The never-ending POTUS Election thread....

[dbair1967]

The Republican establishment are pretty much ensuring that they won't win the election. And I don't even think they give a shit because they'll still maintain their power structure.

Say what you want about Trump, but he's exposed the "process" and the political parties for they are. Corrupt. He'll run as an independent if he doesn't get the nomination which will guarantee a victory for the Democrat nominee.

Its too bad, he's probably the best candidate on either side, by far. He isn't corrupt and he isn't the massive liar like the others.

It wont happen, but it'd be funny if he did run 3rd party, and won.

 

[Dodger12]

Its too bad, he's probably the best candidate on either side, by far. He isn't corrupt and he isn't the massive liar like the others.

It wont happen, but it'd be funny if he did run 3rd party, and won.

I think it could very well happen. Trump doesn't like to "lose." The establishment made him sign an agreement where he'd support the Republican nominee and now we see the establishment will not support him if he reaches the delegate count. I have to admit, I was caught completely off-guard by the political corruption and games which are being exposed. I actually thought that votes mattered.

 

[dbair1967]

I think it could very well happen. Trump doesn't like to "lose." The establishment made him sign an agreement where he'd support the Republican nominee and now we see the establishment will not support him if he reaches the delegate count. I have to admit, I was caught completely off-guard by the political corruption and games which are being exposed. I actually thought that votes mattered.

He's clearly been treated awful by the Republican Party, and if he chooses to run 3rd party no one should have a problem with that.

He's a smart man though, I know he would probably realize running 3rd party wouldn't give him a good chance to win. Still, it's be absolutely hilarious if he did end up winning and the message him winning as a 3rd party would send to both parties up there now- Clean up your act or GTFO.


I knew it was corrupt and full of fraud and waste, but what they are doing in order to hold onto a "power system" is an eye opener to me. Neither party believes in anything, they just want to be there, steal tax payers money and make a living doing absolutely nothing.

 

[peplaw06]

I don't think Trump can be on the ballot in all 50 states if he's not on the Republican ticket. The process for getting on the ballot isn't something that is done quickly. From what I've read, the Libertarian nominee is the only "third party" nominee who will be on the ballot in all 50 states. The LP nominates its candidate in May.

 

[Doomsday]

I don't think Trump can be on the ballot in all 50 states if he's not on the Republican ticket.

Nope, he can't.

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

Still say the Pub "establishment" doesn't have a problem with Trump for his policies or because he isn't one of them so much as the fact that they think he'll embarrass them in the general.

And it's hard to blame them when he says things like women getting abortions should be punished. Didn't think it was possible to piss off both sides of the argument on that topic, but he managed to do it.

 

[dbair1967]

And it's hard to blame them when he says things like women getting abortions should be punished. Didn't think it was possible to piss off both sides of the argument on that topic, but he managed to do it.

Wasn't the question directed at him "if abortion were illegal should the woman be punished"

I'm asking, because I haven't heard or read the quote in its entirety, but that's what someone on the radio said.

 

[dbair1967]

Still say the Pub "establishment" doesn't have a problem with Trump for his policies or because he isn't one of them so much as the fact that they think he'll embarrass them in the general.
.

I 100% disagree on this. They didn't care that McCain or Romney was an embarrassment at how poorly they ran their campaigns. Or Dole. All 3 of them were fucking jokes in the general election.

They hate Trump because he isn't taking their money or giving in to their demands to support their agenda. If he fell in line like the rest of those fools they'd be 100% behind him, but they know their way of life is over if he gets up there.

 

[onlyonenow]

you can tell who is in the pocket of the establishment; thought experiment clearly is.

McCain ran one of the most ridiculous campaigns in history. The establishment did not make much noise there except later to blame Palin.

Now Obama was going to win no matter what due to the economy tanking and racist guilt. But McCain could have made it closer if he had gone directly conservative and shown all the holes in the BS 'hope and change' crap. By pointing out a product of the Chicago Democratic Machine is not someone who is going to change much of anything important that actually would help the country.

He should have attacked Obama directly as absolutely unqualified to be president. And dragged out all the garbage in his background and shown the world all of it.

Like I said enough sheep would have voted for Obama no matter what but it would have destroyed a lot of his credibility that he used to shove the disaster known as Obama care down our throats.

 

[onlyonenow]

the establishment hates Trump because he exposes them. and they know he is absolutely one that they cannot influence or control.

its all about power; and the establishment on both sides hate Trump because he threatens that power.

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

you can tell who is in the pocket of the establishment; thought experiment clearly is.

No, I'm not. I couldn't give two shits about internal party politics. In fact I do understand the desire for an "outsider."

