[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

The party nominees are named. Now who do you support?

  • Total voters
    278
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dennisch
I don't understand why they're complaining about Trump’s wall. There already is a massive fence out there.
Click to expand...
1000 years ago they figured out that a wall was only as good as the archers manning the battlements. The Obama administration has tied the hands of border enforcement officers, which is the crucial factor. The Great Wall was always sugar frosting.
 
homeforsummer
Trump softens promise of border wall, says parts could be fence*

This just a few days after suggesting he may not fully repeal Obamacare.

Anyone care to guess what's next on his list of major campaign promises he's not actually that bothered about keeping? He's starting to sound more like an actual politician by the day!



* Next week: "'I was thinking more of a picket fence actually, maybe with some pretty flowers?' says Trump"
Click to expand...
As I and a lot of others have been saying, who's to say that Trump isn't just some liberal who just conned the racists and bigots just to win? He's a rather odd fellow.

There's way too many vague areas to put him down as- but he's not the one to frighten anyone. It's the ones like Pence and the other Republicans that's the big fright.
 
homeforsummer
Trump softens promise of border wall, says parts could be fence*

This just a few days after suggesting he may not fully repeal Obamacare.

Anyone care to guess what's next on his list of major campaign promises he's not actually that bothered about keeping? He's starting to sound more like an actual politician by the day!

* Next week: "'I was thinking more of a picket fence actually, maybe with some pretty flowers?' says Trump"
Click to expand...
So, why the Liberals still protesting? Should be happy he's going back on his claims instead of letting a sign like this hang around protests.
CxGimxIWEAE5MEh.jpg


And here I was told Donald was all these bad things, yet I'm seeing more & more of it coming from Liberal protesters. Destroying property, assaults bc of who someone voted for, & now a nutjob advocating rape.
 
Last edited:
Reince Priebus confirmed as Chief of Staff. Looks like that swamp isn't getting drained anytime soon!

And Trump's backing down on all his promises. Which means that Pence's presidency will likely be "tax cuts for the rich and legislation that makes Big Coal / Big Oil happy while it lasts" with a dash of "less money into NATO and more into our armed forces": and yet at the same time he has to deal with Trump's rethorics, which split the country more than it ever was.

Mark my words, the 2020 Elections will be a freakshow of unseen proportions.

McLaren
So, why the Liberals still protesting? Should be happy he's going back on his claims instead of letting a sign like this hang around protests.
Click to expand...

Too late, the can of worms has been opened, showing the real width of the rift between the conservative/reactionary rural America and the liberal/multi-identitary cities. Both positions are equally ridiculous when all is said and done, but I think they may dominate the US political debate for a long while. Enjoy?
 
Last edited:
Funny that folk that hated his 'extreme' agenda in the first place, now get triggered when he's willing to add some water to his wine.

"OMG! He said he was going to build a wall, but it won't be all bricks! Liar liar pants on fire!" :lol:
 
McLaren
So, why the Liberals still protesting? Should be happy he's going back on his claims instead of letting a sign like this hang around protests.
CxGimxIWEAE5MEh.jpg


And here I was told Donald was all these bad things, yet I'm seeing more & more of it coming from Liberal protesters. Destroying property, assaults bc of who someone voted for, & now a nutjob advocating rape.
Click to expand...
I have to say, that looks very photoshoped.

A reverse image search brings up a handful of pro Trump sites and nothing else, which adds to my suspicion.
 
mister dog
Funny that folk that hated his 'extreme' agenda in the first place, now get triggered when he's willing to add some water to his wine.

"OMG! He said he was going to build a wall, but it won't be all bricks! Liar liar pants on fire!" :lol:
Click to expand...
When you campaign on a platform of not being a lying politician and then start removing and amending what you had promised to do then you kind of set yourself up to be that target.

Besides if he does backtrack then the main source of ire is going to be his core.

McLaren
I have to say you're not trying very hard then.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-draws-strong-rebuke-sparking-twitter-trend/
Click to expand...
Google certainly didn't return that result, in which case I fully condemn it.
 
TRGTspecialist
Perish the thought........
Click to expand...
It doesn't represent them, yet no one in that huge group of people thought to tell that man, "Go home ya loony"?

At what point with all this coverage of multiple incidents of repulsive acts does it begin to paint a picture of how they're acting?
There's a quote from George Takei going around telling Trump he has the power now to speak out and bring his supporters back down to earth to promote peace. It's ironic quote given the current news of his Liberal supporters.

The Democrats need to learn from the BLM protests and start speaking out to these people before these folks who "don't represent them" start representing their protest.
 
