Apple Withholds Republican Convention Donations Over Trump Politics

[Bobby Corwen]

So you're voting for the least qualified person because he wants to start a construction project? Okkkkkkkk...

Maybe you should watch this...

I didn't realize its still February, yeah I saw that back then, and subsequently cringed.

It sucks how it's caught on so viral and since then everybody has been saying Drumpf everywhere I go and read....

A circle-jerk by anti-trump people for anti-trump people. In other words it wasnt gonna sway anyone.

It came across as try-hard. Trying way too hard with the Drumpf thing. And then self congratulatory at the end which made it lose any effect it was going for at trying to be funny. After the cringefest at the very end it just fell away. If he's stopped before that, it would have been much more powerful despite being littered with inaccurate bias.

Yes, because all the resources spent


So what you're saying is that in order to create more cooperation in the government, to continue to improve the economy, to bring more health care to the people who don't have it and to improve the US's image around the world you need a president who lies constantly, doesn't understand any of the issues, alienates and insults people who don't agree with him, makes scapegoats of minorities, and seems willing to completely disregard the constitution and Geneva Convention? And someone who has shown a willingness to rip people off in order to make a few dollars, who has bankrupted the only business he directly managed, and who's best skill is self-promotion, which is how he's actually made most of his money.

This is someone who you think the country needs?

Who? Are you talking about Obama?

I don't get the point you are trying to make...

 

[cube]

Sortakinda, but not really. It's basically the same gradient used in Europe, but with the center shifted a few degrees farther over to the right.

Liberalism is to the right, the opposite of socialism.

 

[Renzatic]

Are you about to argue that he was a Founding Father and for big government? Please spare us as it is largely false.

It's all about that taxing and spending clause in the Constitution, man. We've all been arguing about it since Day 1. The only difference now is we call each other commies and fascists to get our point across.

He also died in a duel so he was ultimately pro 2nd amendment.

Well, he probably was up until that musket ball entered his chest.

 

[ksnell]

If you don't like people trying to change the way your country is run, why don't you go somewhere else? Seriously. Who gave you the right to decide who should live in the USA and who shouldn't, what opinions should be allowed there and which shouldn't?

I think you are misinterpreting me. I (along with the Founding Fathers) am for individual liberty which you can say and do as you please and so can I. With an over regulating government via Socialism, this cannot be so.

My point is, capitalism in the US is not replicated anywhere else in the world, but Socialism is. There are many other options.

 

[villicodelirant]

I respect your opinion but I think you are missing my point.

I think I got your point.
Mine was "having a heritage and staying true to its principles is okay and all, but you don't necessarily have to remain perfectly immobile".
The US in 2016 can't possibly be something the US Franklin and Jefferson envisioned at any point.
I don't think they were thinking of people posting on forums, for example.
And change is not always for the worse.

But mostly I just wanted to crack a joke about the Roman empire

Every great nation throughout history that has tumbled in one way or another was via government overreach of power.

Interestingly enough, now that I think of it, this might not apply to the fall of the (Western) Roman Empire.
If I remember my history, increasing disparity and poverty, excessive military spending and wars abroad, competition with Byzantium, barbaric invasions and a little known cult of troublemakers known as "Christianity" did.

 

[samcraig]

That's not why I posted that.. Of course that's what you focus on

 

[ksnell]

It's all about that taxing and spending clause in the Constitution, man. We've all been arguing about it since Day 1. The only difference now is we call each other commies and fascists to get our point across.



Well, he probably was up until that musket ball entered his chest.

Zing. Thumbs up on that one!

“The constitution shall never be construed...to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.”
― Alexander Hamilton

 

[Renzatic]

Liberalism is to the right, the opposite of socialism.

Liberalism, at least Classical Liberalism, isn't a political leaning these days, so much as the scale itself. All 1st world nations are deeply entrenched in classical liberalism, the US especially. The modern gradient would be Welfare Statism on the left, and Minarchism on the right.

Socialism, at least by the Marxist definition, is a decentralized form of government and economy, where everyone has a stake in everything. It'd be way to the left of Welfare Statism, probably beyond the scope of the current gradient.

 

[villicodelirant]

Liberalism, at least Classical Liberalism, isn't a political leaning these days, so much as the scale itself. All 1st world nations are deeply entrenched in classical liberalism, the US especially. The modern gradient would be Welfare Statism on the left, and Minarchism on the right.

Socialism, at least by the Marxist definition, is a decentralized form of government and economy, where everyone has a stake in everything. It'd be way to the left of Welfare Statism, probably beyond the scope of the current gradient.

Footnote: a lot of right wing dictatoriships have or have had a large welfare system in place.

Also true of decidedly non-nazi countries such as modern Denmark, though.

 

[ksnell]

I think I got your point.
Mine was "having a heritage and staying true to its principles is okay and all, but you don't necessarily have to remain perfectly immobile".
The US in 2016 can't possibly be something the US Franklin and Jefferson envisioned at any point.
I don't think they were thinking of people posting on forums, for example.
And change is not always for the worse.

