2016 POTUS Election Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
So how do you feel about the lady who lost a son in Benghazi who has been going in on Hillary?

Do you feel sorry for her being used?
Yes I do. That is no different than the Kahn family being used for political purposes. But I would point out that the congress started this process with Hillary. Not so with the Kahn family. They were recruited by the Clinton campaign. As far as I know this lady didn't appear at the. RNC but I could be wrong.
 
Last edited:

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
First time I have seen it but there are probably thousands that feel the same way but we both know this isnt going to happen. It's campaign hot air that happens with all candidates.
Most candidates blow hot air trying to pretend they'd be better than they actually are, Trumps the only candidate that needs his voters to think he's better than he says he is.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,465
Glad you asked...





Donald Trump’s latest media and political firestorm stems from ambiguous answers to a reporter's question: Whether he would support making Muslims register in a national database.

But his comments are not quite as cut-and-dried as the headlines declaring his support for the registry would make them seem. And by Friday, Trump clarified -- on Twitter, his favorite forum for taking on the media -- that he never suggested such a thing.

Follow
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
I didn't suggest a database-a reporter did. We must defeat Islamic terrorism & have surveillance, including a watch list, to protect America
12:51 PM - 20 Nov 2015
4,033 4,033 Retweets 6,869 6,869 likes
Trump continued to clarify his comments on Fox News’ “On The Record” telling host Kimberly Guilfoyle late Friday that he was “really responding to a totally different reporter.”

“He was responding to that reporter where basically the suggestion was made and it’s certainly something we should start thinking about but what I want is a watch list, I want surveillance programs,” Trump said. “I want a database for the Syrian refugees that Obama is going to let in.”

Trump told Guilfoyle that letting Syrian refugees into the United States is a “Trojan horse” and that “plenty of problems are going to be caused.”

“We are very, very foolish in this country and we have a lot of problems and the biggest problem we have no leader.”

When he replied, “We’re going to have to — we’re going to have to look at a lot of things very closely” including mosques, Yahoo News reported that Trump did not “rule [the database] out.”

He was then asked by CNN whether he would rule out such a database, to which Trump said he “never responded to that question” during the Yahoo News interview.

But a separate exchange with NBC News muddied the picture of his position further.

The reporter initially asked Trump whether there should be a database to track Muslims.

“We should have a lot of systems,” Trump responded, but then went on to tout the importance of a strong border and a border wall. Asked whether he would like to implement that, Trump responded:

“I would certainly implement that. Absolutely.”

That single line was swiftly interpreted in several news stories as Trump’s endorsement of a database for Muslims, in turn prompting a widespread backlash. Some stories even stated that Trump had proposed a “plan” to register Muslims in a database.

However, in the NBC News exchange, Trump appeared to be referring in that single line to border and immigration security measures, because he then said the effect would be, “It would stop people from coming in illegally.”


Yet the reporter went on to ask Trump directly, once again, about a database for Muslims, and Trump did not dismiss the idea.

Instead, when asked how to do it, Trump said: “It would be just good management.”

Asked if those running it would have to go to mosques, he said: “Different places. You sign them up … but it’s all about management.”

Asked for clarification, the campaign referred FoxNews.com on Friday to Trump's latest tweet.

Trump has meanwhile been the subject of heated and bipartisan criticism since the remarks were published.

Hillary Clinton tweeted a link to a New York Times story reporting that Trump said he “absolutely” would require Muslim registration.

"This is shocking rhetoric. It should be denounced by all seeking to lead this country," she tweeted.

Republican candidates also slammed Trump. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush called the plan “abhorrent.” Former New York Gov. George Pataki tweeted that the “idea for a Muslim registry is as revolting as it is un-American.”

Ben Carson, meanwhile, reacted to Trump’s comments by saying: "I think we should have a database on everybody ... hopefully we have a database on citizens here."

He then clarified that, “I don't think it's a good idea to treat anybody differently or pick people out based on religion or race."

