Statements of fact aren't trolling.



 

Really weird how the people advocating for censorship here are Trump supporters. Maybe something to do with his desire to suppress the media for so called "hit pieces".

Well... They COULD BE.

We all know that the diehard Trump supporters see any and all comments or quotes that reflect poorly on Trump as being personal attacks on their very being.

It's like bad mouthing their religion.

If Trump says something really, really stupid (as he often does)...

...we can be certain that his supporters will react irrationally when that stupidity is pointed out or quoted.

So in a way, we are responsible for their reactions.  Like giving a balloon to a retard; we know they're going to smile.

 

Both Trump and Obama are running on the same *exact* campaign strategy.

Obama sold how he was going to expand the government to give his voters what they want.

Trump is selling how he is going to expand the government to give his voters what they want.

Same campaign.

If you have an argument, make it.

When you start to make shots below the belt, it usually means that you have run out of valid arguments... And have lost the debate.

No... I do not support either of the New York liberals. I think "conservatives" who support either of the New York liberals are either not conservatives or crazy... But that is just me.

Yes. Trump lobbied and traded money with anti-gun, open-borders Democrats for political favors.

Trump giving money to anti-gun, open-borders Democrats in exchange for political favors is... Lobbying.

Trump saying, that he gave money to anti-gun, open-borders Democrats to get them to do what he wanted them to do... That is "lobbying."

And... Trump is not going to help fix the system that he broke.

The recent smoking-gun is the quote that he will limit who gets and who does not get. Trump will pick winners and losers as a socialist President. Just like Obama did.

Yes... It is a 100% accurate statement to say that Trump gave anti-gun, open-borders Democrats to receive political favors in return. That is called, "lobbying."

We get it you think he's a socialist.

The question remains. Why are you here with your constant anti Trump shtick?  If you don't want to vote for him that's fine.  Why are you trying to convince others not to vote for him?

Are you a closet Hillary supporter masquerading as anti Trump?

Or maybe you're one of those Hillary is paying for support on the internet.

Yeah; some scumbags did it on his Cruz's behalf; which was par for the course.

Trump supporters accuse people on AR15.com of being "paid by Hillary" to post here, if they ever speak ill of, or fail to praise Trump.

It should come as no surprise that Trump was able to easily convince these same geniuses that he was NOT a liberal "NYC gun-grabber, a la Michael Bloomberg."

There's a big difference in discussing the issues on the merits vs repeating the same trump is a socialist line. Over and over and over.

There are only two viable choices. One is my enemy.  The other is an unknown who is saying the right things.  If someone is constantly berating the opposition of my enemy, doesn't that bring into question where that person's interest are.

Like I said, some folks are actually THAT gullible.

If you are attacking the GOP nominee then you are a hillery shill...period............

I don't "think" he is a socialist.

Trump has said --himself-- that he is a "make the government pay for it" socialist.

Trump printed --in his own words-- in his own book, "The America We Deserve" that he wants European socialism.

This week Trump said --in his own words-- that he will decide who gets handed government favors, and who does not get handed government favors.




This is not a personal attack, just a line of argument...

When did you stop hitting your wife?

The only person in this discussion who has supported and funded Hillary... Is Trump.

The only person in this discussion who has done the bidding of Hillary and defended Hillary after Benghazi... Is Trump.

By default, there is only one option. THAT is not being gullible.

Just two weeks ago, you were condemning the "establishment."

Now... "Get in line, shut your mouth, and turn off your brain!"

So what is your solution?

Who will you vote for that has a chance at winning..

You don't like trump, what is the other option?

Trump isn't the establishment, he is the voters nominee on the GOP side, the only other nominee is Hillery on the Dem.side..so if you are attacking the GOP nominee Trump it means you are supporting the Dem nonimee Hillery and that makes you a hillery shill...

My point is that the options on the ballot are two evils... The system is broken.

I will be voting down-ballot for conservatives who will be fighting for their political lives after Trump is done running his mouth and sprinting to the Democrat-left...