McLaren
It doesn't represent them, yet no one in that huge group of people thought to tell that man, "Go home ya loony"?
Click to expand...

I don't know the answer to that, it's difficult to tell what was or wasn't said to the protestor from a couple of pictures.

McLaren
At what point with all this coverage of multiple incidents of repulsive acts does it begin to paint a picture of how they're acting?
Click to expand...

If by 'they' you mean 'the protestors' then it's clear, the coverage shows exactly how they're acting, and how they should be judged.

If you mean 'Liberals in general' - which you implied above - then at no point do I believe that groups of protestors (or more to the point, the subset of protestors that are committing crimes or being awful) are representative of 'Liberals in general' without evidence. In the same way I wouldn't believe people behaving awfully at Trump rallies represent a majority of people who voted for him on Tuesday without evidence. I'm sure we both agree on the latter, so I don't see why we couldn't agree on the former too.

McLaren
The Democrats need to learn from the BLM protests and start speaking out to these people before these folks who "don't represent them" start representing their protest.
Click to expand...

Of course, but given the Dems don't control these protests (as far as I'm aware) - and the fact you'll likely always get idiots at mass gatherings no matter what you do - I guess it's easier said than done.
 
Last edited:
TRGTspecialist
Of course, but given the Dems don't control these protests (as far as I'm aware) - and the fact you'll likely always get idiots at mass gatherings no matter what you do - I guess it's easier said than done.
Click to expand...

There really isn't much they can do other than condemn those idiots that do stupid things in their name. I haven't been able to find much in the way of Democratic leaders doing this though.

The same thing happened with the BLM movement, it started out fine but eventually people started going too far in the name of the group and tarnishing the movement in the process. By the time the leaders of the movement realized they should probably say something about it the damage had already been done.
 
Northstar
There really isn't much they can do other than condemn those idiots that do stupid things in their name. I haven't been able to find much in the way of Democratic leaders doing this though.

The same thing happened with the BLM movement, it started out fine but eventually people started going too far in the name of the group and tarnishing the movement in the process. By the time the leaders of the movement realized they should probably say something about it the damage had already been done.
Click to expand...
Democratic leadership is a bit of a mess these days. I'd guess none of them want to ruffle any feathers and are probably in favour of the protests in general, if not the specific acts of a handful of loons.

The BLM movement was formed based on a lie, I wouldn't expect it to change any time soon.
 
Last edited:
Akira Ishi
As I and a lot of others have been saying, who's to say that Trump isn't just some liberal who just conned the racists and bigots just to win? He's a rather odd fellow.

There's way too many vague areas to put him down as- but he's not the one to frighten anyone. It's the ones like Pence and the other Republicans that's the big fright.
Click to expand...
Yeah.... last summer when he first got going with the mexico border thing that was my gut instinct. But it is also sensible to keep certain entities out if possible. Im more of an isolationist myself. I even would say usa did not need to fight ww2 in european theater although Japan was difficult to avoid as Stalins hands were tied on the other front.
 
TRGTspecialist
I don't know the answer to that, it's difficult to tell what was or wasn't said to the protestor from a couple of pictures.
Click to expand...
In all likeness, I'm going to assume nothing was said because he was spotted in 2 different spots holding that sign.

If by 'they' you mean 'the protestors' then it's clear, the coverage shows exactly how they're acting, and how they should be judged.

If you mean 'Liberals in general' - which you implied above - then at no point do I believe that groups of protestors (or more to the point, the subset of protestors that are committing crimes or being awful) are representative of 'Liberals in general' without evidence. In the same way I wouldn't believe people behaving awfully at Trump rallies represent a majority of people who voted for him on Tuesday. I'm sure we both agree on the latter, so I don't see why we couldn't agree on the former too.
Click to expand...
The problem with people behaving at Trump rallies is that it was already exposed by Veritas that people were being paid to disrupt some of those rallies. So, whilst I don't judge all Trump supporters by those few, I also cut slack because many of them were being antagonized to be that way.

Edit* If you noticed a page or so back, I did say I don't consider the violent protestors a representative of the Democratic party. But, what I'm asking is if more & more news comes out about what some of these people are doing, where is the line drawn before Liberals start becoming nationally seen as this disruptive group of folks who didn't get their way? This isn't a centralized issue that moves from time-to-time like BLM, it's nation-wide right now & if more protests start creating stories about vandalism, assault, & rioting, they will eventually go the path of BLM & become known for it if it begins happening almost every Liberal protest.

