to the Early Days of the Founding Fathers. Its because he’s too RICH to be bought.

  • mikey7777

    Then leave the country with Obama and Hillary and run Mogadishu,I hear they are waiting for new leaders like you and Obama .We do not need anymore gutless weak whites that allow our enemies to exterminate us like cattle.Grow some b a l l s ,man up or STFU!

  • Stosh

    Chump is a life long Demonkrat, should have run against Killary & Bern the Socialist. If he’s the best the GOP can offer, I haven’t left the party, they left me….

  • The wall of the stall

    Dave,
    Hillary is a felon who belongs behind bars.

  • Troll Magnet

    wall. heh, you know, i know just the guy to build one 😛

    have you considered the free state project in NH i believe it was? i think they picked a wrong state for that though…

  • Torcer

    That corner of the country is kind of strange…

    Whenever you look at the map of how the states are politically it seems like it’s the Northeast and West coast that are going way left.

    If things turn out the way I’m afraid they will it’s going rile people up even further… But I think that kind of splitting off of the leftist enclaves would be a good solution.

    But there is the issue of a parasites not wanting to let go of their hosts..

  • Troll Magnet

    turn out how?

    and yes, it would be interesting to see the Fed’s reaction under the C*nt’s administration of states started to leave the union… it didn’t go over well last time :/

  • Torcer

    Two Words: Air Conditioning.

    That invention has shifted the demographics such that the people are moving out of the North… So things may be quite different this time around…

  • ramrodd

    God knows I tried.

    Elections. For the love of God, if you don’t hear anything else I say for
    the rest of the evening, listen to this.

    Elections are no longer free. They are staged theater, designed to maintain the illusion of representative governance and to enrich the political class. This is despotism. If after this mess that we just went through, if you do not understand this, you are beyond hope.

    My God.

    And then you have election fraud on top of it. Here in Colorado ten counties had voter turnout in excess of the total adult population of the [county]. Not just the registered voters – the total adult population of the county, excuse me, the county. And what did Romney do? Roll over. How can you not see this? How can you not understand? Do not talk to me anymore about elections. There are no elections. There are no more free elections. Just stand over that dead horse and beat it – it is never going to get up.

    For the love of God.

    I’m sorry, but there comes a certain point where you have got to pull your head out of your ass and deal with reality. You cannot just keep going on with this over and over and over again, saying, “Well if I just give somebody some money and I put some signs in my yard I’m doing enough…”

    No, you’re not doing enough. You’re not doing enough at all. Not even close. In fact, if you’re participating in this, you’re part of the problem.”

    http://www.barnhardt.biz/2016/04/13/god-knows-i-tried/

  • Meadowbrook

    What a stretch….just admit you work for Hillary and let’s move on…

  • Sweep_the_leg_11590

    Either click bait, or Dave has gone full Little Green Footballs. The idea of letting a sociopath, proven liar, quisling (Dave, please explain her purpose for the classified Email situation, if it was NOT to share info with our enemies…) become CIC, and then claiming to be a patriot in aiding her, is traitorous and disgusting.

  • Tom

    “behaviour” ??? So you’re not even American???

    Never EVER saw an actual American use that spelling…you weren’t quoting anyone…you used the Canadian / British spelling of the word…
    What kind of scam are you running?

  • Tom

    There you go with your “the polling…predicts”…again.

    You sure do love them polls, don’t you? Except, you know, the Q poll dared TODAY that shows Trump leading / tied in PA, FL, and OH.
    Yeah, you didn’t know about that one, did you?

  • Tom

    Don’t get sucked in…he’ll start haraguing you with these “ANSWER – YES OR NO!” BS questions…
    Ask HIM how he can post almost 42000 disqus comments in less than 11 months

  • Tom

    Why do you use the British / Canadian spelling of “behaviour”?
    If you are NOT an American, that would explain a lot.

    Were you even born in this country?

  • Tom

    So you’re just going to stay home on election day?

  • Tom

    what’s the lie? disqus shows (hang in, let me check)…41,857 posts since you joined on Aug. 25, 2015…so my “scores of thousands” cite was accurate…
    You cross-posted a “guest post” that you made at floppingaces, ad judging by the comments there, you are known to them as well…at least 3 such “guest post” columns, all anti-Trump all the way.
    I won’t bother to check your twitter feed but you’re on there, too, with thousands of tweets

    You are pretty much a one-man propaganda machine, aren’t you? And all out of the goodness of your heart!

    So do you have a real job? Aside from posting anti-Trump propaganda?

    ANSWER – YES or NO!

  • Tom

    Once again, what the hell are you talking about? Your post above “Trump is making a mess of his campaign” is frickin’ concern trolling from one of the more liberal wapo writers…
    Check the link yourself…

  • Walter.R

    Yeah…it didn’t take too long to figure it out. Its kind of fun until you realize he has only one little repetitive track and he can’t really comprehend your comments…can’t make any sense of them; then it just becomes boring. Although 42000 comments in 11 months is impressive. However, I am not so cruel as to comment further about that.

  • Torcer

    Irrelevant.

  • Torcer

    Your were wrong, what part of that can you not figure out?

  • Torcer

    Sad that you don’t recognize what you are doing…

  • Torcer

    So are you selective on which polls you believe?

  • 762×51

    No tRump can’t be bought cheap, but he can be bought. He has participated on governmental corruption for decades. He is a member of the pay for access establishment, idiot.

  • 762×51

    Good lord Dave, just look at the comments. The article earlier on the un-trustworthiness of Hillary got ONE comment, mine. This one on why you personally cannot support tRump has 113. I’m telling you these Trumpanzee fascists are insane.

    Just reading the foaming at the mouth smears is like leafing through Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, all on one article. Granted many posts are from duplicate Trumpanzees who are so in love with their cult leader that they post multiple times under different screen names.

    Maybe this bizarre volley of verbal feces will clue a few of the actual conservatives left here on why I take on these howling, screeching hominids with direct aggression and no quarter given. These fools who have posted the shit comments on this article, these FASCISTS who cannot allow anyone to express a personal opinion that disagrees with their opinion or beliefs, are psychotic and should be treated as the drones they are. With contempt, derision and where available unlimited violence. A shame they are all cowards who can never back up their rhetoric.

  • 762×51

    Then go spread your legs somewhere else, dipshit.

  • 762×51

    LOL, another racist Trumpanzee who thinks they can just push people around and force everyone under their fascistic control.

    Why don’t you grow some balls brownshirt or STFU?

  • 762×51

    And yet you are still here, so tell me dick breath, who is the idiot?

  • 762×51

    Of course it doesn’t hurt that you are a Progressive leftist as well.

    Hey Maggot, do the cardboard targets you fight ever yell “hands up, don’t shoot? They look just like the Ferguson crowd, only not dangerous in keeping with your chickenshit character.

  • Troll Magnet

    you do realize how derange you look calling people who you disagree with to a gun fight right?

    how insecure are you exactly?

  • 762×51

    Looks like he has the Brony vote vote all sewed up.

    Are you just a local Bronies for tRump chairman or have you taken your Bronihood national?

  • 762×51

    He’s a Progressive, of course he is selective on which FACTS he believes. You cannot reason with a dirty Progressive.

  • 762×51

    Still haven’t mastered reading comprehension, a janitor?

    Do the other janitors in your Brony club make fun of the way you think?

  • 762×51

    See, told ya, he cannot / will not admit to real facts, Progressives never do. It is a defining characteristic of the targets . . . er . . I mean breed. It is so reliable of an identifier I used in my target identification criteria.

  • 762×51

    I’m not insecure at all, that’s one of the things we learn in combat and why many of us seem cocky to those of you who only play at it.

    I’m not calling people who I disagree with to a gunfight. I’m calling you filthy Trumpanzee fascists who come in here and push people around with your Alinsky, brownshirt, “vote with us or else” attitude, to a gunfight. People are tired of your bullshit and I for one will not stand for it. You pricks have earned that special treatment by being the scum you are just like your little dictator wannabe candidate. That was the point of the article you are posting on now, douche bag. tRump and his dictatorial desires, spoken in his own words, are one of the main reasons we cannot / will not vote for him.

    You assholes are no different than the assholes who voted for Obama or the assholes who will vote for Hillary. Every one of you is a fucking fascist and I know there is only one way to effectively deal with fascists, by putting them in the ground. That day is coming, dick breath, very soon now. You howling chimps have seen to that by forcing the one candidate who cannot beat Hillary onto the ballot.

    Enjoy your smug ignorance while you can, once the main event starts, there is no stopping it.

  • Torcer

    Yes, they also cannot engage in a civil dialog.

    In many ways it is very sad that most who purport to support Trump act very much like the Socialist Justice Warriors of the left…

    Hurling childish invective, trafficking in falsehoods, never acting discussing the issues at hand etc.

    But considering that millions of Democrats supported Trump, it is easy to see that many ARE Socialist Justice Warriors of the left.

  • Troll Magnet

    I rest my case.

    Oh btw, you seem to be obsession about dicks and sperm lately, maybe you should just come you, we will not judge, just don’t make us bake you a cake.

    You sure do seem cocky for a keyboard commando, I’ll give you that.

    Pathetic loser.

  • Torcer

    Many have postulated that the purpose of the Trump candidacy is to propel Comrade Clinton into the White house.

    Note that our ‘friend’ who purports to be a Trump supporter doesn’t actually try to tout his candidacy but instead attacks Conservatives seeding chaos and dividing the right.

  • FrozenPatriot

    If the American people elevate her to Democrat nominee, rather than demand her prosecution, the ideas of liberty and equal justice are over. Might as well throw a match on it and let the collectivist city-hives burn, then influence what rises from the ashes while we’re still young.

  • Artfuldgr

    governmental corruption is not a choice like which line you get on… lets see. do i take the cue of no corruption and save the payoff money for another project, or get on the line for corruption and pay more. your insane if you think you get to have a choice in the matter when it comes to that and getting your projects done. everyone pays if you do a huge project in nyc, because you have permits to get, inspections to pass, unions to placate, city council wants their cut, the mayor wants 1/5 of the luxury condos to be priced for section 8 welfare for his social program promises, and you need to do studies for the environment and so on and so forth. there is no way to avoid it and build a big project in ny, they are waiting for you…

  • FrozenPatriot

    Hey, you’re still here…

  • FrozenPatriot

    Nobody will prosecute the myriad criminals inside government.

    Nobody will lower your tax (theft) burden.

    Nobody will follow the Constitution.

    Nobody will defend your liberties.

    Nobody will leave you alone.

    Vote for Nobody, 2016!

  • Artfuldgr

    Dave and Hillary seem to forget that their assertion of Trumps potential despotic actions is to insult the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and the National Guard in thinking that if trump ordered something illegal against civilians on US soil, they would just go do it without any hesitation or thought and all one had to do to have that ability was be elected to office. If torture was illegal, even Trump ordering it wont make it happen unless he got the law changed which if i remember is not in the purview of the presidents job description.

    Under the military code, soldiers are sworn to only follow LAWFUL orders and actually would be in trouble if they followed an unlawful one.

    In fact, under Article 90, during times of war, a military member who willfully disobeys a superior commissioned officer can be sentenced to death.

    These articles require the obedience of LAWFUL orders. An order which is unlawful not only does not need to be obeyed but obeying such an order can result in criminal prosecution of the one who obeys it. Military courts have long held that military members are accountable for their actions even while following orders — if the order was illegal.

    “I was only following orders,” has been unsuccessfully used as a legal defense in hundreds of cases (probably most notably by Nazi leaders at the Nuremberg tribunals following World War II). The defense didn’t work for them, nor has it worked in hundreds of cases since.

  • J.j. Cintia

    He was buying, the others were and are selling. He’s dangerous cause he’s the money and not one of the whores.

  • Stosh

    Heck NO….there are some real Conservatives running down ticket.

  • gregtuco

    Full disclosure: I posted this on Prison Planet Forum awhile ago towards the beginning of the campaign. Nothing much has changed except for the fact that Jeb! is now politically and officially irrelevant. My point? We “elect” NOBODY in today’s contrived reality.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Instead of the systematic process for deciding the most qualified people to lead the Republic — as they were designed to be — elections in the United States have devolved into political soap operas for the consumption of infotainment-grazing sheep. Yes, there has always been a carnival sideshow quality to this facet of American political life, but in an age where virtually everyone is a ‘media outlet’, the absurdity is magnified to an even more perverse degree.

