I’ve been thinking about politics a lot lately. I listen to a lot of talk radio. It seems that people are divided about Mitt’s recent bashing of Donald Trump. One ultra-conservative talk show host said he supported Mitt in 2012, and was absolutely ashamed of him now. Today’s Op-Ed in the Deseret News is takes the other point of view. He supports Mitt’s speech because he wants “holding [Trump] accountable for the dangerous and degrading behavior he has displayed thus far.”
In a conversation with my sister today, she remembered that I had voted against Hillary Clinton in the 2008 Utah primary, and asked if I would do the same if Rubio or Cruz were to somehow emerge victorious for the Republicans. My response:
No, the Tea Party is just as awful as Trump. I see no improvement in choice. Hillary will get my vote….that should tell you how bad I think all Republican candidates are.
It’s not just me saying these things. Even the right-wing Breitbart News has several articles saying the same thing I’m saying. From March 1: “GOP Establishment Could Back Hillary if Trump or Cruz Wins Nomination.” From today: “GOP Establishment Would Rather Have ‘Crony Capitalist’ Hillary Clinton as President Than Trump.” I don’t think Mitt would establish a “Republicans for Hillary” group, but I could see him voting for her over Trump. The Chicago Tribune tells us, “Hillary Clinton is the Democratic version of Mitt Romney.” If you like Mitt, is Hillary the closest thing to him in this election? Here are a few questions for you.
[poll id =561]
[poll id =562]
[poll id =563]
Wheat & Tares 
Wish I had seen this video before I posted this.
(fyi – Hillary is spelled with two ls.)
I see the humor in your video, but it’s also insulting to me as a Trump supporter. I will vote for whoever the nominee is. The guy isn’t racist. Wanting to report illegal residents isn’t racist. Stopping more Islamic people from entering the country until our vetting situation is reliable isn’t racist- it’s common sense. Making Mexico build a wall with sanctions isn’t racist, it’s common sense. Trump voters don’t hate groups of people, they hate a void of common sense.
Trump changing his views is just him getting more information. He’ll be fine hiring those in the know and taking their advice- he has a clear track record for that. Trade is great but not when it is a playing field stacked against manufacturers from the United States. That interferes with the natural market.
I think many people who cross over to vote against Trump will intend to, but not follow through. They’ll just be so disgusted that they’ll stay home. Who knows- I may get disgusted with him as he has been unpredictable but so far, a clear choice for me.
Mitt was called a flip flopper for changing views. Why doesn’t that charge stick with Trump?
Furthermore, how can anyone know what trump would do in office except erode the Constitution? That’s the one thing Trump had been consistent on.
Romney is about as appealing to the party as Jeb Bush unless there are dramatic shifts.
1. “Even more” loads the response with unnecessary baggage. I don’t like Mitt to begin with, but my opinion of him went up when he took on Trump.
2. There is zero chance that Mitt will emerge as a “compromise candidate.” If Trump falters, Paul Ryan will emerge as the favored compromise (and he will decline, if he has any sense). After him, look for Mitch Daniels.
3. There is even less of a chance that the Republican establishment will support Hillary. Mitt has said flat out that he will not. If Trump gets the Republican nomination, the establishment might concede Hillary’s election by supporting a third party in hopes of maintaining an organization with which to retake the Republican party, but that third-party candidate will attack Hillary just as vigorously as he or she will attack Trump. Will that candidate be Romney? Probably not, but it’s possible.
Perhaps you should have an option for agreeing with Romney on this particular issue–or liking him a little bit more–that doesn’t presuppose that the person being surveyed was already a Romney supporter.
As others have said, the message Mitt delivered was the right message, but Mitt was not a credible messenger. The Clinton years bring the nostalgia of national economic prosperity and freedom from perpetual military involvement in the middle east. Though Hilary may be criticized for her email, at least we have seen that she can provide leadership with decorum, a countenance of respect, and civility towards other foreign leaders. I can’t say that I would have ever guessed I would be leaning that way.
Ok, I fixed Hillary’s mis-spelling, changed the wording to “I like Mitt more”, and added a 3rd poll. (Mitt wasn’t supposed to be in the 2nd poll, so go ahead and add your vote to that one too.)
Most mormon republicanss I know sort themselves into either the Glenn Beck/Cruz/Tea Party or the Establishment/Moderate/Mitt group. One group despises Romney, who campaigned against all of their candidates in past elections (Romney would endorse moderates) and the other group was already on his side. The Mitt speech did nothing, except maybe strengthen the resolve of Trump supporters.
