Trump Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vouthon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Al_Moritz said:
Then overturning Roe v. Wade will not suffice. But overturning Roe v. Wade is what the political pro-life movement constantly talks about, as if that were the magical solution.

You will, however, never get to such a Federal law that states cannot usurp, without first changing minds – otherwise there simply will be no political will.
Click to expand...
I agree and all tactics must be used and the most important is to change minds.
 
Al_Moritz said:
Then overturning Roe v. Wade will not suffice. But overturning Roe v. Wade is what the political pro-life movement constantly talks about, as if that were the magical solution.

You will, however, never get to such a Federal law that states cannot usurp, without first changing minds – otherwise there simply will be no political will.
Click to expand...
It’s a lot easier to work with state legislatures than it is with the Supreme court. For one thing, state legislatures are subject to the will of the people whereas the S.C. isn’t.

But regardless, overturning Roe would be a start in the right direction.
 
karow said:
Collins says three incidents led her to this decision not to support Trump, a full 17 months after he announced his candidacy: Trump’s mocking of Serge Kovaleski; his insistance that Gonzalo Curiel could not be impartial because of his Mexican heritage; and his criticism of the parents of Army Capt. Khan.

But she says nothing of Trump calling undocumented immigrants rapists on day one of his presidential run.

That day, day one, is when anyone with decency would have disavowed him as a person fit for the presidency.

Collins gets no credit for saying Trump is too hateful and hurtful to endorse now, when he’s fixing to lose spectacularly and it’s politically expedient to distance herself from him. Trump was the same kind of nasty a year a half ago.
Click to expand...
Doubtful Collins would have ever voted for Trump or a conservative, either one. She was probably going to vote for Hillary Clinton years ago.

And it’s especially doubtful since he didn’t criticize Khan’s parents for anything other than Mr. Khan’s vicious attack on him (which Khan repeated in Pakistan for their edification)

Trump didn’t say Curiel was biased because of his Mexican heritage. he had ample reason to not like Curiel since Curiel released jury-ruining plaintiff evidence that most judges wouldn’t have done, is a Hillary supporter and a supporter of illegal immigration.

And he didn’t call illegals “rapists”. He criticized open borders inasmuch as it encouraged immigration by criminals such as rapists.

No, if Collins had to concoct bogus reasons to oppose Trump, she never would have voted for him to begin with. She’s really a Democrat under the skin, one of the enablers of Obamacare.
 
Ridgerunner said:
It’s a lot easier to work with state legislatures than it is with the Supreme court. For one thing, state legislatures are subject to the will of the people whereas the S.C. isn’t.

But regardless, overturning Roe would be a start in the right direction.
Click to expand...
But that’s the point. You first have to change minds to change the will of the people in ‘liberal’ states where most of the abortions occur. Only then you can change laws. So going at the problem from the legal perspective first is the wrong approach.
 
ringil said:
More GOP members speaking out against Trump.

bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37016680
Click to expand...
It’s become obvious that there is a concerted, behind-the-scenes effort by the Republican establishment to see Trump lose. Surely committee memberships and committee leadership positions and other under-the-table patronage were promised to those that spoke out publically against Mr. Trump. Who in the party is behind it is anyone’s guess.

The party put up 16 of their best, and they couldn’t beat Mr. Trump. They tried again at the convention and even after the convention to turn him away. Nothing worked, the people had spoken and Trump was there man. Now completely desperate, they have chosen to vote for the opposition to help Hillary Clinton get elected! Once again the will of the people is thwarted and the establishment wins. Trump and Bernie were right - the system is rigged.

We are a one party country - the Establishment Party. May the GOP rot in the dustbin of history…:mad:
 
karow said:
Collins says three incidents led her to this decision not to support Trump, a full 17 months after he announced his candidacy: Trump’s mocking of Serge Kovaleski; his insistance that Gonzalo Curiel could not be impartial because of his Mexican heritage; and his criticism of the parents of Army Capt. Khan.

**But she says nothing of Trump calling undocumented immigrants rapists on day one of his presidential run.

That day, day one, is when anyone with decency would have disavowed him as a person fit for the presidency**.

Collins gets no credit for saying Trump is too hateful and hurtful to endorse now, when he’s fixing to lose spectacularly and it’s politically expedient to distance herself from him. Trump was the same kind of nasty a year a half ago.
Click to expand...
Well said. I do give her some credit for speaking out now though. It’s never too late to do the right thing and she made it clear that she has found him morally repugnant for some time.
gilliam said:
She is also running for reelection in a blue state
Click to expand...
She’s not up for re-election this year.
 
irishpatrick said:
No, you need to protect life from natural conception to natural death with Federal laws that states cannot usurp.

We simple do not, as a nation, take life seriously and we most certainly do not view life as sacred.
Click to expand...
Only way to get it done truly is with a constitutional amendment which requires a whole lot of support from the people.
 
ProVobis said:
She joins Cruz, Kasich, Bush, Rauner, Kirk, and many other Republicans.
Click to expand...
You can bet the first three in your list want Clinton to win. Then in four years they are hoping to run and become president. If trump wins he may or may not run for a second term. But if the economy grow at 3% or better Pence will be the heir apparent. Thats a min of 12 years, some of them will be getting long in the tooth by then.
 
