Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
He's NOT a politician.

Not until he wins the election (and he is going to win, I've seen 20 years of Berlusconi, I am not wrong on this).

Then his passport will list "Politician" as his occupation.

Not that it's the most shameful of professions as you seem to imply, unless you find anarchy and running around naked in the woods appealing.
[doublepost=1466666662][/doublepost]
The founding fathers were short sighted idiots.
The never envisioned todays weaponry, todays transportation facilities, todays communications, todays population and population density.

The founding fathers were just a bunch of learned, very wise men... from the eighteenth century.

And the US constitution is a product of its time: because all constitutions are.
You don't just get up in the morning and draft a constitutional bill, you do so in the wake of something.

That's why the Italian constitution is most evidently drafted by someone who was scared ******** of fascism ever making a comeback, or why the Japanese constitution says "yo emperor, yours is a mostly symbolic role and please don't drag us into another hopeless war, in fact we renounce war".

The uniqueness of the US lies probably in the fact that Americans are very defensive of their heritage and history, however short, and have a tendency to take their 200-year old constitution very literally, just as folks from the Bible belt are fond of reading the book quite literally (the prevailing Catholic interpretation is that "nah, the Earth is not 4000 years old, you have to read between the lines").

That wouldn't probably fly elsewhere, take the gun control issue.
In Europe they would have probably said "okay, so the English are not about to invade us anytime soon, we can safely limit the sale of automatic weapons", not "it's a constitutional right!1111111111 sacrilege!11111"

On the other hand, most European countries, including my own, revise their constitution with way too much ease, so perhaps props need to be given to the US.
 
Last edited:
Trump supporters don't care.

And why [expletive] should they.

What a few centuries of universal suffrage have taught us is: voting is not a rational activity.
That's especially true of a particular breed of voter - the majority.

Trump knows this all too well, that's why he's gonna win while his opponents try to do useless "fact checking".

Instead of checking facts, checking what part of his speeches deals with his supporters' deep-rooted fears and most basic emotions would be a most illuminating endeavor.

While we are at it, I think there is a specific reason why the lefts are losing ground pretty much everywhere and right-wing, nationalist and/or populist movements are on the rise: because left-wingers got stuck with this fact-checking thing, assuming the average voter cares, instead of what the left does best - utopia.

I maintain that if left-wingers, especially in Europe, played hand drums, wore long hair and preached about world peace, unicorns and impossible, irrational things appealing to voters' irrational side, they would gain quite a few seats.

It's as if they haven't learned anything from Guevara's face printed on t-shirts all over the world.
 
And why [expletive] should they.

What a few centuries of universal suffrage have taught us is: voting is not a rational activity.
That's especially true of a particular breed of voter - the majority.

Trump knows this all too well, that's why he's gonna win while his opponents try to do useless "fact checking".

Instead of checking facts, checking what part of his speeches deals with his supporters' deep-rooted fears and most basic emotions would be a most illuminating endeavor.

While we are at it, I think there is a specific reason why the lefts are losing ground pretty much everywhere and right-wing, nationalist and/or populist movements are on the rise: because left-wingers got stuck with this fact-checking thing, assuming the average voter cares, instead of what the left does best - utopia.

I maintain that if left-wingers, especially in Europe, played hand drums, wore long hair and preached about world peace, unicorns and impossible, irrational things appealing to voters' irrational side, they would gain quite a few seats.

It's as if they haven't learned anything from Guevara's face printed on t-shirts all over the world.

So then the masses don't care that Trump is lying? Is a bigot? Only cares about himself? You are saying his opponents should join him in fear mongering and blaming "others" for all their troubles?

But a part of me hopes he wins. And the GOP fill the house and Senate so they can pass all their wet dream laws and f*** the country over so badly, the GOP base will finally see the light. Its a fantasy, I know, But I am sick of all the crap.

the founding fathers were able to form the US because they knew how to COMPROMISE. They ****ing LISTENED to one another!
 
It's hard to compromise when nobody is talking. A president should be meeting with congressional leaders once / week minimum and the entire congress once / month minimum.

very true. But lets be honest... how do you sit in a room with people who fostered the birther nonsense and not smack the **** out of them? There is political discourse, but that level of crap boggles the mind.

The Founding Fathers also said "Americans should not go abroad to slay dragons they do not understand in the name of spreading democracy" and they warned against "entangling alliances."

Hillary violates both.

No president is ever going back to that policy. Well maybe Ron Paul would but nobody listens to him unfortunately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MadeTheSwitch
very true. But lets be honest... how do you sit in a room with people who fostered the birther nonsense and not smack the **** out of them? There is political discourse, but that level of crap boggles the mind.

In the private sector, people often have to work with other people they dislike. Why should it be different in the public sector ? Besides, we elected them and pay them to do their job.
 
In the private sector, people often have to work with other people they dislike. Why should it be different in the public sector ? Besides, we elected them and pay them to do their job.

Correct we do work with people we dislike. But if my coworker started fostering illogical and untrue rumors about me. They would find themselves out of a job. Crap like that doesn't fly in the private sector.
 