I work for the DOD and have clearances similar to what Hillary had a Sec of State. If I had done just a small fraction of what she did with her e-mails, not only would I have lost my job, but I would have been prosecuted. Nobody with a Gov Security Clearance will vote for Hillary.
“Mitt was called a flip flopper for changing views. Why doesn’t that charge stick with Trump?” Hubris. Mitt’s too courteous.
Hillary belongs in prison, not the White House.
The Trump phenomenon really worries me. I see myself as a moderate republican who really liked the Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and didn’t like his sharp turn to the right. But, I voted for him because even though he was talking one way, I felt he’d actually be a little more moderate. For all those evangelicals and Mormons voting for him, I can’t help but think they must be thinking the same way about Trump. He clearly doesn’t share their professed values in any way I can see, has no realistic fiscal or social policies, and (most egregiously) feels no need for people to get along. Worst of all, he’s stated he’s willing to stomp on people’s basic rights, including those of the constitution, to accomplish populist goals. How any government-fearing, liberty-loving Republican can vote for Trump is beyond me, other than they must really not believe he’s as awful as he presents himself.
Our rights are already being stopped on or haven’t you noticed Martin? If I were Caucasian and happened to quote a fact, like there are more fatherless kids in the black community or there are many illegal aliens in our country who are sending their paychecks home to South America, I would be labelled a racist. Others would assume, based on their own racism that I somehow look down on these groups or that I have something against them or no understanding of their experience. I would be judged as having no compassion.
So trump’s comments about opening the libel suit laws look more like an effort to level the playing field against the liberal nutz media to me. Look at how they portray him now – he’s labelled as against free speech for having people ejected from his rallies. He’s also labelled racist for it and for inviting violence. He never told anyone to beat up a protester. He said “get them out” and rightly assumed there’d be a lawsuit against anyone who supports him. Offering pay their legal fees is reasonable. No one expected a dude to punch anyone.
Hilary ejected Black Lives Matter protesters from one of her rallies yet was she labelled racist? Against free speech? Nope. Media bias.
Protesters like those are in a privately funded event and they are trying to deny free speech of the candidate and those there to hear them. Yet Trump is somehow guilty of something?
I’m that person who can vote for him. Those who can’t, who are already caught up in being offended by him, are likely unaware that the country has no other plausible choice at this point.
“…leadership with decorum, a countenance of respect and civility towards foreign leaders…”
Ummm…..Bengazi.
Uh, national security risks with email….
Uh…. No moral compass and a trail of bodies behind her of people who were a risk to the Clinton political goals
By far, she is a very scary and insincere candidate.
“Our rights are already being stopped on or haven’t you noticed Martin? If I were Caucasian and happened to quote a fact, like there are more fatherless kids in the black community or there are many illegal aliens in our country who are sending their paychecks home to South America, I would be labelled a racist. Others would assume, based on their own racism that I somehow look down on these groups or that I have something against them or no understanding of their experience. I would be judged as having no compassion.”
This paragraph seems to imply that it is our unalienable right to not be labeled racist and to not be judged as having no compassion. I don’t think those are considered basic rights by anyone.
Surf40, I have read a lot about the email issue and from what I can tell it all stems from the fact that both Colin Powell and Hillary used private email server and they sent information that – at that time – wasn’t classified. Since then FOIA agents have classified information that both of them sent as Classified…..but at the time neither of them broke the law. I’m failing to see the “gotcha” moment here.
http://www.newsweek.com/colin-powell-emails-hillary-clinton-424187
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/04/politics/hillary-clinton-email-classified-colin-powell-condoleezza-rice/
Martin, I was a big fan of Mitt as the moderate governor of Massachusetts and liked his pragmatic leadership. That all dissipated in the GOP race. Even though I hated GOP Candidate Mitt I still voted for him in 2012. I even had a blog back in 2008 called Confessions of a Moderate Conservative when I lived in Iowa.
Now I would call myself solidly liberal (hard for me to admit) that believes both sides need to compromise to get crap done.
He never told anyone to beat up a protester.
Jenanator, he said “I’d like to punch him in the face,” which is pretty darn close. He also said “In the old days,” protesters would be “carried out on stretchers.” Certainly this implies he is ok with violence and his offer to pay legal fees is why police in North Carolina considered charging him with inciting a riot.
