Church of Trump

[Clipper Nation]

Lol alternet.

Trumps fathers business was nowhere near the size it is before trump came on board, not even a tiny fraction of what trump has built. You're just slandering the enemy per par etc.
It was also a completely different business. Trump's dad built government-subsidized low-income housing, Trump builds luxury real estate properties.

[Clipper Nation]

This man is incredible!!! Trump yes!!!
Here's the full immigration plan:

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/immigration-reform

[DMX7]

Donald Trump's message of "Make America Great Again" is resonating with people from all walks of life, including democrats such as myself. His "tell it like it is" mentality is also refreshing. I like that he doesn't apologize for anything. We don't need another "apologizer-in-chief".

[ChumpDumper]

It was also a completely different business. Trump's dad built government-subsidized low-income housing, Trump builds luxury real estate properties.Why do his businesses keep going bankrupt?

[DMX7]

It was also a completely different business. Trump's dad built government-subsidized low-income housing, Trump builds luxury real estate properties.

Yes! And not only that, but he is not owned by "Big Business" or billionaire donors. And unlike Bernie Sanders, he is not owned by "Small Voter" either. Nobody owns this man. He is his own man. I like that.

[Clipper Nation]

Why do his businesses keep going bankrupt?
Why is he worth over $10 billion while you continue to live off the taxpayer dime, David?

[Clipper Nation]

Yes! And not only that, but he is not owned by "Big Business" or billionaire donors. And unlike Bernie Sanders, he is not owned by "Small Voter" either. Nobody owns this man. He is his own man. I like that.
Bernie's owned by defense contractors and unions, not "Small Voter."

[DMX7]

Bernie's owned by defense contractors and unions, not "Small Voter."

Defense contractors? :lol

Unions are a shell of their former selves (power wise). Not worried about them.

[ChumpDumper]

Why is he worth over $10 billion while you continue to live off the taxpayer dime, David?I have never taken any assistance nor have I ever declared bankruptcy, David.

Why are you getting so angry and defensive?

Just answer the question.

Why do his businesses keep going bankrupt?

[DMX7]

Why do his businesses keep going bankrupt?

He is simply using the laws of the land to his advantage... like any prudent businessman would. Donald Trump, himself, has never declared bankruptcy.

[ChumpDumper]

He is simply using the laws of the land to his advantage... like any prudent businessman would. Donald Trump, himself, has never declared bankruptcy.His advantage for what?

Were they losing money?

[boutons_deux]

"Donald Trump, himself, has never declared bankruptcy."

He was $1B in PERSONAL debt in 1990.

[DMX7]

"Donald Trump, himself, has never declared bankruptcy."

He was $1B in PERSONAL debt in 1990.

And now he has a net worth of OVER 10 BILLION DOLLARS... and he has still NEVER personally declared bankruptcy... ever.

[DMX7]

His advantage for what?

Were they losing money?

To renegotiate debt.

Mr. Trump has many investments. No businessman bats 1.000 and has no misses -- not even the greats. Over the course of a very long career, he has used the laws of the land four time to do what's best for his overall business, his family and himself. His massive net worth is evidence that he has succeeded.

[djohn2oo8]

You mean a "lifelong Democrat" who's had three stints as a Republican, has been a Republican for almost all of his life, and has also been an independent and a third-party (Reform Party) member?

"In many cases, I probably identify more as Democrat," Trump told CNN's Wolf Blitzer in a 2004 interview. "It just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans. Now, it shouldn't be that way. But if you go back, I mean it just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats. ...But certainly we had some very good economies under Democrats, as well as Republicans. But we've had some pretty bad disaster under the Republicans."

:lmao you were saying?

[ChumpDumper]

To renegotiate debt.

Mr. Trump has many investments. No businessman bats 1.000 and has no misses -- not even the greats. Over the course of a very long career, he has used the laws of the land four time to do what's best for his overall business, his family and himself. His massive net worth is evidence that he has succeeded.So were they losing money?

I mean, the guy had to turn to the government for protection from his creditors.

Five times?

[DMX7]

So were they losing money?


Presumably these four investments were losing money and so he cut his loses. That's smart! AND it obviously worked because now he has a net worth of OVER 10 BILLION DOLLARS.



I mean, the guy had to turn to the government for protection from his creditors.

Five times?

He knew the rules of the game and he used those rules to his advantage four times. That's smart!

[ChumpDumper]

Presumably these four investments were losing money and so he cut his loses. That's smart! AND it obviously worked because now he has a net worth of OVER 10 BILLION DOLLARS.



He knew the rules of the game and he used those rules to his advantage four times. That's smart!OK. Losing money and running to the government for protection is smart!

Cool!
























!

[DMX7]

OK. Losing money and running to the government for protection is smart!

Cool!
!

No, having a net worth of OVER 10 BILLION DOLLARS is cool.

That's smart!

[ChumpDumper]

No, having a net worth of OVER 10 BILLION DOLLARS is cool.

That's smart!Where did you get the 10 billion figure from?

And why are you so excited about someone else having money with your all caps and exclamation marks?

[DMX7]

Where did you get the 10 billion figure from?

And why are you so excited about someone else having money with your all caps and exclamation marks?

My all caps and exclamation marks are really just to drive home certain points. I feel it's important to emphasize that Mr. Trump is extremely wealthy, mostly to disrupt this false narrative that critics promote implying that he really isn't smart, successful or a great businessman.

The $10B figure is obviously only an estimate. Trump has investment interests in many extremely high-end real estate properties (whose FMV is difficult to measure precisely and constantly changes). But his camp say's his net worth is over $10B. Forbes and others have taken an educated guess and measured it at many billions, and when your net worth is measured in billions, arguing over the source the calculation misses the point pretty badly. :lol

[Splits]

Trump has made his fortune by gouging taxpayers of hundreds of millions of dollars and working with New York and Philadelphia mob families. He's a con man.

[JohnnyMarzetti]

Everyone, including Trump, knows the economy always does better under a Democrat. Always.

[m>s]

Everyone, including Trump, knows the economy always does better under a Democrat. Always.


LMAO link?

[Clipper Nation]

I have never taken any assistance nor have I ever declared bankruptcy, David.
:lol Good one, David.

[Clipper Nation]

"In many cases, I probably identify more as Democrat," Trump told CNN's Wolf Blitzer in a 2004 interview. "It just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats than the Republicans. Now, it shouldn't be that way. But if you go back, I mean it just seems that the economy does better under the Democrats. ...But certainly we had some very good economies under Democrats, as well as Republicans. But we've had some pretty bad disaster under the Republicans."

:lmao you were saying?


Political party
Republican (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)) (Before 1999; 2009–11; 2012–present)
Reform Party (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Party_of_the_United_States_of_America) (1999–2001)[5] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump#cite_note-5)
Democratic (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)) (2001–09)[6] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump#cite_note-swappedparty-6)
Independent (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_(politician)) (2011–12)[7] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump#cite_note-7)


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump

[djohn2oo8]

Political party
Republican (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_(United_States)) (Before 1999; 2009–11; 2012–present)
Reform Party (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Party_of_the_United_States_of_America) (1999–2001)[5] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump#cite_note-5)
Democratic (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)) (2001–09)[6] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump#cite_note-swappedparty-6)
Independent (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_(politician)) (2011–12)[7] (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump#cite_note-7)


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump

Ahh registered as a democrat. Yup like I said, and most conservatives say Trump isn't really a Republican.

[m>s]

Ahh registered as a democrat. Yup like I said, and most conservatives say Trump isn't really a Republican.
not being a "republican" is exactly why he is leading the polls. people are tired of the RINOs and want real action.

[Pelicans78]

not being a "republican" is exactly why he is leading the polls. people are tired of the RINOs and want real action.

That's the real truth. The Republican establishment has proven to be inept, corrupt, and incompetent just like the Democrats. Trump is just using the Republican Party as a vehicle to get votes just like Ron Paul used to do even he is really different from the rest of the candidates. Honestly, part of me feels he is running just for entertainment and he's highly entertaining.

[Clipper Nation]

Ahh registered as a democrat. Yup like I said, and most conservatives say Trump isn't really a Republican.
He's been a Republican for most of his life. Most of the neocons whining about Trump's former party affiliations probably voted for former Democrats like Reagan and Romney. Ben Carson has been both a Democrat and an independent before, but you don't see the media bringing that up.

[boutons_deux]

Trump said today he wants mass deportation, 11M people (but humanely keep families together!) and build The Wall.

[boutons_deux]

Trump distances himself from GOP: Wouldn’t ‘rip up’ Obama’s Iran nuclear deal


http://www.rawstory.com/2015/08/trump-distances-himself-from-gop-wouldnt-rip-up-obamas-iran-nuclear-deal/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

[boutons_deux]

Donald Trump tracks left on abortion. Will GOP primary voters follow?

“Well, to me, I have exceptions. Rape, incest, if the mother is going to die,” Mr. Trump replied.

“And Ronald Reagan had those same exceptions.

And many Republicans have those same exceptions.”

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Decoder/2015/0816/Donald-Trump-tracks-left-on-abortion.-Will-GOP-primary-voters-follow


Bible humpers and pro-birth extremists gonna bail out.

[Pelicans78]

Donald Trump tracks left on abortion. Will GOP primary voters follow?

“Well, to me, I have exceptions. Rape, incest, if the mother is going to die,” Mr. Trump replied.

“And Ronald Reagan had those same exceptions.

And many Republicans have those same exceptions.”

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Decoder/2015/0816/Donald-Trump-tracks-left-on-abortion.-Will-GOP-primary-voters-follow


Bible humpers and pro-birth extremists gonna bail out.




Most conservatives have those views on abortion.

[hater]

He is simply using the laws of the land to his advantage... like any prudent businessman would. Donald Trump, himself, has never declared bankruptcy.

Truth nuke.

[Clipper Nation]

Trump distances himself from GOP: Wouldn’t ‘rip up’ Obama’s Iran nuclear deal


http://www.rawstory.com/2015/08/trump-distances-himself-from-gop-wouldnt-rip-up-obamas-iran-nuclear-deal/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29
Good! Diplomacy is a good thing, and this shows that Trump isn't the über-hawk that the media portrays him to be.

[hater]

Good! Diplomacy is a good thing, and this shows that Trump isn't the über-hawk that the media portrays him to be.

If Trump jumps on board with the Obama peace plan he wins the election running away. Hes already a great man. Going for peace would make him a historical figure.

What a fine human bing

[boutons_deux]

Trump says invade Iraq again, and steal the oil.

fucking classless Klown

[pgardn]

Trump is getting very good. On Meet The Press this morning he completely ignored questions and went off on some unrelated diatribe. He is definitely catching on to the Washington Political method. I am also amused by his ability to fool other lunatics into thinking his business deal making can transfer into the arena of foreign affairs.

[hater]

Trump is getting very good. On Meet The Press this morning he completely ignored questions and went off on some unrelated diatribe. He is definitely catching on to the Washington Political method. I am also amused by his ability to fool other lunatics into thinking his business deal making can transfer into the arena of foreign affairs.

The Democrats and Republicans have fooled plenty lunatics for the past hundred years. Time for a real person to lead the nation.

[Splits]

I am also amused by his ability to fool other lunatics into thinking his business deal making can transfer into the arena of foreign affairs.

It is pretty hilarious.

I especially loved his answer to where he gets his military advice:


TODD: Who do you talk to for military advice right now?

TRUMP: Well, I watch the shows. I mean, I really see a lot of great... you know, when you watch your show, and all of the other shows, and you have the generals, and you have certain people you like.

:lmao

[TheSanityAnnex]

It is pretty hilarious.

I especially loved his answer to where he gets his military advice:



:lmao
Which candidates will you possibly be voting for? I'm sure we could laugh at some of their answers too if we cut the quote off half way.

[Splits]

Which candidates will you possibly be voting for? I'm sure we could laugh at some of their answers too if we cut the quote off half way.

Oh please do tell me how any other part of his answer makes up for "the shows"? Are you a big John Bolton guy, like the biggest war monger in the entire country? :lmao

[TheSanityAnnex]

Oh please do tell me how any other part of his answer makes up for "the shows"? Are you a big John Bolton guy, like the biggest war monger in the entire country? :lmao
When you purposely leave off the actual answer it's difficult to take you seriously.
so which candidates are you leaning towards?