My point is that there are socialists demanding handouts in the "R" side of the line, just like the "D" side of the line... The system is failing around us...

The solution is to put a *real* conservative on the ballot.

The establishment is tripping over itself to get behind Trump.

Gingrich? Establishment.

Hatch? Establishment.

Christie? Establishment.

Trump is the establishment now, no matter how many Democrats he helped financially to get into office. Trump is the establishment...

Trump is corrupt. You can support a corrupt politician. I won't.

I won't support either of the New York liberals on the ballot...

Trump is on the ballot, and Hillery is not a conservative..so you pick Hillery or Trump..those are the choices.....picking anything but Trump means you are a hillery shill.........

It's ok, you guys can be Hillery shills..just be honest about it.......I mean you have missed every correct answer in the last year regarding this election, why try to fix that now.......

Whatever you say.  

I guess you can petition the site to be a safe space where no criticism of Trump is allowed.  

Im not sure how that will go over though

Liberals always want to silence things that trigger them.



 

What real conservative has a chance at winning the presidency in today's climate. The media and pc police would eat them alive. The only person capable of fighting the media and pc stranglehold is Trump.  If Trump shows the conservatives it is possible to fight and win against the pc left, then maybe there will be a chance for a conservative win in the future.

We've missed no "correct" answers.  Our assessments of what Trump IS and what he has supported remains correct.

You seem to think that winning the nomination changed that.

I guess we'll never know since Republicans seem to keep nominating RINO's every 4 years.  

Each one, exponentially worse than the last

They went way past RINO this time.

They went "full retard".

From my personal observation point, I see Trump as what we NEED right now, not what I WANT right now. We NEED someone who will totally disrupt the cozy little country club our "ruling elites" have created for themselves at our expense. I believe Trump will do so. We NEED someone who will secure the border and deport those here illegally, particularly those who've already been convicted of a crime while they were here. I believe Trump will do that (wall or no wall, the border will be secure). We NEED someone who will incentivize companies to bring jobs back to the US and punish countries that do not give US companies similar levels of access to their markets as we do theirs. I believe Trump will do that in a way that doesn't start a trade war. We need to rebuild our military in a way that makes sense. I believe Trump will do that. We NEED to have Supreme Court justices nominated that hold the Constitution dear. I believe (and his short list proves) he will do that. One could argue Cruz would have done many of these same things, all except the disruption of the DC elites. That I believe would be markedly different under Trump than under Cruz, with Trump being vastly more successful at total disruption, as he's already proved up to this point.

Trump is not without his faults. However, some of you that firmly believe he is a socialist need to examine what he DOES, not what you think he SAYS. As an example, Trump has been raising money for charity for decades. He gives a lot of his own money to charity. Heck, even a lot of his Apprentice shows were charity fund raisers disguised as entertainment. When he says "We need to take care of those less fortunate", he's not saying that "We the People" in the form of the Feral Government need to take care of those less fortunate, he means "We" as in you and I and other Americans need to take care of our own regardless of what the .gov does or does not do. Notice that even Jesus didn't say "Caeser should take care of those less fortunate", he said each of us needs to give alms to the poor as our Christian duty. Or, do you think Trump is not a Christian, in which case, I would estimate there is something wrong with your personal evaluation tools.

As I said, Trump is not without his faults. I'm OK with folks pointing those out and working to convince him and his team the errors of his ways. What we do NOT need to do is invent faults that do not exist and use that as a rationale for an anti-Trump tirade. I also believe we need to support his winning the general not because the alternative is the end of our Republic (which it would be) but because he is the candidate we NEED.

Yeah , you and the kangaroo are the smartest people in the Country, can't fool you.

 
All the millions of people placing a certain amount of trust in Trumps statements now are morons and you and the few others here are the great saviors of our Nation huh?




The sheer arrogance of you 3 or 4 is amazing.


 

You know what I think it is with the anti trumps here, they like the media were wrong every step of the way through the primary and now are super pissed he got the nomination.
Who cares what small donations a business guy gave to BOTH parties.