    Presidential elections, especially, take this charade to new lows as these obscenely expensive, personality-driven puppet shows are dangled in front of the American people to make them feel as if they somehow have a real voice in the Democratic Process.

    In a contrived attempt at building “brand loyalty”, candidates are packaged and marketed as scientifically as any other consumer commodity. Hired media consultants literally teach them how to lie convincingly on camera and in public. Typical campaign strategy will include “soaring” but vacant rhetoric, slickly produced, character-assassinating television ads that border on libel, and opinion poll influenced soundbites aimed at whatever demographic is deemed most useful at the moment. It’s all about pushing the right emotional buttons of people who haven’t the slightest idea that they are being manipulated – although, everyone last one of them will tell you otherwise. The candidate/narcissists who consort with these political parasites know that, despite the wealth of information at their fingertips, the average voter’s general disinterest and chimp-like attention span will keep them from doing the necessary work to seriously research and vet them.

    Democrats, especially, need to exploit these media-savvy qualities if they are to adequately tingle the leg of the Liberal electorate into reaching their desired state of worshipful, pre-election euphoria.

    You can practically hear Josef Goebbels and Edward Bernays laughing from the World Class Liars section from the deepest depths of Hell.

    This national predisposition towards personality worship became glaringly obvious in 2008 with the election of Barrack Obama, a man who came out of virtually nowhere to sweep the celebrity-loving Left off of its feet. His lack of integrity became immediately apparent when, in one of his first official acts as President of “the most transparent administration in history”, he sealed his presidential records from future public scrutiny.

    Reading from a teleprompter and having good enough acting chops to play the part of “statesman” are the only practical skills required of American presidents these days, but it was a stroke of [evil] genius on the part of the Globalists for knowing that the timing was just right to place an “electable” Black man in office. They knew that Obama’s skin color ensured immunity from serious criticism as he proceeded to fast-track their long-held plans for world oligarchy.

    You got to hand it to Obammy though, other than having a little trouble memorizing his lines, (that’s what teleprompters are for, right?) he’s nailed the “presidential” role down good enough keep the suckers, suckered for almost two full terms. Sure, there have been a few the bumps in the road along the way, but he’s had a first rate public relations team to smooth them over. You’ve heard of them, they’re called The Mainstream Media.

    Because it made them FEEL enlightened, the arrested development cases that make up the Left hind quarter of the American voting public happily let themselves be conned into “voting” for a man that did not have a shred of the necessary character or background that it takes to lead a first world superpower. Why? Because for decades, the Globalists have primed this country to embrace successively more radical Marxist weasels than the last one. They knew that Political Correctness and it’s traveling companion, White Liberal Guilt, had turned the collective American psyche into such a quivering mass of self-flagellating shame, that it just FELT good to elect The Magic Negro.

    If it LOOKS like a president, WALKS like a president and QUACKS like a president, THEN BY GOLLY IT MUST BE A PRESIDENT!

    With all due respect to Morgan Freeman, Hollywood could not have cast the part better.

    In the real world, a typical job applicant is subjected to all manner of personal questions, background checks, credit checks, reference requests, skill evaluations, etc.. But raising even legitimate and obvious questions to a Globalist owned “candidate of color” – who is, by the way, applying for THE most demanding and highest political office in the world – well, that’s just being a “hater”. And if some poor, misguided chump DARES to make the mistake of publicly asking inconvenient and embarrassing questions of the Chosen One? Well, then he or she is mercilessly shouted down by the nattering suck-ups in the Corporate Media, with the character and career-killing accusation of “RACIST!”, their verbal buckshot of choice these days for blowing away social and political dissent.

    “Homophobe” and “Islamophobe” are in the chamber and at-the-ready when needed.

    “Christian” will be next.

    As Obama’s monarchy winds down, you can almost smell the desperation coming out of the Rainbow House as he and Devil Doll, Valerie Jarrett scramble to complete the Eight Year Game Plan For Social Justice [read: Tyranny] that their Globalist Puppeteers assigned to them in 2008. End goal of said game plan? Weaken the United States in every way possible, Cloward-Piven style.

    “Fundamentally change America”? It’s the only thing Barry DIDN’T lie about.

    Prediction: When King Barack finally abdicates his throne in 2017, like that other ex-Oval Office serial liar, Bill “Slick Willie” Clinton before him, he will invent some bogus “foundation”, assume the guise of Elder Statesman and Lear jet around the world pushing garbage like his “wealth distribution” and climate schemes from country to country at, say half a million per speech (besting Slick Willie’s going rate by 300k!).

    That old Sixties flower child axiom: IF IT FEELS GOOD, DO IT, has reached its only logical conclusion and left society rotten to its self-centered core. Emotionilism and the Reactionism that it breeds is now the modus operandi that shapes public opinion and government policy in today’s America. This and generations of Marxist/Skinner/Dewey influenced public education, combined with the eradication of God from the public square, have given us a citizenry that no longer has the necessary moral and cognitive skills to determine right from wrong, good from bad. The barest of essentials for the survival of any culture.

    Idiocy like the so-called Self Esteem Movement that has infiltrated our public schools and popular culture over the last few generations, have all but replaced logic-based curriculum in the K through 12 public schools. By the time the average student enters college, his muddled brain is primed and ready to accept whatever perversions his Marxist “professors” want to indoctrinate it with.

    This is the mental and emotional makeup of a significant percentage of “voters” currently sizing up the candidates in the early stages of the 2016 presidential campaign. The odds-on favorites at this point in time look to be The Usual Suspects, or, more accurately, Relatives of The Usual Suspects.

    Establishment Leftists eagerly await “Hillary’s Turn”. This toxically self-entitled shrew thinks that just because she’s run all the political bases AND her name is Clinton, AND she’s a woman, AND we have already “elected” a Black man, she is somehow owed the right to park her evil-ridden soul in the White House for a new four year crime spree. AND for an extra-added-evil bonus — partner in crime, future “First Dude” Slick Willie, comes along for the ride.

    Let the White [frat]House hijinks begin anew!

    This all depends, of course, on whether she can beat the rap for the many scandals currently plaguing her odious and self righteous campaign to lead the American People further towards the cliff. I’d say yes, given that she has just the right blend of Machiavellian and criminal tendencies that the Globalists look for in their presidents.

    The Establishment Right, i.e., the Neo Cons and RINOs, can’t wait to elect the Bush Crime Family’s latest entry into the race for American Oligarchy, Jeb Bush. This political turd has the gall to solicit campaign donations from the very underclass (formerly the Middle Class) that he plans to defecate on if and when the Globalists install him in the White House. The irony here is that Jeb, or “Jeb!”, as his catchy new, one word candidate logo proudly trumpets, is rolling in Scrooge McDuck money, thanks to The Family’s multi-generational rape and plunder of the known universe.

    Has the “Liberal” Media bothered to seriously question “Jeb!” on this? Or even his Republican or Democratic rivals? Of course not. And they never will. Why? Because true liberalism AND true conservatism are not what’s being practiced anymore in the District of Corruption — at least not by the little demagogues currently steering that rotting monument to greed and self-servitude into the ditch. They know better than to question The System. And why would they? They are essentially mid-level managers FOR the system. I’m not talking about the now defunct system of checks and balances that once defined a great country. I’m talking about international banker and multi-multi-billionaire – if not trillionaire – David Rockefeller’s idea of a System, the one that he proudly admitted to at the infamous Bilderberg Conference in 1991:

    “We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”

    And how about this little nugget of depravity from international banker and CFR member James Warburg:

    “We shall have world government, whether or not we like it. The question is only whether world government will be achieved by consent or by conquest.”

    By “we”, he means “us” — the “little people” of the world.

    This holds equally true for the The System’s propaganda arm, the so-called Liberal Media, which by the way, is anything BUT Liberal, at least by any classical definition of the term. They are Radical Left and completely in service to this Globalist Agenda — which the world will soon discover is AUTHORITARIAN TO ITS CORE.

    Don’t let warm and fuzzy sounding phrases like “Global Governance” fool you when it enters the popular lexicon in a couple of years.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    As I write this, there has been a new development in the campaign:

    Preening billionaire/carnival barker, Donald Trump is overtaking Jeb! in the polls by tickling the ears of desperate and demoralized conservatives everywhere, with outrageous declarations like: “A country that does not secure its borders, ceases to be a country”.

    Of course, Trump is absolutely correct in his assessment of the role that border security plays in the health and survival of a nation. It’s outrageous ONLY in that a presidential candidate would actually verbalize such a blunt and politically incorrect statement in today’s sissified political and social climate. Unadulterated, purely spoken truth is now the exception, not the rule in today’s public discourse.

    It’s just unfortunate that this blustering, vainglorious buffoon lacks the self-discipline and focus that it would take to lead this country back from the brink of ruin. Because it’s not about altruistic personal sacrifice with this guy, it’s all about “The Donald” and The Donald’s Trump-Towering EGO.

    At least he is forcing the political conversation into an area that the other candidates want no part of, despite the fact that most of the (sane) people in this country are thinking the very things that Trump is saying.

    And it will be hilarious watching all the other mannequins as they try their best to stand out from the pack by acting “controversial” and “provocative”, something that they’ve made it a point to NOT TO BE, their whole political lives.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Why did the recent return of House control to the Republicans fail to turn the legislature back to something resembling sanity? Well, because the old, entrenched demagogues who control the House and Senate, routinely inform the new fresh-faced wannabes coming into the House and Senate, that to remain in the House and Senate, and have any voice at all in the House and Senate, they will need to buckle under and go-along-to-get-along. In other words: PLAY GLOBALIST BALL. The latest proof? The trashing of our national sovereignty by way of the Trans Pacific Partnership, an international treaty that, if ultimately passed, will override American independence on many, many levels. Some that have yet to be determined because precious few of our “legislators” have been allowed to read it, much less talk about it publicly (and no photocopies or note-taking permitted!).

    Other than some obligatory sniveling from some of the faux “Constitutionalists”, I didn’t hear much out of any of them in the way of REAL protest. After reading this illegal document, a true Congressional patriot would have sacrificed his or her “position”, defied the presidential gag order, and sung like a canary after walking out of the carefully guarded room where this travesty was kept hidden from the public.

    Just the latest in a long list of self-serving and treasonous crimes by our “leaders”.

    So all of that high-minded and noble “soaring rhetoric” that you’re hearing from the campaign trail? You know, all that stuff about “Getting those business as usual” types out of office so we can “Return the government back to The People”? Forget it. No one who enters that festering pustule of lies gets out of there with their soul intact. At BEST, good and decent people who go to Washington DC with honorable intentions are steamrolled into irrelevance by the Globalist lackeys who now rule the American crime capitol. Designating postage stamps and throwing a little “pork” back to the voters at home is the best they can hope for during their time in office.

    Here’s a revealing quote by [Bill Clinton’s] Georgetown University professor and Globalist insider, Carroll Quigley, from his epic1966 volume, Tragedy and Hope:

    “The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy”.

    Sound familiar? The sham Democrat/Republican paradigm in a nutshell.

    So go ahead America, vote your favorite candidate into that Washington DC parliament of whores in 2016, and when your politician of choice throws you under the bus after the usual ‘soaring rhetorical’ campaign bait and switch?

    Don’t worry — you can always “THROW THE RASCALS OUT!”.

    (Again).

  • Tom

    So you’re on board with Dave here? That your deep-down, innermost feelings of concern for the tender sensibilities of the terrorists and the habeus corpus rights of their non-citizen, overseas relatives are just SO STRONG, that there’s no way you could vote for Trump, even if someone put a gun to your head?

    That the idea – the very IDEA! – of waterboarding terrorists is just too, too much of an injustice for the poor widdle jihadis to endure, and instead of leveling the village, we should round everyone up and bring them to America so we can make sure that they receive due process of law?

    Really? You’re proudly declaring that your fellow Americans who support Trump should be treated with contempt, derision, and “unlimited violence”, while holding a soft spot in your heart for the feelings of the jihadis and the well-being and due process eights of their families.