[boutons_deux]

Good! Diplomacy is a good thing, and this shows that Trump isn't the über-hawk that the media portrays him to be.

His diplomacy, articulated today, is to re-invade Iraq and steal the oil.

[Clipper Nation]

Here's some of the greatest hits from Splitcuck's candidate of choice:

"You don't necessarily need a choice of 23 underarm spray deodorants or of 18 different pairs of sneakers when children are hungry in this country."

"A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy. A woman on her knees, a woman tied up, a woman abused... A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by three men simultaneously."

"I would like to see a couple of hundred thousand people come here to Washington, say hello to the president, say hello to the Republicans, say do not balance the budget."

"You can delegate rights you don't have."

[Splits]

When you purposely leave off the actual answer it's difficult to take you seriously.
so which candidates are you leaning towards?

Ok, please forgive me for leaving off the "actual" answer. Is this better?


TODD: Who do you talk to for military advice right now?

TRUMP: Well, I watch the shows. I mean, I really see a lot of great... you know, when you watch your show, and all of the other shows, and you have the generals, and you have certain people you like.


TODD: But is there somebody, is there a go-to for you? You know, every presidential candidate has a go-to...


TRUMP: Probably there are two or three. I mean, I like Bolton. I think he’s a tough cookie, knows what he’s talking about. Jacobs is a good guy.


TODD: You mean Ambassador Bolton?


TRUMP: Yes.


TODD: You mean Colonel Jack Jacobs?


TRUMP: Colonel Jack Jacobs is a good guy, and I see him on occasion.

And I'm not leaning towards any candidates at this point. Could never vote for any of the 18 clowns in the red car. Could never vote for Hilary, Lincoln Chafee, or Martin O'Malley. That leaves The Bern, but I don't trust him on the Zionist question which is a deal-breaker for me. He's also horrible on guns. I'm hoping Gore jumps in I guess. It's pretty dark times for far-leftists these days...

[pgardn]

The Democrats and Republicans have fooled plenty lunatics for the past hundred years. Time for a real person to lead the nation.

So you want Don Rickles to jump in.
He has said some funny things.

[Clipper Nation]

I'm hoping Gore jumps in I guess.

:lmao And you think Trump says dumb shit?

"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet."

"We can be e pluribus unum -- out of one, many."

"Breast cancer victims face a long waiting line before they could get a biopsy or, uh, or a uh, another kind of, what am I looking for, a sonogram or...."

"He's proposing to take $1 trillion, a million billion dollars out of the Social Security trust fund."

"A zebra does not change its spots."

[boutons_deux]

confirming Trump is classless, hateful, racist, misogynistic piece of shit, he attracts maggots like AC

Ann Coulter: Donald Trump can personally perform abortions in the White House if he makes this happen

http://www.salon.com/2015/08/17/ann_coulter_donald_trump_can_personally_perform_ab ortions_in_the_white_house_if_he_makes_this_happen/

[ducks]

Will not be the only classless person in a government position

[boutons_deux]

Will not be the only classless person in a government position

.... excellent defense, you win.

[DMX7]

I love so many of the themes that he is touching on. I love how he is just as sick as I am about America playing "world police". Our military is like the first line of defense for so many countries... many of which are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves. I am in favor of having many allies, but being an ally doesn't mean we fight in lieu of the ally or use our resources in lieu of them. It's just ridiculous at this point.

[boutons_deux]

Trump, nor anybody, will ever touch the MIC, aka "world police"

MIC is corporate welfare, redistribution upwards of taxpayers' $100Bs to the MIC. and the transfer causes national debt, taxpayers pay the interest, too.

MIC is absolutely untouchable, and is currently looking for more $100Bs, and will wil get them.

But Repugs refuse to finance VA, help the vets aka "ex world policemen", at the level the WH requests.

[DMX7]

The MIC is basically institutionalized within Congress, so of course it's not going away.

Trump, on the other hand, is not taking donations from defense contractors and he is not running for a seat in Congress. He is running for President.

The Commander-in-chief has huge influence over how we deploy and station our military. Obama has done a poor job organizing forces in the middle-east to fight ISIS from the start, and has basically made it an American problem first when it shouldn't be. We should be supporting the fight against ISIS, but the countries in that region need to be making a much bigger investment in actually destroying ISIS. He gave them the impression that America's "got this" like we always do and that they don't have to do anything. They're finally realizing that's not the case. Under Trump, they will know this from the start.

[boutons_deux]

"The Commander-in-chief has huge influence over how we deploy and station our military."

The Repugs refuse even to vote to authorize the Exec's "war" on ISIS.

"Obama has done a poor job organizing forces in the middle-east to fight ISIS from the start"

so as CiC, what would you do. And why is ISIS the USA's fight, because USA is world's policeman?

[boutons_deux]

Trump says he’d deport all 11 million undocumented immigrants as president

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/08/trump-says-hed-deport-all-11-million-undocumented-immigrants-as-president/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

"keeping the families together" includes deporting American citizens.

triplng ICE from 5000 to 15000 Gestapo troops will cost how much? Sessions doesn't say.

who pays for the deportation, transportation of 11M illegals? how much?

The Wall will cost $100Bs

[DMX7]

"The Commander-in-chief has huge influence over how we deploy and station our military."

The Repugs refuse even to vote to authorize the Exec's "war" on ISIS.


Oh, so he is fighting a war unilaterally? He is even more powerful than I thought.

Thanks for making my point.



"Obama has done a poor job organizing forces in the middle-east to fight ISIS from the start"

so as CiC, what would you do. And why is ISIS the USA's fight, because USA is world's policeman?

ISIS is only our fight because they have threatened us and because they threaten Iraq (which we're basically forced to protect under the international doctrine of "you break it, you buy it").

But this is a fight the region should be much more engaged it, not just America. I am not running for CiC, but I don't think what's going on now is the best that could have been done.

[ChumpDumper]

The MIC is basically institutionalized within Congress, so of course it's not going away.

Trump, on the other hand, is not taking donations from defense contractors and he is not running for a seat in Congress. He is running for President.

The Commander-in-chief has huge influence over how we deploy and station our military. Obama has done a poor job organizing forces in the middle-east to fight ISIS from the start, and has basically made it an American problem first when it shouldn't be. We should be supporting the fight against ISIS, but the countries in that region need to be making a much bigger investment in actually destroying ISIS. He gave them the impression that America's "got this" like we always do and that they don't have to do anything. They're finally realizing that's not the case. Under Trump, they will know this from the start.How is ISIS not an American problem?

America made ISIS exist.

[m>s]

"keeping the families together" includes deporting American citizens.

triplng ICE from 5000 to 15000 Gestapo troops will cost how much? Sessions doesn't say.

who pays for the deportation, transportation of 11M illegals? how much?

The Wall will cost $100Bs
Not that much compared to the costs of illegal immigration, crime, healthcare for illegals, etc. the savings would pay for it while adding jobs.

[DMX7]

How is ISIS not an American problem?

America made ISIS exist.

Read post#558. I said an "american problem first", meaning it shouldn't be primarily America's problem first and foremost. It should be America's problem AND the region's problem... but really they're more threatened than we are due to proximity.

[ChumpDumper]

Read post#558. I said an "american problem first", meaning it shouldn't be primarily America's problem first and foremost. It should be America's problem AND the region's problem... but really they're more threatened than we are due to proximity.We broke it. We own it.

[DMX7]

We broke it. We own it.

What does that mean to you?

Countries in the region are relieved from the responsibility to defend themselves from ISIS?

[boutons_deux]

What does that mean to you?

Countries in the region are relieved from the responsibility to defend themselves from ISIS?

ISIS is ex-Saddam Sunnis/Bathist Army generals, that's why they aren't just a bunch of ragheads, but professional military, who would still be in Saddam's Army with Bremer hadn't fired them all.

Thanks, Repugs, for de-stabilizing the Middle East, FOR FUCKING DECADES.

[ChumpDumper]

What does that mean to you?

Countries in the region are relieved from the responsibility to defend themselves from ISIS?Nope, but the main responsibility is ours. We destabilized the region. We shouldn't have, but we did. Now we are in the middle of the shitstorm we created and will be for a long time to come.

[DMX7]

ISIS is ex-Saddam Sunnis/Bathist Army generals, that's why they aren't just a bunch of ragheads, but professional military, who would still be in Saddam's Army with Bremer hadn't fired them all.

Thanks, Repugs, for de-stabilizing the Middle East, FOR FUCKING DECADES.

So they are or are not the "JV team"? :lol

[boutons_deux]

Trump wanted this scrubbed from Internet, but it was preserved

Watch the Long-Lost ‘Donald Trump’s House of Wings’ Sketch


To that end, we have uncovered a bit of Donald Trump history that has been mysteriously scrubbed from television’s memory banks. In 2004, Trump appeared in a Saturday Night Live sketch entitled “Donald Trump’s House of Wings” in which he pitched a fictional Buffalo wing joint. The sketch was even listed on the package for an SNL DVD release, but the sketch itself was inexplicably missing from the disc. For whatever reason, somebody doesn’t want you to see this sketch.

We don’t think that’s fair to the public, so in the interest of a fully-informed electorate, we present the full “Donald Trump’s House of Wings” commercial parody, so they can draw their own conclusions. Does it reflect a deficiency of gravitas, or does it demonstrate wit and charm to rival Ronald Reagan? Does it portend drastic changes in the menu and decor at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave? You be the judge:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/watch-the-long-lost-donald-trumps-house-of-wings-sketch/

[DMX7]

Nope, but the main responsibility is ours. We destabilized the region. We shouldn't have, but we did. Now we are in the middle of the shitstorm we created and will be for a long time to come.

Terrorist organizations in that region form for many reasons. They exist now and they existed before we invaded Iraq. ISIS is thanks to Uncle Sam, but it doesn't shift the primarily responsibility for self-defense from ISIS or any threat from those countries in the middle-east to US (except in the case of Iraq, which we are responsible for defending).

[ChumpDumper]

Terrorist organizations in that region form for many reasons. They exist now and they existed before we invaded Iraq. ISIS is thanks to Uncle Sam, but it doesn't shift the primarily responsibility for self-defense from ISIS or any threat from those countries in the middle-east to US (except in the case of Iraq, which we are responsible for defending).We broke it, we own it.

Sorry, we shouldn't have broken it in the first place, but we can't runaway from our responsibility either.

And lol at "primary responsibility" -- how many bases do we have in foreign countries? We're responsible for the defense of a shitload of countries.

[DMX7]

We broke it, we own it.

Sorry, we shouldn't have broken it in the first place, but we can't runaway from our responsibility either.

And lol at "primary responsibility" -- how many bases do we have in foreign countries? We're responsible for the defense of a shitload of countries.

We have a stake in defending many countries and usually a self-interest interest in doing so. It's not our primary responsibility to do so. :lol

But really, we're side tracking here... there are plenty of countries in the middle-east that could and should be doing more to defeat ISIS. You can blame whoever you want -- it doesn't change that fact.

[ChumpDumper]

We have a stake in defending many countries and usually a self-interest interest in doing so. It's not our primary responsibility to do so. :lol How much are we spending on those countries compared to the fight against ISIS?


But really, we're side tracking here... there are plenty of countries in the middle-east that could and should be doing more to defeat ISIS. You can blame whoever you want -- it doesn't change that fact.Which countries? What do you want them all to do?

[DMX7]

How much are we spending on those countries compared to the fight against ISIS?


Probably a lot more. Why?

I'm not defending our global empire. We can't afford to be the world police and I don't think it's worth whatever we're actually getting in return for it.



Which countries? What do you want them all to do?

Well we could start with Saudi Arabia. That's not a country with a weak military. Why aren't they committing more military resources to the fight?

What about Turkey? They can't do more? We weren't even allowed to use their air bases to launch strikes against ISIS from until last week. How ridiculous...

Too many countries think we will make almost all the sacrifice and they don't have to do anything.

[boutons_deux]

Probably a lot more. Why?