But obviously nothing he says will change your mind.
I don’t understand how any person with an IQ over 50 supports this guy.
Trump also said, “If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously.” I don’t really know how to post links, but it was in Cedar Rapids on February 1.
Someone throwing a tomato is inciting violence, not responding to it that instigates it.
No but we have a right not to be slandered by the media in a published manner. Calling someone racist can affect their livelihood, their family, their relationships and their earning capacity. It is a silencer. A victim of such slander who is affected by it in such ways should be easily able to sue.
I can suur you those voting for him have a much higher IQ than you can imagine.
Kristine, the very fact that she used her personal account is a big red flag. A coworker of mine sent an e-mail from his personal “Hotmail” account with a trip report on it. Nothing was classified, but he was reprimanded, and his personal laptop was confiscated to be scrubbed by our security guys. He will be fired for his next offence.
We’ll never know for sure if the stuff Hillary put in her e-mail was unclass at the time is was written, because we’ll never get to see it. Some of it was so highly classified that the Inspector General of the IC (Intel Community)could not even look at the e-mails until he was approved and read into the programs covered in the e-mail.
Just because Colin Powell broke the law also does NOT give Hillary a pass. He should be investigated also.
Okay so you’re arguing that they (Colin & Hillary) should be held to the same standard as everyone else. Enforcement is being applied differently to everyone else but them (the highest powered positions, regardless of political persuasion) and they have a technicality on which they are allowed to slide by.
Am I not correct? So if you try to crucify one you need to crucify the other. Otherwise it’s all political theater.
Jenanator, did you know a tomato and a fist are 2 VERY different things? A tomato won’t injure anything (but your pride), while a fist is likely to knock out teeth (or even kill in Mike Tyson’s case.)
Double standard about Trump supposedly inciting violence.
At a campaign event in Philadelphia in June 2008, Mr. Obama told supporters, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun. Because from what I understand, folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”
Not trying to offend anyone (as I’m sure no one is trying to offend me either) but I gotta say, with the incredible double standards you folks are buying into about Trump’s campaigning just, to me at least, show how much you are getting played by the media. You are believing the conclusions they are feeding you without seeing that Obama has “incited violence” in his 2008 campain and Hilary has “kicked out minorities” from her rallies as well as “stifled their free speech” too.
Trump isn’t any different.
Of course I’m aware a tomato is not a fist but it’s still attacking a major candidate for the presidency in a physical manner. It’s assault if it hits the target. It should be treated as such. This attack was on free speech as much as it was on Trump.
“No but we have a right not to be slandered by the media in a published manner. Calling someone racist can affect their livelihood, their family, their relationships and their earning capacity. It is a silencer. A victim of such slander who is affected by it in such ways should be easily able to sue.”
We currently have libel and slander laws in place. Are you advocating that we change those laws so that anyone who expresses a negative opinion of another person can be sued? That sounds like a silencer to me.
Jenonator, you’re arguing false equivalence. Check out the differences in how to handle protesters in a mature manner.
In studying history, I could never understand how 37% of Germans could have voted for Hitler as president in 1932. I understand better now.
As far as the “common sense” in stopping Muslims at our borders…how would we know? It’s not like male Muslims wear special clothing or anything, and not even all Muslim women wear a hijab or whatever.
No. I don’t know enough about those laws to form an opinion about if they need to be changed but Trump saying he’d expand them doesn’t scare me. Perhaps it should but I don’t see it happening or being a serious threat from him anyway. If still vote for him after hearing that and clearly, many others would too- I’m just explaining my perspective for those if you who can’t understand why people would vote for him.
Actually you are arguing false equivalence. It’s not even a fair comparison. Obama had the overwhelming support of the media as well as much more docile protesters from the right who have not been trained as disruptive minions paid by George Soros. The right leaning protesters, unlike the hypocritical left, do not believe that free speech is great unless someone doesn’t agree with them.
Exactly- we can’t know and our vetting system certainly isn’t working so for national security, it’s important to consider halting all immigration from Muslim dominated countries as a very viable and logical option. ISIS has already promised to send terrorists through the refugee camps and across birders illegally to accepting nations. Proof that they’ll follow through on their word has already been found at our border to Mexico.
Even if that wasn’t the case, there is clear proof that Muslim culture is deey at odds with first world nations’ cultures and legal systems. Countries including Sweden and Germany have had a huge increase in sexual assaults, all perpetrated by Muslim immigrants and often in groups together.
