Cleveland RNC 2016

[Pillbug Toenibbler]

I didn't say straight white Christian guys would vote for Trump, only they aren't directly targeted out by the hateful policies of Trump, Pence, & the RNC platform like many non-Christians, non-whites, non-male, and non-straight people are.

I've heard many straight white Christian dudes say that a Trump/Pence presidency and Far-Right Congress & SCotUS wouldn't be that bad, or dismiss the threat as something that can be weathered. As a partially-employed poor lesbian woman, I'm terrified of that very possible future, and I seriously doubt my ability (and that of many of my friends) to survive it.

To me, not voting for Trump isn't enough. Not voting for downticket Repub & Tea-Partiers isn't enough. The only way to ensure the better of these two possible futures is to vote for Clinton/Kaine and downticket Dems. I'd rather have imperfect candidates and incremental progress than see my world undone.

[thejeff]

Turin the Mad wrote:

That presumes Trump won't hold his many grudges against Congress from the campaign trail.

'straight white Christian guy' describes a LOT of the voters who will not vote for Trump btw.

"Straight white Christian guy" is however Trump's strongest demographic.

Certainly not all of them. Not even all the Christian right, which certainly isn't all Christians, but that's where he pulls from.

[MMCJawa]

I'm pretty sure that Trump's only interest in this position is the ability to give regular speeches and appearances that are guaranteed to get media coverage and adoration from a certain segment of the public, and the ability to add the "former president" label to his existing brand. If he can use that position to punish a few critics or remove some business obstacles all the better.

Pence I suspect would be left with the day to day policy, which is stomach curdling in so so many ways.

[Quark Blast]

Krensky wrote:

Quark Blast wrote:

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

What actions would those be?

Krensky wrote:

The lying, the cheating, the defrauding of his business partners, customers, contractors and the tax payers. The inventing of multiple false identities to talk to the press while pretending to be someone else. The sexual harassment and alleged rape. The creepy lusting after his own daughter. The racism, the misogyny, the abelism, the casual cruelty and general douchbaggery. Let's not forget the temper tantrums, physical outbursts, and pathological need to be the biggest, most important person in the room.

I probably missed a few things.

Trump isn't a meritocrat. He's never had any cosideration for mertiocracy. He's a spoiled rich brat who's squandered the fortune his grandfather the pimp and father the racist landlord left him. He's an exploiter and con artisit.

If he was as bad as all that he would have announced himself as the deserving winner of every episode of The Apprentice.

I agree that he suffers from NPD. He's like the type specimen for that. And as such I won't be voting for him.

Though, oddly, if he were to win he could in theory assign a cabinet that is actually competent. As opposed to filling it with people to whom are owed favors, like Mrs. Clinton will do.

Never mind that EVERYTHING I listed can be found with a cursory amount of research. Never mind that he apparently doesn't really want to be president since he offered all the actual policy work to Kasich with the VP slot and has presumably done the same with Pence. He's a liar, a cheat, and a scumbag. He lives in a reality free zone.

Yes, everything you list can be found with a cursory amount of "research" on the Internet. Not to mention everything you didn't list. :D

Somehow I doubt you'll apply even that level of diligence to "researching" Mrs. Clinton.

And as for the "reality free zone". Yes, a hallmark of NPD is they make (and star in) their own reality.

But if Mr. Trump is as incompetent as you seem to need to believe then why is he still a billionaire? If he was a total clown that money he inherited should have been like water through fingers.

[Krensky]

That was the deal he supposedly offered Kasich with the VP spot, so yeah, Pence will likely be the one doing all the work while Trump does Trump things.

[Krensky]

Quark Blast wrote:

Krensky wrote:

Quark Blast wrote:

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

What actions would those be?

Krensky wrote:

The lying, the cheating, the defrauding of his business partners, customers, contractors and the tax payers. The inventing of multiple false identities to talk to the press while pretending to be someone else. The sexual harassment and alleged rape. The creepy lusting after his own daughter. The racism, the misogyny, the abelism, the casual cruelty and general douchbaggery. Let's not forget the temper tantrums, physical outbursts, and pathological need to be the biggest, most important person in the room.

I probably missed a few things.