    And who, exactly, is preventing you from expressing your personal opinion?
    Is it all the fellow Americans (fascist feces-flingers) here on moonbattery? You whinge about these “insane” fascists who ” cannot allow anyone to express a personal opinion that disagrees with their opinion or beliefs…” while you talk about – in your puffed-up, macho posery – using “unlimited violence” against those with whom YOU disagree? You don’t see the jarring disconnect here?

  • Tom

    Fuck off, A-V-E.

  • Tom

    Wow…haven’r seen you on here in days and then, when it is obvious that you sore Cruzers are being overwhelmed by the majority of folks who, logically, point out that it’s Trump or Hillary and it’s time to salve your butt-hurt, grow up, and do the right thing for America…here you are, not providing any kind of “logical” argument for your beliefs, but rather just slinging shit and insults…
    Did Dave or tor/cer send out an SOS?

  • Tom

    “Please explain why I would take the time to WARN people of the danger of his candidacy?”
    That’s an easy one….because you’re getting paid to do it in an effort to elect Hillary.

  • Tom

    I’ll take that as a NO…

  • Tom

    Sad for you that we’re starting to see through your scam…you weren’t born or raised in America, were you
    Where are you from? Canada? That might help explain your drooling man-love for Cruz, huh?

  • Tom

    Oh, I see…you’re going to waste your vote in an exercise in futility…

  • KirklesWorth

    Flagged that one as inappropriate…

  • KirklesWorth

    People afraid of tough talk rather than treasonous actions is unfathomable to me. Hillary has demonstrated she WILL skirt the law and her liberal accomplices will applaud her lawlessness as president. Trump will be under constant scrutiny and will be lucky if he gets any of the immigration restrictions he is championing.

  • BrainMatter5

    Trump is nowhere near perfect, but he’s still way way better than the lawless Clinton.

  • Bob

    Yes Trump isn’t perfect and neither was any of the republicans. But Hillary is evil. She is a criminal. She will have so many picks for judges it will be the end of the second amendment and the Constitution . It will be the end of this website Dave. I think Trump really wants to do what is right for America. But there will be three choices. Trump, Clinton or doing nothing. Sorry Cruz didn’t win, but joining up with the Rhino’s to defeat Trump is what you are doing. I’m right wing as you can get but I don’t want to be the part of destroying the republic. Trump is probably all that is standing in the way.

    I’ve heard plenty of people who know Trump who say he is listening to good advice. He has some great ideas. His one son is a hunter, pro guns. Trump might really get this illegal immigration problem under control. But you think 8 years of Hillary & Bill will be a better choice?

  • MAS

    Oh ouch…NOT. I hold that the God who created the universe with a word holds the fate of men and nations in His sovereign control. That He turns the king’s heart as water courses and so decides all who are placed into authority . Ted was my best choice when considering that the Lord knows our every thought and the ballot box isn’t a safe place to hide. But hey, you go ahead and support, on these sites, a vote for the baby killer supporting, multiple divorced, attempted widow’s property stealing, two faced, reprobate…it’s your eternity to face not mine. As for me and my house we will obey the Lord…

  • Torcer

    And you continue to LIE.

  • Torcer

    And once again you are wrong..

  • Torcer

    That doesn’t make any sense – why would some raise an alarm in that regard?

    They would most likely stay silent or criticize those who did so…

  • Tom

    Boy, for a multi-platform one-man propaganda machine, you don’t seem too bright…

    Why, oh why, would someone on conservative (read: GOP-supporting) websites – purporting to be a conservative – expend SO much effort and blather (tens of thousands) to demean, diminish, slam, slime, decry, insult, impugn, and malign Trump – the only alternative to the horrors of Hillary – all in the guise of a “concerned, principled, conservative”?

    Gosh, that’s a tough one, isn’t it? Maybe because he’s being paid by the Hillary camp to – again – slam, slime, etc – the GOP nominee? That the HRC folks are hoping that some weak-minded naifs would be overwhelmed by the frickin sheer volume of your anti-Trump propaganda and decide to vote for Hillary?

    Come on…there’s not THAT many dots to connect…..

    Here’s another dot: “behaviour” in place of the spelling that EVERY American uses…never, ever seen an American “accidentally” use the British / Canadian spelling…

  • Tom

    And the Lord is telling you to stay at home on election day? And God said: Let there be Apathy?

  • Torcer

    Perhaps it would help if you were to take the time to actually READ what I wrote.

    That would be a much better utilization of your time than writing long screeds as you have been doing.

    Try reading what I wrote and respond based on that please.

  • Tom

    Yeah, yeah…I’ve been going round and round with you here for months now…you push anything and everything that’s Anti-Trump…Trump’s a liar, Trump’s a thief, Trump’s unqualified and uncouth…
    You throw in an occasional anti-Hillary bit, but by and large, your one-note-song has been NoTrumpNeverTrumpTRUMP IS AWFUL!
    You’ve been “warning” us for months about what a scumbag Trump is…how unfit, how deceitful, how just flat out terrible Trump is…kind of like Hillary, huh?

  • Gene

    I see that the number one argument for Trump is that “Hillary is worse.” I feel much better about the choice now.

    Assuming that is true, one must still ask which one will do more damage to the conservative cause and individual liberty after their term is up. If a Trump win results in conservative losing the next four elections, it might not be a good thing. Of course 4 years of Obama didn’t teach anyone anything. I may vote in the end, but I’m getting really tired of voting for people because the other candidate is worse. (In Trump’s case we think Hillary is worse.)

  • Torcer

    Perhaps spending the time to read what I wrote and UNDERSTANDING it would help you in this matter.

    It would be a much better use of you time than writing long screeds as you are doing.

  • Tom

    I UNDERSTAND that you seem to have a pathological hatred of Trump, despite there being ANY other alternative besides Hillary. I UNDERSTAND that you post far, far more than any normal, average joe could do. I UNDERSTAND that someone who uses the spelling “behaviour” was not born / educated in America.

  • Torcer

    And once again you destroy your own credibility with more falsehoods.

    Try acting like an adult dispensing with the lies and childish invective..

  • Tom

    Please tell me what part of what I just said is a lie.

  • Torcer

    The lot of it.

    Can you Prove the veracity of what you said?

    Again, You are the the one making the accusation, YOU are the one who has to prove it – IF you can.
    [Please note that repeating said accusations DOES NOT constitute proof, neither does piling ANOTHER lie upon your previous lies prove anything]

  • dilsin

    I disagree. I view it as choosing between the certainties of a Hillary administration (Amnesty, SCOTUS gone liberal for a generation at least – bye bye Citizens United. Bye Bye Heller, single payer healthcare, law enforcement approach to terrorism, common core, affirmative action forever, basically everything we oppose) and the possibility of an upside surprise from Trump. I really think the dictator thing is a bit far-fetched. He’s a blowhard who could use a few lessons from School House Rock about how government works, but he’s hardly a dictator.

  • MAS

    You said that straw-man, not me. I just won’t be voting for YOUR god…

  • 762×51

    Far fetched? Today he said ” “Well, I’d like them to do that. But I don’t mind being a free agent, either,” Trump replied when that question was posed to him.” When asked how he felt about the possibility of losing the Senate in November. Those are the words of a dictator.

    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-doesnt-mind-being-free-agent-if-senate-gop-majority-falls/article/2596399

    News flash, if Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress, Chuck Schumer will be the Majority Leader and control the chamber. Want to bet ANY Constitutional justice gets through the confirmation process under that douche bag?

  • 762×51

    Epic fails are a way of life for you, aren’t they?

    First of all, I’m quite sure that I have smoke checked more hajjis than you or douche bag Donnie, so when it comes to jihadis, I will keep my own council on how to handle them, not some semi literate janitor who thinks he knows it all.

    Second, I have said here many times that waterboarding is not torture, the difference being that I have actually been waterboarded in a captive environment. stripped naked, handcuffs, bag over the head, stress box, electric shock and other things you cannot even imagine, all in a specific effort to break my will. You just howl and screech about it even though know nothing about it, which is your whole MO in a nutshell.

    Third, I only treat the brownshirts here, assholes like you, with derision, contempt and, if you had the balls to face me, unlimited violence. It’s the same thing you will receive in the streets before this is over so get used to it, people despise your kind.

    Fourth, you cannot stop me, I have proven it here many times, but you fascist Trumpanzees have silenced and driven off a number of others from this site having shit all over it daily for no other reason than it does not comport to your new found cult. There is no disconnect, fascist, I only target those who seek to impose their will on others, you are Barrack Obama as far as I’m concerned. See you and your kind are just hajjis who bathe occasionally, nothing more. Your totalitarian, “vote with us or else” ideology is Islam for politicos. I don’t care what you believe but your attempted to force others to comply with your ideology “or else” will not be tolerated. I disagree with others here, have for years, but never tried to force them to my beliefs, nor they me. You pricks roll in and start pushing people around and then act surprised when someone pushes back

    Finally, you always like to claim I’m “puffed up” but are too afraid to prove your words, they are therefore meaningless, like your life.

    Go play with your Bronys, chickenshit and say hello to your wife and my kids.

  • 762×51

    I agree, spread the leg 6969 is completely inappropriate.

  • 762×51

    Thank you for admitting his criminal complicity in influence pedaling.

    See, it makes no difference whether you are buying or selling, it’s all illegal, unless you believe that only narcotics sellers get arrested.

  • 762×51

    I have said repeatedly that your kind receive nothing but contempt and derision here, from me. I know that you cannot be reasoned with so I will not waste my time. Instead, I abuse you as fully as I can in this limited environment, but only because you lack the courage to face me in person, Brony Bitch.

  • 762×51

    Not an obsession, you sound like a bath house bitch every time you . . . open your mouth.

    There you go again, cardboard shooter with the “keyboard commando” bullshit, you must be looking in a mirror. We both know that you are the chickenshit who lacks the courage to face me in combat.

    Loser, loser, AAAWWWWKKKKK, Polly Parrot, Pussy.

  • Tom

    So is that your long-winded way of saying that you disagree with Dave’s ultimate, deep-down reasons for opposing Trump – because he would waterboard terrorists?
    In this post, dave reveals that Trump’s call to waterboard (or worse) terrorists is repulsive to him and is the ONE REAL reason why he could never vote for Trump….
    Sounds like you disagree with Dave, and agree with me.

  • KirklesWorth

    Does mommy know you are using the computer?

  • J.j. Cintia

    You must be joking. His opponent Hillary has such a long sordid criminal career its depressing she’s even eligible to run. Considering the corruption now, the idea that someone completely honest could or would even get involved is hard to believe. You probably favor Cruz, and that guy is a slimeball. He frequents whorehouses, takes money from Goldman-Sachs, and his wife even works there. Cruz’s wife wrote the proposal for the North American Union. They’re big time globalists. His Christianity is about as sincere as Jim and Tammy Bakker, or Jimmy Swaggert.

  • I just drop in even few weeks to see if sanity has reasserted itself.

  • dilsin

    Those aren’t the words of a dictator. Those are the words of someone not committed to Republican or conservative principles. Trump sells himself as a Republican, but he has been a Democrat most of his life. I don’t think he has strong conservative or liberal leanings. I think he is just not an ideological guy. Not saying that it’s a good thing, but it’s not the same thing as being a dictator.

    And this election will be all or nothing. The only way Trump wins against the massive well-funded, experienced Clinton machine is if there is a large wave of turnout for him as a protest against the establishment. If that wave materializes, then the GOP will keep the senate. If it doesn’t, Trump loses and it’s a moot point.

  • 7

    No, it’s an in depth way of demonstrating what an intellectual midget and hapless duck sucker you are. I notice you failed to address ANY of my points, another fail, again. Besides, it only seemed long because of you limited reading comprehension skills. It is also proof that you Trumpanzee insects are not interested in a discussion, you want to dictate and be obeyed, fuck that.

    Unlike you Progressive swine, we conservatives can disagree based on principles and not beat each other up for the disagreement. That is because one of our principles is that we don’t force others to agree with us. You Progressive vermin march in dazed lock step to a rigid, fact-less ideology wrapped around a cult of personality, smothered in bullshit and topped with whipped cream and a cherry on top.

    Dave may also disagree with me for some of the things I have done for God and Country, that’s Ok as well, so long as he does not disrespect my fallen brothers which I doubt he would do. I also doubt he has ever been waterboarded and so I do not believe he or anyone should have an opinion about it unless they have been through it.