The notion of a Muslim database also faced ridicule from a constitutional standpoint.

“There are unconstitutional ideas, and then there are ideas that are so patently unconstitutional that they really ought not to even merit a response,” Stephen I. Vladeck, law professor with the American University Washington College of Law, told FoxNews.com.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations also issued a statement condemning Trump for "Islamophobic and unconstitutional" comments.
 

2233boys

Not So New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
2,793
How in the hell can you say Trump hasn't read the constitution? Also this whole thing started with the DNC so there would not have been any reason for Trump to try to defend himself otherwise. If you can't see that this whole scheme was laid by the DNC then you are in denial. Trump is guilty of being stupid and not avoiding this debacle but he isn't responsible for it.

For the record who do you blame for Capt. Kahn' s death?
A real leader or potential leader of the free world, doesn't respond on twitter. When asked about the Kahns in Interviews after he says, I grieve with them for the loss of their son. He was an American Hero.

Oh and a real leader doesn't resort to fear tactics saying they're going to ban everyone from a particular religion. He did say soon after those comments, that could extend to American Muslims trying to come back home from a trip abroad as well. He may have walked that back.

The guy is a delusional dirt bag who has no business anywhere near the White House.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
A real leader or potential leader of the free world, doesn't respond on twitter. When asked aboute Kahns in Interviews after he says, I grieve with them for the loss of their son. He was an American Hero.

Oh and a real leader doesn't resort to fear tactics saying their going to ban everyone from a particular religion. He did say soon after those comments, that could extend to American Muslims trying to come back home from a trip abroad as well. The guy is a delusional dirt bag who has no business anywhere near the White House.
I get that you don't like Trump. What I don't get is your pretentious statements of what a real world leader does and doesn't do. Those remarks are conjured up from your own thought processes but a lot of people disagree. You extend your pretentious position by taking a position if anyone disagrees they are stupid and inferior. Have a different opinion just be aware there are multitudes that have a different mindset.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Glad you asked...





Donald Trump’s latest media and political firestorm stems from ambiguous answers to a reporter's question: Whether he would support making Muslims register in a national database.

But his comments are not quite as cut-and-dried as the headlines declaring his support for the registry would make them seem. And by Friday, Trump clarified -- on Twitter, his favorite forum for taking on the media -- that he never suggested such a thing.

Follow
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
I didn't suggest a database-a reporter did. We must defeat Islamic terrorism & have surveillance, including a watch list, to protect America
12:51 PM - 20 Nov 2015
4,033 4,033 Retweets 6,869 6,869 likes
Trump continued to clarify his comments on Fox News’ “On The Record” telling host Kimberly Guilfoyle late Friday that he was “really responding to a totally different reporter.”

“He was responding to that reporter where basically the suggestion was made and it’s certainly something we should start thinking about but what I want is a watch list, I want surveillance programs,” Trump said. “I want a database for the Syrian refugees that Obama is going to let in.”

Trump told Guilfoyle that letting Syrian refugees into the United States is a “Trojan horse” and that “plenty of problems are going to be caused.”

“We are very, very foolish in this country and we have a lot of problems and the biggest problem we have no leader.”

When he replied, “We’re going to have to — we’re going to have to look at a lot of things very closely” including mosques, Yahoo News reported that Trump did not “rule [the database] out.”

He was then asked by CNN whether he would rule out such a database, to which Trump said he “never responded to that question” during the Yahoo News interview.

But a separate exchange with NBC News muddied the picture of his position further.

The reporter initially asked Trump whether there should be a database to track Muslims.

“We should have a lot of systems,” Trump responded, but then went on to tout the importance of a strong border and a border wall. Asked whether he would like to implement that, Trump responded:

“I would certainly implement that. Absolutely.”

That single line was swiftly interpreted in several news stories as Trump’s endorsement of a database for Muslims, in turn prompting a widespread backlash. Some stories even stated that Trump had proposed a “plan” to register Muslims in a database.