Trump isn't a meritocrat. He's never had any cosideration for mertiocracy. He's a spoiled rich brat who's squandered the fortune his grandfather the pimp and father the racist landlord left him. He's an exploiter and con artisit.

If he was as bad as all that he would have announced himself as the deserving winner of every episode of The Apprentice.

I agree that he suffers from NPD. He's like the type specimen for that. And as such I won't be voting for him.

Though, oddly, if he were to win he could in theory assign a cabinet that is actually competent. As opposed to filling it with people to whom are owed favors, like Mrs. Clinton will do.

Never mind that EVERYTHING I listed can be found with a cursory amount of research. Never mind that he apparently doesn't really want to be president since he offered all the actual policy work to Kasich with the VP slot and has presumably done the same with Pence. He's a liar, a cheat, and a scumbag. He lives in a reality free zone.

Yes, everything you list can be found with a cursory amount of "research" on the Internet. Not to mention everything you didn't list. :D

Somehow I doubt you'll apply even that level of diligence to "researching" Mrs. Clinton.

And as for the "reality free zone". Yes, a hallmark of NPD is they make (and star in) their own...

Because he's a con artist. He works off credit and debt and lies. Look into any of his business dealinga. Also, there is no proof of his bring a billionaire other than his own claims, which are completely untrustworthy based on his past actions.

[lucky7]

Quark Blast wrote:

Krensky wrote:

Quark Blast wrote:

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

What actions would those be?

Krensky wrote:

The lying, the cheating, the defrauding of his business partners, customers, contractors and the tax payers. The inventing of multiple false identities to talk to the press while pretending to be someone else. The sexual harassment and alleged rape. The creepy lusting after his own daughter. The racism, the misogyny, the abelism, the casual cruelty and general douchbaggery. Let's not forget the temper tantrums, physical outbursts, and pathological need to be the biggest, most important person in the room.

I probably missed a few things.

Trump isn't a meritocrat. He's never had any cosideration for mertiocracy. He's a spoiled rich brat who's squandered the fortune his grandfather the pimp and father the racist landlord left him. He's an exploiter and con artisit.

If he was as bad as all that he would have announced himself as the deserving winner of every episode of The Apprentice.

I agree that he suffers from NPD. He's like the type specimen for that. And as such I won't be voting for him.

Though, oddly, if he were to win he could in theory assign a cabinet that is actually competent. As opposed to filling it with people to whom are owed favors, like Mrs. Clinton will do.

Never mind that EVERYTHING I listed can be found with a cursory amount of research. Never mind that he apparently doesn't really want to be president since he offered all the actual policy work to Kasich with the VP slot and has presumably done the same with Pence. He's a liar, a cheat, and a scumbag. He lives in a reality free zone.

Yes, everything you list can be found with a cursory amount of "research" on the Internet. Not to mention everything you didn't list. :D

Somehow I doubt you'll apply even that level of diligence to "researching" Mrs. Clinton.

And as for the "reality free zone". Yes, a hallmark of NPD is they make (and star in) their own...

1. Inherited wealth. According to the Dobald, $1 Million was a small loan from his father. It's a lot easier to get to home plate when you start on 3rd.

2. Considering Trump's net value apparently chages based on his mood, he''s not the best person to talk about his wealth with.

3. If Donald Trump had taken his inheritance and played tiddlywinks all day long, he would have the same amount of money he claims to have had (this includes the expenses of his billionaire lifestlye.)

[Quark Blast]

Krensky wrote:

Also, there is no proof of his bring a billionaire other than his own claims, which are completely untrustworthy based on his past actions.

Yeah, I concede. I can't argue with that. I mean, I've never even seen Trump Tower. For all I know it's a pile of pop sickle sticks and Elmer's Glue.

[Krensky]

So what was the $3.36 Million his father loaned him illegally?

[Krensky]

Quark Blast wrote:

Krensky wrote:

Also, there is no proof of his bring a billionaire other than his own claims, which are completely untrustworthy based on his past actions.

Yeah, I concede. I can't argue with that. I mean, I've never even seen Trump Tower. For all I know it's a pile of pop sickle sticks and Elmer's Glue.

* Sigh.

So you are completely unfamiliar with how credit, debt, and tax breaks work, huh?