I'm not defending our global empire. We can't afford to be the world police and I don't think it's worth whatever we're actually getting in return for it.

Well we could start with Saudi Arabia. That's not a country with a weak military. Why aren't they committing more military resources to the fight?

What about Turkey? They can't do more? We weren't even allowed to use their air bases to launch strikes against ISIS from until last week. How ridiculous...

Too many countries think we will make almost all the sacrifice and they don't have to do anything.

Saudi arabia bombing Yemen, slaughtering lots of civilians, with US help

Turkey seems to be taking advantage of the situation by going after Kurds as well as ISIS.

btw, the horrible disaster of M/E spreads to Europe as 10Ks of Syrians, etc are now refugees seeking asylum, shelter, refuse, whatever via Greece and Italy and who knows where else.

Thanks, Repugs and BigOil, you have REALLY REALLY REALLY fucked up.

[ChumpDumper]

Well we could start with Saudi Arabia. That's not a country with a weak military. Why aren't they committing more military resources to the fight?Why should they? It's not their country.


What about Turkey? They can't do more? We weren't even allowed to use their air bases to launch strikes against ISIS from until last week. How ridiculous...Why should they? It's not their country. In fact, many of those fighting ISIS in Iraq and Syria have links to separatist groups in Turkey. Why should they help them?


Too many countries think we will make almost all the sacrifice and they don't have to do anything.They didn't destabilize the region and cause the formation of ISIS. We did.

[DMX7]

Why should they? It's not their country.

Why should they? It's not their country. In fact, many of those fighting ISIS in Iraq and Syria have links to separatist groups in Turkey. Why should they help them?

They didn't destabilize the region and cause the formation of ISIS. We did.

Well considering one of ISIS’ stated goals is to capture the city of Mecca in Saudi Arabia, I would say ISIS is an enemy of Saudi Arabia and one they might have an interest in defeating. Unless of course you think they should wait till ISIS is at their front door, then take a bigger interest in fighting. Is that what you think? :lol

Same basic idea with Turkey… I guess they should just wait till maybe they cross the border into Turkey.

As long as you don't think about it, it makes perfect sense to just count on the USA to do everything. We broke it, we bought it. The whole security of the region is out of the hands of those countries and belongs to the USA. We “got this” and you should totally trust us because we’ve been so effective at beating down ISIS so far too. :rolleyes

[ChumpDumper]

Well considering one of ISIS’ stated goals is to capture the city of Mecca in Saudi Arabia, I would say ISIS is an enemy of Saudi Arabia and one they might have an interest in defeating. Unless of course you think they should wait till ISIS is at their front door, then take a bigger interest in fighting. Is that what you think? :lolconsidering one of ISIS' stated goals is taking over the White House, I would say ISIS is an enemy of the US and one they might have an interest in defeating. Unless of course you think they should wait till ISIS is at their front door, then take a bigger interest in fighting. Is that what you think? :lol


Same basic idea with Turkey… I guess they should just wait till maybe they cross the border into Turkey. Same basic idea with the US… I guess they should just wait till maybe they cross the border into the US.


As long as you don't think about it, it makes perfect sense to just count on the USA to do everything. We broke it, we bought it. The whole security of the region is out of the hands of those countries and belongs to the USA. We “got this” and you should totally trust us because we’ve been so effective at beating down ISIS so far too. :rolleyesWhat have we done to beat down ISIS?

[hater]

House of Saud is more scared of the Iranian boogeyman. They can always take care of their boy toy ISIS. Prince Bandar basically is the father of ISIS, he conceived I while he was chief of the Saudi version of CIA.

The money is coming fom there so there is no way in hell ISIS will turn on their funders anytime soon.

And since ISIS is now Syrias biggest enemy, Saudis are actually rooting for them

[hater]

:cry ISIS is going to come in from Mexico and attack us :cry

[DMX7]

considering one of ISIS' stated goals is taking over the White House, I would say ISIS is an enemy of the US and one they might have an interest in defeating. Unless of course you think they should wait till ISIS is at their front door, then take a bigger interest in fighting. Is that what you think? :lol


We've already established that the US should play a role in fighting ISIS. So "no", that's not what I think.

I don't see ISIS getting on any war ships and sailing to the USA to capture the White House anytime soon.

So clearly ISIS is a bigger threat to the countries in that region than to US; therefore they should have a bigger role in fighting ISIS.



What have we done to beat down ISIS?

It's sarcasm. We have NOT been effective in defeating ISIS. Therefore, other countries should probably not trust us to do most of the heavy lifting when it comes to fighting them given our recent track record of failure in the region.

[ChumpDumper]

We've already established that the US should play a role in fighting ISIS. So "no", that's not what I think.

I don't see ISIS getting on any war ships and sailing to the USA to capture the White House anytime soon.

So clearly ISIS is a bigger threat to the countries in that region than to US; therefore they should have a bigger role in fighting ISIS. Who says they need a war ship?

When did ISIS say it was going to take over Turkey?


It's sarcasm. We have NOT been effective in defeating ISIS. Therefore, other countries should probably not trust us to do most of the heavy lifting when it comes to fighting them given our recent track record of failure in the region.They don't.

[boutons_deux]

ISIS not a threat to USA, but to US/UK oil projects in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc.

Based on the failure of USA to "win" in Iraq and Afghanistan, who can be positive about fighting what sounds like a very tough, professional, well organized ISIS?

goddamit, fuck the Repugs, dubya, dickhead, wolfie, feith, etc and BigOil all the FUCKING HELL for creating this mess to increase BigOil's profits. This Repug disaster will drag on for years and years. US was 13 years in Iraq, and lost.

[DMX7]

Who says they need a war ship?

When did ISIS say it was going to take over Turkey?


Well they need something. But they have much further to go and a lot more obstacles to face to capture the White House than to fight in Saudi Arabia or Turkey.



They don't.

That's yet another reason why they should step up their fight and not count mostly on us.

[ChumpDumper]

Well they need something. But they have much further to go and a lot more obstacles to face to capture the White House than to fight in Saudi Arabia or Turkey.



That's yet another reason why they should step up their fight and not count mostly on us.When did ISIS say it was going to take over Turkey?

[SpursforSix]

When did ISIS say it was going to take over Turkey?

When did Japan say they were going to bomb Pearl Harbor?

[ChumpDumper]

When did Japan say they were going to bomb Pearl Harbor?So you're saying FDR should have preemptively attacked Japan.

Smart.

[DMX7]

When did ISIS say it was going to take over Turkey?

I didn't say it did.

[SpursforSix]

So you're saying FDR should have preemptively attacked Japan.

Smart.

wot? where did I say that?

[ChumpDumper]

I didn't say it did.So why should Turkey fight ISIS?

[DMX7]

So why should Turkey fight ISIS?

Because it's a terrorist organization that has murdered people in Turkey (via suicide bombing).

[ChumpDumper]

Because it's a terrorist organization that has murdered people in Turkey (via suicide bombing).Was that confirmed? Last I heard is was a Kurd who "may have been linked" to IS.

[DMX7]

Was that confirmed?

Turkey thinks so and ISIS has claimed responsibility for it.

[ChumpDumper]

Turkey thinks so and ISIS has claimed responsibility for it.Did they? I didn't see that.

I mean the first thing Turkey did after that was attack the Kurd separatists.

[ducks]

ISIS not a threat to USA, but to US/UK oil projects in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc.

Based on the failure of USA to "win" in Iraq and Afghanistan, who can be positive about fighting what sounds like a very tough, professional, well organized ISIS?

goddamit, fuck the Repugs, dubya, dickhead, wolfie, feith, etc and BigOil all the FUCKING HELL for creating this mess to increase BigOil's profits. This Repug disaster will drag on for years and years. US was 13 years in Iraq, and lost.isis is not a threat to usa?
really you do not think isis will come to usa and use planes like 9-11

[ducks]

Trump puts Americans first, not illegals

[Ignignokt]

Chump is a neocuckcon, no surprises here.

inb4 "ttthssttaaahpp" and "why are you so obsessessssed!!!"

[ChumpDumper]

Chump is a neocuckcon, no surprises here.

inb4 "ttthssttaaahpp" and "why are you so obsessessssed!!!"Nah, I'm fine with your stalking me. You're harmless.

Just quit being a bitch about it when you are called on it.

[Ignignokt]

Nah, I'm fine with your stalking me. You're harmless.

Just quit being a bitch about it when you are called on it.

Why is it when you call other people bitches, it seems like it's coming from a place of menopausal cat rage?

Anyway, you need to channel that rage into finding someone instead of being a 4ever alone.

[ChumpDumper]

Why is it when you call other people bitches, it seems like it's coming from a place of menopausal cat rage?

Anyway, you need to channel that rage into finding someone instead of being a 4ever alone.I never feel alone with you stalking me, gtown.

You're a bit of a creeper, but I'm glad I'm keeping you off the streets. You're an impotent time bomb.

[hater]

tell us how ISIS is going to cross the US border and attack us :lmao

[ChumpDumper]

tell us how ISIS is going to cross the US border and attack us :lmaoGee no Muslim extremist has ever has ever attacked the US.

Ever!

[hater]

Gee no Muslim extremist has ever has ever attacked the US.

Ever!

Still waiting on your evidence of them planning to enter through our borders and attack :rolleyes

[Clipper Nation]

633609638479577089

:lol Even higher approval among women than men
:lol SJWs and feminazis BTFO

[Clipper Nation]

Right now there is Donald Trump, and everyone else. Anyone who disputes that isn’t dealing with the reality of the 2016 race. There’s a lot of time left, a lot of opportunity for Donald Trump to lose favor among voters but for now he is re-writing all the rules of a national campaign and everyone else is playing catch up. He’s gone from political sideshow to the only show in town. And there’s a part of this story the media is ignoring – Trump’s appeal to minority voters. It exists, it’s real, and it’s getting stronger.

http://dcwhispers.com/trumps-turning-point-he-can-win-this/

[boutons_deux]

633609638479577089

:lol Even higher approval among women than men
:lol SJWs and feminazis BTFO

that's REPUG assholes' preference, not the entire electorate. Trump loses to both Hillary and Bernie

[Clipper Nation]

that's REPUG assholes' preference, not the entire electorate. Trump loses to both Hillary and Bernie
:lol Fuck off, shill. Trump will be phenomenal to the women, he cherishes women, and they know it. He's strong on women and will be the greatest women's president ever put on this earth. Trump easily beats Hillary and especially the old socialist faggot.

[Quetzal-X]

:lol Barry really fucked yall honkeys up pretty good:lol

[ChumpDumper]

Still waiting on your evidence of them planning to enter through our borders and attack :rolleyesYou just moved the goalpost.

[DMX7]

You just moved the goalpost.

Well in fairness, writing that "no Muslim extremist has ever has ever attacked the US" is just a response to a strawman.

No one said they've never attacked us.

[ChumpDumper]

Well in fairness, writing that "no Muslim extremist has ever has ever attacked the US" is just a response to a strawman.

No one said they've never attacked us.That's why his pre-goalpost move question was so stupid.

[hater]

You just moved the goalpost.

So no evidence. You were talking out your ass again.

Carry on then faggot :lol

[ChumpDumper]

So no evidence. You were talking out your ass again.

Carry on then faggot :lolThat wasn't your question. :lol

You had to pretend you didn't ask it and move the goalposts. :lol

Shitposting. :lol

[pgardn]

:lol Fuck off, shill. Trump will be phenomenal to the women, he cherishes women, and they know it. He's strong on women and will be the greatest women's president ever put on this earth. Trump easily beats Hillary and especially the old socialist faggot.

Fat Woman beware...

Breast Implanted Trophy Wife, with no brains, your time to get an old man is upon us.

[Splits]

Right now there is Donald Trump, and everyone else. Anyone who disputes that isn’t dealing with the reality of the 2016 race. There’s a lot of time left, a lot of opportunity for Donald Trump to lose favor among voters but for now he is re-writing all the rules of a national campaign and everyone else is playing catch up. He’s gone from political sideshow to the only show in town. And there’s a part of this story the media is ignoring – Trump’s appeal to minority voters. It exists, it’s real, and it’s getting stronger.

http://dcwhispers.com/trumps-turning-point-he-can-win-this/

Based on... "A trusted D.C. Whispers" :lol DC Whispers? Who the fuck are they?