However, in the NBC News exchange, Trump appeared to be referring in that single line to border and immigration security measures, because he then said the effect would be, “It would stop people from coming in illegally.”


Yet the reporter went on to ask Trump directly, once again, about a database for Muslims, and Trump did not dismiss the idea.

Instead, when asked how to do it, Trump said: “It would be just good management.”

Asked if those running it would have to go to mosques, he said: “Different places. You sign them up … but it’s all about management.”

Asked for clarification, the campaign referred FoxNews.com on Friday to Trump's latest tweet.

Trump has meanwhile been the subject of heated and bipartisan criticism since the remarks were published.

Hillary Clinton tweeted a link to a New York Times story reporting that Trump said he “absolutely” would require Muslim registration.

"This is shocking rhetoric. It should be denounced by all seeking to lead this country," she tweeted.

Republican candidates also slammed Trump. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush called the plan “abhorrent.” Former New York Gov. George Pataki tweeted that the “idea for a Muslim registry is as revolting as it is un-American.”

Ben Carson, meanwhile, reacted to Trump’s comments by saying: "I think we should have a database on everybody ... hopefully we have a database on citizens here."

He then clarified that, “I don't think it's a good idea to treat anybody differently or pick people out based on religion or race."

The notion of a Muslim database also faced ridicule from a constitutional standpoint.

“There are unconstitutional ideas, and then there are ideas that are so patently unconstitutional that they really ought not to even merit a response,” Stephen I. Vladeck, law professor with the American University Washington College of Law, told FoxNews.com.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations also issued a statement condemning Trump for "Islamophobic and unconstitutional" comments.
Those Pulitzer Prize winners at politifact Had a pretty good run down on the issue. Essentially some reporter suggested it and he agreed to it because he says "absolutely" about 90 times per second and it's meaningless. Then when pressed again he kept trying to change the subject to Syrian refugees, and (because he's a poor communicator) said some things that sounded like he wanted a warmth list for Muslims, but probably didn't mean that.

The larger issue is whenever he's pressed he won't ever just say. "No, I don't want a Muslim registry" he says "We're not ruling anything out." because he's an irresponsible buffoon.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Yes I do. That is no different than the Kahn family being used for political purposes. But I would point out that the congress started this process with Hillary. Not so with the Kahn family. They were recruited by the Clinton campaign. As far as I know this lady didn't appear at the. RNC but I could be wrong.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Glad you asked...





Donald Trump’s latest media and political firestorm stems from ambiguous answers to a reporter's question: Whether he would support making Muslims register in a national database.

But his comments are not quite as cut-and-dried as the headlines declaring his support for the registry would make them seem. And by Friday, Trump clarified -- on Twitter, his favorite forum for taking on the media -- that he never suggested such a thing.

Follow
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
I didn't suggest a database-a reporter did. We must defeat Islamic terrorism & have surveillance, including a watch list, to protect America
12:51 PM - 20 Nov 2015
4,033 4,033 Retweets 6,869 6,869 likes
Trump continued to clarify his comments on Fox News’ “On The Record” telling host Kimberly Guilfoyle late Friday that he was “really responding to a totally different reporter.”

“He was responding to that reporter where basically the suggestion was made and it’s certainly something we should start thinking about but what I want is a watch list, I want surveillance programs,” Trump said. “I want a database for the Syrian refugees that Obama is going to let in.”

Trump told Guilfoyle that letting Syrian refugees into the United States is a “Trojan horse” and that “plenty of problems are going to be caused.”

“We are very, very foolish in this country and we have a lot of problems and the biggest problem we have no leader.”

When he replied, “We’re going to have to — we’re going to have to look at a lot of things very closely” including mosques, Yahoo News reported that Trump did not “rule [the database] out.”