It matters what he is saying now , backing it up in writing as he has done with the second amendment on his web site.

If he is a liar we'll find out soon enough and we'll still have the house & senate to stop him dead in his tracks.

If he is telling the truth than we will have a President who will fix all the broken shit we have now.


The guys is owned by no one.

He doesn't need the money, he already has power by the Billions he owns.

Why would a guy in his position take on this job if he truly didn't care about America?


   

Oh is that why all the anti trumps are shitting in every trump thread that cones up?

 
This thread was about Trump clinching the nomination, the 3 or 4 of you have turned it into a trump bashing thread once again.

BS it's your fucking opinion.

 

Wouldnt this be the appropriate place to discuss the Republican nominee?

triggered






 
 

Like I said... Trump is the establishment now.

Between two New York liberals... I pick neither.

Trump is not a conservative. His record of supporting anti-gun, open-borders Democrats is fair game.

everything is proceeding as I have foreseen

Much of what you wrote I somewhat agree with...

Except... Trump is not anti-PC.

We will beat the PC crowd with civility and attacking it with someone with an even-keel and even temper... Trump has too thin skin, and too big of an ego to take-on the PC culture.

This election cycle Trump has stated that he will sue people for simply saying things he disagrees with. That right there is why we have a PC culture.

Trump demands PC when people address him, then he wants to say he can run his mouth, and he is anti-PC. Trump has formally sued people for simply saying things he does not like.

That is not anti-PC... Trump is ***NOT*** anti-PC when he runs his mouth, then threatens to sue folks who disagree with them...

Thin-skin, massive ego, huge temper, no civility Trump is not anti-PC, he is the exact opposite. It will take a candidate who is civil and shoots-straight and has an even-keel to take on the PC culture.

Trump emboldens the PC culture when he runs his mouth, then threatens anyone else who does the same thing.

Also from you: "The only person in this discussion who has done the bidding of Hillary and defended Hillary after Benghazi... Is Trump."

I am pretty damn sure you viewed that interview, so you know exactly what Trump said, in context, and it was not defending Hillary. You know it. I know you know it. Countless other posters here know you know it, yet you continue to propagate the same deceptive line.

You're a liar, Captain Kangaroo.

Trump most certainly defended Hillary's record of Secretary of State after Benghazi.

He was supporting and defending anti-gun, open-borders Democrats as recent as two years ago.

And Trump has explained that his lobbying with Hillary was a two-way street. Anti-gun, open-borders Democrats needed money, and he wanted political favors...

Yes, I have read the interview. Trump defended Hillary's record... It was after Benghazi.

 
me too, and McCain before him.    


I'm voting for whoever isn't Hillary.

So since he gave money to the GOP guys too doesn't that make him a conservative according to your logic?

I mean you 4 are claiming that because Trump gave money to dems that he is a liberal

So why aren't you saying he gave money to GOP that makes him a Republican ?


when your argument fails then what?

This is the clip to which I am referring: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4lFrk4PbVg Ignore the title the poster chose for the clip, watch the clip. Where does Trump defend Clinton?

How naive are you? that's the same shit the RNC has been peddling for the last 8 years or more and look where it's gotten us?
I'm glad trump came along if for nothing else to show how dudes with their heads stuck in the sand like you are what has been dragging down everything in the fight against the left.

I can't even fathom a way to describe how horribly, horribly fucked your ideology is, and how it is built on a foundation of sand.  

Just like in 2008 when most people on here were saying:

I'm not buying ammo, I'm waiting for prices to come down, Your a fool to buy ammo now, Blah, Blah Blah.

All I can say to the nay sayers is.:  Ha Ha

The establishment getting behind the party nominee does not make the nominee establishment also.

You're projecting the qualities of one on to the other.

If we use the same logic, the opposite must also be true.

Those not supporting Trump, by default, support his opponent.

You can't have it both ways.  So by default you support Hillary.