So then the masses don't care that Trump is lying?

Nope

Is a bigot?

Now, this, some may care about.

You are saying his opponents should join him in fear mongering and blaming "others" for all their troubles?

No, just refrain from ever appealing to facts or reason, since that won't win an election, ever.
I have already suggested - in a completely serious fashion - to counter fear mongering and blaiming with rainbows, unicorns and world peace.

the founding fathers were able to form the US because they knew how to COMPROMISE. They ****ing LISTENED to one another!

Captain Obvious says: the founding fathers were not competing for votes.
 
Captain Obvious says: the founding fathers were not competing for votes.

True. Though mini's notion that yee olde founding fathers of olde compromised on everything, and always listened to each other isn't exactly correct. They argued like straight up mofos on every issue that came their way.

The difference between then and now is that they all thought each other as having differing opinions, while still being vested in the good of the nation. This has been pretty common in our politics, up until about the late 90's, when our party pundits started viewing each other as enemies of the state.
 
True. Though mini's notion that yee olde founding fathers of olde compromised on everything, and always listened to each other isn't exactly correct. They argued like straight up mofos on every issue that came their way.

The difference between then and now is that they all thought each other as having differing opinions, while still being vested in the good of the nation. This has been pretty common in our politics, up until about the late 90's, when our party pundits started viewing each other as enemies of the state.


^^^ this.

Having different POV on issues and arguing for them is one thing. It's recommended. But in the end, we need people to actually listen to the other side, acknoledge that the other side also has good points, and then both sides compromise to what is best for the country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: villicodelirant
True. Though mini's notion that yee olde founding fathers of olde compromised on everything, and always listened to each other isn't exactly correct. They argued like straight up mofos on every issue that came their way.

The difference between then and now is that they all thought each other as having differing opinions, while still being vested in the good of the nation. This has been pretty common in our politics, up until about the late 90's, when our party pundits started viewing each other as enemies of the state.

I actually meant this about the founding fathers. I assumed it was common knowledge that they argued about everything. But they knew how to conpromise for the greater good. Today everyone seems to want to go to their corners and anyone who even suggests listening to the other is a traitor.
 
I actually meant this about the founding fathers. I assumed it was common knowledge that they argued about everything. But they knew how to conpromise for the greater good. Today everyone seems to want to go to their corners and anyone who even suggests listening to the other is a traitor.

Yeah, we're kind of in a stupid place politically these days.

...but the question is: who started it? Let the discussions commence.
 
True. Though mini's notion that yee olde founding fathers of olde compromised on everything, and always listened to each other isn't exactly correct. They argued like straight up mofos on every issue that came their way.

The difference between then and now is that they all thought each other as having differing opinions, while still being vested in the good of the nation. This has been pretty common in our politics, up until about the late 90's, when our party pundits started viewing each other as enemies of the state.
Eh, we no longer had the Ruskies to point our fingers at.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Renzatic
Wow, really? Alex Jones website? Explains a lot!!
[doublepost=1466465250][/doublepost]

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!

You're trying to purport that the Clintons are not corrupt....well that says a whole lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Urban Joe
"Fact Check" is the new damage control.

Hillary was shredded, but not anywhere near the loser she'll be in a live TV one-on-one against Trump. Turn on those cackle-meters; they'll be rip-roaring.

:p

It is sad to read someone say 'fact checking is considered damage control'
how about just telling the truth? The truth no longer matters?
 
Unsurprisingly, riddled with inaccuracies and outright lies. It is what we have come to expect.

But we all know that Trump supporters don't care.



Fact Check: Trump's Speech On Clinton Annotated

Fact-Checking Trump's Speech

Lmao strong strong cope.

He went on stringing dozens of various attacks as a greater whole with the effect of severely maligning her character. He went on for what felt like a 40 minute freestyle rap verse just going on and on with an incredibly influential and presidential diction and vernacular. Those articles only covered like 5 (most of which were bogus in the sense that, Trump says Hillary was hiding evidence, and the debunking essentially saying, "theres no evidence"(face palm)) so it doesnt even cover half the attacks on her, most of which have already been circulating on viral youtube Shillary compilations for months now.

He brilliantly reinforced all that and more while making himself seem immensely confident and presidential in comparison to anyone but the most brainwashed of cucks..

keep coping.
 
Last edited:
So he lied! It doesn't matter. What does is that he lied with such style.

It's funny that, for all your priming and posturing about being NOT A CUCK, you're here proudly admitting how easily swayed you are.

What did he lie about?
 
What did he lie about?

Did you not read the list? Oh yeah, you did. And your response was "olol they said there's no proof but HILLARY IS HIDING THE PROOF". The closest he comes to telling the truth are spins hidden in half truths. Plus more long since disproven Benghazi stuff. Guess that horse hasn't been beaten to a bloody pulp quite yet.

Though does it really matter? You know Trump's lying, but you don't care. Nothing will change your mind on him by this point. Changing your mind is what Cucks do, amirite?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rdowns
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.