    Just as not being for tRump does not make me for Hillary, not being for Dave Blounts opinion on waterboarding does not me for you, or tRump.

  • Tom

    So you’re conflicted…you decry all those mean old Trump supporters for supposedly suppressing dissenting opinions and that we are “not interested in a discussion, you want to dictate “, but on the other hand, Dave and anybody else who hasn’t been waterboarded “…should have an opinion about it unless they have been through it.”

    So, IOW, if we haven’t shared your life experiences, we are not even worthy of an opinion. I’ve never been waterboarded, yet I support its use if circumstances dictate it. So even though I AGREE WITH YOU, I am not worthy of expressing an opinion on the topic?
    How narrow-minded and insecure of you…
    You sure seem perpetually angry…Here I was trying to find common ground with you but you repeat your foul-mouthed and hate-filled tirade…Just think of how angry and alienated you will be on Nov 9, after Trump is elected president.

  • 762×51

    Right douche water, I’m so insecure that I’m willing to, in fact have, put my life on the line for the liberty of generations yet unborn. I have even risked my life to destroy some of your stated enemies. Guess that is what passes for insecurity in proggie retard land.

    Only a fascist thinks in terms of worth as in “not worthy of expressing an opinion”. I suppose it’s because fascists look down on those they would presume to lord over. Your “opinion is just that, subjective conjecture about a subject with which you have no practical experience. It’s not that you aren’t worthy of having an opinion, it is that the opinion is merely hot air. It would be the same if I had an opinion about the merits, pro or con of the benefits or use of the Large Hadron Collider. I know what it is, where it is and have a rudimentary understanding of its function, it accelerates and collides particles of subatomic matter. My opinion about it though is merit-less to anyone except me. I might express that opinion but I’m never going to try and persuade, much less force, any else to accept it as their own.

    Just think of how dead you’ll be as a result of the coming civil war that you have helped force on everyone else by by forcing your un-electable, shit candidate on us.

  • Tom

    Here’s a tip for you…to save yourself some keystrokes yet leave your analogy intact, next time you want to refer to something about which you say, ” I know what it is, where it is and have a rudimentary understanding of its function…”, instead of having to type “Hadron Large Collider”, just type “pussy”….

  • 762×51

    I already do that, when I’m referring to you, pussy. Won’t it get confusing if I refer to both of you with same term?

    Once again you evade the points I made, proving my point that you don’t care at all about a give and take, only your fascism. I assume you accept them as true.

    BTW, it’s the Large Hadron Collider, not the Hadron Large Collider. A hadron is a type of particle such as a photon. They must have covered this in janitor school.

  • 762×51

    Another Trumpanzee fascist who can’t handle anyone that disagrees with him or his cult leader, lol. My, my, this is a target rich environment.

    Report me some more fascist, I love it.

  • 762×51

    So Hillary did it, that makes it OK for tRump? LOL, logic was never your strength.

    I see you have been listening to Alex Jones, since you hate Goldman Sachs so much, how do you feel about your boy “The Donnie” hiring a former GS partner AND Soros Fund employee, Steven Mnuchin,as his campaign finance chairman? I assume that is perfectly fine because Trumpanzees always accept anything Donnie does regardless of how they have railed against it in the past. Steven Mnuchin father was also a GS partner years ago.

    So now, your mission is to roll over and show your belly and tell me how that doesn’t matter because it’s tRump.

    BTW, your boy has holdings all over the world, globalist? I think so.

  • 762×51

    Don’t talk with your mouth full of “the Donalds” dick.

    Well, maybe not full; . . .

  • 762×51

    Nope, tRump is still the presumptive nominee, no sanity out there yet. Come back after your boy loses to Hillary though, so I can really abuse you for making that happen.

  • Yeah because Jeb! was a real winner? Rubio wasn’t a traitorous fuck? Cruz didn’t have what it takes.

    So you just keep hoping for HRC to win so you can say I told you so.

    In fact, I think you should vote for her.

  • KirklesWorth

    I bet mommy’s proud of her child using big words like “fascist”. Maybe mommy will explain to you what “fascist” means and how to behave like an adult.

  • 762×51

    Nope, Jeb is a Progressive just like his father, older brother, Rubio and tRump.

    Cruz has what it takes to be President, unlike tRump, and would be a nominee I could vote for if not for tRump and his army of winged Trumpanzee Progressive fascists, people like you.

    The only people here who are helping Hillary win are you trumppie vermin who choose the only candidate out of a field of 16 that the general electorate find more distasteful than Hillary Clinton. The only candidate that agrees with Hillary on nearly every issue, it takes a special kind of stupid to accomplish that feat.

    By backing tRump, you are helping Hillary win, you are therefore a Hillary supporter.

  • So, you want to overturn the votes of the Republican primary cuz ya didn’t like the results? Cruz lost the primary. I was concerned about his ability to sell himself all along. I was right. Of course having him for AG, that would be a treat.

    What is the point of having elections then? Maybe you and a few of your friends should get together and just select our leaders for us since we aren’t smart enough?

    Why don’t you crawl back into your hole and piss and moan until after Trump is elected?

  • 762×51

    Ahh, the inner workings of the mind of a fascist, it never changes.

    I’m not overturning anything.moron. It was always the case that you were going to have to sell your boy to the MAJORITY of the electorate. You were able to elect tRump with the help of 12 million DEMOCRATS who voted in the GOP primaries, I suppose you are naive enough to believe that they will also vote for him in the general election, how amusing.

    tRump is a PLURALITY candidate, not a MAJORITY candidate, you should learn the difference before attempting future discussions on politics or even voting for that matter.

    Now, since you apparently perceive yourself to be a tough guy, how about you MAKE ME crawl into a hole, you little prick. You are comfortable saying it from behind the safety of your keyboard, but of course you haven’t the balls to do it in person, none of you Trumpanzee vermin ever do. That’s because, like your boy “the Donald”, you are all talk and no guts, now prove me wrong, asshole.

  • 762×51

    Too bad your “Mommy” didn’t bother you teach you to not be a fascist but then she was busy being a coke whore and a gangbang slut for black men along with Obama’s Mommy.

    Go fuck yourself asshole.

  • KirklesWorth

    Priceless! It sure doesn’t take much to get you to display your irrational hostility. You have as much grace, wit, and charm as a Bernie Sanders supporter.

  • Pingback: Moonbattery » Muslim to Give Closing Prayer on Day Two of Cleveland Trumpfest()

  • Pingback: Muslim to Give Closing Prayer on Day Two of Cleveland Trumpfest | Tea Party News()

  • 762×51

    No denial of the facts I presented so I assume you agree with my presumption that your mother is a dirty, black cock whore. Good, now, what can I learn about you?

    The usual pattern with you Trumpanzee vermin is you come in here and start pushing people around, lording over everyone with your elitist mentality. I see no difference in you than any of the other scum that have infested this site since tRump began his run. You have followed that pattern to the letter so it is safe to assume you are a sniveling coward like the rest of them, so superior as long as you remain hidden behind your keyboard but a cowering wretch in real life.

    My hostility is exactly what you wanted because it makes you feel like a man to stir up trouble while safe in your moms basement. The Internet lets you do things you haven’t the courage to do in real life. That sociopathic need to start trouble with complete strangers tells me you are also a narcissist which explains your love of tRump who is also a narcissist. It also demonstrates a complete lack of moral center which sociopaths lack. You are someone who will do anything to anyone so long as you can get away with it unscathed. All in all apathetic little prick.

    Well, see you on the battlefield, target.

  • KirklesWorth

    Why respond to the most juvenile, lazy, and pathetic of responses – insulting my mother? That is a troll cliché that speaks for itself. Do I really have to point out for the record how wrong you are, how immature you are for attempting it, and how lacking your analytical skills are?

    “Trumpanzee vermin is you come in here and start pushing people around, lording over everyone with your elitist mentality” – how laughably hypocritical. Who is doing the pushing here? Who is acting with an “elitist mentality”? Why, it is you! Pot, kettle.

    As far as your following paragraph, it is classic projection, hypocrisy, elitism, and comical un-self-awareness. YOU are the one attempting to “feel like a man to stir up trouble while safe in your moms basement” starting with your first insult. YOU are the one who is using “the Internet lets you do things you haven’t the courage to do in real life” as I doubt you would have the courage to say these things to our faces. YOU are the one that started “that sociopathic need to start trouble with complete strangers tells me you are also a narcissist” as you were the first to make trouble. YOU are the one with the “complete lack of moral center which sociopaths lack” as you come in here and name-call people who don’t agree with you (as well as pathetically insult my mother). YOU are the one who “will do anything to anyone so long as you can get away with it unscathed” (“Report me some more fascist, I love it”). Then of course, your last comment regarding “apathetic” is a perfect projection.

  • Mr_Paine

    HRC has outspent Trump 40 to 1, and they are in a statistical dead heat. Trump is 11 point ahead of HRC with independents.

    You are angry and stupid.

    No guts? Would you like to get together for a fistfight?

  • 762×51

    You fascist assholes have been pushing people around in here for over a year, jackass. That you don’t know that is a testament to your troll intent to come in here and start trouble. I didn’t seek you out, you started with me.

    Your attempted projection back onto me is noted and laughed at. These online pissing contests are so boring. The only real question is do you have the courage to take this outside the Internet? None of you fascistic fucktards have yet, and eventually you are going to have to back up your fascistic bullshit with action.

    Smart money says you are a coward just like the rest of them.

  • KirklesWorth

    To quote Socrates (just so you know, he’s a famous Greek philosopher): “When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” And just so you know, “slander” means “oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed”. And I expect you’ll fixate on “oral”, but since he died in 399 BC, we’ll give him some slack on not anticipating the internet, won’t we? We could call it “libel” if you prefer…

    But anyway, just how have “we” been “pushing you around” and just exactly how are “we” “fascists”? Just who is the “dictator” in this “fascist” scenario? The only one that has made demands in this thread is you. After that, maybe you have a reading comprehension problem regarding who is the trouble-starter, so I’ll direct your attention to your initial response to Sweep_the_leg_11590, “Then go spread your legs somewhere else, dip____.” My simple response to that was “Flagged that one as inappropriate…” to which you started your tirade starting with the demand “Report me some more fascist, I love it.” So, who started the trouble again?

    But once again, you state something and do another. You state “these online pissing contests are so boring”, and yet here you are. Will you contradict your own statement with another response in this “contest”? I wait with eager anticipation…

    And “do you have the courage to take this outside the Internet” is muy macho and all, but once again contradicts your criticism of “pushing people around”, “starting trouble”, “lording over everyone”, the ever-clever “Go f__k yourself a__hole.”, etc. (take your pick). If you ignore your own criticisms, why should anyone else take them seriously?

    This last comment just takes the bully cake: “Smart money says you are a coward just like the rest of them”. Boo freakin’ who…poor 762×51 doesn’t like being challenged, so he/she gets all threatened and defensive by some words typed in the comments section of an internet blog…pathetic.

  • KirklesWorth

    Your all-or-nothing “Trumpanzee” slur is a typical liberal tactic putting everybody who doesn’t share your views into one group and lazily insulting them in one fell swoop. Therefore, I could say if you don’t support Trump as the republican nominee, then you are a traitor to the republican cause – but I wouldn’t do such a thing.

    Decrying everybody that doesn’t agree with you a “fascist” is laughable and part of your m.o. of being histrionic. Since you continue to decry what you apparently don’t understand, please illustrate how the following definition of “fascism” applies in this situation:

    fas·cism /ˈfaSHˌizəm/ (1) a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government; (2) very harsh control or authority.

    Who is the one calling people “fascists” while hypocritically crying “who cannot allow anyone to express a personal opinion that disagrees with their opinion or beliefs”? Who should be decried as the “coward who can never back up their rhetoric”?

    Obnoxious bullying is not a substitute for reasoned debate. Is it that difficult to understand the republicans who are standing behind the republican nominee, or is that too abstract for you? Do you think that calling people “Trumpanzees” and “fascists” is going to sway anybody towards your position or do the opposite alienation?

    If you and Dave want to lose the White House to Hillary Clinton, that’s your decision – demonizing the rest of us for trying to prevent that abomination is just irrational hatred.

  • 762×51

    Well, I can elitist to the list of things I know about you which is consistent with the Trumpanzee filth behavior and coward as well.