If he was so successful why has he gone bankrupt four times and been fired by his own companies twice... three times...I've lost count.

[Quark Blast]

Krensky wrote:

Quark Blast wrote:

Krensky wrote:

Also, there is no proof of his bring a billionaire other than his own claims, which are completely untrustworthy based on his past actions.

Yeah, I concede. I can't argue with that. I mean, I've never even seen Trump Tower. For all I know it's a pile of pop sickle sticks and Elmer's Glue.

* Sigh.

So you are completely unfamiliar with how credit, debt, and tax breaks work, huh?

If he was so successful why has he gone bankrupt four times and been fired by his own companies twice... three times...I've lost count.

Look how many times Steve Jobs found himself out on his ear/broke.

Crazy people take crazy risks.

One of the ways to hedge your bets is to selectively use the bankruptcy laws.

Seems pretty smart to me. Not the least bit ethical, but smart. Kind of like Clinton smart <cough>White Water</cough>.

[Squeakmaan]

<cough> another fake conspiracy <cough>

[GM_Beernorg]

Giant douche or turd sandwich, you gotta pick one Stan!

I used to find this funny, now, I find it terrifying.

[bugleyman]

I'm not sure I've ever seen FUD quite like is currently being directed at Clinton.

Throw enough crap, and even though none of it sticks, the sheer volume of it starts to make it hard to see.

[Scott Betts]

GM_Beernorg wrote:

Giant douche or turd sandwich, you gotta pick one Stan!

I used to find this funny, now, I find it terrifying.

Watch the speeches from the RNC, then watch the speeches from the DNC. And come back here and tell me you don't see a meaningful difference between the two parties and the two candidates. You're buying into a cynical, fashionable view that the two are interchangeable that has zero basis in reality. It's reductionist, and harmful to discourse and democracy.

[thejeff]

Scott Betts wrote:

GM_Beernorg wrote:

Giant douche or turd sandwich, you gotta pick one Stan!

I used to find this funny, now, I find it terrifying.

Watch the speeches from the RNC, then watch the speeches from the DNC. And come back here and tell me you don't see a meaningful difference between the two parties and the two candidates. You're buying into a cynical, fashionable view that the two are interchangeable that has zero basis in reality. It's reductionist, and harmful to discourse and democracy.

Yeah, the contrast is as extreme as I've ever seen it. Sure you can say it's all just talk, but the difference between the hate and fear the Republicans are trying to drum up and the emphasis the Democrats bring is just worlds apart.

[Pan]

Scott Betts wrote:

GM_Beernorg wrote:

Giant douche or turd sandwich, you gotta pick one Stan!

I used to find this funny, now, I find it terrifying.

Watch the speeches from the RNC, then watch the speeches from the DNC. And come back here and tell me you don't see a meaningful difference between the two parties and the two candidates. You're buying into a cynical, fashionable view that the two are interchangeable that has zero basis in reality. It's reductionist, and harmful to discourse and democracy.

Tell me about it. I got an office full of....(not sure what you call folks who think Trump and Clinton are working together for a Clinton presidency) but anyways they say third party is the only choice because the rest is a set up...../facepalm

[Scott Betts]

Pan wrote:

Scott Betts wrote:

GM_Beernorg wrote:

Giant douche or turd sandwich, you gotta pick one Stan!

I used to find this funny, now, I find it terrifying.

Watch the speeches from the RNC, then watch the speeches from the DNC. And come back here and tell me you don't see a meaningful difference between the two parties and the two candidates. You're buying into a cynical, fashionable view that the two are interchangeable that has zero basis in reality. It's reductionist, and harmful to discourse and democracy.

Tell me about it. I got an office full of....(not sure what you call folks who think Trump and Clinton are working together for a Clinton presidency) but anyways they say third party is the only choice because the rest is a set up...../facepalm

On the bright side, it shouldn't be tough to earn merit-based promotion in an office filled with people like that.

[GM_Beernorg]

Never said they are the same, I just can't stand either platform for varied reasons.

DNC is less disturbing in the dictator sense, but not comforting either, Hilary is a corp puppet, from my perspective, which is also dangerous, just like an ego maniac with delusions of grandeur. Guess it comes down to I see both leading candidates as bad options, though I suppose there could be a lesser of two evils in there somewhere ;).