Democratic leaders have a chance to nip this in the butt before they get painted in that light, and I can guarantee you it will not work out well for them in the 2020 election. They have to push out & punish the violence now. You & I, and everyone here will know not to judge the actions of a few, but not all of Americans have that mindset. If the news feeds people about Liberal protests causing problems, they will form their own thoughts. We already saw the news feeding people all year that Hillary had this election in the bag.
Of course, but given the Dems don't control these protests (as far as I'm aware) - and the fact you'll likely always get idiots at mass gatherings no matter what you do - I guess it's easier said than done.
Click to expand...
How about the fact that nobody is saying anything at all? This is the perfect opportunity for Hillary to come out & condemn these protestors disrupting into violence. Instead, it's taking someone like Damian Lillard to come out, and say, "Stop".
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/...rtland-oregon-following-donald-trump-election
"I think it's very unfortunate that people have done some of the things they have done during the protest. A lot of harm and damage has been done," Lillard told ESPN on Saturday. "I do understand their frustration, and I commend people wanting to come together for some kind of change. Tearing apart your own city just isn't the place to begin, and also making your own city less of a safe place isn't the answer."
Click to expand...
A point brought up about Portland is that it & surrounding counties voted for Hillary so why are they attacking their own city?

Trump, on the other hand, is reported by CNN to be asking his disruptive followers to stop.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/13/politics/donald-trump-60-minutes-first-interview/index.html

Again, where is Hillary or any other Democrats asking the same?
 
Last edited:
Johnnypenso
My great hope is that he takes this surge of popular support and lays to rest some of the burning social issues of the day, once and for all, or at least for 8 years. If he supports same sex marriage, for example, and I think he will, it pretty much deflates any Republican initiatives in that regard before they get started. These niggling little social issues are a distraction to the real work that must be done over the next few years. Nose to the grindstone, get your boots dirty, work, with no time to waste talking about who is kissing whom or which receptacle your plug is going in to.
Click to expand...
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/donald-trump-fine-with-scotus-ruling-on-gay-marriage-its-done/
In his first post-election interview, President-elect Donald Trump indicated that he had no problem with the Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling that gay marriage was a constitutional right and that it didn’t play at all into his decision-making on judicial picks.“It’s irrelevant because it was already settled. It’s law. It was settled in the Supreme Court,” Trump said bluntly on 60 Minutes.
Click to expand...
Boom.
@BobK, @mister dog, who "liked" the original post.
 
McLaren
where is the line drawn before Liberals start becoming nationally seen as this disruptive group of folks who didn't get their way? This isn't a centralized issue that moves from time-to-time like BLM, it's nation-wide right now & if more protests start creating stories about vandalism, assault, & rioting, they will eventually go the path of BLM & become known for it if it begins happening almost every Liberal protest.
Click to expand...
Why are you assuming that all of the protesters are liberals? Sure, a lot of them might have voted for Clinton, but what about people who voted for the other candidates? Or the people who didn't vote at all because they were unhappy with both of the major party candidates?

mister dog
Funny that folk that hated his 'extreme' agenda in the first place, now get triggered when he's willing to add some water to his wine.
Click to expand...
Trump got himself elected on a platform of cutting through the red tape and quashing the wheeling and dealing that has hijacked the controls of democracy - and here he is, doing a U-turn (albeit a relatively minor one) on one of his central policies. It doesn't inspire much confidence.
 
I find it hard to see as a major or minor u-turn. It's much more easy to say build a wall to the masses and get them on board, rather than saying, and we're going to build a wall through this area, a fence here, use this natural mountain terrain here to do what it's been doing all along, and use vehicular outpost to monitor it, etc...

That's all I'm seeing thus far, if you actually go to my state and drive to the border, you will see this

102115_hn_wlj_1280.jpg


beyond that is another barricade structure in case coyote or runners get over the initial wall, it's at many point elevated due to the natural terrain so it can't be jumped or climbed over easily with vehicles. Then those who decide to go on foot afterwards can easily be picked up by border patrol...or hope they make it several miles to civilization. Also what isn't seen is areas along this that are run through by the Colorado and Gila rivers as well as the All American Canal. A place where many drown when crossing.

tumblr_nyc0hiLgAK1qznndco1_1280.jpg


So what Trump is proposing isn't anything really amazing in the first place. Rather a more sturdy structure than what you currently have been shown. I wouldn't be surprised if the wall started to look like that of what Israel did.