    You will notice that the comment is still in place so evidently not everyone shares your overly sensitive, “mommies boy” views. Flagging someone IS STARTING TROUBLE, asshole.

    The offer was real, I’m not “attempting” to feel like anything other than someone who takes out the trash and you are pure garbage. Once you are done pontificating, realize that no one cares about you or your kriklesworthless opinions. I just know that the endless back and forth name calling serves no purpose in resolving the conflict between Americans and you Progressive insects so I swat those insects wherever possible. Unfortunately, the bulk of you are sniveling cowards who can only do what you are doing now and haven’t the courage to actually translate those meaningless words into action. You have provided one more demonstration that all of you are cowards who can’t back up your bullshit. I am willing to back up my words so until you grow a pair, go fuck yourself.

  • KirklesWorth

    “Flagging someone IS STARTING TROUBLE”??? Are you kidding me? You wouldn’t even have known if I hadn’t have said something. Classic! You are so disingenuous that you won’t acknowledge that you started trouble by saying to Sweep_the_leg_11590 “Then go spread your legs somewhere else, dips__t.”. Look at all the other threads where you were the instigator of trouble. Pathetic misdirection.

    So, when you said, “these online pissing contests are so boring” and “endless back and forth name calling serves no purpose”, you lied, right? I guess that pretty much determines the worth of all of your statements because contrary to your claims and by just looking over the comments on this one story, your favorite thing to do is to start and foment “pissing contests” as well as do the most name-calling (many of which I have listed below for easy reference).

    So we have lying, hypocrisy, and bullying. That makes you a swell person in my book. I barely insinuate something and you go off your stick like a rabid dog. I don’t call you names while you call me a “Trumpanzee”, “fascist”, “vermin”, “sniveling coward”, “prick”, “a__hole”, “jackass”, “f__ktard”, and my mother a “a coke whore and a gangbang slut for black men” and “dirty, black cock whore”. You are completely unglued, and your own words betray your instability way more than any insult I could produce.

    Did I mention bullying? Because maybe your big brother going to beat me up on the playground after school because I’m a “coward”…? Irritated that your pathetic insults are useless and detrimental? Frustrated that you keep keep dishing out the hateful swearing but can’t take not getting any back and leaving you with nothing but your “wit”? You are one tender snowflake. Oops, was that a nasty insult? Shame on me! But then again, it would be embarrassing to have someone demonstrate that you don’t even abide by your own criticisms and demands. But if you are not shamed nor embarrassed by ignoring your own statements, that must mean you are a glutton for punishment because every time you reply you give me more ammunition to demonstrate your hypocrisy and irrationality.

    But then again, you must be one ominous hero since you smoke checked hajjis, were waterboarded, stripped naked, handcuffed, head bagged, stress boxed, electrically shocked, risked your life, etc., I guess you are somehow entitled to be obnoxious and threaten people since nobody has broken your will before. Odd that you claim that you have defended our freedom of speech and then insult and threaten us for using it. Does that make you worse than the people you defended us from? Sorry if I sound skeptical of your implied military heroics, but the military people I know would never act in such an unrespectable manner. Maybe its a result of PTSD or something that makes you feel magnanimous?

    So which of your favorite tactics are you going to use next? What would you suggest the “smart money” be placed on? Can you come up with something that doesn’t involve name-calling, hypocrisy, bullying, or straight-out lying? Because for each reply, you condemn your “these online pissing contests are so boring” and “endless back and forth name calling serves no purpose” deeper into the fertilizer heap from where it came.

  • KirklesWorth

    So, the biggest anti-Trump argument is that democrats would vote for him and maybe they think it will work to their benefit? What else would they say? Even their worse-case scenarios sound better than Hillary opening the immigration spigot, gun grabbing, U.S. citizen contempt, race-baiting, law-dodging, embassy-abandoning, etc..

  • KirklesWorth

    Why shouldn’t we be thinking about the RATs (Republicans Against Trump) are voting against him rather than the democrats voting for him? Democrats voting for Trump is proof that Trump is bad? What is not voting for Trump going to accomplish that will be so positive?

    Are you going to be as thorough exposing what a Hillary presidency will be like? What about how Hillary would flood the country will illegals so a republican couldn’t get voted in ever again? How she considers herself above the law and would take away your rights? The civil and police wars that she and Obama instigate?

    Your selective indignation is interesting.

  • Torcer

    Is there some reason you would rather focus your efforts on trying to intimating others into acquiescing to your bad choice than defeating the national socialist left in November?

  • Torcer

    So why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?

  • KirklesWorth

    So what is the “superior” choice? Just what is my “bad choice” and how is it bad? What is your proposal for defeating the national socialist left in November?

  • KirklesWorth

    And your superior candidate is…?

  • Torcer

    Answer the question please:

    Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?

  • Torcer

    Please dispense with the strawmen and answer my question.

  • KirklesWorth

    Your question is loaded and subjective. You have no proof of this supposed “working against trying to win”. If the nominees are Trump and Hillary, I would be working for Trump. Now answer my question….your superior candidate is?

  • Torcer

    Then please explain Trump’s unforced errors?
    Instead of focusing on the general election campaign he’s talking about irrelevant issues.

    He already has the attention of the media, so why isn’t he trying to sell his candidacy instead issues that won’t matter in the long run.

    And as for your question:

    1. It’s a Straw man since I never mentioned the term you are using.
    2. There are only a couple choices since Trump was forced on the rest of the party.

  • KirklesWorth

    Nice evade. Your non-answer answer was expected. You have no better candidate, therefore you aren’t even “trying to win in November” – you are wasting your time criticizing us for wasting our time.

    I don’t have to explain nor justify Trump’s approach, I just have to make sure to expose peoples’ true anti-Trump agenda…especially when they have no better option to back them up.

  • Torcer

    Odd that you should say that since you’ve done that already.

    I’ve rejected your strawman argument so you can dispense with that attempt at ‘evading’ the question.

    Face it, you cannot explain the man’s actions can you?

  • KirklesWorth

    As I have rejected your straw man argument as well. Your first question was “Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?”. I posed the next question “And your superior candidate is…?”, but you refused to answer until I answered your first question, which I did. I even answered your second question, to which you incorrectly labeled as a “straw man”. But there will be no more answers from me until you do the same demand you made of me by answering my first question.

  • Torcer

    The problem for you is that mine wasn’t a strawman.
    It is a question based on recent events that have taken place.

    Again: I never mentioned the term you are using.

    But as YOU said: ‘Nice evade. Your non-answer answer was expected.’

    Face it – you cannot explain why the man is harming his own campaign with those actions.

  • KirklesWorth

    You either can’t or won’t answer my simple 5-word question: “And your superior candidate is…?”, and your “I never mentioned the term you are using” word-play games are irrelevant.

  • KirklesWorth

    Do you even know what a straw man fallacy is? It is “giving the impression of refuting an opponent’s argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent.” Your straw man was “I never mentioned the term you are using”, which fits the definition perfectly.

  • Torcer

    Please cite where I mentioned that term.

  • Torcer

    Again: That is a strawman.

    But as YOU said: ‘Nice evade. Your non-answer answer was expected.’

    Face it – you cannot explain why the man is harming his own campaign with those actions.

  • KirklesWorth

    You are disingenuous. You haven’t answered any of my questions. I started with a whole paragraph of questions, but you ignored them all by asking your own straw man question “So why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?”. Then when I replied with a question, and you refused to answer until I answered yours. And now you are back to refusing. Your “rules (or questions) for thee but not for me” debate “style” is hypocritical.

  • Torcer

    Ah yes, and now we see the use of name calling.

    But as YOU said: ‘Nice evade. Your non-answer answer was expected.’

    Face it – you cannot explain why the man is harming his own campaign with those actions.

  • KirklesWorth

    Unnecessary and irrelevant, thus the straw man. I posed a question to you that was not contingent on anything you had previously said.

    But here you are, still balking at my simple 5-word question: “And your superior candidate is…?” I didn’t realize it was going to be so tough for you…well, actually I did.

  • KirklesWorth

    Still waiting for you to answer one of my questions……

  • Torcer

    And I can ask the same: Still waiting for you to answer one of my questions……

  • KirklesWorth

    I’m just following your lead…refusing to continue until your question is answered. You set the rules…I’m just following them. And what supposed name did I call you?

  • Torcer

    And so you cannot show where I said that can you?

    “Still waiting for you to answer one of my questions……”

  • KirklesWorth

    I’ll defer to the answer I just posted below. You refused to continue until I answered your question, so I’m following your lead. You set the rules.

  • Torcer

    Perhaps if you were to refrain from such childish invective you wouldn’t need to ask such questions.

  • Torcer

    Do you really think that these types of heavy handed tactics will get people to support your candidate?

    I merely posted an excerpt of someone postulating a theory, and whether you realize it or not, you are confirming that theory.

  • KirklesWorth

    Still not answering my simple 5-word question: “And your superior candidate is…?” And somehow I am the one demonstrating “childish invective”…that’s a good one! So you are blaming me to justify your not answering my questions because of this so-called “childish invective”? Classic!

    Forgive me if I refrain from your suggested refraining. But I apologize if you have a reading comprehension problem, so I’ll recap for you. Please refer to item (4), which is where I am following your lead from this point on.

    (1) I posed (3) questions in my first paragraph, you answered zero of them.
    (2) You asked “So why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?”.
    (3) I responded to your question with the question “And your superior candidate is…?”
    (4) You stopped the conversation with “Answer the question please: Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?”
    (5) I answered your question with “If the nominees are Trump and Hillary, I would be working for Trump.”
    (6) Then, as you had done previously, I restated my question “Now answer my question….your superior candidate is?”
    (7) Then you evaded with various word-play games, yadda-yadda-yadda, until we ended up here – still with zero answers from you.

    It’s your volley.

  • KirklesWorth

    “Heavy handed tactics”? Are you joking? Who is the one plastering anti-Trump rhetoric all over these comments? But then again, you have no stated candidate, so your primary goal here is not to support any particular candidate but to disrupt support for Trump. Is that part of your theory I’m confirming?

  • Torcer

    No, it doesn’t work that way – you don’t get to ‘evade’ my question and then hurl back a number back.

    Again: Please cite where I mentioned that term.

    You will have to post an except of my using that term.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth

    “Heavy handed tactics”? Are you joking? Who is the one plastering anti-Trump rhetoric all over these comments? But then again, you have no stated candidate, so your primary goal here is not to support any particular candidate but to disrupt support for Trump. Is that part of your theory I’m confirming?

    And now you add denial to mix along with more strawman arguments.

    Please post an excerpt where I stated that which you are claiming.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth So, the biggest anti-Trump argument

    Who stated that?
    Except please.

    KirklesWorth What use is a subjective conspiracy theory
    (that reeks of desperation) about Trump handing over the White House to Hillary?

    As a warning to people.. That should be obvious.

    KirklesWorth What else would desperate RATs
    (Republicans Against Trump)

    That would be some of your
    childish same calling.

  • KirklesWorth

    Oh, so you get to make the rules but you don’t have to abide by them? How convenient for you. But I am four questions up on you, and it’s been your turn for several rounds – that you continuously keep trying to skip.

    The fact that you didn’t use the word “superior” is irrelevant and immaterial to the question. Pick any adjective you like: “better”, “improved”, “preferred”, “worthier”…take your pick. Your rhetoric is that Trump is an inferior candidate, so the logical 5-word follow-up question is “And your superior (or any other synonym) candidate is…?” .

  • KirklesWorth

    Ah ah ah…you’re not following your rules:

    (4) You stopped the conversation with “Answer the question please: Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?”

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth
    Oh, so you get to make the rules but you don’t have to abide by them? How convenient for you. But I am four questions up on you, and it’s been your turn to answer for several rounds – that you continuously keep trying to skip.

    But just to keep you from stalling the conversation…the fact that you didn’t use the word “superior” is irrelevant and immaterial to the question. Pick any adjective you like: “better”, “improved”, “preferred”, “worthier”…take your pick. Your rhetoric is that Trump is an inferior candidate, so the logical 5-word follow-up question is “And your superior (or any other synonym) candidate is…?” (Jeopardy theme)

    No, the point is that I didn’t bring up that subject.

    So, you failed in that little strawman distraction.

    Now please answer my question instead of ‘evading’ it.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth

    Ah ah ah…you’re not following your rules:

    (4) You stopped the conversation with “Answer the question please: Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?”