:lol Fuck off, shill. Trump will be phenomenal to the women, he cherishes women, and they know it. He's strong on women and will be the greatest women's president ever put on this earth. Trump easily beats Hillary and especially the old socialist faggot.

Uh huh. Why don't you look at the crosstabs of the poll you're citing, dumb fuck

http://i.imgur.com/or3ubeS.png

[hater]

That wasn't your question. :lol

You had to pretend you didn't ask it and move the goalposts. :lol

Shitposting. :lol

Lol mad

You stated ISIS would cross the borders and attack the US.

Where is the evidence they are even planning it?

That's right. Your dumb ass was caught once again. Think next time you post dummy

[ChumpDumper]

Lol mad

You stated ISIS would cross the borders and attack the US.

Where is the evidence they are even planning it?

That's right. Your dumb ass was caught once again. Think next time you post dummylol asking the same goalpost move question after you've been exposed. :lol

You're a shameless dumbass. :lol

[hater]

Still waiting on any evidence of ISIS coming in through our borders to attack us as u stated.

Lol mad

[ChumpDumper]

Still waiting on any evidence of ISIS coming in through our borders to attack us as u stated.I never stated there was any evidence of ISIS coming in through our borders to attack us.


Lol madlol moved goalpost straw man.

[boutons_deux]

Repugs have Trump beating every other Repug in all categories, but 58% of Repugs thinks a non-Trump has a better chance of winning the WH. :lol

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/18/politics/cnn-orc-poll-republicans-2016-election/index.html

[hater]

new poll today. SHILLARYs lead vs Trump shrinks. Only leads by 6 points :lmao

Your worst nightmare is becoming reality libtards :lmao

Oh and Obama's Iran plan is most likely going to fail. Too bad Shillary already fucked up and endorsed it. :lol

She's finished :lmao al gore it is for you :lol

[Clipper Nation]

:lmao Shillary
:lmao Trump haters
:lmao Libtards BTFO

[in2deep]

amazing

[DMX7]

Oh and Obama's Iran plan is most likely going to fail. Too bad Shillary already fucked up and endorsed it. :lol


If I could make a large cash wager that it's going to survive, then I would. I wouldn't be celebrating yet if I were you.

[DMX7]

Trump will make the Iran deal work. He will police it like you wouldn't believe.

Do a simple Google search and you will see not even republicans think they have the votes to stop it.

[boutons_deux]

Do a simple Google search and you will see not even republicans think ...


... Trump is electable, and that they want another asshole as Repug candidate.

[DMX7]

... Trump in electable...

That opinion has been changing though and it could change further. We don't know.

[boutons_deux]

That opinion has been changing though and it could change further. We don't know.

the cnn/orc poll said 58% of Trump supporters wanted somebody else as candidate. And that's with his "approval" rating probably peaked among Repug assholes.

He was on Teevee today saying the 14th Amendment didn't mean anchor babies were citizens, same shit as Fox and white supremacists.

[hater]

Lol his approval peaked. You idiots been singing that song for months now :lol

[DMX7]

the cnn/orc poll said 58% of Trump supporters wanted somebody else as candidate. And that's with his "approval" rating probably peaked among Repug assholes.

He was on Teevee today saying the 14th Amendment didn't mean anchor babies were citizens, same shit as Fox and white supremacists.

We will see... It's simply too early to make a final judgement about who the actual candidate will be.

And quite frankly, I don't think it's unreasonable to criticize the 14th amendment.

By the strict technical interpretation, anchor babies are clearly citizens. However, anchor babies are a flagrant violation of the spirit of the text (of the 14th amendment). Clearly, it implies and assumes that people born here are born to parents here legally.

[Clipper Nation]

Boutons' face when he saw the latest polls:

http://i.imgur.com/9HE52Xx.jpg

[boutons_deux]

...

[Pelicans78]

The MIC is basically institutionalized within Congress, so of course it's not going away.

Trump, on the other hand, is not taking donations from defense contractors and he is not running for a seat in Congress. He is running for President.

The Commander-in-chief has huge influence over how we deploy and station our military. Obama has done a poor job organizing forces in the middle-east to fight ISIS from the start, and has basically made it an American problem first when it shouldn't be. We should be supporting the fight against ISIS, but the countries in that region need to be making a much bigger investment in actually destroying ISIS. He gave them the impression that America's "got this" like we always do and that they don't have to do anything. They're finally realizing that's not the case. Under Trump, they will know this from the start.

The majority of those countries are too busy fighting a proxy war against Iran. That's why they're not doing as much as they can against ISIS. However they won't have a choice once ISIS starts to attack them like what happened in Turkey.

[Pelicans78]

His diplomacy, articulated today, is to re-invade Iraq and steal the oil.

That should have happened a long time ago.

[boutons_deux]

That should have happened a long time ago.

The Repugs tried, and their abused military failed, yet again, but US/UK accomplices are pumping some oil out of Iraq.

[boutons_deux]

The majority of those countries are too busy fighting a proxy war against Iran.

which countries?

[boutons_deux]

By the strict technical interpretation, anchor babies are clearly citizens.

... strict, originalist interpretation is what the Repug/VRWC-appointed SCOTUS5 emphasizes. Although I can imagine Uncle Tom (who otherwise would be 3/5 of a human), Scalia refusing to recognize the Amendments as part of the Constitution.

[Pelicans78]

which countries?

Saudi Arabia and other Sunni countries like Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait, etc. That's what's going on in Yemen.

[Pelicans78]

The Repugs tried, and their abused military failed, yet again, but US/UK accomplices are pumping some oil out of Iraq.

Democrats voted for the war too and Obama's regime didn't do anything different other than pull out.

[boutons_deux]

Palin: Donald Trump Is ‘Joe Six-Pack’ With ‘Common-Sense’ Solutions


http://www.nationalmemo.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/2015-08-18-sarah-palin-greta-van-susteren-fox-news-donald-trump-joe-six-pack-640-668x501.jpg

http://www.nationalmemo.com/palin-donald-trump-is-joe-six-pack-with-common-sense-solutions/

well,the campaign is over, pitbull bitch has spoken, Trump is the President with practical solutions of deporting 11M illegals.

[DMX7]

... strict, originalist interpretation is what the Repug/VRWC-appointed SCOTUS5 emphasizes. Although I can imagine Uncle Tom (who otherwise would be 3/5 of a human), Scalia refusing to recognize the Amendments as part of the Constitution.

It was obviously not the original intent of the 14th amendment to have citizenship for anchor babies. If they want to argue that implicit in the text is the assumption that parents are legally here, then I don't think that's an unreasonable argument.

[boutons_deux]

Democrats voted for the war too and Obama's regime didn't do anything different other than pull out.

:lol Is that all ya got? cause is total bullshit, would explain a lot if you are from southern Louisiana.

[Pelicans78]

:lol Is that all ya got? cause is total bullshit, would explain a lot if you are from southern Louisiana.

I've already schooled you numerous times. Anyway the Democrats never had a viable solution after they took over. What happened in Iraq since Obama took over? What happened in Afghanistan? Both places have gotten worse since 2008.

And it doesnt matter where I'm from, I will always be more successful than you. I'm not the one on my computer all day looking up articles on the Internet and posting on multiple forums. Get a job buddy.

[boutons_deux]

I've already schooled you numerous times. Anyway the Democrats never had a viable solution after they took over. What happened in Iraq since Obama took over? What happened in Afghanistan? Both places have gotten worse since 2008.

And it doesnt matter where I'm from, I will always be more successful than you. I'm not the one on my computer all day looking up articles on the Internet and posting on multiple forums. Get a job buddy.

school your own ignorant self.

The US military lost Afganistan and Iraq (and Viet Nam). There was no "viable solution" for Obama in Iraq because Iraq refused to grant US military immunity from prosecution under SOFA, so Obama implemented the REPUG withdrawal agreement.

Both countries have gotten worse (didn't the "surge" win the Iraq war? :lol ), like water running down a hill, since Repugs broke both countries, neither country was "winnable", and you haven't signed up, yet, have ya?

Germany and France both CORRECTLY told US/UK to stay out of Afghanistan. Freedom FUCKING Fries, baby!

[Pelicans78]

school your own ignorant self.

The US military lost Afganistan and Iraq (and Viet Nam). There was no "viable solution" for Obama in Iraq because Iraq refused to grant US military immunity from prosecution under SOFA, so Obama implemented the REPUG withdrawal agreement.

Both countries have gotten worse (didn't the "surge" win the Iraq war? :lol ), like water running down a hill, since Repugs broke both countries, neither country was "winnable", and you haven't signed up, yet, have ya?

Germany and France both CORRECTLY told US/UK to stay out of Afghanistan. Freedom FUCKING Fries, baby!

Quit confusing me for a Republican. I don't like either party. Both are useless and signed up for both wars without thinking long-term. You're no better. You only follow party lines and can't think for yourself. That's why you're home all day on your computer.

[Pelicans78]

And Obama went full-bore into Afghanistan and failed miserably.

[boutons_deux]

And Obama went full-bore into Afghanistan and failed miserably.

yep, he believed the Iraq "surge" lies from the military, and let the military surge again, AND THE MILITARY FAILED AGAIN.

[Pelicans78]

yep, he believed the Iraq "surge" lies from the military, and let the military surge agains, AND THE MILITARY FAILED AGAIN.

That's his fault for doing what they say since he's you commander of chief, but you're full of shit since he campaigned on Afghanistan being the right war and Iraq being the wrong war.

[boutons_deux]

That's his fault for doing what they say since he's you commander of chief, but you're full of shit since he campaigned on Afghanistan being the right war and Iraq being the wrong war.

:lol

Afghanistan was "right" target after 9/11, of course. Iraq was not a target, its oil was.

Afghanistan targeted to punish Taliban, AQ, and kill OBL was turned into failed occupation and war by the Repugs, not by Obama.

[hater]

:lmao Trump just obliterated Shillary :lol

"the email scandal is devastating to her candidacy. She has no chance now. She should be worried about jailtime"

:lol

[DMX7]

The e-mail scandal is as substance less and as desperate as Benghazi.

[Pelicans78]

:lol

Afghanistan was "right" target after 9/11, of course. Iraq was not a target, its oil was.

Afghanistan targeted to punish Taliban, AQ, and kill OBL was turned into failed occupation and war by the Repugs, not by Obama.

You can't have it both ways. You can't say it's the military's fault for Obama going all out in Afghanistan and failing and also pretend it's the right war 7 years after 9/11.

[boutons_deux]

You can't have it both ways. You can't say it's the military's fault for Obama going all out in Afghanistan and failing and also pretend it's the right war 7 years after 9/11.

Obama MEANT that Repugs/BigOil attacking Iraq was the wrong target (as EVERYBODY knows) and the 9/11 attackers were in right target, IN 2001!!!, in Afghanistan. Obama got stuck with Repug shit in Afghanistan. AIN'T HIS FAULT that the Repug war in Afganistan was unwinnable.

Obama wanted to "win" the REPUG bullshit Afganistan war so he could bring the troops home. So he let the military try its "surge" bullshit AGAIN, and it FAILED again. What choices did he have, facing REPUGs' Afghanistan disaster?

[ChumpDumper]

Trump needs to watch out for this new up and comer in North Carolina:
http://www.keyetv.com/template/ugc/keye/1754/RkX6fyPx.jpg

[boutons_deux]

Trump's "Go-To" National Security Adviser Says He's Never Talked Policy With Trump
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/08/donald-trump-jack-jacobs-military-policy-adviser

:lol

[CosmicCowboy]

Shits getting crazy. Trump is almost even with Hillary in the latest polls. Not sure if it is how good he is doing or how bad she is doing.

[boutons_deux]

Trump won't be President. He will fade as fake politician exactly like pitbull bitch.

He's a huge distraction, mindless entertainment, garbage teevee, but unlike all the other distractions and bullshit from the Repugs, he's distraction FROM the establishment Repugs and even tea bagger pols. He seems to be pulling the umpteen other Pres pretenders even nastier to the right extremism.