But mostly I just wanted to crack a joke about the Roman empire


Interestingly enough, now that I think of it, this might not apply to the fall of the (Western) Roman Empire.
If I remember my history, increasing disparity and poverty, excessive military spending and wars abroad, competition with Byzantium, barbaric invasions and a little known cult of troublemakers known as "Christianity" did.

Good joke good joke. I 100% agree - otherwise we would still have crazy stuff going on like segregation and women not voting.

Regarding Roman Empire, wouldn't that grasp for additional power via military, etc be constituted as an overreach? Maybe only in hindsight? That's the scary part.

 

[Urban Joe]

You don't understand the word you are trying to define here.

haha... what does anybody actually know. Your comments leave me with a similar feeling. Just out of curiosity...if you love socialism so much then why not move to a more socialistic system ? At least let the free market try to exist in one place on the earth will ya?

 

[gnasher729]

Well trump would like to profile Muslims. He would not like to do it but he would.

I wonder what Muhammad Ali thought of him.

In London, Trump's Mini Me aka Boris Johnson is gone, and Sadiq Kahn told him were to stick it. Londoners actually preferred a Muslim to a Trump lookalike.

 

[Renzatic]

Footnote: a lot of right wing dictatoriships have or have had a large welfare system in place.

Also true of decidedly non-nazi countries such as modern Denmark, though.

Yeah, because a welfare system isn't exclusive to any form of left or right leaning government. If we go by the wider political gradient, the one all the moonbats and wingnuts seem to think we're on, with totalitarianist collectivism on the far left, and totalitarianist authoritarianism on the far right, then it's pretty much a universal concept. Only it's implementation would differ.

 

[gnasher729]

The "Trump is Hitler" argument has gotten old. Nothing in Trump's business career suggests he's anything like Hitler. By 1933 Hitler had written an anti-semitic diatribe and tried to start a military coup against the Weimar government.

In 2016 Trump has publicly said that he wants political opponents to be carried away on stretchers. In 2016, we hear one anti-muslim diatribe from Trump after the other. At the same time the pope tells him to behave like a Christian. Fat chance.

 

[Bonte]

Lol, wow.... I stand corrected (sort of).
Imagine all my surprise that a Trump supporter was also an expert on Hitler history, lol.

I wanted to know and i found it on wikipedia, you should try that too before throwing in a Godwin.

 

[Larry-K]

Liberalism is to the right, the opposite of socialism.

Nope, guess again.

 

[Bonte]

In 2016 Trump has publicly said that he wants political opponents to be carried away on stretchers. In 2016, we hear one anti-muslim diatribe from Trump after the other. At the same time the pope tells him to behave like a Christian. Fat chance.

Trump is misquoted all the time, he didn't want opponents to be carried away on stretchers. Its easy to quote out of context and twist the words.

“Look, see, he’s smiling. See, he’s having a good time,” Trump said of the protester. “You know what I hate? There’s a guy, totally disruptive, throwing punches, we’re not allowed to punch back anymore. I love the old days. You know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this? They’d be carried out on a stretcher, folks. Here's a guy trowing out punches but he's walking out smiling and i would like to punch him in the face”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...n-protester-id-like-to-punch-him-in-the-face/

even some video of it

[doublepost=1466461604][/doublepost]

Liberalism is to the right, the opposite of socialism.

Liberalism is freedom, it just depends on how you see socialism i guess.

EU socialism in the seventies was all about freedom, not so anymore.

 

[KPOM]

In 2016 Trump has publicly said that he wants political opponents to be carried away on stretchers. In 2016, we hear one anti-muslim diatribe from Trump after the other. At the same time the pope tells him to behave like a Christian. Fat chance.

Meanwhile it has been primarily the Bernie and lesser extent Hillary supporters engaging in actual violence. Liberals don't seem to understand the concept of hyperbole. Trump has not called for violence.

The "Muslim ban" looks extreme only in comparison to the current administration that wants to bury its head in the sand and actually released 9/11 transcripts of Omar Mateen with ISIS replaced with [omitted].
[doublepost=1466462665][/doublepost]

I wonder what Muhammad Ali thought of him.

In London, Trump's Mini Me aka Boris Johnson is gone, and Sadiq Kahn told him were to stick it. Londoners actually preferred a Muslim to a Trump lookalike.

Trump and Muhammad Ali were good friends.

I wonder how much Londoners like their new mayor now that he's addressing the key priorities, like banning ads showing women in bikinis. Of course, Londonistan was already in its early stages when I lived there (during Red Ken's tenure).

 

[FieldingMellish]

So you think that shows that Obama doesn't like the US or "demeans" it? Interesting. Pretty much says all I need to know about your logic.

At least admit it when you're totally shown the corner to stand in.
[doublepost=1466462821][/doublepost]

Really, dude? The Heritage Foundation?