    What are you talking about?
    Is that all you have, More strawman arguments?

    Again:

    KirklesWorth

    “Heavy handed tactics”? Are you joking? Who is the one plastering anti-Trump rhetoric all over these comments? But then again, you have no stated candidate, so your primary goal here is not to support any particular candidate but to disrupt support for Trump. Is that part of your theory I’m confirming?

    And now you add denial to mix along with more strawman arguments.

    Again: Please post an excerpt where I stated that which you are claiming.

  • KirklesWorth

    Playing dumb now? Beginning from when I started this branch on this thread, I have answered 2 questions – you have answered zero. I had four questions in the queue before you which are still awaiting answers. You set precedent by stopping the conversation when you didn’t get your first answer – so I’m just following your lead / your rules. Or did you forget all that already?

  • KirklesWorth

    You sure put a lot of work and effort in evading my simple 5-word question: “And your superior candidate is…?” All you simply had to do is state a name or say “I don’t know”, but apparently that was too much for you. Did you use the word “superior”? Nope. Did that fact have any relevancy? Nope, which I continuously stated to no avail. It’s not all that abstract, really. So, with that excuse of the way, the $64,000 question still stands: “And your superior candidate is…?”

  • Torcer

    Again: You are basing your argument on a Strawman.

    The point is that I didn’t bring up that subject.

    You failed in that little strawman distraction.

    Now please answer my question instead of ‘evading’ it.

  • KirklesWorth

    Which question are you referring to now?

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth Playing dumb now?

    And now we see the use of more childish insults.

    Your failure to converse as an adult has no bearing on my abilities.

    KirklesWorth Beginning from when I started this branch
    on this thread, I have answered your first 2 questions (plus
    more),

    If that is the case then it should be EASY for you to
    post them here.

    KirklesWorth but you have answered
    zero.

    Really..

    KirklesWorth I had four questions in the queue before
    any more of yours that are still awaiting answers.

    And were those?

    Please post an excerpt of those questions

    KirklesWorth You set precedent by stopping the
    conversation

    Please explain how that was done –
    and note merely repeating the same thing explains NOTHING

  • Torcer

    The same question you have been evading.

    Answer the question please:

    Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?

  • KirklesWorth

    I guess this must be some sort of endurance test. Are you feelings hurt when I ask you if you are playing dumb? The definition of playing dumb is “To pretend that one has no or little knowledge (of something); to act ignorant or uninformed (about something)” This was illustrated by your question “What are you talking about?”, to which I had fully explained ad nauseum.

    “Your failure to converse as an adult has no bearing on my abilities.” There’s some handy projection for you.

    Unanswered question #1: “So, the biggest anti-Trump argument is that democrats would vote for him and maybe they think it will work to their benefit?”

    Unanswered question #2: “What use is a subjective conspiracy theory (that reeks of desperation) about Trump handing over the White House to Hillary?”

    Unanswered question #3: “What else would desperate RATs (Republicans Against Trump) say?”

    “KirklesWorth You set precedent by stopping the conversation. Please explain how that was done -”

    I did. “(4) You stopped the conversation with “Answer the question please: Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?”

  • KirklesWorth

    Oh, you mean the “unanswered question” I “evaded” yet somehow answered with:

    “Your question is loaded and subjective. You have no proof of this supposed “working against trying to win”. If the nominees are Trump and Hillary, I would be working for Trump. Now answer my question….your superior candidate is?”

    I’ll go further and say your question lacks foundation. You have no idea who will win in November, nor that it is my intention to work against trying to win. So if I wasn’t clear before, I refute the premise and require you to prove (1) that my candidate will lose in November, and (2) that he and I are working against trying to win.

    It’s that straw man thing you are so enamored with. You inserted the unfounded “working against trying to win” which lacks foundation and phrased the question as an attack on something unproven. It was cute, but I thought you’d be embarrassed to bring it back up because it was so faulty.

  • Torcer

    “Your failure to converse as an adult has no bearing on my abilities.” There’s some handy projection for you.

    What? You are the one hurling childish insults.

    Unanswered question #1: “So, the biggest anti-Trump argument is that democrats would vote for him and maybe they think it will work to their benefit?”

    Did you miss where I already addressed those questions? Veracity not your strong suit?

    Again:

    KirklesWorth So, the biggest anti-Trump argument

    Who stated that?
    Except please.

    Unanswered question #2: “What use is a subjective conspiracy theory (that reeks of desperation) about Trump handing over the White House to Hillary?”

    Again:

    KirklesWorth What use is a subjective conspiracy theory
    (that reeks of desperation) about Trump handing over the White House to Hillary?

    As a warning to people.. That should be obvious.

    Unanswered question #3: “What else would desperate RATs (Republicans Against Trump) say?”

    KirklesWorth What else would desperate RATs
    (Republicans Against Trump)

    That would be some of your
    childish same calling.

    “KirklesWorth You set precedent by stopping the conversation. Please explain how that was done -”

    I did. “(4) You stopped the conversation with “Answer the question please: Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?”

    And note merely repeating the same thing explains NOTHING

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth You have no proof of this supposed “working against trying to win”.

    Then explain why Trump keeps on reviving controversies instead of focusing on getting his message out and winning?
    Or are you going to deny that he hasn’t done that?

  • KirklesWorth

    Sorry, still waiting for your answer for “And your superior candidate is…?”. I’m not going round-and-round in circles again because you didn’t grasp an answer the first time.

  • Torcer

    Again – you have to cite where I brought that up.
    [You can expect me to repeat that – so don’t complain when it happens]

    You’ve FAILED to do so AND explain Trumps incomprehensible actions.

  • KirklesWorth

    “What? You are the one hurling childish insults.” (LOL). “Playing dumb” and “You are disingenuous” is so hurtful…and yet still true because both still apply.

    “Did you miss where I already addressed those questions? Veracity not your strong suit?” I don’t want to call you a liar or anything, but where did you address those questions?

    “KirklesWorth So, the biggest anti-Trump argument” “Who stated that?” “Except please.”

    Uh, I stated that. Crazy as that may sound, I think for myself. I posed my own summary of information as a question. You see, I don’t copy and paste large swaths of text like a mindless lemming – I process information and try and come up with my own thoughts.

    And what is it with you and your difficulty with questions? Oops, I asked another question…

    “That would be some of your childish same calling.” Would that be childish name-calling like “enormous Trump ego that expands faster than the universe”, or are you not to blame for insults from the article you cited?

  • KirklesWorth

    Shout all you want, throw a tantrum, whatever…but you have to wait in line and follow the rules like all the rest of us. It’s your turn to answer your first question “And your superior candidate is…?”

    Or maybe I just misunderstand that this is another one of your “Torcer rules for debate”?

    (1) Torcer asks questions – Torcer doesn’t answer them
    (2) Torcer’s questions are free-form and loaded, but non-Torcers must cite whatever Torcer demands.
    (3) Torcer’s questions have priority over all other questions regardless of the chronology
    (4) Torcer can post large swaths of other peoples’ text and others have address it
    (5) Torcer reserves the right to change the rules at Torcer’s request

  • Torcer

    “Your failure to converse as an adult has no bearing on my abilities.” There’s some handy projection for you.

    What? You are the one hurling childish insults.

    Unanswered question #1: “So, the biggest anti-Trump argument is that democrats would vote for him and maybe they think it will work to their benefit?”

    Did you miss where I already addressed those questions? Veracity not your strong suit?

    Again:

    KirklesWorth So, the biggest anti-Trump argument

    Who stated that?
    Except please.

    Unanswered question #2: “What use is a subjective conspiracy theory (that reeks of desperation) about Trump handing over the White House to Hillary?”

    Again:

    KirklesWorth What use is a subjective conspiracy theory
    (that reeks of desperation) about Trump handing over the White House to Hillary?

    As a warning to people.. That should be obvious.

    Unanswered question #3: “What else would desperate RATs (Republicans Against Trump) say?”

    KirklesWorth What else would desperate RATs
    (Republicans Against Trump)

    That would be some of your
    childish same calling.

    “KirklesWorth You set precedent by stopping the conversation. Please explain how that was done -”

    I did. “(4) You stopped the conversation with “Answer the question please: Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?”

    And note merely repeating the same thing explains NOTHING

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth Shout all you want, throw a tantrum, whatever…

    You’re the one acting childish.

    KirklesWorth It’s your turn to answer your first question “And your superior candidate is…?”

    Strawman – unless you can show where I brught that up. Which you have failed to do.

    KirklesWorth(1) Torcer asks questions – Torcer doesn’t answer them

    Are you claiming I’ve never addressed those qustions?

    KirklesWorth(2) Torcer’s questions are free-form and loaded, but non-Torcers must conform to Torcer’s requirements and cite whatever Torcer demands.
    (3) Torcer’s questions have priority over all other questions regardless of the chronology
    (4) Torcer can post large swaths of other peoples’ text and others have address it
    (5) Torcer reserves the right to change the rules at Torcer’s request

    I’m so you have no qualms about making things up then, correct?

  • KirklesWorth

    “You’re the one acting childish.” LOL…I know you are but what am I? LOL

    “Strawman – unless you can show where I brught [sic] that up. Which you have failed to do.”

    I’m sorry to point this out, but you keep using that “straw man” excuse as though it had some sort of validity (which it doesn’t) but you don’t know what it means. A straw man is a statement or combination of statements giving the impression of refuting an opponent’s argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent (not a question). It follows the form:

    Person 1 asserts proposition X.
    Person 2 argues against a superficially similar proposition Y, falsely, as if an argument against Y were an argument against X.

    Since a question is a sentence worded or expressed so as to elicit information, it is not asserting a proposition (unless it is a loaded question which you already demonstrated). Therefore, it is not a valid excuse for not answering questions.

    And yes, I am claiming you didn’t address those questions. Please feel free to cite and prove me wrong.

    Am I making up “Torcer’s rules for debate”, or have you already demonstrated them? Can’t take a little ribbing?

  • Torcer

    Well at least you’ve proven that you read my comments – but that is even more disturbing.

    Strawman Definition
    A fallacy in which an opponent’s argument is overstated or misrepresented in order to be more easily attacked or refuted.
    http://grammar.about.com/od/rs/g/strawmanterm.htm

  • KirklesWorth

    Fine, I’ll start block quoting…first a test…

    This is a test

  • KirklesWorth

    You claim you had responded to questions, so where are they before your last two comments? Where were they earlier in the conversation? Citations please.

  • KirklesWorth

    I was typing up this huge response, but I’m tired and I’d like to make it simple so I’ll rephrase the “And your superior candidate is…?” question this way:

    “Do you have a superior candidate and who would it be?”

    It’s redundant, more wordy, and conditional than “And your superior candidate is…?”, but you are so touchy about whether you do or don’t have a superior candidate that I’m not interested enough in debating your “straw man” excuse while simultaneously pointing out your logical fallacy of “avoiding the issue”.

    I’ll take the blame for not thinking about this sooner and letting you go on-and-on about excuses why questions won’t get answered.

  • KirklesWorth

    This opinion piece is from McClatchy, described by http://sitebias.com/ as “mostly social-left/economic-left leaning democrat”. So that indicates that whatever they attack on the right is in their best interest. If Trump is the target, he must be the biggest threat to them, and therefore the best choice for the right.

    The unmitigated bias of this propagandist hit piece oozes with contempt illustrated by this unabashed statement, “…enormous Trump ego that expands faster than the universe”. That alone should condemn this piece for being completely unobjective and bias-ridden.

    The title of the article is “What if Trump’s goal is really a Clinton victory?” Betteridge’s law of headlines is an adage that states: “Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no.” Using that alone, I could end my observations stating that the article has already negated its own premise. Nevertheless, I will go on.

    Innuendo, hyperbole, circumstantial evidence, correlation without causation, etc. are all techniques that this article uses to try and convince the naive reader of a scary “Trump-Hillary conspiracy” in order to drive voters to Hillary. Since its publishing 12 days ago, two of its observations are demonstrably wrong and the others don’t have to be disproven because they haven’t been proven in the first place or are just irrelevant.

    “All indications now are that the billionaire businessman will not become the 24th GOP president…” What indications? The article is 12 days old but many polls show Trump almost tied with Clinton.