So the point to me where people see some flip flop, seems like the same word manipulation used when reporting before the election ended. @Akira Ishi makes a good point, I too believed Trump to be more liberal in nature than conservative, and I feel realistically if people go back and look at political views he's had that weren't widely broadcast it makes sense why. Then you couple that with how badly the RNC didn't want him to begin with, until they had no choice and it becomes quite plausible. This isn't to say he is liberal but he surely isn't full on Right wing as those of his party would like.
 
LMSCorvetteGT2
So the point to me where people see some flip flop, seems like the same word manipulation used when reporting before the election ended.
Click to expand...
But will the electorate be that discerning? Trump was extremely effective in making three-word slogans throughout the campaign, like "Drain the Swamp" and "Crooked Hilary Clinton". Now "Build a Wall" has morphed into "Build a Wall, or a Fence, or Use the Terrain Where Necessary", and that isn't necessarily going to sit well with the voters.

It probably wouldn't be a problem for any other politician - but a key part of his campaign was to present himself as a president who will rise above political skulduggery.
 
prisonermonkeys
But will the electorate be that discerning? Trump was extremely effective in making three-word slogans throughout the campaign, like "Drain the Swamp" and "Crooked Hilary Clinton". Now "Build a Wall" has morphed into "Build a Wall, or a Fence, or Use the Terrain Where Necessary", and that isn't necessarily going to sit well with the voters.

It probably wouldn't be a problem for any other politician - but a key part of his campaign was to present himself as a president who will rise above political skulduggery.
Click to expand...

I don't recall build the wall being one of his trade mark slogans, rather a policy point. I agree I don't see any draining of the swap, but I also don't think he's gone back on anything yet. Also he never said any of what I said, other than agreeing sure "they're will be fencing". If voters think the man is Moses and his party trick of parting the Red Sea, is building an impossible wall along the entire U.S. - Mexico border...they've failed themselves really. So my question to you is exactly how is he turning back on his promise and getting mired by "political skulduggery"?

If the feat is impossible and the plan was just to say "hey we're going to build a beautiful, strong, giant wall", without anyone questioning how...that is the voters fault. And precisely why the modern day American voter finds themselves in these situations. Does it mean he isn't going to try? Not at all. Does it mean he's going to build a wall of one material and one size through and through...? No, cause it's physically impossible. I'd venture to say (before you answer my question) is that your take on behalf of the voters is one of..."well Trump you can't do that now, you said one thing you have to stick to it! You can't now get technical and exact after the fact, not takesies backsies"

Or in short, where would you like to position the goal post?
 
prisonermonkeys
By promising one thing and delivering another. Maybe he hasn't done it just yet, but it doesn't bode well.
Click to expand...

So basically like I said you'd say just in a more formal syntax, i.e. no takesies backsies, Trump.

He promised a wall, a vertical divider between lands, if that happens to have Fence cause it is more viable for that area or better at getting the job done, or natural land where the wall would cost millions of more just to rip through a mountain to make people happy...what does it change. People will still have got what they voted for. What Trump needs to do if he actually cares is make it happen day one, and make sure it's built before his first term is out.

If this doesn't happen, I can easily see your point, if it gets bogged down with delays and infamous red tape of bureaucracy then you have a valid transgression. For now I don't see this ominous setting you've put forth, then again I don't believe he's going to accomplish half of what he claims but I will give him the chance as I've done all previous Presidents I didn't agree with. Basically all of them in my life time.
 
prisonermonkeys
But will the electorate be that discerning? Trump was extremely effective in making three-word slogans throughout the campaign, like "Drain the Swamp" and "Crooked Hilary Clinton". Now "Build a Wall" has morphed into "Build a Wall, or a Fence, or Use the Terrain Where Necessary", and that isn't necessarily going to sit well with the voters.

It probably wouldn't be a problem for any other politician - but a key part of his campaign was to present himself as a president who will rise above political skulduggery.
Click to expand...

Most people I think don't assume policies can be entirely summed up in 3 words and realise slogans are just there to get a point across.
 
prisonermonkeys
Why are you assuming that all of the protesters are liberals? Sure, a lot of them might have voted for Clinton, but what about people who voted for the other candidates? Or the people who didn't vote at all because they were unhappy with both of the major party candidates?
Click to expand...
If you think there's any Johnson or Stein supporters out there, you're far too detached from what's being shown here. The only people upset with Trump winning are the same folks who think they can get the Electoral College to all sway to vote Hillary because of a petition; Liberals.

Anyone who didn't vote & is out there needs to pack up and get their ass home. You don't get to be upset with the results if you chose not to make a choice for any of the other candidates in the first place. Hell, the 11,000 people who voted for Harambe have more of a reason to be out there than someone who didn't vote at all.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Posts

Back