I almost want Bernie to pull it off. Watching the world burn is becoming a rather enjoyable pastime.
Clinton, Kasich, Rubio would just be more of the same slow downward death spiral that when it finally hits nobody will care.
Trump and Bernie have the potential to light things on fire just to piss people off.
Imagine a Trump/Bernie combo the world may end from such greatness !
Both are candidates from outside the establishment, both were never intended to even make it this far in the race, neither are at the mercy of lobbyists, and neither can do anything wrong in the eyes of their supporters.
I have yet to see an valid argument against Trump. We have had 8 years of a failed President already. I don't see how Trump could be worse.
If the fact that he spews hate and bile at a near non-stop pace isn't enough for you, then nothing will. He's the closest to an actual Fascist American politics has seen, but his followers have spent the past eight years stripping that word of all meaning by inappropriately throwing it at Obama, so they don't even *** get it.
Trump is scum. A walking, talking, breathing pile of cat ***.
I don't give a good god damn if he turns this country into a gold-plated paradise. If that paradise is basically WASP-only, I want nothing to do with it.
The fact that entire countries -- allies! -- would consider banning him from their country and have nothing to do with him as a world leader should be indicative of far, far greater issues.
Edit: Of course, inversely, all my vitriol aside, there's always that little spark of anarchist in me that still says, "Why not? You *** want to watch the world burn? I'll probably weather it a lot better than the rest of you."
If the fact that he spews hate and bile at a near non-stop pace isn't enough for you, then nothing will.
Wait, after nearly 8 years of non-stop hate and bile from Obama, you are tired of Trump's hate and bile? Man, you need to start looking around your area...
He's the closest to an actual Fascist American politics has seen, but his followers have spent the past eight years stripping that word of all meaning by inappropriately throwing it at Obama, so they don't even *** get it.
Obama isn't fascist, but Trump isn't fascist either. He is just opinionated against people. Kindof like Obama is. And Clinton. And Sanders.
Instead of the wealthy and successful that Obama/Clinton/Sanders are against, Trump is against illegals and people of Islamic faith. How is the democrats any different than Trump on their ill placed biases?
Wait, after nearly 8 years of non-stop hate and bile from Obama, you are tired of Trump's hate and bile? Man, you need to start looking around your area...
I'm being deadly serious when I ask you to provide me an instance of Obama utilizing hate speech the way that Trump does. I don't recall him ever speaking or even implying things in such a fashion. But I'm willing to admit I may be bias, as long as there's record of such and not just rhetorical "I don't like this guy, so he's hateful." Please provide examples.
Obama isn't fascist, but Trump isn't fascist either. He is just opinionated against people. Kindof like Obama is. And Clinton. And Sanders.
Instead of the wealthy and successful that Obama/Clinton/Sanders are against, Trump is against illegals and people of Islamic faith. How is the democrats any different than Trump on their ill placed biases?
Except none of the named Democrats actually hate the "wealthy and successful," given that they are among those wealthy and successful and likely only spend their private time with the same people.
You're really demonstrating quite well, however, the twisted persecution complex present in our nation right now. You're suggesting that being in favor of policies that gradually soften the drastic wealth distribution problems in this country is somehow on par with persecuting an entire group of people because of their religion. It's really disheartening. Just like you constantly accuse me of hating corporations, when I don't. What I hate is greed and the inclination of the people at the top to abuse those at the bottom.
but Trump isn't fascist either. He is just opinionated against people.
While many definitions are available, I think this one from Wiki is pretty spot-on.
Quote:
Robert Paxton says that fascism is "a form of political behavior marked by obsessive preoccupation with community decline, humiliation, or victimhood and by compensatory cults of unity, energy, and purity, in which a mass-based party of committed nationalist militants, working in uneasy but effective collaboration with traditional elites, abandons democratic liberties and pursues with redemptive violence and without ethical or legal restraints goals of internal cleansing and external expansion."[32]
Of course, as always, I'm sure someone will try to twist that to match Obama too, because clearly he's the worst president we've ever had, ever.
I'm being deadly serious when I ask you to provide me an instance of Obama utilizing hate speech the way that Trump does. I don't recall him ever speaking or even implying things in such a fashion. But I'm willing to admit I may be bias, as long as there's record of such and not just rhetorical "I don't like this guy, so he's hateful." Please provide examples.
If you are asking for direct hate speech, I cannot give you an example, because Obama's speeches are made in a way that he doesn't directly say hateful things.
However, his underlying messages are what are hateful and bile.
Example: Trevon Martin case "If I had a son, he would look like Trevon" is a perfect example of rhetoric meant to divide a country.
During the 2010 campaign, he stated that Latinos should "punish our enemies (meaning the Republicans)" if they vote for the democrats. Don't believe me?
Let's also not forget his support for Occupy Wall Street, a movement of hate, pillaging, and anarchy.