    “What if Trump’s idea of winning is electing Hillary Clinton? And devastating the GOP in the process?” So, now we are entertaining “what ifs” as hit piece justifications? Innuendo and circumstantial evidence from years ago is not proof of anything. Trump was a business man and made many contributions to many things because it was in his best interest at the time.

    The comment that “Trump has done everything possible to torpedo his campaign as a serious candidate – and help Clinton’s stumbling candidacy” is laughable. Says who? He is currently polling right there with Clinton, has had relatively few missteps, and if Hillary wasn’t indicted for lying and destroying classified information, it certainly wasn’t Trump’s fault.

    “His fundraising is tardy and halfhearted.” Says who? USAToday recently stated “Republican Donald Trump swept to his strongest fundraising month of the presidential election in June, pulling $26.7 million”. Funny how getting off to a slow fundraising start is somehow indicative of Trump working for Hillary according to Andrew Malcolm. Well, that “explanation” just got demolished.

    “Trump’s done little to unify a fractured GOP riven with suspicions over his conservative credentials and with fears for its own political survival inside his Nov. 8 ballot blast zone.” So what? Ted Cruz was a staunch conservative and he is out. Trump’s goal is to get elected by popular vote – not necessarily to placate republicans and RINOs.

    “Trump routinely steps in to divert attention back to himself.” So? What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? He also refers to the greatness of America and the American people. Anybody ever heard an Obama speech? Obama referred to himself 118 times in a 4 minute video and is apologetic for America and Americans. “divert attention back to himself” is subjective and irrelevant.

  • KirklesWorth

    I don’t know where my previous comment went, but what you are complaining about is that you think “And your superior candidate is…?” is a “loaded question”, not a “strawman”. I’ll reword it to match your delicate sensibilities with “Do you have a superior candidate and who would that be?” Any childish evasions this time?

  • Torcer

    Didn’t you already state:

    KirklesWorth
    Crazy as that may sound, I think for myself. I posed my own summary of information as a question. You see, I don’t copy and paste large swaths of text like a mindless lemming – I process information and try and come up with my own thoughts.

  • Torcer

    Did you even understand my point?

    You are the one supposedly advocating the Trump candidacy not I.

    You are the one who should be selling the his candidacy and yet you are here haranguing for it.

    Do you you really think that people will respond positively to that kind of onslaught?

  • Torcer

    Sadly, you cannot even acknowledge the correct definition of the term..

  • Torcer

    1. Those excerpts were posted back when there still was a chance of someone else getting the nod.

    2. At this point it is entirely POINTLESS to re-litigate the primaries.

    3. There were several candidates Tom Coburn, Scott Walker, Ted Cruz or for that matter just about any Conservative picked at random from the Denver phone book would be a good choice.

    4. At this point in time AFTER the RNC convention there are in essence 4 – 5 choices: Trump, SMOD, Not voting that part of the ticket, Gary Johnson and the comrade from the national socialist left.

  • Torcer

    Pointing out that someone is acting childish is supposedly ‘childish’ is absurd – that is akin to parent admonishing their offspring about their behaviour is purportedly acting as their children.

    And make no mistake, It makes no matter if you want to act childish – I am merely pointing this out because it is a sure indicator that you have run out of intellectual arguments.

    It does not matter if you want to continue acting childish, it only shows you are out intellectual firepower and have to sink into the SKW gutter of hurling childish invective, falsehoods and a tacit refusal to engage in civil debate on the issues.

  • Torcer

    “Your failure to converse as an adult has no bearing on my abilities.” There’s some handy projection for you.

    What? You are the one hurling childish insults.

    Unanswered question #1: “So, the biggest anti-Trump argument is that democrats would vote for him and maybe they think it will work to their benefit?”

    Did you miss where I already addressed those questions? Veracity not your strong suit?

    Again:

    KirklesWorth So, the biggest anti-Trump argument

    Who stated that?
    Except please.

    Unanswered question #2: “What use is a subjective conspiracy theory (that reeks of desperation) about Trump handing over the White House to Hillary?”

    Again:

    KirklesWorth What use is a subjective conspiracy theory
    (that reeks of desperation) about Trump handing over the White House to Hillary?

    As a warning to people.. That should be obvious.

    Unanswered question #3: “What else would desperate RATs (Republicans Against Trump) say?”

    KirklesWorth What else would desperate RATs
    (Republicans Against Trump)

    That would be some of your
    childish (edit) name calling.

    “KirklesWorth You set precedent by stopping the conversation. Please explain how that was done -”

    I did. “(4) You stopped the conversation with “Answer the question please: Why are you and your candidate working against trying to win in November?”

    And note merely repeating the same thing explains NOTHING

  • Torcer

    Loaded question
    A loaded question is a question that presupposes a disputed claim or indulges in circular reasoning. Closely related to this is the complex claim, which is a loaded question expressed as a statement rather than as a question.
    http://www.conservapedia.com/Loaded_question

  • KirklesWorth

    Duh. You were the one that needed the “loaded question” explanation, remember? The superior candidate is Trump, and the laughable article you posted just goes to show the desperation people have.

  • Torcer

    Why do you keep on wasting time criticizing postings from before the convention?

  • KirklesWorth

    The criticism was initially yours, so why aren’t you following your own suggestions? Because your quest is not for debate but for obfuscation.

  • Torcer

    From BEFORE the convention… What is the point in wasting time on this now?

    BTW, Just how do you know my motivation in this matter?
    Please cite the FACTS to back up this assertion of yours.

  • KirklesWorth

    I’m not playing any more semantics games with you. You posted an hit piece that was as useless as the toilet paper it would have been printed on. Why are you wasting time asking me about wasting time? Do you follow anything you suggest?

  • Torcer

    You’re the one who decided to keep on about this on an issue..

    Just how do you know my motivation in this matter?
    Please cite the FACTS to back up this assertion of yours.

  • KirklesWorth

    A certain person once asked me, “What is the point in wasting time on this now?” So if two people are intent on getting in the last word, the conversation will continue. Got a problem with that?

  • Torcer

    The problem for you is that I can wait days if not weeks to inquire on the issue I raised about Trump’s actions.

    If he keeps on as he has done in the past it will be harder and harder to deny the reality of the situation.

    KirklesWorth Because your quest is not for debate but for obfuscation.

    Just how do you know my motivation in this matter?
    Please cite the FACTS to back up this assertion of yours.

  • KirklesWorth

    Bully for you. And I can reply with the poll numbers. What’s your point? The reality is tipping in Trump’s favor.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth Because your quest is not for debate but for obfuscation.

    Just how do you know my motivation in this matter?
    Please cite the FACTS to back up this assertion of yours.

  • KirklesWorth

    Nope. Reaching back for more challenges on semantics, eh? Well, I’ve been through that roundabout before. But if you want to concede that Trump is the best candidate, then my work here would be done.

  • KirklesWorth

    How did I miss this little gem? More criticism about semantics while avoiding the topic…and without your precious citation either…tsk, tsk, tsk. If not Trump, then who?

  • Torcer

    How did you phrase it previously?

    Nice evade. Your non-answer answer was expected.

  • Torcer

    That is called a fact… perhaps if you and those you purport to be in kinship knew more of them the nation wouldn’t be in such dire straits.

  • KirklesWorth

    LOL…wow, you are getting desperate. Blame me and everybody else for the country? What a ridiculous stretch. As someone once instructed me, Please cite the FACTS to back up this assertion of yours.

  • KirklesWorth

    I thought I was clear…I’m not playing your semantics games any more. Your McClatchy hit piece slammed Trump, and I slammed Andrew Malcolm’s propaganda and his lack of journalistic integrity. And since you have no better candidate, I would have to pose your own question back at you “What is the point in wasting time on this now?” Although your anti-Trump rhetoric answers the question for you.

  • KirklesWorth

    LOL…what the devil are you grasping at now? Because I did some of those “citations” you demand? What a hypocritical non-response response. Once again, you dodge the issue and comment on the commenter…pathetic. Please stick to the topic and curb this obsession with my writing style.

  • Torcer

    Hahahahaha.. sorry to laugh at your expense but there you go with another unfounded assertion..

    My facts have already been posted previously. unless you are alluding to something else – in which case you will have to be specific in what you are referring to.

    But then again, that would mean you would actually have to answer a question.

  • Torcer

    Again – as stated those items were posted BEFORE the convention while there still was chance for someone else to step in and save the day..

    At this time it is pointless to re-litigate the primaries.

    You are also aptly demonstrating that you would rather attack Conservative than try to sell Trump’s candidacy.

    Why don’t you try doing that without invoking the name ‘Hillary’
    BTW, I’m till awaiting your answer on this:

    KirklesWorth Because your quest is not for debate but for obfuscation.

    Just how do you know my motivation in this matter?
    Please cite the FACTS to back up this assertion of yours.

  • Torcer

    So which is it?
    You used that excuse to avoid answering a question and yet you had no qualms about the practice when it was advantageous to you.

  • Torcer

    Who’s up for another day of news about First Lady speech plagiarism?
    For reasons known only to him, the big guy thought it was worth reviving this story this morning.

    Donald J. Trump@realDonaldTrump
    Good news is Melania’s speech got more publicity than any in the history of politics especially if you believe that all press is good press!
    11:31 AM – 20 Jul 2016

    “All press is good press” is a tidy summation of the Trump philosophy and it supports some of the theories kicked around yesterday that the plagiarism was some sort of deliberate, next-level strategic gambit. Alas, the truth is more mundane: Meredith McIver, a Trump Organization employee who helped Melania Trump with the speech, now admits that the simplest and most obvious explanation is the correct one — namely, it was a screw-up.
    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/07/20/whos-up-for-another-day-of-news-about-first-lady-speech-plagiarism/

    SURPRISE. Trump Campaign Admits Plagiarism In Melania Trump’s Speech | RedState http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2016/07/20/surprise.-trump-campaign-admits-plagiarism-melania-trumps-speech/

    Why We Criticize Melania Trump | RedState http://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2016/07/20/criticize-melania-trump/

    Melania Trump’s Speechwriter Admits Plagiarism; Trump Campaign Manager Spends 8-Minutes Denying Plagiarism http://goo.gl/DDiKnT via @thepolitistick

  • Torcer

    WATCH: NY Times video NAILS why so many Republicans are ANTI-TRUMP http://therightscoop.com/watch-ny-times-video-nails-why-so-many-republicans-are-anti-trump/

    WATCH: NY Times video NAILS why so many Republicans are ANTI-TRUMP
    The NY Times has published a video interviewing Republicans on why they have a problem with Trump as the nominee — and it’s very good.

    Amanda Carpenter says it’s an “excellent video piece documenting concerns GOP-ers have with Trump and who won’t vote for him.”
    https://youtu.be/dbbaWU8vOow
    http://therightscoop.com/watch-ny-times-video-nails-why-so-many-republicans-are-anti-trump/

  • Torcer

    HOLY WOW: Amazing Voice Matchup Between Melania and Michelle Leaves ZERO Doubt [VIDEO]
    Everyone is waffling back and forth on whether or not Melania Trump’s speech was lifted from Michelle Obama’s whole cloth. Well the debate is over.

    Pay really close attention to this video from Heat Street.
    https://m-secure.wsj.net/video/20160719/melaniafinal/melaniafinal_v2_ec664k.mp4
    Think about accents.
    Every clip of Melania in that video is not using her voice. That is the audio of Michelle Obama laid over video of Melania. That’s how perfectly it matches. That’s how exact. Her lips literally synch with Michelle’s voice.
    http://www.redstate.com/absentee/2016/07/19/holy-wow-amazing-voice-matchup-melania-michelle-leaves-zero-doubt/

  • Torcer

    George W. Bush: I could be ‘the last Republican president’
    A story published Tuesday by Politico says President George W. Bush told former aides at a staff reunion in April that he is concerned he could be the last Republican president:

    When it came to talk of 2016, though, the mood was grim. The Republican primary had just narrowed to essentially two choices, each anathema to these card-carrying members of the GOP establishment: Ted Cruz and, even more egregiously, Donald Trump.

    But few were as dark about the Republican Party’s future as former President Bush himself. In a more intimate moment during the reunion, surrounded by a smaller clutch of former aides and advisers, Bush weighed in with an assessment so foreboding that some who relayed it could not discern if it was gallows humor or blunt realpolitik.