[BigNorseWolf]

Pan wrote:

Tell me about it. I got an office full of....(not sure what you call folks who think Trump and Clinton are working together for a Clinton presidency)

Semi rational conspiracy theorists?

[Irontruth]

Quark Blast wrote:

Kobold Cleaver wrote:

What actions would those be?

Krensky wrote:

The lying, the cheating, the defrauding of his business partners, customers, contractors and the tax payers. The inventing of multiple false identities to talk to the press while pretending to be someone else. The sexual harassment and alleged rape. The creepy lusting after his own daughter. The racism, the misogyny, the abelism, the casual cruelty and general douchbaggery. Let's not forget the temper tantrums, physical outbursts, and pathological need to be the biggest, most important person in the room.

I probably missed a few things.

Drumpf isn't a meritocrat. He's never had any cosideration for mertiocracy. He's a spoiled rich brat who's squandered the fortune his grandfather the pimp and father the racist landlord left him. He's an exploiter and con artisit.

If he was as bad as all that he would have announced himself as the deserving winner of every episode of The Apprentice.

I agree that he suffers from NPD. He's like the type specimen for that. And as such I won't be voting for him.

Though, oddly, if he were to win he could in theory assign a cabinet that is actually competent. As opposed to filling it with people to whom are owed favors, like Mrs. Clinton will do.

I'm really curious how you're going to spin this one to evade it (when if it were about a Clinton, you'd immediately assume all of it was true)....

Back in the 90's, Donald Trump was a friend of a man named Jeffrey Epstein. In the late 00's, Epstein was charged and convicted of having sex with minors. He's currently a registered sex offender.\

Donald Trump wrote:

“I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it, Jeffrey enjoys his social life.”

A case has recently been filed against Trump, by a woman who alleges he raped her in 1993. She claims she was held by Mr. Epstein and gives many accurate details of situations we know to be true in other cases. Notably, the new case also includes a witness statement (usually witnesses are hard to find in these older cases).

During their divorce, Ivana Trump, during her sworn testimony, described how Donald had attacked her, ripped out hair and forcefully penetrated her. She said she "felt" like she had been raped. After the divorce settlement, which includes clauses where she's not allowed to say anything negative about him, she's clarified that she wasn't using the word in it's literal sense.

New York Magainze, Nov 9, 1992. If you go to page 43, about 2/3's the way down you can find the statement:

Quote:

Trump is talking about women and says "You have to treat 'em like s---."

[Pillbug Toenibbler]

thejeff wrote:

Scott Betts wrote:

GM_Beernorg wrote:

Giant douche or turd sandwich, you gotta pick one Stan!

I used to find this funny, now, I find it terrifying.

Watch the speeches from the RNC, then watch the speeches from the DNC. And come back here and tell me you don't see a meaningful difference between the two parties and the two candidates. You're buying into a cynical, fashionable view that the two are interchangeable that has zero basis in reality. It's reductionist, and harmful to discourse and democracy.

Yeah, the contrast is as extreme as I've ever seen it. Sure you can say it's all just talk, but the difference between the hate and fear the Republicans are trying to drum up and the emphasis the Democrats bring is just worlds apart.

It's funny that the Repubs claim to worship at the altar of St. Ronnie, but this DNC so far is full-on hope and brightness channeling "It's morning again in America."

[Grey Lensman]

Pillbug Toenibbler wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Scott Betts wrote:

GM_Beernorg wrote:

Giant douche or turd sandwich, you gotta pick one Stan!

I used to find this funny, now, I find it terrifying.

Watch the speeches from the RNC, then watch the speeches from the DNC. And come back here and tell me you don't see a meaningful difference between the two parties and the two candidates. You're buying into a cynical, fashionable view that the two are interchangeable that has zero basis in reality. It's reductionist, and harmful to discourse and democracy.

Yeah, the contrast is as extreme as I've ever seen it. Sure you can say it's all just talk, but the difference between the hate and fear the Republicans are trying to drum up and the emphasis the Democrats bring is just worlds apart.