His main value is exposing the total nastiness of the Repug base.

[hater]

My fear is that Trump can't do it all alone. Problem is too many incompetent motherfuckers around.

Trump would have to build a momentum the size of a space bound rocket to overcome this. Hope and change :tu

[boutons_deux]

G.O.P. Candidates Follow Trump to the Bottom on Immigration

Before Donald Trump, Republican presidential candidates could deflect tough questions on immigration with vague promises to secure the border and oppose all “amnesty” for illegal immigrants.

Not anymore. Mr. Trump has offered a plan to “take back our country” from what he calls the rapist-murderer-job stealers being exported from Mexico. He is full of ideas.

He would expel 11 million immigrants, and their families, and let only “the good ones” back in.

He would restrict legal immigration, and impose a national job-verification system so that everyone, citizens too, would need federal permission to work.

He would build a 2,000-mile border wall and force Mexicans to pay for it. He would replace the Constitution’s guarantee of citizenship by birth with citizenship by bloodline and pedigree, leaving it to politicians and bureaucrats to decide what to do with millions of stateless children. He would flood the country with immigration agents and — it almost goes without saying — dismantle the economy and shred America’s standing as an immigrant-welcoming nation.

You could say the front-running Mr. Trump has put his opponents in a bind. Or you could say he has given them a gift: the opportunity to be specific in return about what they would do to fix the immigration mess.

And to be forthright in rejecting his despicable proposals.

Because his plan is so naked — in its scapegoating of immigrants, its barely subtextual racism, its immense cruelty in seeking to reduce millions of people to poverty and hopelessness — it gives his opponents the chance for a very clear moral decision.

They can stand up for better values, and against the collective punishment of millions of innocent Americans-in-waiting.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/20/opinion/gop-candidates-follow-trump-to-the-bottom-on-immigration.html?_r=0

[boutons_deux]

Momentum Slipping Away in Iowa, Scott Walker Adopts a Trump-Like Stance

On a three-day tour of Iowa after declaring his candidacy for president last month, Scott Walker (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/07/13/us/elections/scott-walker.html?inline=nyt-per) wore the same rolled-sleeves uniform, told the same sports joke and answered questions with verbatim passages from his announcement speech, whether he was in Davenport, Cedar Rapids or Sioux City.

He was disciplined almost to the point of seeming robotic.

Since then, a bracingly unscripted candidate has upended the Republican race. And no one has suffered more in the Summer of Trump than Mr. Walker, the Wisconsin governor, who has sagged in the polls (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/ia/iowa_republican_presidential_caucus-3194.html) from early Iowa front-runner to unimpressive single digits.

In a blunt self-critique, Mr. Walker acknowledged on a private conference call with donors (http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/08/18/scott-walker-to-increase-attacks-on-washington/) on Monday that voters had found him passionless. He announced a reset of his campaign, according to a participant in the call, in which he would take on the Republican establishment to show that, like Donald J. Trump, he, too, strongly opposed the status quo.

Mr. Walker offered as Exhibit A (http://www.washingtonpost.com/posttv/politics/scott-walker-to-protester-i-am-not-intimidated/2015/08/17/6af5b772-4503-11e5-9f53-d1e3ddfd0cda_video.html) an exchange he had had with a heckler just hours earlier at the Iowa State Fair: “I’m not intimidated by you, sir, or anyone else out there,” he had shouted, before turning to the crowd and saying:

“You want someone who’s tested? I’m right here.”

Mr. Walker’s team was so pleased with the tussle, which may wind up in a television ad, that a top campaign aide joked that he would have paid the heckler to show up.

“Where he’s really messed up with people like me,” said Phil Cavanaugh, a Republican chairman in Wapello County, who was once a Walker supporter, “is that he keeps bringing up his buddy-buddy relationship (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/06/us/politics/wisconsin-politics-and-faith-bind-scott-walker-and-paul-ryan.html) with establishment people like Paul Ryan.”

John Stineman, a Republican strategist in Des Moines who has worked on past presidential campaigns, said Mr. Walker’s decision to pursue voters who admire political outsiders like Mr. Trump and Ben Carson, a retired neurosurgeon, could ultimately be more problematic than his recent decline in the polls.

“The dip isn’t the problem,” Mr. Stineman said. “It’s that he’s going to follow Trump into the rabbit hole. To try to emulate Trump is likely to be folly. So taking Trump-like positions on things doesn’t seem like a solid long-term bet.”

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/20/us/politics/momentum-slipping-away-in-iowa-scott-walker-adopts-a-trump-like-stance.html

[DMX7]

https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/trump-cover-final.jpg?quality=65&strip=color&w=419

[ChumpDumper]

I kind of want a Trump/Biden contest just for the contrasts in dealing with male pattern baldness.

[DMX7]

I wouldn't mind a Trump/Biden ticket... only in fantasy land though...

[velik_m]

He would restrict legal immigration, and impose a national job-verification system so that everyone, citizens too, would need federal permission to work.




What's wrong with this? I mean in my country an illegal cannot get a job at any major company, because it's illegal to employ them and no serious company would risk breaking the law.

I guess some americans would prefer to keep their cheap near slave like workforce, they can get rid of at any time...

[boutons_deux]

"no serious company would risk breaking the law."

To repeat, Repugs campaign on immigration to rouse the base of rabble, but after the campaigns, they do nothing because 1000s of Repug businessmen depend on cheap, abused, unpaid/underpaid illegals.

[DMX7]

What's wrong with this? I mean in my country an illegal cannot get a job at any major company, because it's illegal to employ them and no serious company would risk breaking the law.

I guess some americans would prefer to keep their cheap near slave like workforce, they can get rid of at any time...

I don't think too many major companies in America hire them but they hire contractors who may.

[boutons_deux]

Racist Donald Trump Fans Allegedly Beat, Urinated on Sleeping Latino Homeless Man

One of the men remarked: 'Donald Trump was right, all these illegals need to be deported.'

Two white Boston brothers Scott J. Leader, 38, and Steve M. Leader, 30, were arrested on numerous charges of assault, indecent exposure, and more after allegedly urinating on and then beating a sleeping 58-year-old Latino homeless man because he was Latino.

According to the charges, the Boston Globe reports (http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/08/19/homeless/iTagewS4bnvBKWxxPvFcAJ/story.html), the brothers allegedly urinated on the man, punched him, and then beat him with a metal pole, breaking his nose and bruising his head and torso. Witnesses say they saw the brothers hitting the man in the head with the pole. The homeless man, who remained unidentified, was subsequently hospitalized at Boston Medical Center.

State Police spokesman Dave Procopio recalled (http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/08/19/homeless-man-beaten-urine-state-police-south-boston/) “Scott Leader made a statement referring to the victim as an ‘illegal immigrant’ and stated the reason he and his brother were arrested is that they were white and the victim was a minority.”

The brothers also spoke favorably of Donald Trump, according to the police, who recall Scott remarking "Donald Trump was right, all these illegals need to be deported." Police say he saw no problem attacking the man because he is Latino and homeless.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/racist-donald-trump-fans-allegedly-beat-urinated-sleeping-latino-homeless-man?akid=13399.187590.x6-Ub_&rd=1&src=newsletter1041204&t=2

[DMX7]

Racist Donald Trump Fans Allegedly Beat, Urinated on Sleeping Latino Homeless Man

One of the men remarked: 'Donald Trump was right, all these illegals need to be deported.'

Two white Boston brothers Scott J. Leader, 38, and Steve M. Leader, 30, were arrested on numerous charges of assault, indecent exposure, and more after allegedly urinating on and then beating a sleeping 58-year-old Latino homeless man because he was Latino.

According to the charges, the Boston Globe reports (http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/08/19/homeless/iTagewS4bnvBKWxxPvFcAJ/story.html), the brothers allegedly urinated on the man, punched him, and then beat him with a metal pole, breaking his nose and bruising his head and torso. Witnesses say they saw the brothers hitting the man in the head with the pole. The homeless man, who remained unidentified, was subsequently hospitalized at Boston Medical Center.

State Police spokesman Dave Procopio recalled (http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/08/19/homeless-man-beaten-urine-state-police-south-boston/) “Scott Leader made a statement referring to the victim as an ‘illegal immigrant’ and stated the reason he and his brother were arrested is that they were white and the victim was a minority.”

The brothers also spoke favorably of Donald Trump, according to the police, who recall Scott remarking "Donald Trump was right, all these illegals need to be deported." Police say he saw no problem attacking the man because he is Latino and homeless.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/racist-donald-trump-fans-allegedly-beat-urinated-sleeping-latino-homeless-man?akid=13399.187590.x6-Ub_&rd=1&src=newsletter1041204&t=2





These people don't represent us. Donald Trump has emphasized "humanity" in deportation techniques.

[hater]

Lol boitons. Reaching pathetic levels.

[boutons_deux]

These people don't represent us. Donald Trump has emphasized "humanity" in deportation techniques.

there's NO HUMANITY in deporting 11M people, which includes American citizens.

Trump and Repug white supremacy, nativism, xenophobia enables, encourages, justifies criminals like those 2 in Boston, and Ms of other in the Repug racist base.

[Clipper Nation]

Racist Donald Trump Fans Allegedly Beat, Urinated on Sleeping Latino Homeless Man

One of the men remarked: 'Donald Trump was right, all these illegals need to be deported.'

Two white Boston brothers Scott J. Leader, 38, and Steve M. Leader, 30, were arrested on numerous charges of assault, indecent exposure, and more after allegedly urinating on and then beating a sleeping 58-year-old Latino homeless man because he was Latino.

According to the charges, the Boston Globe reports (http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/08/19/homeless/iTagewS4bnvBKWxxPvFcAJ/story.html), the brothers allegedly urinated on the man, punched him, and then beat him with a metal pole, breaking his nose and bruising his head and torso. Witnesses say they saw the brothers hitting the man in the head with the pole. The homeless man, who remained unidentified, was subsequently hospitalized at Boston Medical Center.

State Police spokesman Dave Procopio recalled (http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/08/19/homeless-man-beaten-urine-state-police-south-boston/) “Scott Leader made a statement referring to the victim as an ‘illegal immigrant’ and stated the reason he and his brother were arrested is that they were white and the victim was a minority.”

The brothers also spoke favorably of Donald Trump, according to the police, who recall Scott remarking "Donald Trump was right, all these illegals need to be deported." Police say he saw no problem attacking the man because he is Latino and homeless.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/racist-donald-trump-fans-allegedly-beat-urinated-sleeping-latino-homeless-man?akid=13399.187590.x6-Ub_&rd=1&src=newsletter1041204&t=2




:lol Media getting really desperate now.

[djohn2oo8]

Shits getting crazy. Trump is almost even with Hillary in the latest polls. Not sure if it is how good he is doing or how bad she is doing.

Trump won't get the women vote.

[DMX7]

there's NO HUMANITY in deporting 11M people, which includes American citizens.

Trump and Repug white supremacy, nativism, xenophobia enables, encourages, justifies criminals like those 2 in Boston, and Ms of other in the Repug racist base.

They must go!

[hater]

Trump won't get the women vote.

Neither will Shillary

[CosmicCowboy]

Hillary won't even be the candidate. Obama will blow her fat ass up.

I'm calling a Biden/Warren ticket.

[boutons_deux]

Donald Trump’s appalling reaction to a hate crime committed in his name

Here's what Donald Trump said when told about the alleged assault, according to theBoston Globe (https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/08/19/homeless/iTagewS4bnvBKWxxPvFcAJ/story.html):

"It would be a shame ... I will say that people who are following me are very passionate.

They love this country and they want this country to be great again.

They are passionate."

http://www.vox.com/2015/8/20/9182169/trump-hate-crime

Trump and his followers are classless pieces of shit.

[DMX7]

Trying to demonize the people you disagree with is wrong. It's not constructive. I would never engaged in such behavior. You're out of control B_D.

[boutons_deux]

Trying to demonize the people you disagree with is wrong. It's not constructive. I would never engaged in such behavior. You're out of control B_D.

Trump and his racist "passionate" followers are self-demonizing.