He may not directly state hateful things like Trump does, but that doesn't mean he doesn't support or instigate hateful things.
Let's also not forget his support for Occupy Wall Street, a movement of hate, pillaging, and anarchy.
I'm not saying it was the proper course of action, but you also very much don't understand the root cause of the Occupy movement. I thought it was really stupid. But the impetus for it is very valid and has nothing to do with hate or anarchy.
But in general, yeah. Your response was exactly what I suggested you not do.
You responded with "he doesn't agree with what I think, so it's hateful."
There's a difference. A very obvious difference. You're either completely oblivious, or maliciously deceitful if you can't see/acknowledge this.
I lean toward the former because you've clearly been raised to believe very specific things about poor/underprivileged people to the point where, much like the deeply religious, there's no wedging facts between you and your beliefs.
Yes, yes. I know. You think the same about me, I'm sure. Just going to let it go at this point as it's clearly an irreconcilable difference between us.
So, your retort to me is that I did exactly what you said not to do, even though you did the exact same thing in your response? I mean, you just did the whole "he doesn't agree with what I think, so it's hateful" argument that you claim I did.
I'm sure you don't see it, just like you accused me of not seeing my response being how you described it.
So, instead of actually looking at the examples I provided and countered them, you just did a basic "I told you so" statement.
Also, nice comeback on your "deeply religious" stance. I'm sure your union representative taught you well on hating corporations, the wealthy, and the successful.
Let's also not forget his support for Occupy Wall Street, a movement of hate, pillaging, and anarchy.
I'm not saying it was the proper course of action, but you also very much don't understand the root cause of the Occupy movement. I thought it was really stupid. But the impetus for it is very valid and has nothing to do with hate or anarchy.
But in general, yeah. Your response was exactly what I suggested you not do.
You responded with "he doesn't agree with what I think, so it's hateful."
There's a difference. A very obvious difference. You're either completely oblivious, or maliciously deceitful if you can't see/acknowledge this.
I lean toward the former because you've clearly been raised to believe very specific things about poor/underprivileged people to the point where, much like the deeply religious, there's no wedging facts between you and your beliefs.
Yes, yes. I know. You think the same about me, I'm sure. Just going to let it go at this point as it's clearly an irreconcilable difference between us.
The root of Occupy Wall Street is thousands of liberal arts degrees in Women's Studies, Art History, Anthropology etc. And blaming Wall Street because something ? They should blame themselves but a millennial has never examined all the mistakes they made in their lives.
on topic- President Trump is going to destroy them!
off topic- all movements are bad and you should feel bad for joining them!...
like terminal cancer. they start out small, sometimes with good intentions or simple self preservation... but then they grow and evolve into something hideous that they were never meant to be... occupy, tea party, child free, anti vax, reform party, peta, madd, pmrc, blm, sds...
you name it and we can watch them, over a short amount of time, spiral out of control and metastisize
off topic- all movements are bad and you should feel bad for joining them!...
I dunno. I look forward to a good movement at least once a day.
Edit: But in seriousness, like I said. Good impetus. But all these movements and actions...yeah. They're prime to be hijacked by jackasses. It's why trying to pressure Trump into not speaking is a problem. It's limiting free speech. Which is awful.
My problem has never been Trump himself: there will always be jackass blowhards who can make bank by being "leaders" of terrible people.
My problem with Trump has always been the everyday people supporting him, feeding his ego and acknowledging how alive and well intolerance is in this country.
off topic- all movements are bad and you should feel bad for joining them!...
I dunno. I look forward to a good movement at least once a day.
Edit: But in seriousness, like I said. Good impetus. But all these movements and actions...yeah. They're prime to be hijacked by jackasses. It's why trying to pressure Trump into not speaking is a problem. It's limiting free speech. Which is awful.
My problem has never been Trump himself: there will always be jackass blowhards who can make bank by being "leaders" of terrible people.
My problem with Trump has always been the everyday people supporting him, feeding his ego and acknowledging how alive and well intolerance is in this country.
You want to vote for a loser go ahead Bernie is waiting for you !
Trump won't let himself lose he will buy his way to the top !
US TV network NBC is cutting ties with Donald Trump over "recent derogatory statements" that the veteran businessman made about immigrants.
NBC said the company would now not be airing the Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants that are co-owned by Mr Trump.
Responding to the announcement, Mr Trump said he would consider suing NBC.
Earlier this month, he accused Mexicans of adding drugs and crime to the US as he announced he was seeking the Republican presidential nomination.
"They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists, and some I assume are good people, but I speak to border guards, and they tell us what we are getting," he said in his speech on 16 June.
He also pledged to build a "great wall" on the US border with Mexico and insisted it would be paid for by Mexicans.
He later insisted he was criticising US lawmakers, not Mexican people.