It's funny that the Repubs claim to worship at the altar of St. Ronnie, but this DNC so far is full-on hope and brightness channeling "It's morning again in America."

Ronnie wouldn't recognize this Republican Party - the nominee admires someone who claims the breakup of the USSR is the greatest disaster of the 20th century, owes a large part of his fortune to the same guy (and his lackeys), and might even be getting help from them. The rest of the party is passing bathroom bills, voter ID laws, and other nonsense that can best be summed up as 'solutions in search of problems', or as I like to call them, 'exactly the big government Reagan warned about'.

[GM_Beernorg]

Watch the speeches from the RNC, then watch the speeches from the DNC. And come back here and tell me you don't see a meaningful difference between the two parties and the two candidates. You're buying into a cynical, fashionable view that the two are interchangeable that has zero basis in reality. It's reductionist, and harmful to discourse and democracy.

That is a rather harsh and unfounded response to my post, as I never wrote anything close to "both parties are the exact same". I am more than intelligent enough to tell the difference in the two parties' stance, and I would take it as a kindness if you avoided telling me what I think, and why.

It is simply my perspective that both options are sub optimal, though for vastly different reasons.

I welcome discourse, I do not welcome being insulted.

[thejeff]

Grey Lensman wrote:

Ronnie wouldn't recognize this Republican Party - the nominee admires someone who claims the breakup of the USSR is the greatest disaster of the 20th century, owes a large part of his fortune to the same guy (and his lackeys), and might even be getting help from them. The rest of the party is passing bathroom bills, voter ID laws, and other nonsense that can best be summed up as 'solutions in search of problems', or as I like to call them, 'exactly the big government Reagan warned about'.

Well, Reagan, like all the GOP since, wasn't nearly as anti big government as he claimed. Only some types of big government.

He really started the link to the religious right that brought anti-abortion and other "values" issues to the GOP. That's led us straight to the bathroom bills of today.

There's also always the trouble distinguishing between Reagan's actual policies and opinions and the canonized perfect Republican the party worships today.

[Scott Betts]

GM_Beernorg wrote:

That is a rather harsh and unfounded response to my post, as I never wrote anything close to "both parties are the exact same". I am more than intelligent enough to tell the difference in the two parties' stance, and I would take it as a kindness if you avoided telling me what I think, and why.

It is simply my perspective that both options are sub optimal, though for vastly different reasons.

I welcome discourse, I do not welcome being insulted.

Recycling "giant douche or turd sandwich" is discourse? To a lot of people, that sounds like the speaker believes that both choices are equally awful.

I'm not here to insult you, but if you don't want your words to be labeled as reductionist, it may be worth considering that posting reductionist drivel isn't the best way to go about that.

Even if you think the parties are both "sub optimal", you need to be able to judge which is the two is more optimal than the other. One of them is. I think you probably know which.

[GM_Beernorg]

Bathroom bills...evidence that a number of our political leaders are both insane, and about 150 years behind the times.

Earth is being capitalism'd to death for resources and suffering for our massive over consumption, law enforcement has been exposed as less than lawful (not new really, not at all), I could go on. But what do some of our law makers focus on, preventing folk from using the bathroom of their choice, all because of their outmoded and dated ways of thinking, and a massive disconnect from the people they are supposed to represent.

So, cynical, probably, but unfounded, I think not.

[thejeff]

GM_Beernorg wrote:

Bathroom bills...evidence that a number of our political leaders are both insane, and about 150 years behind the times.

Earth is being capitalism'd to death for resources and suffering for our massive over consumption, law enforcement has been exposed as less than lawful (not new really, not at all), I could go on. But what do some of our law makers focus on, preventing folk from using the bathroom of their choice, all because of their outmoded and dated ways of thinking, and a massive disconnect from the people they are supposed to represent.

So, cynical, probably, but unfounded, I think not.

And this is your argument for why you can't support Democrats? Cause I'm missing something.

[GM_Beernorg]

Actually nae, that is not meant to by a "why I can't vote democrat"

Just espousing on the insanity of some of our lawmakers, red ones mostly, but I have little confidence in either side at this point.

But the bathroom bill is not one of the reasons I have very little confidence in the blues, that is a whole different kettle of smelly old fish.