I just want the Dems out, and I'm afraid Trump won't do it. If he weren't such a loose cannon I'd be a lot more on his side.

Not every person who isn't for Trump is "establishment." That's ridiculous.

 

[ThoughtExperiment]

And to dbair -- I don't keep up with politics on a day to day basis because it's such a sickening process. But I did happen to see Trump clearly say that he thought they should be punished. He may have been asked the question, but he didn't just give a "yes", either.

 

[dbair1967]

And to dbair -- I don't keep up with politics on a day to day basis because it's such a sickening process. But I did happen to see Trump clearly say that he thought they should be punished. He may have been asked the question, but he didn't just give a "yes", either.

Maybe someone can post the clip in its entirety. The mainstream media hasn't been showing the whole thing, I suspect its because what I posted above might be true.

If so, he didn't say anything wrong. If they asked him "if abortion is illegal should a woman be punished for having one" then the obvious answer is yes.

 

[Doomsday]

Wasn't the question directed at him "if abortion were illegal should the woman be punished"

No, Trump first proposed the hypothetical about if Roe v. Wade were overturned, and said there would have to be some penalty if abortion were banned. Matthews then gleefully pounced. That was a completely self-inflicted wound by Trump there.

 

[dbair1967]

No, Trump first proposed the hypothetical about if Roe v. Wade were overturned, and said there would have to be some penalty if abortion were banned. Matthews then gleefully pounced. That was a completely self-inflicted wound by Trump there.

OK, it sounds like you are agreeing with what I said then.

It doesn't make any difference if it was "hypothetical" or not, if he was answering the question with relation to abortions being illegal (as they should be, except for very extenuating circumstances like rape, incest, threat to mothers life) and someone being punished for an "illegal" thing, then what he said is correct.

 

[Doomsday]

if he was answering the question with relation to abortions being illegal (as they should be, except for very extenuating circumstances like rape, incest, threat to mothers life) and someone being punished for an "illegal" thing, then what he said is correct.

Except, there's never been a time in our history when abortion was banned, that the female gets punished for getting one. It's always been the Sot who is illegally providing it, who gets the hammer not the female. Whether that's 'fair' or right or not, is of course debatable. But I would be leaning towards getting the providers instead of the victims.

Would the punishment for the woman be a dime? Or ten years? A fine and a handslap misdemeanor, or a felony. It's not worth pursuing, let's get the illegal provider.

All this really shows is that on this issue like so many others, Trump hasn't given it much thought at all, if any. And this is why he is so often unprepared.

OK, it sounds like you are agreeing with what I said then.

If you're talking about here yeah, but I hadn't seen that one when I replied to the first one. I was just answering your question which I'd quoted.

abortions being illegal (as they should be, except for very extenuating circumstances like rape, incest, threat to mothers life)

They should not be illegal nor should they be commonplace, and especially not "on demand" on the taxpayer dime. I don't have any moral objections to the procedure.

 

[dbair1967]

They should not be illegal nor should they be commonplace, and especially not "on demand" on the taxpayer dime. I don't have any moral objections to the procedure.

I think they should be. Its slaughtering a human life.

These woman that use it as a form of birth control are massive losers IMO. Like I said I do think there are times when it should be considered, but not because some dumb bitch didn't want to take birth control or make the dude wear a damn rubber.

 

[Doomsday]

I think they should be. Its slaughtering a human life.

If you believe human life begins at conception. It's human DNA right? So is sperm, fingernail clippings - you're slaughtering human cells.

These woman that use it as a form of birth control are massive losers IMO.

If they want to risk their health doing abortions as a form of birth control, that's their dumb ass - but not on the public dime.

Like I said I do think there are times when it should be considered, but not because some dumb bitch didn't want to take birth control or make the dude wear a damn rubber.

Birth control sometimes fails. Especially condoms.

 

[Dodger12]

Wasn't the question directed at him "if abortion were illegal should the woman be punished"

I'm asking, because I haven't heard or read the quote in its entirety, but that's what someone on the radio said.

Don't let them sway you David. That's exactly how it was posed. It was a loaded question. I mean, if abortion was illegal I'd assume it's because the fetus was defined as life. So if a woman got one and terminated that life, how could she not get punished? What's the point of having the law if no one will be punished.

I'm not advocating for making it illegal, just thinking of the slippery slope if it was.

 

[Doomsday]

Don't let them sway you David. That's exactly how it was posed. It was a loaded question.

Did you watch the segment?

Donald Trump's Hazy Stance On Abortion 'Punishment' | Hardball | MSNBC - YouTube