[TheSanityAnnex]

there's NO HUMANITY in deporting 11M people, which includes American citizens.

Trump and Repug white supremacy, nativism, xenophobia enables, encourages, justifies criminals like those 2 in Boston, and Ms of other in the Repug racist base.

And you are trying to justify 11 million criminals.

[TheSanityAnnex]

:lol Media getting really desperate now.

:lol jail booking cell being a hotbed of political discussions

[Clipper Nation]

Trump and his followers are classless pieces of shit.


Let me guess, though - you agree with Jeb that when illegals come here to murder, rape, and join gangs, it's an "act of love?"

[DMX7]

And you are trying to justify 11 million criminals.

There is no humanity in breaking the law!!!

It was wrong when Rosa Parks did it and it's wrong now. I don't care!

[DMX7]

Trump and his racist "passionate" followers are self-demonizing.

Well technically they are "passionate", a very few are just not "compassionate".

[boutons_deux]

Krazy Kruz down the Trump rabbit out with Latino reachout

Ted Cruz Flip-Flopped On Birthright Citizenship

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said Wednesday he welcomed Donald Trump's call (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/donald-trump-birthright-citizenship) to end birthright citizenship, which he described as "a view I have long held."

However, "long held" apparently only stretches back a few years because, as the Huffington Post points out, (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ted-cruz-birthright-citizenship_55d5f798e4b0ab468da01952?emf5hfr) Cruz in 2010 called ending birthright citizenship a "mistake."

"I've looked at the legal arguments against it, and I will tell you as a Supreme Court litigator, those arguments are not very good," Cruz, who was then gearing up for his 2012 Senate race, said in 2010 on "The Duke Machado Show."

"As much as someone may dislike the policy of birthright citizenship, it's in the U.S. Constitution. And I don't like it when federal judges set aside the Constitution because their policy preferences are different," Cruz said then.

While Trump says that the Constitution (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bill-o-reilly-donald-trump-immigration)already could be read to not grant birthright citizenship, others in the GOP 2016 field are calling for a constitutional amendment to end the practice.

Cruz on Wednesday said he would “absolutely" support changing the policy.

"We should end granting automatic birthright citizenship to the children of those who are here illegally,” Cruz said in an interview (http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/251502-cruz-absolutely-backs-ending-birthright-citizenship) on Michael Medved’s radio show. “That has been my position from the very first day of my running for the Senate.”

But in that 2010 interview, Cruz said, "I think it is a mistake for conservatives to be focusing on trying to fight what the Constitution says on birthright citizenship. I think we are far better off focusing on securing the border, because birthright citizenship wouldn't be an issue if we didn't have people coming in illegally."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ted-cruz-birthright-citizenship?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29

Thanks, TX Repugs!

[TheSanityAnnex]

:lmao slapping down a SJW reporter.

FR2BpMB8uC4

[boutons_deux]

Euro-White Supremacists on the 14th a long time

It’s Not Just Trump: GOP Has Plotted For Years To End Birthright Citizenship

Trump’s idea to end birthright citizenship didn’t come out of nowhere. For years, legal minds on the far right have been laying out a plan to stop granting citizenship to children born on U.S. soil regardless of their parents' legal status.

Their plan rests on the willingness of state or national lawmakers to push through a constitutionally-questionable law in the hopes that the conservative Supreme Court will take it as bait to scale back the 14th Amendment. Crazier things (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/supreme-court-guts-the-voting-rights-act) have happened (http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf) in the John Roberts court.

“This notion that the 14th Amendment guarantees citizenship to anyone who has happened to be born on U.S. soil no matter how they’re here -- they're just wrong,” said Chapman University School of Law Dean John Eastman, who has led conservative legal fights on everything from gay marriage to reining in the Supreme Court. (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/ted-cruz-supreme-court-judicial-activism)

The House Judiciary Committee held (http://judiciary.house.gov/index.cfm/hearings?ID=E7872029-9B7E-4A62-A9E9-1C035179C7F4) hearings on the issue in the spring under the title: "Birthright Citizenship: Is It The Right Policy For America?" Eastman testified at the hearing in support of ending birthright citizenship and told TPM this week that criticisms that “Trump’s idea is silly because it would take a constitutional amendment -- that’s not true.”

Trump may have pushed he issue to the forefront of the GOP presidential primary, but even before he included the proposal on his immigration policy paper this week, the issue was simmering on the fringes. In May, former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) wrote (http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/05/06/an-immigration-policy-for-hard-working-americans/) in an op-ed that “only children born on American soil where at least one parent is a citizen or resident aliens is automatically a U.S. citizen.” Just last week, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) was calling (http://thinkprogress.org/election/2015/08/12/3690791/chris-christie-birthright-citizenship/) for the 14th Amendment to be “re-examined.” Gov. John Kasich pushed for ending birthright citizenship while in Congress (https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/1191/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%221191%22%5D%7D) and said he supported (http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/insight/2010/09/26/division.html) changing the practice in 2010, before reversing his position this summer.
Republican presidential candidates who say they oppose ending birthright citizenship have been able to do so under the cover that it’s not worth the trouble of changing a Constitutional amendment.

“There are like 10 things I would change in the Constitution with a magic wand," Former Gov. Jeb Bush (R) said on the birthright question (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/08/17/jeb-bush-on-donald-trumps-immigration-ideas-a-plan-needs-to-be-grounded-in-reality/), before later backtracking (http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/18/politics/jeb-bush-constitution-magic-wand/) on the remark.

"I have to live with reality. Reality is it takes at best years, probably decades to deal with this 14th Amendment issue," former Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) said. (http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2015/08/19/perry-questions-border-wall-plans-stresses-better-security)The 14th Amendment -- which includes an assortment of weighty rights like due process and equal protection -- says: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.”

But according to Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, :lol the architect of some of the country's harshest anti-immigration laws, the phrase “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” confers automatic citizenship only to some subset of children born on U.S. soil.

“There’s some people excluded, because that’s what the words ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ mean and the Supreme Court has never had an occasion [to examine] what that means, and to specifically look at the question of the children of illegal aliens,” Kobach told TPM. “Any justice who sought to come to the conclusion that the Constitution requires citizenship for the children of illegal aliens would have to explain what the words 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' mean, and that's a very difficult task for them to do.”

He suggested Congress propose a law limiting birthright citizenship to the children of citizens and permanent residents.

“For lack of a better word, the ‘open borders interests’ are probably going to challenge anything Congress passes in this regard and they will see if they can draw a good judge and probably hope that they don’t go to the U.S. Supreme Court,” Kobach said. If the issue did get to the Supreme Court, he said he was “confident” it would be upheld.

Bills proposing to end birthright citizenship have been introduced on a fairly regular basis since the 1990s. In just the last year, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) (http://www.nationaljournal.com/next-america/newsdesk/steve-king-birthright-citizenship-19691231) and Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) (http://www.vitter.senate.gov/newsroom/press/vitter-introduces-legislation-to-close-birthright-citizenship-loophole) have introduced legislation to limit birthright citizenship to only certain children depending on their parents. An earlier version of Vitter's bill was cosponsored by presidential candidate Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) in 2011.

King acknowledged (http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/rep-steve-king-pass-legislation-puts-end-birthright-citizenship) that his proposal would likely be litigated, but that a “constitutionally sound” law would pass in the courts.

Past attempts to limit birthright citizenship through legislation have been widely called unconstitutional. (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/experts-gop-plan-to-change-citizenship-rights-is-clearly-unconstitutional)

In addition to the plain text of the Constitution, legal scholars point to the Supreme Court’s decision in 1898’s United State v Wong Kim Ark, which reaffirmed the right of citizenship for U.S.-born children regardless of their parents' legal status.

But birthright opponents say that the decision only applies to the children of permanent residents and the opinion's broader language regarding birthright citizenship is merely "dicta," as Eastman put it.

State lawmakers have proposed anti-immigrant legislation with the explicit purpose of getting the Supreme Court to chip away at the 14th Amendment, as was the case with a failed 2011 bill in Arizona. (http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/02/07/arizona.citizenship/)

So far conservative lawmakers haven't been able to advance the strategy, with some Republicansadmitting (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/tierneysneed%20[6:13%20PM]%20http://lubbockonline.com/filed-online/2015-08-18/trumps-immigration-birthright-citizenship-stance-echoes-texas-bills#.VdT_Z1NViko) the likelihood of success is not worth the legal costs.
However, for birthright critics, this is the wrong approach:

"We ought not anticipate an erroneous decision from the court on the front end,” Eastman said. Trump echoed that strategy, saying he wouldn't wait to pass a Constitutional amendment but would go straight to the courts to see if U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants are in fact citizens.

"I’d much rather find out whether or not anchor babies are actually citizens," Trump said Tuesday. "We're going to test it out."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/birthright-citizenship-constitution?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29

Trump so FUCKING IGNORANT about the 14th.

[Dirk Oneanddoneski]

http://i.imgur.com/PIILFuy.jpg

[pgardn]

Shits getting crazy. Trump is almost even with Hillary in the latest polls. Not sure if it is how good he is doing or how bad she is doing.

If he gets the Republican nomination and defaults the WH to the Democrats then shit will turn from crazy to revolutionary in Republican headquarters. And Trump WILL hand the WH to almost any Democrat once people get real. When his business acumen and slimyness are fully exposed people will beg for a Washington insider or a socialist.

I expect if Trump lasts long enough his remaining opposition in the Republican primary will tear him a new one ahead of what the Democrat will do.

[hater]

yeah unfortunately the Donald is screwing up his immigration :lol nga don't know that lots of hispanics can vote? lol

hopefully someshit happens in the world in the next few days to change the topic and The Donald can move on to other issues :lmao

[DMX7]

The Great Wall of China was built thousands of years ago and is much longer than the length of our border. A wall can be built. Should it? That's another question.

[boutons_deux]

Mexicans want to come to USA because they can't obtain a good life in MX. BigCorp destroyed 100Ks of subsistence MX farms by pushing for NAFTA, pushing Ms Mexicans toward the USA. The USA could help the federal and state govts in MX make a better life for poor Mexicans, but pervasive corruption could be an obstacle.

[boutons_deux]

The Washington Post Debunks Conservative Media's "Anchor Baby" Myth


But usually the debate has been about the residency of the parents, who after all are supposed to be using the child as their "anchor."

This is the definition that has little legal underpinning. For illegal immigrant parents, being the parent of a U.S. citizen child almost never forms the core of a successful defense in an immigration court. In short, if the undocumented parent of a U.S.-born child is caught in the United States, he or she legally faces the very same risk of deportation as any other immigrant.

The only thing that a so-called anchor baby can do to assist either of their undocumented parents involves such a long game that it's not a practical immigration strategy, said Greg Chen, an immigration law expert and director of The American Immigration Lawyers Association, a trade group that also advocates for immigrant-friendly reforms.

That long game is this: If and when a U.S. citizen reaches the age of 21, he or she can then apply for a parent to obtain a visa and green card and eventually enter the United States legally.
[...]
If a person has lived in the United States unlawfully for a period of more than 180 days but less than one year, there is an automatic three-year bar on that person ever reentering the United States -- and that's before any wait time for a visa. So that's a minimum of 21 years for the child to mature, plus the three-year wait.

And, for the vast majority of these parents, a longer wait also applies. If a person has lived in the United States illegally for a year or more, there is a 10-year ban on that person reentering the United States. So, in that case, there would be the 21-year wait for the child to mature to adulthood, plus the 10-year wait.

All told, the parents of the so-called anchor baby face a 24-to-31-year wait to even enter the United States, much less obtain a visa and green card or become a citizen.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/08/21/the-washington-post-debunks-conservative-medias/205082

[DMX7]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/21/politics/donald-trump-rally-mobile-alabama/

[boutons_deux]

you Euro-white supremacists looking for anchor babies?

Federal Agents Raid Alleged ‘Maternity Tourism’ Businesses Catering to Chinese

http://www.wsj.com/articles/us-agents-raid-alleged-maternity-tourism-anchor-baby-businesses-catering-to-chinese-1425404456

[DMX7]

you Euro-white supremacists looking for anchor babies?