[Comrade Anklebiter]

Irontruth wrote:

I'm really curious how you're going to spin this one to evade it (when if it were about a Clinton, you'd immediately assume all of it was true)....

Well, Citizen Blast, if you were so inclined...

Pre-rape allegations:

The Salacious Ammo Even Donald Trump Won't Use in a Fight Against Hillary Clinton

Post-rape allegations:

The Billionaire Pedophile Who Could Bring Down Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton

[Comrade Anklebiter]

More breaking news:

The Nigerian Princess' second favorite artists of the year (after Beyonce, natch) turn on their patron:

'USA Freedom Kids' dancing girl trio's manager threatens to sue Trump

[thejeff]

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

More breaking news:

The Nigerian Princess' second favorite artists of the year (after Beyonce, natch) turn on their patron:

'USA Freedom Kids' dancing girl trio's manager threatens to sue Trump

Yeah, I saw that. That's Trump's style. All you small businessmen backing Trump. Remember that's how he treats you. Cuts you off, breaks the deal, doesn't pay and then fights you in court with better lawyers than you can afford until you settle for pennies on the dollar. That's what you're cheering for.

[Arbane the Terrible]

Grey Lensman wrote:

Ronnie wouldn't recognize this Republican Party - the nominee admires someone who claims the breakup of the USSR is the greatest disaster of the 20th century, owes a large part of his fortune to the same guy (and his lackeys), and might even be getting help from them.

It's both bizarre and hilarious to me how dewy-eyed so many Republicans get over an ex-KGB kleptocrat, just because he's so MANLY.

Grey Lensman wrote:

The rest of the party is passing bathroom bills, voter ID laws, and other nonsense that can best be summed up as 'solutions in search of problems', or as I like to call them, 'exactly the big government Reagan warned about'.

Yes, but big government is OKAY, as long as it's putting Those People in prison (see Drugs, War On). It's only bad when it stops businesses from doing whatever they want.

[BigNorseWolf]

GM_Beernorg wrote:

Just espousing on the insanity of some of our lawmakers, red ones mostly, but I have little confidence in either side at this point.

in what year were they ever sane?

[GM_Beernorg]

ummm...far far in the past, bordering on never?

[Pillbug Toenibbler]

thejeff wrote:

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

More breaking news:

The Nigerian Princess' second favorite artists of the year (after Beyonce, natch) turn on their patron:

'USA Freedom Kids' dancing girl trio's manager threatens to sue Trump

Yeah, I saw that. That's Trump's style. All you small businessmen backing Trump. Remember that's how he treats you. Cuts you off, breaks the deal, doesn't pay and then fights you in court with better lawyers than you can afford until you settle for pennies on the dollar. That's what you're cheering for.

I really hope the students who blew up all the RNC's balloons got the donation to their school paid up front.

[bugleyman]

thejeff wrote:

Yeah, I saw that. That's Trump's style. All you small businessmen backing Trump. Remember that's how he treats you. Cuts you off, breaks the deal, doesn't pay and then fights you in court with better lawyers than you can afford until you settle for pennies on the dollar. That's what you're cheering for.

That's how we Make America Great Again...if you think the gilded age and robber barons were great.

[GM_Beernorg]

I call dibs on high speed rail baron!

[Grey Lensman]

Arbane the Terrible wrote:

Grey Lensman wrote:

Ronnie wouldn't recognize this Republican Party - the nominee admires someone who claims the breakup of the USSR is the greatest disaster of the 20th century, owes a large part of his fortune to the same guy (and his lackeys), and might even be getting help from them.

It's both bizarre and hilarious to me how dewy-eyed so many Republicans get over an ex-KGB kleptocrat, just because he's so MANLY.

Grey Lensman wrote:

The rest of the party is passing bathroom bills, voter ID laws, and other nonsense that can best be summed up as 'solutions in search of problems', or as I like to call them, 'exactly the big government Reagan warned about'.

Yes, but big government is OKAY, as long as it's putting Those People in prison (see Drugs, War On). It's only bad when it stops businesses from doing whatever they want.

My problem with business regulation is that most of the ones I hear about now seem to be written by large corporations for the purpose of preventing anyone else from being able to make money. I don't believe in the unrestricted free market, but crony capitalism is even worse.