My experience with pro-life people is that they already are trying to address the abortion issue from multiple angles. I don’t understand the false dichotomy. Personally, I think the Achilles heel of conservative pro-life efforts is contraception, since many tacitly support it. But that doesn’t therefore mean I’m going to say those people should stop their prayers, counseling, or aid.
 
Sy_Noe said:
Had no idea where to put this since the Trump thread 2 has apparently been closed.

But Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, announced tonight that she would not vote for Donald Trump in the presidential election, dealing another blow to Mr. Trump as he tries to unite his party and win more support from women.

nytimes.com/2016/08/09/us/politics/susan-collins-trump.html?_r=0
Click to expand...
Everybody wants to tell you what they dislike, but they are too timid to tell you what they like.
 
jimcav said:
It’s become obvious that there is a concerted, behind-the-scenes effort by the Republican establishment to see Trump lose. Surely committee memberships and committee leadership positions and other under-the-table patronage were promised to those that spoke out publically against Mr. Trump. Who in the party is behind it is anyone’s guess.

The party put up 16 of their best, and they couldn’t beat Mr. Trump. They tried again at the convention and even after the convention to turn him away. Nothing worked, the people had spoken and Trump was there man. Now completely desperate, they have chosen to vote for the opposition to help Hillary Clinton get elected! Once again the will of the people is thwarted and the establishment wins. Trump and Bernie were right - the system is rigged.

We are a one party country - the Establishment Party. May the GOP rot in the dustbin of history…:mad:
Click to expand...
You are right, Im really starting to believe there truly is some small group of ‘all powerful’ people who control everything that goes on and happens, they just like people to believe they have a say.
 
To play the devil’s advocate here . . . Do we really need to resort to conspiracy theories to explain differences of opinion? Isn’t it worth seriously considering the perspective of a growing number of people with demonstrable public service experience who are suggesting that Mr. Trump might not be well suited to this job?

I’m not saying that those speaking out against Mr. Trump are necessarily correct / incorrect. I’m simply suggesting that it might be a bit dangerous to suggest that those who disagree with a given point of view must therefore be a part of some secret group or plan?

Finally, aren’t public servants also public citizens? In other words, aren’t they equally entitled to express their opinions / ideas / desires? If so, isn’t it a bit unfair to label them as subverting the will of the people when they do so?
 
Ridgerunner said:
Doubtful Collins would have ever voted for Trump or a conservative, either one. She was probably going to vote for Hillary Clinton years ago.

And it’s especially doubtful since he didn’t criticize Khan’s parents for anything other than Mr. Khan’s vicious attack on him (which Khan repeated in Pakistan for their edification)

Trump didn’t say Curiel was biased because of his Mexican heritage. he had ample reason to not like Curiel since Curiel released jury-ruining plaintiff evidence that most judges wouldn’t have done, is a Hillary supporter and a supporter of illegal immigration.

And he didn’t call illegals “rapists”. He criticized open borders inasmuch as it encouraged immigration by criminals such as rapists.

No, if Collins had to concoct bogus reasons to oppose Trump, she never would have voted for him to begin with. She’s really a Democrat under the skin, one of the enablers of Obamacare.
Click to expand...
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.” - Trump, June 15, 2015

“What can be simpler or more accurately stated? The Mexican Government is forcing their most unwanted people into the United States. They are, in many cases, criminals, drug dealers, rapists, etc.” Trump, July 6, 2015

You can white knight for him all you want, but he said what he said.
 
He said SOME were of questionable character. Not all.He was speaking the inconvenient truth.
 
karow said:
“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.” - Trump, June 15, 2015

“What can be simpler or more accurately stated? The Mexican Government is forcing their most unwanted people into the United States. They are, in many cases, criminals, drug dealers, rapists, etc.” Trump, July 6, 2015

You can white knight for him all you want, but he said what he said.
Click to expand...
I’m nobody’s white knight. Even your own quote does not say all Mexicans are rapists. Never did Trump say all of them, even the illegals, are.
 
jesucated said:
To play the devil’s advocate here . . . Do we really need to resort to conspiracy theories to explain differences of opinion? Isn’t it worth seriously considering the perspective of a growing number of people with demonstrable public service experience who are suggesting that Mr. Trump might not be well suited to this job?

I’m not saying that those speaking out against Mr. Trump are necessarily correct / incorrect. I’m simply suggesting that it might be a bit dangerous to suggest that those who disagree with a given point of view must therefore be a part of some secret group or plan?

Finally, aren’t public servants also public citizens? In other words, aren’t they equally entitled to express their opinions / ideas / desires? If so, isn’t it a bit unfair to label them as subverting the will of the people when they do so?
Click to expand...
Well, conspiracy theorists have been proven pretty much correct over the last 50 years.

The much maligned John Birch Society, the master conspiracy group, warned us and told us many years ago nearly everything that we are seeing today. They were nearly spot on in their predictions. Yet conspiracy theorists are still waved off as nuts.

And none of these lifetime Republican appointees, sorry, “servants”, ever said a bad word when terrible establishment candidates like McCain or Romney were put before us, and they were truly terrible candidates, but they would keep the status quo. They towed the line and were just as happy to have Obama president as either McCain or Romney. However now that an outsider like Trump is the candidate, they are full of themselves and talking trash.

The system is broken. The establishment is in full defense against Trump now. The will of the people is denied yet again, and the establishment roles on. The American people will rue the day when Clinton becomes president…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top