Federal Agents Raid Alleged ‘Maternity Tourism’ Businesses Catering to Chinese

http://www.wsj.com/articles/us-agents-raid-alleged-maternity-tourism-anchor-baby-businesses-catering-to-chinese-1425404456

I can't read the whole thing, but that is scary from what I can tell!

[boutons_deux]

The Repug establishment is hoping some of the 17 Repug Klowns drop out, that their votes will go to shrub2 or Kockenstein or other, eventually dumping Trump.

[Clipper Nation]

30,000 people at Trump's rally last night: media focuses on the empty seats because fuck him for not totally filling up a 40,000 seat stadium, right?

10,000 people at Bernie's rallies: media acts like 10 million people showed up to hear God (aka Bernie Sanders) give them the Word of the Lord.

[Clipper Nation]

Republican Donald Trump is pulling away from the pack in the race for the party's U.S. presidential nomination, widening his lead over his closest rivals in the past week, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Friday.

Republican voters show no signs they are growing weary of the brash real estate mogul, who has dominated political headlines and the 17-strong Republican presidential field with his tough talk about immigration and insults directed at his political rivals. The candidates are vying to be nominated to represent their party in the November 2016 general election.

Nearly 32 percent of Republicans surveyed online said they backed Trump, up from 24 percent a week earlier, the opinion poll found. Trump had nearly double the support of his closest competitor, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, who got 16 percent. Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson was third at 8 percent.

Even when Trump was pitted directly in the poll against just his top two competitors, 44 percent backed him. Bush won about 29 percent of respondents, and Carson 25 percent.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/21/us-usa-election-poll-trump-idUSKCN0QQ2CO20150821

[boutons_deux]

Most Republicans do not support his candidacy and seem unlikely ever to do so. Even now, more say they definitely would not vote for him than say they support him.

The breadth of Mr. Trump’s coalition is surprising at a time of religious, ideological and geographic divisions in the Republican Party. It suggests he has the potential to outdo the flash-in-the-pan candidacies that roiled the last few Republican nominating contests. And it hints at the problem facing his competitors and the growing pressure on them to confront him, as several, like Jeb Bush and Scott Walker, are starting to do.

His support is not tethered to a single issue or sentiment: immigration, economic anxiety or an anti-establishment mood. Those factors may have created conditions for his candidacy to thrive, but his personality, celebrity and boldness, not merely his populism and policy stances, have let him take advantage of them.

Trumpism, the data and interviews suggest, is an attitude, not an ideology.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/23/us/politics/why-donald-trump-wont-fold-polls-and-people-speak.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0

iow, Trump is handing the Presidency to the Dems.

[DMX7]

I would strongly consider voting for him over Hillary, and I have never voted for any republican in my life.

[ChumpDumper]

30,000 people at Trump's rally last night: media focuses on the empty seats because fuck him for not totally filling up a 40,000 seat stadium, right?

10,000 people at Bernie's rallies: media acts like 10 million people showed up to hear God (aka Bernie Sanders) give them the Word of the Lord.lol you whine as much as Trump, David.

[Clipper Nation]

Most Republicans do not support his candidacy and seem unlikely ever to do so. Even now, more say they definitely would not vote for him than say they support him.

The breadth of Mr. Trump’s coalition is surprising at a time of religious, ideological and geographic divisions in the Republican Party. It suggests he has the potential to outdo the flash-in-the-pan candidacies that roiled the last few Republican nominating contests. And it hints at the problem facing his competitors and the growing pressure on them to confront him, as several, like Jeb Bush and Scott Walker, are starting to do.

His support is not tethered to a single issue or sentiment: immigration, economic anxiety or an anti-establishment mood. Those factors may have created conditions for his candidacy to thrive, but his personality, celebrity and boldness, not merely his populism and policy stances, have let him take advantage of them.

Trumpism, the data and interviews suggest, is an attitude, not an ideology.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/23/us/politics/why-donald-trump-wont-fold-polls-and-people-speak.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&_r=0

iow, Trump is handing the Presidency to the Dems.


The NY Slimes, another failing, money-losing liberal rag that can't hide their anti-Trump bias.

[boutons_deux]

The NY Slimes, another failing, money-losing liberal rag that can't hide their anti-Trump bias.

show us the poll that shows Repugs want Trump as candidate, would vote him as President.'

You stupid fuckers are as duped by Trump's bullshit as you were by pitbull bitch's looks and word salads.

[boutons_deux]

Prior to the event, the Trump campaign gave out numbers ranging from 30,000 attendees all the way up to 40,000. Here are some of the reports in that vein:

YAHOO NEWS (https://www.yahoo.com/politics/more-than-30000-expected-to-turn-out-for-donald-127250915821.html): “More than 30000 people are expected to turn out for Donald Trump's Mobile, Alabama” rally.

WASHINGTON EXAMINER (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump-expecting-over-30000-people-at-alabama-event/article/2570564): “Trump expecting over 30,000 people at Alabama event”

CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/20/politics/donald-trump-alabama-event-moved/index.html): “As of Thursday morning, 35,000 tickets to the event have been distributed, according to the Trump Campaign.”

NEW YORK POST (http://nypost.com/2015/08/20/trump-rally-likely-to-be-biggest-primary-event-so-far/): “It’s going to end up at 30- to 40,000 people in Alabama,” the Post wrote, quoting Trump himself.


These are just a few of the headlines the Trump event was previewed with. Notice that they all had one thing in common – all of these reporters decided to base the crowd numbers on Trump’s claims. None of them decided to do any groundwork to figure out if the claims had any validity – which would involve, for example, surveying the community itself.

As it turned out, the rally ended up featuring around 20,000 people (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/thousands-attend-trump-rally-mobile-alabama/story?id=33240509) – around half the capacity of the 40,000-person stadium.

But this wasn’t the first time Trump exaggerated his own numbers.

After his first rally in Phoenix, Arizona, Trump claimed (http://freakoutnation.com/2015/07/donald-trump-claims-20000-attended-his-event-the-only-problem-is-he-was-off-16000/) “20,000” people attended his event there. The thing is, local media did their own tally, and figured closer to four to five thousand people showed up.

This is now a trend. Trump makes a wild claim about the number of people who will be attending or have attended one of his rallies, and the media republishes his claims without actually checking the veracity of the source.

Later, local media does its own count and finds that Trump exaggerated his numbers, in the case of Phoenix, by four to five times; in Mobile, by possibly 100 percent.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/trump-keeps-lying-about-his-crowd-counts-and-media-letting-him

[Clipper Nation]

The city of Mobile confirmed that 30,000 people showed up. The media has consistently underreported the attendance, shown empty seats that were far away from the stage and ignored the fact that there was a large crowd standing on the field in order to keep convincing themselves that Trump isn't popular.

As for the Phoenix rally, Politico breathlessly reported that Bernie Sanders drew 11,000 to that same "2,000-seat room."

lol Alternet

[hater]

Ppl just dont realize how shitty shillary is.

I probably vote for trump before that bitch

[boutons_deux]

The city of Mobile confirmed that 30,000 people showed up. The media has consistently underreported the attendance, shown empty seats that were far away from the stage and ignored the fact that there was a large crowd standing on the field in order to keep convincing themselves that Trump isn't popular.

As for the Phoenix rally, Politico breathlessly reported that Bernie Sanders drew 11,000 to that same "2,000-seat room."

lol Alternet

Bernie rented the main Phoenix convention center's Main exbiition hall, capacity 12K, Trump rented its North Ball room, capacity 4200.

[Th'Pusher]

30,000 people at Trump's rally last night: media focuses on the empty seats because fuck him for not totally filling up a 40,000 seat stadium, right?

10,000 people at Bernie's rallies: media acts like 10 million people showed up to hear God (aka Bernie Sanders) give them the Word of the Lord.


I'll bet you any amount of money trump doesn't get the republican nomination. Put your money where your mouth is you shitbag fake libertarian.

[boutons_deux]

Trump On How He’ll Deport All 11 Million Undocumented Immigrants: ‘Don’t Worry About It’


STEPHANOPOULOS: So if there’s no idea, how are you going to round them all up?
Where are you going to get the money, where are you going to get the forces?
Exactly how are you going to do it?
What are the specifics here?

TRUMP: George, it’s called management. And the first thing we have to do is secure the border. But it’s called management. And we’ll get people back in, the really good ones, we’re going to expedite it so they get back in, so they can at least come in legally.
But we have to do it…

STEPHANOPOULOS: You keep declaring how you’re going to do it…

TRUMP: It’s management.

STEPHANOPOULOS: — but you don’t say…

TRUMP: We don’t…

STEPHANOPOULOS: — how.

TRUMP: Excuse me, George?

STEPHANOPOULOS: You declare how you’re going to to it, but you don’t say how.

TRUMP: George, I’m telling you, it’s called management. You can do this and we can expedite the good ones to come back in. And everybody wants that. But they have to come in legally.

An analysis by the Center For American Progress estimates deporting 11.3 million people would cost $10,070 per person, or $114 billion (https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/immigration/news/2015/08/18/119474/what-would-it-cost-to-deport-11-3-million-unauthorized-immigrants/). That only covers the “direct cost of physically deporting unauthorized immigrants.”

The conservative American Action Forum, considering the total cost to the economy, estimates mass deportation of all undocumented immigrants would cost between $420 billion and $620 billion and take 20 years (http://americanactionforum.org/research/the-budgetary-and-economic-costs-of-addressing-unauthorized-immigration-alt).

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/08/23/3694275/trump-on-how-hell-deport-all-11-million-undocumented-immigrants-dont-worry-about-it/

so "deport all 11M+ illegals" and "build a hermetic, seal-the-border wall" are just "don't worry about it"

(because we are only campaigning on these issues, we'll never do anything about them)

[hater]

Yup I called that Trump is messing up on immigration. Thankfully so are the rest of the candidates. So no issue :lmao

[boutons_deux]

Real Estate Moguls of the World Unite!


Trump bags first mega campaign contribution (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/trump-bags-first-mega-campaign-contribution-from-disgraced-ex-con) from disgraced ex-con real estate mogul behind one of the New Jersey/New York's most notorious recent scandals.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/real-estate-moguls-of-the-world-unite?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29

================

Independent Trump Bags First Mega Donation from Disgraced Ex-Con Real Estate Mogul

One of the larger donations that the super PAC has received so far has come from Charles and Seryl Kushner, the in-laws to Trump’s daughter Ivanka and the parents of her husband, New York Observer owner Jared Kushner. The Kushners gave $100,000 to the Make America Great Again super PAC in July.On Sunday, they took that support one step further by hosting Trump for a meet-and-greet on the candidate’s behalf (http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/08/23/donald-trump-pays-a-visit-to-his-not-so-poor-relations/)at their seaside home on the New Jersey shore.

While we probably can’t blame Donald Trump for attending a political event hosted by his daughter’s parents-in-law or accepting an unsolicited donation from the same, the name Charles Kushner might ring a bell. And not for a good reason.

More than a decade ago, Kushner, who like Trump is a real estate developer, was one of the biggest behind-the-scenes players in New Jersey’s real estate-obsessed political establishment. In the early 2000s, through his relatives and companies, Charles Kushner could be personally linked to almost 5% of the donations collected by then-N.J. Gov. James McGreevey’s 1997 and 2001 gubernatorial campaigns. He was also the largest single donor to Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Robert Torricelli.

In return, McGreevey had rewarded Kushner with a nomination to chair the board of directors of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, the powerful bi-state transportation and real estate infrastructure agency now at the center of the Bridgegate scandal. Kushner was on track to become the agency’s chairman (a job later held by David Samson) when his candidacy was derailed by intra-family lawsuits alleging that Charles had made many of those Kushner-tied donations by improperly using business funds without the permission of his partners – who just happened to be his relatives, including his brother Murray. Murray filed suit against Charles in state court over the matter, but the suit was under seal and off-limits to the New Jersey lawmakers who vetted and eventually backed Charles’s Port Authority appointment.

But before it could be finalized, the Kushners’ top accountant filed a whistleblower suit in federal court alleging that Charles had fired him after learning that he had provided evidence of the campaign donations to Murray. Moreover, the suit’s allegations went well beyond mere donations; the accountant charged that Charles had used his family’s company money to do things like buy out an insurance firm briefly owned by Gov. McGreevey’s chief of staff, the sale of which earned that official more than $350,000.