[thejeff]

bugleyman wrote:

thejeff wrote:

Yeah, I saw that. That's Trump's style. All you small businessmen backing Trump. Remember that's how he treats you. Cuts you off, breaks the deal, doesn't pay and then fights you in court with better lawyers than you can afford until you settle for pennies on the dollar. That's what you're cheering for.

That's how we Make America Great Again...if you think the gilded age and robber barons were great.

I really do want to find out when he thinks America was great. What's he aiming for? In any era I can think of, there are either horrors even the Republicans can't admit to wanting back or building blocks they despise. Often both.

Even nostalgic 50s middle class utopia had Jim Crow for the first and a union backbone for the second.

[Rednal]

...If I had to guess, there's no specific time he has in mind. When he says "Make America Great Again", he's saying "It's not what you want it to be anymore, and I'll fix that". Basically, he's letting people fill in the blanks and make assumptions about what he's going to do.

[thejeff]

Rednal wrote:

...If I had to guess, there's no specific time he has in mind. When he says "Make America Great Again", he's saying "It's not what you want it to be anymore, and I'll fix that". Basically, he's letting people fill in the blanks and make assumptions about what he's going to do.

Of course he is. That's why you need to question it. Nail him down on what it means.

It's a great rhetorical trick, but only if he's allowed to get away with it.

[GM_Beernorg]

Big promises made, details on how to accomplish said items, almost nil, hmmm my political maneuvering and BS senses are tingling...

[Arbane the Terrible]

thejeff wrote:

I really do want to find out when he thinks America was great. What's he aiming for? In any era I can think of, there are either horrors even the Republicans can't admit to wanting back or building blocks they despise. Often both.

Even nostalgic 50s middle class utopia had Jim Crow for the first and a union backbone for the second.

Don't forget the imminent threat of nuclear war with the USSR, and a 90% top income tax rate!

(I think we need to bring back that tax rate - encouraging the ultra-rich to spend money is a GOOD thing.)

Being the uncharitable person that I am, I think some of Trump's fans want the 50's back - the 1850s.

[thejeff]

Arbane the Terrible wrote:

thejeff wrote:

I really do want to find out when he thinks America was great. What's he aiming for? In any era I can think of, there are either horrors even the Republicans can't admit to wanting back or building blocks they despise. Often both.

Even nostalgic 50s middle class utopia had Jim Crow for the first and a union backbone for the second.

Don't forget the imminent threat of nuclear war with the USSR, and a 90% top income tax rate!

(I think we need to bring back that tax rate - encouraging the ultra-rich to spend money is a GOOD thing.)

Being the uncharitable person that I am, I think some of Trump's fans want the 50's back - the 1850s.

Yeah, the tax rate would be another thing to ask about.

And I agree about the 1850s. That's got lots of things they can't admit they want. Or even the 1890s.

[MannyGoblin]

So I heard the RNC was a real dumpsterfire with such Luminaries like Roosh V(Professional Rape apologist) and Milo Yakaopolis(Professional bilker of Gamergaters) bouncing up and down and celebrating Trump.

[Samy]

Arbane the Terrible wrote:

Don't forget the imminent threat of nuclear war with the USSR

As much as I fear Trump, I don't consider that one of the top fears. Trump has a crush on Putin, and both of them hate the European Union. It would be more of an "Axis of Evil" situation with US+USSR crushing the EU on both sides, I think. And I wouldn't be surprised if Turkey and/or ISIS joined in to surround and squeeze Europe.

[Kobold Catgirl]

The USA won't join Putin, but under Trump, we won't stop him, either.

What I like about Trump is that he's done a lot to separate the honest Republicans from the s#*!lords. Sure, some bad made it into the "I refuse to endorse him" camp, but it's telling that on one side you have Republicans like McCain, who actually believe what they've been fighting for . . . and then you have Republicans like Christie.

[Pan]

Trump may not be fit to shine McCain's boots, but Christie is fit to shine Trump's.

[Grey Lensman]

Pan wrote:

Trump may not be fit to shine McCain's boots, but Christie is fit to shine Trump's.

Christie and his purge list quote at the RNC was shameful.