Educate yourself.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/23/politics/fact-check-apology-tour/

Those are Obama's actual words, your bogus fact check notwithstanding.

 

[laurim]

Nah...if I was as proactively discriminative as Apple is with regards to social/moral views I wouldn't buy Apple products at all. Period. However, I overlook the differences I have with them and focus on what I actually DO like and appreciate about their company/products. I am a conservative, like many others, who are actually able to suffer the opinions of those I disagree with. I RARELY IF EVER...in my experience...come across bleeding heart liberals who offer the same gracious hospitality in intellectual venues.

Maybe skipping the name calling would be a good start if you really want to have a friendly discourse.
[doublepost=1466463190][/doublepost]

I have never seen or met or heard of anyone knowing of any actual real life KKK people that exist in my entire lifetime.

But I see violent extremist BLM terrorist groups bringing them up all the time on TV and in the news.



40million? Wrong. (Or provide unbiased evidence)

Lol did you watch that history channel documentary I posted? He started with a small loan of a million dollars from his father and started making major moves from there, revitalizing NY in the process.

I lived in Louisiana for 3 years. Bought my first car in Denham Springs and afterward heard that's the town where a Grand Dragon lived. You need to get out more. Just because you don't know any KKK/Neo Nazi/White nationalist personally doesn't mean they don't exist. They don't wear their sheets out in the general public.
[doublepost=1466463328][/doublepost]

Trump and Muhammad Ali were good friends.

Such good friends he didn't remember Ali was muslim when he tweeted he couldn't think if any great muslim athletes when Obama said there were many.
[doublepost=1466464104][/doublepost]

Not rally back In The days they ran whole cities and states and had communities all over the south.

I have never once seen reports of them doing anything to anyone for as long as I have been alive .

Yet I see BLM terrorist violence every day on WSHH

What exactly is your thesis? You keep grasping at straws.

OMG, is it that hard to Google?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/27/us/kkk-rally-in-anaheim-violence/
https://mic.com/articles/122500/15-...hat-a-kkk-rally-looks-like-in-2015#.O5frrkW7S
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progre...labama-kkk-planning-violent-all-out-race-war/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_white_nationalist_organizations

 

[cube]

Nope, guess again.

Liberalism is not libertarianism and socialism is not communism.

 

[laurim]

Again still has nothing to do with the info graphic I posted.

its a commonly posted pic from all over the internet that everyone has seen and is from legit sources.

Heres a link to something that says the same stuff http://www.infowars.com/black-crime-facts-that-the-white-liberal-media-darent-talk-about/

There are such statistics all over the place.

Wow, really? Alex Jones website? Explains a lot!!
[doublepost=1466465250][/doublepost]

Yet, you don't care about Hillary's corruption? Have you looked into her Clinton Foundation, the Russian uranium deal, how she's received tens of millions of dollars from Saudi-Arabia, Qatar and co etc.? Or all the other cases of criminal fraud? Have you looked into the Clinton Universities, which is a clear example of fraud (unlike the Trump University case). Liberals are all about "do as I say, not as I do".

Fraud huh? Where's the convictions? List the judgments, please.
Do you mean this Clinton University program? https://www.clintonfoundation.org/clinton-global-initiative/meetings/cgi-university
How dare they do such awful good works? How much does it cost to attend? Free except for any travel and lodging. Bastards!

 

[bent christian]

Liberalism is to the right, the opposite of socialism.

Here, we have another who fails to understand even the most basic concepts in political language. No surprise. People in the U.S. tend to lack any political education at all. It is not a thing valued by our society. The logical outcome being the classic Trumpist.

Liberalism is best described as centrism, as straddles the Left and the Right. Social liberals are obviously on the Left. Economic liberals (neoliberalism worldview) is decidedly Right-of-center.

 

[cube]

Here, we have another who fails to understand even the most basic concepts in political language. No surprise. People in the U.S. tend to lack any political education at all. It is not a thing valued by our society. The logical outcome being the classic Trumpist.

Liberalism is best described as centrism, as straddles the Left and the Right. Social liberals are obviously on the Left. Economic liberals (neoliberalism worldview) is decidedly Right-of-center.

Social liberalism would be the center.

US is to the right.

 

[bent christian]

Social liberalism would be the center.

US is to the right.

The U.S. is a Right-of-center nation. Yes. Our choices tend to be the center-Right Democratic Party, and far-Right Republicans. No genuine Left exists in this country, none that has any power.

How can social liberalism be "the center" in your mind? Just a bit ago you typed:

Liberalism is to the right, the opposite of socialism.

Social liberalism is a branch of Liberalism (it is the second word in that phrase). You aren't making any sense.

If we break the it down to the root word - "liberal" simply means to allow many things (full stop). If we are talking economics, it means laissez-faire (Right-wing econ), socially we are talking about support for Feminism, abortion rights, same-sex marriage rights, social justice, etc. - all things at odds with what the Right-wings holds dear and full supported by those who are definately Left-of-center.