Charles’s Port Authority nomination was dead by early 2003 and in June 2004, Kushner agreed to pay a $508,900 fine to the Federal Election Commission (one of the largest in its history) to settle claims about those political donations. At the time, the FEC claimed that it had stumbled on Kushner’s money by way of an audit of former N.J. Sen Bill Bradley’s 2000 presidential campaign financials.

But that explanation didn’t hold up for long.

Just weeks later in July 2004, Charles Kushner was indicted by then-U.S. Attorney Chris Christie on charges of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and interstate promotion of prostitution (!) for trying to derail a federal investigation Christie’s office had opened into Kushner’s political operations during the prior year.

It turned out that Charles was concerned about his sister’s cooperation with Christie’s grand jury and decided to blackmail her into silence by hiring a prostitute to seduce her husband. In a Bridgewater, N.J. motel (https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x89c3bfe970d4d15f:0xb85475c1b77b4126!2m5!2m 2!1i80!2i80!3m1!2i100!3m1!7e1!4shttps://ssl.panoramio.com/photo/79795406!5sred+bull+inn+bridgewater+nj+-+Google+Search&sa=X&ved=0CJcBEKIqMApqFQoTCMvSscvkwMcCFQoZPgodaMgCxw) room of the Red Bull Inn (not kidding) equipped with a hidden video camera Charles secretly recorded his brother-in-law in flagrante. Charles then sent the tape to his sister, threatening to make it public unless she stopped cooperating with the feds.

Now I know some of you are saying, “why didn’t I think of that?” But let me stop you right now – this plan did not work out for Charles.

The sister talked. Her husband talked. The prostitute talked. Game over.

Charles pled guilty to the charges in August 2004, a week after Gov. McGreevey resigned and publicly came out as gay by way of admitting to a homosexual affair with a member of his staff: an Israeli citizen whose American work visa had been sponsored by none other than Charles Kushner.

(People I knew in New Jersey politics during that time – including some in the governor’s office – were convinced Christie was sitting on their phones.)

Although he was sentenced to two years in federal prison, Charles Kushner won admission to an addiction treatment program that shortened his sentence. Prosecutors launched an investigation into whether Kushner was fibbing about being an addict in order to win a chance at being transferred from a federal prison in Alabama to a halfway house in Newark, N.J.

Ultimately, however, they backed his transfer and a sentence reduction upon his completion of a 500-hour-long rehabilitation program. Kushner was released from federal custody in August 2006, just fourteen months into his sentence.

Looking back, it’s hard to overstate just how central Charles Kushner was to the unraveling of Jim McGreevey’s governorship and to New Jersey Democrats’ loss of the state’s governor’s mansion to a U.S. Attorney eager to be seen as the top cop going after political corruption in the state.

It’s now ironic, of course, that Charles Kushner is back in the game supporting the GOP candidate who is nudging Christie out of the race. But family or not, it remains to be seen if even the likes of Donald Trump can afford to carry the baggage that comes with this guy (http://nypost.com/2004/07/15/sex-gal-now-helping-feds-hooker-turns-on-kushner/).

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/trump-bags-first-mega-campaign-contribution-from-disgraced-ex-con

:lol

[DMX7]

Trump already said he is going to take the money of the special interest groups and "screw them". He said it publicly.

[ChumpDumper]

The city of Mobile confirmed that 30,000 people showed up. The media has consistently underreported the attendance, shown empty seats that were far away from the stage and ignored the fact that there was a large crowd standing on the field in order to keep convincing themselves that Trump isn't popular.

As for the Phoenix rally, Politico breathlessly reported that Bernie Sanders drew 11,000 to that same "2,000-seat room."

lol AlternetHey, what does Trump say is the unemployment rate in the US?

[DMX7]

Hey, what does Trump say is the unemployment rate in the US?

why?

[ChumpDumper]

why?Why would anyone NOT want to know what the leading Republican candidate for the presidency of the United States thinks about unemployment in the US?

Please explain that to me.

[boutons_deux]

Why would anyone NOT want to know what the leading Republican candidate for the presidency of the United States thinks about unemployment in the US?

Please explain that to me.

Didn't I hear him say the real unemployment was 20% what he says doesn't matter, it's all a bullshit distraction

[ChumpDumper]

Didn't I hear him say the real unemployment was 20% If only. :lol

It may be awhile before his disciples bite on this one.:downspin:

[DMX7]

Why would anyone NOT want to know what the leading Republican candidate for the presidency of the United States thinks about unemployment in the US?

Please explain that to me.

I care what he thinks about unemployment overall (like his policy to address it and such). However, I don't really care what he calculates the specific rate to be. In interviews, I have heard him say it's extremely high, but of course he like every Republican running is going to say that.

[ChumpDumper]

I care what he thinks about unemployment overall (like his policy to address it and such). However, I don't really care what he calculates the specific rate to be. In interviews, I have heard him say it's extremely high, but of course he like every Republican running is going to say that.How high?

I think people might be interested.

I can't see how they wouldn't be. Seems pretty important.

[DMX7]

How high?

I think people might be interested.

I can't see how they wouldn't be. Seems pretty important.

Extremely high :lol

But again, I don't think what he calculates the exact rate to be is all that interesting or important.

He is a candidate running for the GOP nomination, they are all going to say it's astronomically high.

(it's a hodgepodge calculation anyway, so I don't put much stock in the exact number)

[ChumpDumper]

Extremely high :lol

But again, I don't think what he calculates the exact rate to be is all that interesting or important.

He is a candidate running for the GOP nomination, they are all going to say it's astronomically high.

(it's a hodgepodge calculation anyway, so I don't put much stock in the exact number)What exact number did Trump use?

[DMX7]

What exact number did Trump use?

40% :lol

[ChumpDumper]

40% :lolYou're still too low :lol

[DMX7]

You're still too low :lol

Really? I've not see him say a number higher but he always speaks in hyperbole so I don't take it too seriously.

I think he gave his most serious estimate at his campaign launch event when he said it could be anywhere from 18 to 20 percent when you factor in the number of people who have exited the work force entirely because of seemingly hopeless job prospects for them.

[DMX7]

Ok, so I read the Time magazine article where he said the real unemployment rate is 21%... and then in the same breath, he said actual real unemployment rate was 42%.

Not sure where that came from but that's ok.

So again, this is all just for show. He knows exactly what he's doing. :hat

[ChumpDumper]

Ok, so I read the Time magazine article where he said the real unemployment rate is 21%... and then in the same breath, he said actual real unemployment rate was 42%.

Not sure where that came from but that's ok.

So again, this is all just for show. He knows exactly what he's doing. :hatWhat does he know he's doing by saying it's 21% then immediately saying it's 42%?

[DMX7]

What does he know he's doing by saying it's 21% then immediately saying it's 42%?

Getting attention... bringing attention to the fact that government's sub-6% number is a scam.

[ChumpDumper]

Getting attention... bringing attention to the fact that government's sub-6% number is a scam.By saying one number then a completely different number?

How is that not a scam?

[DMX7]

By saying one number then a completely different number?

How is that not a scam?

Interpreting what he says requires some assumptions and you have to read what he said carefully. He first said the real unemployment rate is 21% (probably based on unemployment rate + projected amount people who have exited the work force). Then, he said 42% based on a chart he saw that was likely calculating the total number of people that could work (even if they didn't necessarily ever want to). In a great economy, maybe at least some of those people want to work.

When he makes America great again, those people who could work but don't want to now, may consider it.

[DMX7]

This man is thinking big. I love it!

[ChumpDumper]

Interpreting what he says requires some assumptions and you have to read what he said carefully. He first said the real unemployment rate is 21% (probably based on unemployment rate + projected amount people who have exited the work force). Then, he said 42% based on a chart he saw that was likely calculating the total number of people that could work (even if they didn't necessarily ever want to). In a great economy, maybe at least some of those people want to work.

When he makes America great again, those people who could work but don't want to now, may consider it.
Don’t forget in the meantime we have a real unemployment rate that’s probably 21%. It’s not 6. I’s not 5.2 and 5.5. Our real unemployment rate–in fact, I saw a chart the other day, our real unemployment–because you have ninety million people that aren’t working. Ninety-three million to be exact.

If you start adding it up, our real unemployment rate is 42%.I read what he said carefully.

He said our real unemployment rate is 21%, then he said our real unemployment rate is 42%.

Which is it?

It can't be both.

[ChumpDumper]

This man is thinking big. I love it!You're just trolling now.

[DMX7]

I read what he said carefully.

He said our real unemployment rate is 21%, then he said our real unemployment rate is 42%.

Which is it?

It can't be both.

You didn't read what I wrote carefully is the problem.

[ChumpDumper]

You didn't read what I wrote carefully is the problem.You aren't Trump. I read Trump's words carefully.

All the sudden Trump is such a terrible communicator he needs online translators like you. I love it! :lol

[DMX7]

You aren't Trump. I read Trump's words carefully.

All the sudden Trump is such a terrible communicator he needs online translators like you. I love it! :lol

Maybe you're just a poor receiver of communication.

[DMX7]

And I'm dead serious about voting for this guy over Hillary. That's just me though, and I'm just one vote.

[ChumpDumper]

Maybe you're just a poor receiver of communication.:cry I'll have to have someone else translate that for me to understand :cry

[DMX7]

I guess so, it's really not that complicated.

[ChumpDumper]

:cry I'll have to have someone translate that too! This is your system! :cry

[ChumpDumper]

Or maybe I'll jut take Trump at his actual words and not your attempt to spin them.

[DMX7]

What you said was just your spin.

What are his "actual words" to you?

[DMX7]

What you said was just your spin -- not a serious attempt to understand context and the clear differentiating reference to a "chart" that states "ninety million people that aren’t working".

[ChumpDumper]

What are his "actual words" to you?
Don’t forget in the meantime we have a real unemployment rate that’s probably 21%. It’s not 6. I’s not 5.2 and 5.5. Our real unemployment rate–in fact, I saw a chart the other day, our real unemployment–because you have ninety million people that aren’t working. Ninety-three million to be exact.

If you start adding it up, our real unemployment rate is 42%.

[DMX7]

What you said was just your spin -- not a serious attempt to understand context and the clear differentiating reference to a "chart" that states "ninety million people that aren’t working".

[ChumpDumper]

But I can just use your words too:
Ok, so I read the Time magazine article where he said the real unemployment rate is 21%... and then in the same breath, he said actual real unemployment rate was 42%.Which is exactly what I said, but somehow your own words are no longer valid here either.

[DMX7]

But I can just use your words too:

You didn't use all of them -- maybe that's why you're not understanding.

[ChumpDumper]

You didn't use all of them -- maybe that's why you're not understanding.Those are your words before you went into full spin mode and discredited yourself.

[DMX7]

^ that sounds like spin to me.

[ChumpDumper]

^ that sounds like spin to me.
Don’t forget in the meantime we have a real unemployment rate that’s probably 21%. It’s not 6. I’s not 5.2 and 5.5. Our real unemployment rate–in fact, I saw a chart the other day, our real unemployment–because you have ninety million people that aren’t working. Ninety-three million to be exact.

If you start adding it up, our real unemployment rate is 42%.
Ok, so I read the Time magazine article where he said the real unemployment rate is 21%... and then in the same breath, he said actual real unemployment rate was 42%.

Not sure where that came from but that's ok.

So again, this is all just for show. He knows exactly what he's doing. :hat
I read what he said carefully.

He said our real unemployment rate is 21%, then he said our real unemployment rate is 42%.

Which is it?

It can't be both.

[DMX7]

Still didn't use them all -- that seems to be a continuing issue here.

[ChumpDumper]

Still didn't use them all -- that seems to be a continuing issue here.I excluded all your ensuing spin.

Your not admitting it is spin is a continuing issue here.

[ChumpDumper]

https://scontent-dfw1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/11891225_1174239865926173_7043013836130888235_n.jp g?oh=061eb0cbfe74d4aabffc3fd9d484f891&oe=5669F9E2