    “I’m worried,” Bush told them, “that I will be the last Republican president.”

    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/07/19/george-w-bush-worried-he-could-be-the-last-republican-president/

  • Torcer

    SURPRISE! The Staffer that Wrote Melania’s Speech Is a Registered Democrat
    Melania who initially claimed wrote the speech with as little help as possible, actually had the speech written for her by a staffer named Meredith McIver. She is a ghost writer for Trump, and according to her, a long time friend of the Trump family.

    McIver has taken full responsibility for the speech, and even offered an explanation to the public.

    But as the lies unravel, one interesting tidbit was discovered by WKYC in Cleveland. As it turns out, McIver is a registered Democrat.

    “TEGNA investigative reporter Brendan Keefe has learned Meredith McIver is shown as a registered Democrat in Lexis/Nexis, a database of information regularly used by journalists, lawyers and government officials. McIver is an in-house staff writer for the Trump Organization who also has ghostwritten multiple books written by Donald Trump. She has been a registered Democrat since 1996, according to the database.”

    So here we have a Democrat, plagiarizing speeches from another Democrat, for a woman married to a Democratic donor running for President as a Republican.

    You can’t see it, but I’m slow clapping.
    http://www.redstate.com/brandon_morse/2016/07/20/surprise-staffer-wrote-melanias-speech-registered-democrat/

  • KirklesWorth

    Issue: republican candidate. Not issue: just about anything else you try and change the subject to.

  • KirklesWorth

    So now that it is AFTER the convention, you will concede that Trump is the best pick, right? Hillary notwithstanding. Assertions can be made with your silence like this: “who would you pick for the republican candidate?” If you have no response, then you are here to spread anti-Trump rhetoric with nary a solution in mind, n’est pas?

  • KirklesWorth

    This verbal merry-go-round just ends up back at the same spot. You have no candidate better than Trump, and you will bend over backwards to try and change the subject. I don’t know what “facts” you think you’ve presented other than that discredited article that you somehow now no longer stand behind because it is “pre-convention”, but your foundation has crumbled and no amount of side-tracking every comment is going to produce a candidate better than Trump.

  • Torcer

    1. You can dispense with the incessant repetition of your strawman argument.
    2. Try answering this : Are you a Conservative? Yes or No?

  • KirklesWorth

    And you can dispense with your instructions to dispense. But to answer your question, yep. Do you have a better candidate than Trump?

  • Torcer

    1. You can dispense with the incessant repetition of your strawman argument.
    2. Are you decreeing the parameters of one’s free-speech?

  • Torcer

    You are also aptly demonstrating that you would rather attack Conservative than try to sell Trump’s candidacy.

    Why don’t you try doing that without invoking the name ‘Hillary’

  • Torcer

    So can we take that as a Yes? That you are a Conservative?

  • KirklesWorth

    And you can dispense with the incessant repetition of your strawman criticism. “Are you decreeing the parameters of one’s free-speech?” Compete dodge, subject change, and as you are fond of saying, “Please cite the FACTS to back up this assertion of yours.”

  • KirklesWorth

    I’m sorry…I thought “yep” meant “yes”. Do you have a better candidate than Trump?

  • Torcer

    Since you purport to be a supporter of his, why don’t you lay out you case for his candidacy without invoking the name of Comrade Clinton?

  • KirklesWorth

    Improper response. It is your turn to answer, not ask. My question is pending: Do you have a better candidate than Trump?

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth
    Assertions can be made with your silence like this: “who would you pick for the republican candidate?” If you have no response, then you are here to spread anti-Trump rhetoric with nary a solution in mind, n’est pas?

    1. You can dispense with the incessant repetition of your strawman argument.
    2. Are you decreeing the parameters of one’s free-speech?

  • KirklesWorth

    “Please cite the FACTS to back up this assertion of yours.” This section of the thread was to challenge you on your anti-Trump rhetoric. Nice attempt though.

  • Torcer

    Again, that is your strawman.

    At this time it is pointless to re-litigate the primaries.

    You are also aptly demonstrating that you would rather attack Conservative than try to sell Trump’s candidacy.Why don’t you try doing that without invoking the name ‘Hillary’

  • Torcer

    Again – as stated those items were posted BEFORE the convention while there still was chance for someone else to step in and save the day..

    At this time it is pointless to re-litigate the primaries.

    You are also aptly demonstrating that you would rather attack Conservative than try to sell Trump’s candidacy.

    Why don’t you try doing that without invoking the name ‘Hillary’

  • KirklesWorth

    Thanks for confirming that you are anti-Trump and have no better solution. The article you posted was anti-Trump, and your silence on what would be better than Trump demonstrates you have nothing.

  • KirklesWorth

    Improper response to my yes-or-no question. There is no “strawman” in the question: “Do you have a better candidate than Trump?” Just because answering it sets you up for ridicule does not qualify it as a “strawman”. In terms of “attacking conservatives”, Please cite the FACTS to back up this assertion of yours.

  • KirklesWorth

    I am defending the de-facto republican candidate, you are not. I am the pro-conservative in this scenario, you are not. If there is any “conservative attack” going on here, it is you who is perpetrating it.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth
    Thanks for confirming that you are anti-Trump and have no better solution. The article you posted was anti-Trump, and your silence on what would be better than Trump demonstrates you have nothing.

    Ah yes, the use of the tactic of disingenuously pretending something was said when it wasn’t. You used most of the tools in the SJW toolkit, so it was sure bet that would show up at some point.

    Why are you having so much trouble arguing arguing in favour of Donald?

  • Torcer

    I’ve already presented the case on that, Why are you having so much trouble arguing arguing in favour of Donald?

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth
    I am defending the de-facto republican candidate

    How exactly are you doing that?
    The best you’ve been able to offer in the incessant repetition of your strawman argument.

    Do you actually have reasons to vote for Donald?

  • KirklesWorth

    See below for further responses. I’m not going the the same rigmarole multiple times in the same thread.

  • KirklesWorth

    “How exactly are you doing that?” What a ridiculous and disingenuous question. I can’t believe I have to explain this, but here goes – you attacked Trump, and I am defending him. Boy, that was abstract – no wonder you missed it. But then again, everything is incorrectly a “strawman” to you.

    Here’s a complicated reason to vote for Trump: he is the republican candidate. Wow, everything is so deep…

  • Torcer

    No, that is a new tactic you are using.

    Why are you having so much trouble arguing arguing in favour of Donald?

  • Torcer

    “How exactly are you doing that?”

    KirklesWorth What a ridiculous and disingenuous question.

    Try answering the question instead of using ad hominem attacks.

    Do you actually have reasons to vote for Donald?
    Something OTHER than the reason you keep on repeating..

    KirklesWorth But then again, everything is incorrectly a “strawman” to you.

    Where did I state that?
    You would have credibility if you could manage to avoid making assertions like that.

  • KirklesWorth

    I did answer your ridiculous and disingenuous question “How exactly are you doing that (defending the de-facto republican candidate)?” I said “I can’t believe I have to explain this, but here goes – you attacked Trump, and I am defending him.” Problems with reading comprehension? Forget that embarrassing article you want to sweep under the rug?

    “Do you actually have reasons to vote for Donald? Something OTHER than the reason you keep on repeating.” Yep (“yes”). See how I demonstrated how to answer a yes or no question?

    “Where did I state that? You would have credibility if you could manage to avoid making assertions like that.” Non-specific…where did you state what? You don’t state a lot of things that says as much about you as what you do say. Please include the phrase you are referring to.

    I think Inigo Montoya would respond about your “straw man” claims:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk

  • KirklesWorth

    Apparently you are confused regarding “having so much trouble arguing arguing [sic] in favour of Donald?” with not be inclined to give you my reasons. Kind of like your refusal to name a better choice than Trump. I will be voting for the republican candidate…is that not sufficient?

    On a side note, curious spelling of “favour”. as it has a distinct Canadian flavour…?

  • KirklesWorth

    Apparently you are confused regarding “having so much trouble arguing arguing [sic] in favour of Donald?” with not be inclined to give you my reasons. Kind of like your refusal to name a better choice than Trump. I will be voting for the republican candidate…is that not sufficient?

    On a side note, curious spelling of “favour”. as it has a distinct Canadian flavour…?

  • Torcer

    Try it this way: Why are you having so much trouble arguing in favour of Donald?

    Did you support Donald during the primaries?
    And if not, who did you support?

  • Torcer

    That is your best response?

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth
    “Where did I state that? You would have credibility if you could manage to avoid making assertions like that.” Non-specific…where did you state what? You don’t state a lot of things that says as much about you as what you do say. Please include the phrase you are referring to.

    Did you miss where I included your quote:

    KirklesWorth But then again, everything is incorrectly a “strawman” to you.

    Where did I state that?
    You would have credibility if you could manage to avoid spewing falsehoods.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth
    Forget that embarrassing McClatchy article I demolished that you want to sweep under the rug?

    How did you specifically ‘demolish’ that article?

    KirklesWorth “Do you actually have reasons to vote for Donald? Something OTHER than the reason you keep on repeating.” Yep (“yes”). See how I demonstrated how to answer a yes or no question?

    Okay let’s see those reasons.

  • KirklesWorth

    Try it this way. Why are you having so much trouble arguing in favor of any one that you are unable to name?

    Did you support this unnamed candidate during the primaries? And if not, what gives you the stones to ask other people about who they support?

  • KirklesWorth

    “How did you specifically ‘demolish’ that article?” Standing behind it then? You tried a couple times to claim it was irrelevant. But I already answered this question with paragraphs of critique, so I’ve already done my part. Prove me wrong.

    “Okay let’s see those reasons.” Excuse me? Who are you to make demands of me? I support the republican candidate, you don’t – and you have nobody else. If there is a conservative here that should be on the defensive, it is you.

  • KirklesWorth

    Tom and Walter.R – you guys should check out Torcer’s doublespeak on the thread I am on. Torcer’s repetitive tactic with me is declaring “strawman” whenever there is something Torcer doesn’t want to reply about. Funny that Torcer demands yes or no answers from you guys but won’t answer a single yes or no question from me. Oh the irony and the hypocrisy…

  • KirklesWorth

    Torcer said “favour” on my thread, and I asked him/her the same thing!

  • Walter.R

    Yeah…I have started blocking trolls like torcer. they are all the same. They start out as if they are reasonable people, only wanting you to reasonably consider that Donald Trump is the cause of all the world’s problems and if only it were Cruz running who we should all vote for, it would be wonderful. Never a negative word about that thing that shall not be named. When you challenge that theme, it quickly deteriorates to name calling and demands that YOU answer them. Generally, I get to the point where I just block them resulting in a much more peaceful life.

  • Tom

    He’s been noticably absent from moonbattery for a while…just popped up today to chirp some more.
    Somebody is paying him…

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth No, try it this way. Why are you having so much trouble arguing in favor of anyone that you are unable to name?

    Did you support this unnamed candidate during the primaries? And if not, what gives you the stones to ask other people about who they support?

    1. I’ve already elucidated an answer to that question.

    2. You claimed that you could cite those reasons:

    KirklesWorth “Do you actually have reasons to vote for Donald? Something OTHER than the reason you keep on repeating.” Yep (“yes”).

    Again: Let’s see those reasons.

  • Torcer

    KirklesWorth “How did you specifically ‘demolish’ that article?” Standing behind the article then? But yet you tried a couple times to claim it was irrelevant for being BEFORE the convention. But I already answered this question with paragraphs of critique, so I’ve already done my part. Prove me wrong.

    1. That doesn’t answer the question.
    2. If you had already accomplished that task, it should be EASY for you to re-post that answer.
    3. You made the claim, YOU have to back it up. If you cannot it is worthless.

    KirklesWorth “Okay let’s see those reasons.” Excuse me? Who are you to make demands of me? I support the republican candidate, you don’t – and you have nobody else. If there is a conservative here that should be on the defensive, it is you.

    Why are you spending so much time and energy trying to avoid answering that question?
    Let’s hear those reasons.

  • KirklesWorth

    Again, no. In case I haven’t been perfectly clear, I am voting for the republican candidate. You are not entitled to know anything beyond that until you can explain why that statement is insufficient or why my vote would be better cast for somebody else.

  • Torcer

    Face it, as a supposed Trump supporter you are FAILING to explain your rationale for voting for the man.

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy