Jump to content

"10 Things Trump Supporters Are Too Stupid To Realize"

Mitch Cronin

By Mitch Cronin
in Airline Aviation Forum

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 447
  • Created
  • Last Reply
IFG

IFG

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Fido said:

I just love to see you Lefties twisting in the wind over Trump

G'day, Fido - Not sure who's really doing that "twisting in the wind" thing. Lefties do seem to whipsaw between savoring the possibility of a massive electoral victory (surely premature), and panic at the thought of Trump actually prevailing. FA@AC's right tho', your terminology is actually warranted much more for the "righties". 

Many of the most thoughtful and longer-term conservative writers (e.g. have you read George Will or Charles Krauthammer lately?) are rejecting Trump outright. Will says it's every conservative's duty to see him defeated in all 50 states. Legions of Republican luminaires are publicly disavowing any normal party-solidarity support. Bridging the gap between principled conservative rejection, and fevered Trump disciples (in spite of anything their candidate says or does) is a cohort of Republican careerists trying to walk a tightrope, with burning party bridges on one side, and thorough embarrassment - nay! self-regret & utter humiliation - from being associated in any way with such a vile standard-bearer.

Every time I see Paul Ryan "twisting in the wind" trying to reconcile his support for his party's nominee with the latest backup from the Trump sewer, his eyelids are blinking SOS. Oh yes, it's a real hoot if you don't give a **bleep** ...

Cheers, IFG :b:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Moon The Loon

Moon The Loon

Posted
Posted

Hey Mitch: Much as I don't disagree with the premise, you coulda picked a more reliable source. I mean, The Death of Robert Redford??  :o

http://en.mediamass.net/people/robert-redford/deathhoax.html

Many of Hollywood's famous have been targeted by these hoaxes. Tom Selleck was targeted last week. He's not dead either!

Kinda mitigates some of the site's opinions, dontcha think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

What I find amusing is the amount of time some folks spend downing Trump or Clinton, despite we (Canadians that is) have absolutely no say in the out come. Talk about pissing in the wind....Instead why not debate Canadian issues.  Mr Photo Opt Trudeau or perhaps the Premiers of BC, Ab and Ontario who seem to have a large number of detractors? :021:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, FA@AC said:

If any of those folks were howling psychopaths like Trump they'd probably get the attention he does.

But back to my question. Why do Canadians even bother to comment when we don't have any horse in the race or indeed any possibility of influencing the final decision? Seems to me that we should pay more attention to home and the items that we can influence / change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FA@AC

FA@AC

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

But back to my question. Why do Canadians even bother to comment when we don't have any horse in the race or indeed any possibility of influencing the final decision?

Probably for the same reason that people all over the world bothered to comment when Rob Ford was mayor of Toronto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IFG

IFG

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

But back to my question. Why do Canadians even bother to comment when we don't have any horse in the race or indeed any possibility of influencing the final decision? Seems to me that we should pay more attention to home and the items that we can influence / change.

Oh get off that high-horse, Malcolm - Sanctimonious piffle! By your lights we'll ban most discussions. How many people affect the outcome of such important things as pro sports? or WAWCON's where they don't work? or ...

IAC, like it or not, we're inundated with US political news and commentary, so many people's personal politics (when the think about them at all) are reflected through opinions held on American issues, and that ultimately does sway their Canadian vote (when they vote at all ;)), so discussing those issues can sometimes proxy for Canadian politics.

Secondly, the outcome of US elections actually has discernable consequences for Canadians, and many of us have social/professional contacts with Americans. Staying abreast of their politics is simply good sense for Canadians. And often provides forewarning for us. Exaggeration & overstatements aside, none of our political performers is such a malignant, hypocritical dilettante as is Mr. Trump, but I would not harbour illusions about our electorate never flirting with such a figure. Sometimes proxy politics can illuminate issues here.

And finally, Malcolm, you frequently recommend that people just ignore what they personally don't like reading.  Personally, I don't encourage people to keep their heads in the sand, but your own counsel does provide an option.

Sheesh! (but cheers too), IFG :b:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, FA@AC said:

Probably for the same reason that people all over the world bothered to comment when Rob Ford was mayor of Toronto.

Lots or just only some press as the general population was not at all interested.  After-all Toronto is not exactly the center of the universe unless you live east of Manitoba. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FA@AC

FA@AC

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

Lots or just only some press as the general population was not at all interested.  After-all Toronto is not exactly the center of the universe unless you live east of Manitoba. 

I was asked about Rob Ford all over the world.  Any place that elects a buffoon like that as leader would get attention everywhere, and Toronto got plenty.

The US presidential election is likely getting so much coverage and attracting so much attention outside the country for similar reasons.  The GOP nominee is insane.  The country is insane.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DEFCON

DEFCON

Posted
Posted

Alright then; assume all you 'Lefties' are correct and Trump is less than the ideal candidate for the job.

Considering the alternative, can any one of you keep a straight face and claim that Clinton is any more satisfactory for the position?

... or, do you appreciate the situation for what it is and just how precariously close to collapse America really is now?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Maverick

Maverick

Posted
Posted

This truly is the election with no choice. As much as Hillary and her elitist supporters disgust me I'd still hold my nose and vote for her. Trump is such a loose cannon that the mind reels at what he might do. 

'course they didn't ask me for my opinion...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DEFCON

DEFCON

Posted
Posted

Hilary's inner circle has known, or ought to have known since at least the time of her collapse during her tour as Secretary of State that she is medically unfit for the job of President.

Should the team even make election day, predictably, Clinton will fail under the pressure of the job shortly after inauguration which will leave the little known guy she's running with as President.

Will the Dems have anyone credible to field if Hilary goes down before the election now that Bernie has quit the Party?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
blues deville

blues deville

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, FireFox said:

How could you vote for either?

Judge Jeanine: http://video.foxnews.com/v/5082808168001/judge-jeanine-now-we-know-why-hillary-used-private-email/?#sp=show-clips

Hopefully, in the future, the present situation in the US will lead to more acceptable candidates stepping up.

Have to agree. I don't see either candidate as being capable of holding this office. The republicans have left behind better choices in Trump's dust. And Hillary? Smart women but she hasn't done anything to prove she should be president either. What a long and expensive process they have to end up with these two. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

And here is a list from the other side for those who feel the need to follow the action. Unless there is something personal directed to me in this thread and I feel the need to respond, this will be my last post on the subject of US Politics.

Why Anyone Who Votes for Hillary Is Ignorant, Stupid, and/or Psychopathic

Eric Zuesse

This is the result of her action: https://theintercept.com/2016/03/11/drugs-dams-and-power-the-murder-of-honduran-activist-berta-caceres/

This is how she did it: http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-clintons-six-foreign-policy-catastrophes/5509543?print=1

And this is what she says about it, in retrospect: http://www.salon.com/2016/04/15/hillary_clinton_is_lying_about_the_criminal_u_s_backed_coup_in_honduras_it_should_be_as_scandalous_as_libya/

If the Democratic Party, for which I have voted throughout my life, nominates Hillary Clinton for President, then I (being neither ignorant, nor stupid, nor psychopathic) will consider the Democratic Party, and the people who vote for it, as being now run by psychopaths, and as relying upon votes from individuals who are ignoramuses and/or idiots — I’ll never again support the national Democratic Party. I haven’t been, and will not be, a Republican (and anyone who is, after Bush’s 2003 invasion of Iraq, is beneath even basic decency), but if Hillary becomes the Party’s nominee, then the Democratic Party is just as rotten, from its top on down, as the Republican Party is — and, with Hillary as its Presidential nominee, anyone who would be denying the fact of its rottenness, under such a circumstance, would necessarily be either ignorant, stupid, or psychopathic. That’s an undeniable scientific fact about the Party, if it runs a person such as that, as its Presidential nominee.

After the Nazi Party ran Adolf Hitler as its nominee in Germany’s 1933 election, is there anyone today who would vote Nazi who isn’t ignorant, stupid, and/or psychopathic? Of course not. For the masses of people in Honduras — the murder capital of the world after Hillary stanched up and defended and kept in power its fascist coup-regime in 2009 — their country is approximately as terrifying as Hitler’s Germany was terrifying to Jews. All decent people will feel repugnance at the very thought of Hillary Clinton becoming the Democratic Party’s nominee, and no intelligent person will trust anything she says, because her record shows her true character, which is plain repulsive.

 

For example, she recently said “The Legislature—or the national Legislature in Honduras and the national judiciary actually followed the law in removing President Zelaya”, but even her own U.S. Ambassador in Honduras, Hugo Llorens, right after the coup, wrote to her the contrary (and she ignored what he and all decent persons were saying — and her refusal to call it a “coup” enabled U.S. government funds to be released to prop up the dictators, despite the universal condemnation of them by other countries):

The actions of June 28 can only be considered a coup d’etat by the legislative branch, with the support of the judicial branch and the military, against the executive branch. It bears mentioning that, whereas the resolution adopted June 28 refers only to Zelaya, its effect was to remove the entire executive branch. Both of these actions clearly exceeded Congress’s authority. … No matter what the merits of the case against Zelaya, his forced removal by the military was clearly illegal, and  [puppet-leader Roberto] Micheletti’s ascendance as ‘interim president’ was totally illegitimate.

She still brazenly lies through her teeth. And ‘Democratic’ suckers and psychopaths still take seriously what she says, and vote for her. If that’s not repulsive, what is?

As Jonathan Watts recently noted, in Britain’s Guardian:

Environmental activists are more likely to be killed in Honduras than any other country, according to a study by the NGO Global Witness. More than 80% of murders go unpunished. Part of the problem, according to the InterIACHR, is that the military has taken on roles that should be left to a civilian police. They tend to work in conjunction with powerful interests, while human rights activists are criminalised.

Due to the widespread condemnation of the Honduran Government for the murder of Berta Cáceres, the Honduran Government is allegedly now trying to build a case against someone else within her own environmental organization to prosecute for it.

Without the Obama Administration’s support, the coup-regime wouldn’t have lasted out the year. Hillary even tried to block the democratically elected President, Manuel Zelaya, from being returned to the country. It’s clear where her heart is: it’s with the money, not with the people.

She should be in prison, not in the White House.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Seeker

Seeker

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

Unless there is something personal directed to me in this thread and I feel the need to respond, this will be my last post on the subject of US Politics.

Malcolm, what are your feelings on the Libertarian platform?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
J.O.

J.O.

Posted
Posted

Neither is an even half decent choice but I'm pretty sure that if I closed my eyes and pointed the pen at the ballot, any attempt to get close to ticking the Trump box would result in said pen stabbing me in the eye.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...