He was then asked by CNN whether he would rule out such a database, to which Trump said he “never responded to that question” during the Yahoo News interview.

But a separate exchange with NBC News muddied the picture of his position further.

The reporter initially asked Trump whether there should be a database to track Muslims.

“We should have a lot of systems,” Trump responded, but then went on to tout the importance of a strong border and a border wall. Asked whether he would like to implement that, Trump responded:

“I would certainly implement that. Absolutely.”

That single line was swiftly interpreted in several news stories as Trump’s endorsement of a database for Muslims, in turn prompting a widespread backlash. Some stories even stated that Trump had proposed a “plan” to register Muslims in a database.

However, in the NBC News exchange, Trump appeared to be referring in that single line to border and immigration security measures, because he then said the effect would be, “It would stop people from coming in illegally.”


Yet the reporter went on to ask Trump directly, once again, about a database for Muslims, and Trump did not dismiss the idea.

Instead, when asked how to do it, Trump said: “It would be just good management.”

Asked if those running it would have to go to mosques, he said: “Different places. You sign them up … but it’s all about management.”

Asked for clarification, the campaign referred FoxNews.com on Friday to Trump's latest tweet.

Trump has meanwhile been the subject of heated and bipartisan criticism since the remarks were published.

Hillary Clinton tweeted a link to a New York Times story reporting that Trump said he “absolutely” would require Muslim registration.

"This is shocking rhetoric. It should be denounced by all seeking to lead this country," she tweeted.

Republican candidates also slammed Trump. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush called the plan “abhorrent.” Former New York Gov. George Pataki tweeted that the “idea for a Muslim registry is as revolting as it is un-American.”

Ben Carson, meanwhile, reacted to Trump’s comments by saying: "I think we should have a database on everybody ... hopefully we have a database on citizens here."

He then clarified that, “I don't think it's a good idea to treat anybody differently or pick people out based on religion or race."

The notion of a Muslim database also faced ridicule from a constitutional standpoint.

“There are unconstitutional ideas, and then there are ideas that are so patently unconstitutional that they really ought not to even merit a response,” Stephen I. Vladeck, law professor with the American University Washington College of Law, told FoxNews.com.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations also issued a statement condemning Trump for "Islamophobic and unconstitutional" comments.
So the actual words out of his mouth is misleading?

Yes he did try to "clarify" things later but the initial report was based on his exact words.

And I don't know how you tie illegal immigration and a registry together, now that sounds misleading.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,465
So the actual words out of his mouth is misleading?

Yes he did try to "clarify" things later but the initial report was based on his exact words.

And I don't know how you tie illegal immigration and a registry together, now that sounds misleading.
Actually, it sounds like he was answering a different question because there were multiple reporters asking questions at the same time. Not sure how his answer was misleading.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,465
The larger issue is whenever he's pressed he won't ever just say. "No, I don't want a Muslim registry" he says "We're not ruling anything out." because he's an irresponsible buffoon.
Actually it's just typical pandering. You should be used to it since that's about all Clinton does. By the way, I don't like it when either party does it.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
Actually it's just typical pandering. You should be used to it since that's about all Clinton does. By the way, I don't like it when either party does it.
This is the guy who's supposed to "tell it like it is". I guess the only people he needs to be PC for are David Duke's fan base.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,465
This is the guy who's supposed to "tell it like it is". I guess the only people he needs to be PC for are David Duke's fan base.
No he is just straddling the fence so that the crazy nuts will still follow him. With no real intentions of a ridiculous registry.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
No he is just straddling the fence so that the crazy nuts will still follow him. With no real intentions of a ridiculous registry.
Isn't that telling though? That the nuts are who he's willing to pander to? Gold star family? Fuck 'em. POWs? Fuck 'em. Mock a disabled guy, call women pigs, say a judge isn't qualified because he's Hispanic, say Cruz's father helped plan the JFK assassination, say Fiorinna isn't qualified because of her appearance, say Megan Kelly's on the rag.