If that doesn’t concern you, I can’t imagine what does. 25% of muslims surveyed in first world nations and refugee camps believe in sharia law above the laws of the land. They were specifically asked about corporal applications of the law against homosexuals, disobeying females, and thieves regarding standard practice if cutting off their hand for the theft.
While believing in sharia law shouldn’t prevent a person from living in our country, acting on it should definitely get them deported. The fact that males join together in sexually assaulting as well as in enforcing sharia indicates that while individual situations of immigration aren’t a problem, allowing huge groups if muslims in all at once is not helping them assimilate to our laws and our culture. Their are many Christian refugees who would be a better safer fit for us and who are in more danger staying where they are.
We can assist Muslims with our military in their own nations and we should.
Trump is now forecasting riots if he’s not the GOP nominee. This is a wink wink, nudge nudge prediction in that he’s effectively calling for riots. “I wouldn’t lead it, but I think bad things would happen.”
I can’t believe that you can’t seriously see the difference between him and everyone else, Jenonator. I guess it seems like you chalk up any obvious differences to “media bias” or whatever, so you can write off anything you don’t like.
Link:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-riots-nomination_us_56e956fae4b0b25c9183e915
Ziff are you insulting me on purpose? Yes, their us likely to be uprising if he isn’t the Republican nominee. He is the clear frontrunner by far. The Republican party has let us down by breaking their promises and now they clearly not listening to the will of the public who has supported them for years with donations and votes. Trump’s just calling like it is, not inciting anything. No one is talking about violence either but the blogs and radio shows I see and learn sten too have people indicating their anger and disillusionment with the Republican party if they go against the clear public choice.
Further, if the replicans change the rules to block him from a natural nomination according to their prior Caucases, voters Luke me may go against the nominated person because the GOP betrayed us again. GOP has put themselves in this position, not Trump. They were elected based on promises they repeatedly failed to keep immediately after elections prior to him ever coming on the political scene. Now, on top of that, they have directly gone against the vote if their party members rather than eating crow, apologizing, then stating they understand our anger and finding another pitician we can get behind who has similar messages to the ones that keep Trump rating high in the polls. Instead, they’ve again insulted us and he has become the voice if the party they are ignoring. Their base is gone because they didn’t represent it and then they insulted it.
Jenonator, I wonder, if you had a kid who behaved as the bully Trump is, how you’d handle it.
He’s an embarrassment to the nation and the only thing worse than Trump is knowing how many Americans support his empty bombast and veiled threats.
If that seems insulting I’m sorry but I can’t alter the truth of this ugly situation to ease your feelings. He’s a dangerous demagogue, plain and simple.
Even if that wasn’t the case, there is clear proof that Muslim culture is deey at odds with first world nations’ cultures and legal systems.”
Just curious, have you actually been to a Muslim country? I have, at least twice. And I didn’t find this wickedness that scares you so much.
Do you have friends or colleagues who are Muslim? I do. I appreciate that they respect my religion and I respect theirs in return.
There are no objective figures supporting Muslim rapes in Europe, and various officials have denied it. I am sure there are some rapists who are Muslim–and Mormon. But outside of conspiracy blogs, there isn’t a lot of data.
My friends who work for the state department spend a lot of time writing reports. Yet Trump prides himself on not reading other people’s books and instead making decisions based on his gut. THAT scares me.
Amen, Naismith!
I was fortunate enough to spend 6 months living in Cape Town, South Africa last year where a significant portion of the population is Muslim. It was a special pleasure to wander around the V&A where cultures mix freely and see the diversity of Muslim dress from the extremes of faces veiled to expose only slits for eyes to the elegant casual chi of women of means. And it was a joy to see the smiles that radiate out of people’s DNA despite a long tradition of exploitation (now, happily, greatly diminished).
I was there for Ramadan and got the full explanation from my Muslim housekeeper, a woman of grace, kindness and generosity I will never forget. I was there for Eid which was exuberant. I am grateful for the experience and I will NEVER be able to listen to stereotyping caricatures that do so much injustice to a whole group of people again.
I’m glad you spoke up and reminded me to as well.
Yes I have Muslim friends and some experience with Muslim culture. I actually love it. Theirs no denying the beauty of many aspects of it, however, that’s no reason to deny cultural compatibility issues with roaming groups of Muslim men, who perceive women very differently than you likely do.
Examples-
Denmark 2015 stats-
Male Lebanese immigrants and their descendants, a big part of them being of Palestinian descent,[52] have, at 257, the highest crime-index among the studied groups, which translates to crime rates 150% higher than the country’s average. The index is standardized by both age and socioeconomic status. Men of Yugoslav origin and men originating in Turkey, Pakistan, Somalia and Morocco are associated with high crime-indexes, ranging between 187 and 205, which translate to crime rates about double the country’s average. The lowest crime index is recorded among immigrants and descendants originating from the United States. Their crime-index, at 32, is far below the average for all men in Denmark.[52] Among immigrants from China a very small crime-index is recorded as well, at 38.
Sweden–
http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/12/immigrant-rape-wave-in-sweden.html?m=1
Most countries that have an immigration agenda, like ours, are not collecting nor reporting true crime stats regarding immigration but it gets out thanks to bloggers and social media. That doesn’t mean the information us unreliable, it means the mainstream media isn’t being fed the data and it doesn’t fit their agenda anyway.
Look- you can say something like 60 percent of crimes were completed by citizens any only a minority- 40% were completed by immigrants but when you look at the representation of immigrants in the general population compared to their over-representation in a crime stat- there’s your real info to pay attention to- not that “a minority” if these crimes were committed by immigrants.
Basing your opinion on biased and misleading reports and ignoring gut and other information sources scares the hell out if me.
“Most countries that have an immigration agenda, like ours, are not collecting nor reporting true crime stats regarding immigration but it gets out thanks to bloggers and social media.”
The plural of anecdotes is NOT data. I’ve never denied that some crimes are committed by immigrants.
In Norway, they HAVE reported rape stats by nationality and the vast majority are committed by Europeans.
In Germany, the incident at the music festival involved young immigrants who had come there as unaccompanied minors. Perhaps it was more about their lack of parenting than their religion? Perhaps it could have been prevented by more religious instruction not less?
And how would vetting them as a child entering the country have identified them as more likely to commit crimes?
I don’t have a problem with vetting immigrants, I just think it should be applied to all, not singling out a religion which mostly has a legacy of peace.
A recent episode of MADAM SECRETARY was insightful in this regard. Security shut down entrance to an event. The mideastern-looking woman nodded her head and walked away. It was the Anglo-looking woman who stormed the barricade and detonated a suicide bomb.
Jenanotor’s (and all Trump supporters) comments scare the hell out of me. You can’t reason with Jenonator. It’s all gut instincts and they want a fascist to take care of things. Sounds just like Satan’s plan in the pre-existence. Elect me and I will fix everything by force of personality! The Bill of Rights–hogwash! Who needs rights anyway?
“Basing your opinion on biased and misleading reports and ignoring gut and other information sources scares the hell out if me.”
This idea explains why no amount of actual logic will convince Trump supporters not to vote for Trump. Data and reports are scary. Gut feelings about packs of Muslim rapists are more reliable.
Oh, it’s all the media’s fault. Never mind that Hillary, and Sanders, and Cruz, and Rubio, and Carson all complain about the media for being biased too. Here’s news to you. All candidates say that the media is biased against them. But you only believe it when Trump complains…..
No- not only if Trump complains- there is a massive media slant against right leaning candidate and values. The overwhelming majority of news reporters are registered Democrats. The difference with Trump is that the establishment INCLUDING the right is slamming him any chance they get. Their is a media conspiracy specifically targeting him only. They hate him because they cannot control him but they attack him on anything they can- even the established right if it betrays the same values they hold- they’ll compromise their integrity to try to bash him.
Hillary complaining if media bias is an unfair comparison. Minority right leaning news sources bash her but the overwhelming majority of news agencies soft pitch her.
That’s a personal attack because we don’t agree and you think I support fascism? You don’t see the hypocracy?
A plural of anecdotes- real documented events that are examples if greater data is far more factual than fictional television show!
Unaccompanied minors comments you made contradict the reality of the attitude towards unmarried unaccompanied uncovered women in the middle East so your speculations that perhaps these violent mysoginist youth attacks a may have been discouraged by parents if they were around is BASELESS and a fantasy of your dream that their beautiful exotic culture can meld with yours. It may work on many individual levels but it definitely has a poirtrack record in group refugee migrations.
Here’s the media slant against Bernie Sanders: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-new-york-times-sandbagged-bernie-sanders-20160315
Fox News was founded on slamming the left (and as you can see the NY Times) slams the left too.
You do support fascism. Trump has made no bones about removing freedom of the press, freedom of US Birthright, and freedom of speech by inciting violence against protestors. How is this not fascist?
So please explain this to me without gut instincts. I’d like to hear reasons from you, because you just hand wave away everything. You think tomatoes are the same as fists. This isn’t reason. This is fear and false equivalences, and then accusing me of the same. This is not reason, it is the sign of someone with a weak argument. Gimme a break. You’ve come up with nothing so far.
“Basing your opinion on biased and misleading reports and ignoring gut and other information sources scares the hell out if me.”
What reports are we talking about here? I am concerned that Trump will not bother to read the reports produced by intelligence agencies, the military, and the state department.
Does he read every issue of The Economist? Has he seen THE BATTLE FOR ALGIERS? Read John Hersey’s A BELL FOR ADANO? How many foreign languages does he speak?
We’ve already had a case where a president followed his gut rather than listening to reports that counseled against an action he wanted to take. It resulted in the unnecessary invasion of Iraq, the deaths of so many Iraqi civilians (beyond the battle deaths and missiles gone astray, if you rely on insulin or a thyroid drug or whatever to stay alive, you died when the nation’s infrastructure was decimated).
It also caused our national debt to spiral, and the continued obligation to care for so many veterans who survived will be a burden to our grandchildren.
I have both a brother and a daughter who served in Iraq for a year. I will not start to list details of the price my family has paid when a president followed his gut.
Media slam. Not inciting, not calling for. Bad things can mean bad things for the GOP membership numbers anyway and that is highly likely.
If course I don’t encourage my daughters to be bully’s on the playground but if they were running for president against a media bias with double standards and propaganda, I’d encourage them to come out with both guns blazing and defend the people. Some of Trump’s comments are ones I’d discourage but it wouldn’t stop my support for him if he’s the nominee.
I could say the same thing of you- you are basing your politics on a gut reaction and propaganda that Islam is the religion of peace and when you are shown other data, your gut instict doesn’t allow you to examin things with any healthy logic.
Trump’s success has relied heavily on his ability to hire the greatest people to advise him on how to manage each property or business on a whole. He clearly utilizes the studies and data of experts he hires and lifts up all his employees in the process.
An obvious translation to a good presidential candidate. One of the reasons I liked Mitt Romney has nce too.
I support fascism? You are the one following the propaganda and demonizing people who question it.
He’s done none of those things you are describing. We’ve already discussed that above. You have every right to your opinion that he has, but that is a perception based on facts that aren’t fully supporting the claims. Its fear mongering and there are far bigger things to fear that obviously aren’t on your radar.
Jenonator, I don’t expect you to be informed, but here’s where fascist Trump doesn’t follow constitution.
(1) He’s against the 1st Amendment Freedom of the Press:Donald Trump wants to ‘open up’ libel laws so he can sue press and
(2) Freedom of Speech by claiming a peaceful protestor was throwing punches when he clearly wasn’t.
(3) Trump is against 1st Amendment freedom of Religion, and this comes from an official LDS Church statement:
(4) He’s against the 14th Amendment about birthright citizenship:Donald Trump and other GOP candidates want to radically change a 150-year-old cornerstone of American citizenship
So I’ve backed up my claims. You respond by saying “He’s done none of those things you are describing.” Total BS. You also say “I support fascism? You are the one following the propaganda and demonizing people who question it.” Total BS again.
I back up my facts. You make up facts. I’m done with you. I suppose you think the earth is flat, and the moon landings were faked too. Facts mean nothing to you. I see nothing more productive about someone who is so devoid of reality.
If you want to support a fascist dictator with no respect for the Constitution, go ahead–but be honest and state that you don’t support the constitution and want a fascist dictator to keep you safe from the boogeyman Muslims and Mexicans. Just get some facts to support yourself and quit posting lies about the Donald and what I say. I’ve given you 4 pieces of evidence that he is a fascist that doesn’t support the Constitution. That’s neither propaganda, nor demonizing people. It’s fact. Even the LDS Church recognizes how dangerous Trump is. Why can’t you?
“I could say the same thing of you- you are basing your politics on a gut reaction and propaganda that Islam is the religion of peace”
Actually, I am not basing my opinion on gut reaction. I am basing it on study of Islam and actually traveling to Muslim countries.
Propoganda? There’s a loaded word. Can we trust the classes at BYU in world religions, or is that “propoganda”?
“…and when you are shown other data,…”
Could you please say “information” to describe the blogs you have cited? No way does that qualify as data.
“Trump’s success has relied heavily on his ability to hire the greatest people to advise him on how to manage each property or business on a whole.”
Although Trump likes to throw the word “great” around, he can only hire people who are willing to (lower their standards to) work for him.
And if they are so “great,” what happened with all those bankruptcies?
“He clearly utilizes the studies and data of experts he hires…”
That is not what he said in “Trump 101: The way to success.” Chapter 8, Your Gut is Your Best Advisor.
“…and lifts up all his employees in the process.”
Well, when you have bent down so low to lick his boots and kiss his ass, it can only go upward from there.
A few bankruptcies are proof he can cut programs that don’t work. Bankruptcy is a tool for renegotiating or at times extending terms. I don’t see anyone still waiting for payment from him. Do you?
You sitting there telling me I don’t have factual sorces and you do is an interpretation. Either side can be argued. We’ve already gone over this- a tomato is inciting violence first. You not agreeing with that is your interpretation/ opinion. Trump’s comment about libel laws gave no specifics nor plan for how he would accomplish that through the existing system- your concern about that doesn’t make it a fact that he would and could accomplish that nor does it give specific infringements on anything. You are just offended by it. Him saying he uses his git doesn’t mean he wouldn’t have advisors he listens to- that is your opinion, not fact. There seems to be a habit here of you taking a Trump comment and putting your own interpretation on it then cell ng it a fact and anyone who disagrees an an uninformed fascist racist. Nice. Meanwhile you find yourself watching your own fascist propaganda thinking it’s somehow legit because the majority if media agrees with you while portraying it that way and friends agree with you. Sounds like the start of Nazism on your end – labelling and demonizing people who disagree and rallying your perceived majority to back you up.
I fully support your right to disagree, your right to perceive things differently and vote differently. It’s the name calling and demonizing and belittling facts you don’t like that I can’t condone.
“I don’t see anyone still waiting for payment from him. Do you?” All the small businesses that went out of business because Trump didn’t pay them…. They’ve already collected unemployment and Trump isn’t going to make good on what he promised. But you couldn’t care less about Trump’s broken promises and changing positions. Trump can do no wrong. Trump even boasted he could shoot someone and not lose votes. Be honest, what would cause you to not vote for Trump? Shooting someone?
It isn’t name calling or belittling if you can back it up. I’ve backed up everything I’ve said. You haven’t posted a single reference to back up anything, and I have no hope that you will. Facts simply don’t matter to you. That’s not name calling, that’s simply telling the facts, that you are loathe to admit.
Look Moses said “eye for eye, tooth for tooth, tomato for tomato.” He didn’t say “tomato for fist.” Trump’s upping the ante, and you keep doing false equivalences. Trump could have simply thrown a tomato back, not encourage fists. That’s inciting violence. It’s futile explaining this to you again……
“It isn’t name calling or belittling if you can back it up.”
I do not agree. One can cite other sources without resorting to the bullying of which I have been the target in other discussions.
If your case is so strong, just state it–no need to say things about the other person in an ad hominem way.
I’m grateful for jenonator for being willing to explain her point of view. I feel that I understand it a lot better.
Funny Naismith for you to play kettle again; you’re always a model citizen here: http://www.wheatandtares.org/19633/repeating-the-mistake-of-brigham-young/#comment-100203
“Go find someone else to piss on.”
You’re a bully against LGBT, so your words are a bit hollow and hypocritical.
mh, it conveys nothing to call someone a name. Far better to offer an alternative viewpoint.
I was happy to listen to the sources you cite that contrast what others have said. I even agree with them in this case.
And I am so tired of you bringing up one of my statements from 3 months ago. If you can’t find something more recent with which to flagellate me, it would seem that I don’t have much of a pattern, and certainly strive toward the ideal. More importantly, why do you have a need to call other people names?
Jenonator,
Do you not find Trump’s use of the term “Little Marco” for a Senator of the United States–fellow republican–and rival repugnant whatsoever? Whether it is referring to his height, his penis size, youth, or resume, it is repugnant behavior. I feel very uneasy that we might have a US leader that refer to world leaders with insulting or crude terms that would incite the opinion of the citizens represented by those leaders against the US. Sure you might say, but those leaders must have it coming to them and it removes the cloak of ‘political correctness’. I would disagree. I would hate to see the lives of our troops, ambassadors–or even missionaries–placed at risk when anti-American sentiment in a foreign country is drummed up from a loose cannon spouting off his mouth. I do not see Trump running for president for love of country. It seems, and this is my observation and personal opinion, that he is running because it will be the ultimate reward in his megalomaniacal quest.
Goodness- politicians have been calling each other names for centuries. Trump isn’t original with that. I don’t like it but it seems to be a part of politics and singling Trump out without looking at all the others in history us ridiculous. The back lash against Trump and the very personal attacks against him you justify make you the same as Trump.
There’s already antiamerican sentiment in every country we’ve assisted. Our country hasn’t required any sense of respect for the assistance it provides. I think it best to withdraw assistance in most of those countries or show more backbone, which is Trump’s agenda.
In terms of the free speech people thinks Trump is after, did you not notice your side of politics blocking Americans from crossing the bridge to hear him speak? That’s a direct attack on free speech of everyone.
Did you notice that the Republicans are blocking Pres Obama’s Supreme Court nominee? This is nothing new. Welcome to politics!!! It sounds like you’ve never encountered political protests before.
Did you know Robert F Kennedy was shot while running for President in 1968? And Governor Wallace? Are you outraged over this direct attack on free speech?
You may want to expand on how your comment even relates to itself or any other comment. What does blocking a supreme Court nominee or assassinating Kennedy have to do with protesters blocking free speech. Why post at all this point? Let’s let the thread sleep.
Question: “What does blocking a supreme Court nominee….have to do with protesters blocking free speech.”
Answer: “This is nothing new. Welcome to politics!!! It sounds like you’ve never encountered political protests before.”
Question: “What does …. assassinating Kennedy have to do with protesters blocking free speech.”
Answer: Kennedy’s free speech was silenced FOREVER. You complained “did you not notice your side of politics blocking Americans from crossing the bridge to hear him speak? That’s a direct attack on free speech of everyone.”
Yes I did notice. Let me state it a 3rd time. “Welcome to politics!!! It sounds like you’ve never encountered political protests before.”
As for your note that blocking a bridge is “a direct attack on free speech of everyone.” While blocking a bridge is annoying, it pales in comparison to the direct attack bullet that killed Kennedy’s free speech rights in 1968. You’re complaining about blocking a bridge in Arizona? KENNEDY DIED!!! That’s a direct attack. Nobody died in Arizona. Kennedy’s attack was a much worse attack on free speech.
People in the senate filibuster bills or won’t even vote on Supreme Court nominees. They stop free speech in Congress. Get used to it. “Welcome to politics!!! It sounds like you’ve never encountered political protests before.”
Trump: ‘I Love the Poorly Educated!’
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/trump-i-love-the-poorly-educated/
Yes he does. Now I know why you support Trump. You can’t read a comment and understand that your questions are answered. You can’t connect the dots.
I’m pretty sure that Trump likes supporters who can’t read English, even better (unless they’re Mexican, then ship them out!!!!)
Even most Utahn’s won’t support Trump if he is the nominee: http://www.ksl.com/index.php?sid=38970451&nid=960
Yes let’s put this thread to sleep. I couldn’t agree more.
Dude you have a complete misunderstanding if what free speech means the way it’s written in the constitution. It protects one from being arrested from what they say, NOT the way they say it. It DOESNT protect their right to be head either in terms of yelling over others in a private venue it blocking the only route to a venue. That is not free speech, it’s disordly conduct at the least.
I’m not uneducated nor am I stupid and I think it’s outrageous that you feel free to imply that while you attack another man for name calling.
I don’t need a welcome to politics and your weird references to assassinations in regards to free speech sound as much as like a call to violence as you accuse Trump if unfairly.
You are intolerant if anyone disagreeing with you yet you accuse Trump unfairly if being intolerant. You accuse him (rightly so) of personal attacks and just dge him for it yet you personally attack me via what you assume is my education level.
Guess what? Trump voters are educated and we vote. George Soros hiring idiot protester trying to provoke doesn’t deter us. Most of us are quiet because people like you cannot refrain from continually personally attacking. Clearly, we are not silent in the polls. I just did you a favor steak ng up about why he’s the right candidate for many- Its regrettable you can’t appreciate that and work towards peace and understanding rather than perpetuating uncivilized behavior.
*judge (not just)
*speaking (not steak)