But when a Muslim Registry gets brought up. That's when he chooses his words wisely. When David Duke endorses him, he has to think about how to respond. It's interesting to see the demographic he doesn't want to offend.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,465
Isn't that telling though? That the nuts are who he's willing to pander to?
You mean like Hilary saying that a baby has no rights up until the second they are actually born? Because that's not pandering to the super fringe pro abortion crazies or anything.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
You mean like Hilary saying that a baby has no rights up until the second they are actually born? Because that's not pandering to the super fringe pro abortion crazies or anything.
She said an unborn child doesn't have constitutional rights. As far as I know that's the case. Since an unborn child might need to be aborted to save the life of the mother, you can say pretty definitively that they aren't legally extended the same rights as a human under Roe V Wade.

Also 47% of the population is pro choice. So no I wouldn't call that a fringe.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
You mean like Hilary saying that a baby has no rights up until the second they are actually born? Because that's not pandering to the super fringe pro abortion crazies or anything.
Townsend can't grasp that Hillary is Trump with a dress on. Both are very typical politicians trying to get elected. They will say things that are idiotic and veiled things to not really respond. Most of us recognize that but because of predetermined biases he can only own up to Trump being the worse. I have said before that my vote is determined by refusing to vote for Hillary because of her established track record. Trump is an unknown despite predetermined opinions so I will go with that. If anyone thinks that Clinton is a superior choice simply has not reviewed her track record with an open mind. She is just better at addressing questions and saying nothing.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
You mean like Hilary saying that a baby has no rights up until the second they are actually born? Because that's not pandering to the super fringe pro abortion crazies or anything.
It's also pretty funny that you go out of your way to fact check Trump criticisms, and then find articles that criticize the award winning fact checkers, because they're biased against liars, but when it comes time to talk about Hillary you exaggerate or straight up lie to make your point.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,465
It's also pretty funny that you go out of your way to fact check Trump criticisms, and then find articles that criticize the award winning fact checkers, because they're biased against liars, but when it comes time to talk about Hillary you exaggerate or straight up lie to make your point.
I'm not exaggerating. And I've actually denounced both candidates. Instead of flopping like you did from the Bernie lovers club to whatever democratic candidate is put in front of you next regardless of how horrific of a human being that person is.
 

townsend

Banned
Joined
Apr 11, 2013
Messages
5,377
I'm not exaggerating. And I've actually denounced both candidates. Instead of flopping like you did from the Bernie lovers club to whatever democratic candidate is put in front of you next regardless of how horrific of a human being that person is.
I make no bones about Hillary's flaws, or Bernie's for that matter. Hillary has been deeply entrenched in Washington for too long, there are legitimate concerns of corruption, she has a deep interventionist streak, and that was responsible for a huge gaffe in Libya.

Bernie was an idealist which is also dangerous. He was protected in liberal ass Vermont, from having to change or examine any of his ideas. And the parts of his platform that echo Jill Stein's make him seem like an old looney.

The difference between me and you is that I don't see everything as black and white, democrat or republican. Yes, I generally think the GOP is horse shit, the neocons started a war for profit, the Tea Party want to legislate morality. But I would vote for Ryan or Romney over Hillary.

You won't even accept Hillary's a superior candidate to Trump, even though it's painfully apparent that literally any candidate would be superior to Trump. Now how am I the biased one? Because I'm not buying into false centrist narratives about them both being equally bad? Fuck that, it's lazy, and foolish. Because as a person who's never voted for a democratic president, I'm willing to side with one instead of a republican candidate who hasn't got a single bullet point on his resume worth mentioning?

No. If this was Kasich versus Hillary and I was unequivocally backing her you'd have reasons to accuse me of being biased. But there's no criteria for which a person could say Trump's better than Hillary, and over a dozen through which you could say Hillary is better than Trump. I'm just enough of a man to back flawed candidate over an unqualified one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom