• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pontius Trump washes hands of responsibility

Last edited:
Harry Guerrilla said:
I'm fairly certain that Trump knew one of his opponents would do so and prepared for such an act.
It gives him the cover of being the better man and allows him to punch back, conceivably worse.

One thing I've gleaned from this election so far, is that Trump is a tactical genius to the likes of Sun Tzu.
He's exploited all his opponents weaknesses, in a maddening fashion.
Click to expand...
I was thinking he's more along the lines of a cross between Niccolo Machiavelli & P.T. Barnum!
 
Have you noticed that all of Trump's attacks on people are actually true about Trump himself?

Oldest Alinsky tactic in the book.
 
bubbabgone said:
I looked but even given it was ThinkProgress, I still didn't see "I Would Intentionally Kill Families To Defeat ISIS" in any of the Trump quotes.
Click to expand...

His position on killing the families of terrorists is so well known that the source is irrelevant. But here's CNN:

"The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families, when you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. When they say they don't care about their lives, you have to take out their families," Trump said.

Donald Trump on terrorists: 'Take out their families' - CNNPolitics.com

So yeah, families are not off limits.

But you're right he said "take out," not "kill." Perhaps Trump meant take out, as in, "We should take out the families of terrorists...for a movie and a delicious meal at a Chinese restaurant!"
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I disagree.
For 1, it's embarrassing to everyone to see their candidate get bitch slapped.
I think how people are treating Trump supporters is more revealing about them, than the supporters.

Please show me the politician that isn't a pathological liar?
If our election were fielded by non patho liars, we'd have Sanders and that's it.



I'd agree, but how is that different from any other campaign.
They all pull out the stops if it benefits them, it's just that he's doing it better.
Click to expand...

His supporters believe it's okay to create a religious test for entry into the country, for creating a database on Muslims, defend Trump's infographic on black people, defend his statement that Mexican government is sending us its rapists and murderers, have specified that that they don't care when he lies, and shrug when it's revealed that his university is a giant con job. That reveals more about them than it does about me.
 
Renae said:
The next morning. You cannot let the "Cruz owned" bull**** of the media go. For shame. Cruz: No involvement in Melania Ad | MSNBC
Click to expand...
It from your source, Renae:

"Mr. Cruz did denounce the ad on Wednesday, calling it “completely inappropriate” and stressing that his campaign had nothing to do with it."

Renae said:
No, it's an anti-Trump Pac.



Ted Cruz has DENOUNCED the ad, and said spouses are OFF LIMITS! ? Cruz spokeswoman Stewart » The Right Scoop -
3 Problems With Media Coverage Of Attacks On Heidi Cruz


http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...onald-trump-to-leave-his-wife-the-hell-alone/
Click to expand...

And your link (MSNBC) you just posted is time-stamped 3/23.

Again, I stand by my statement.
 
Cardinal said:
His position on killing the families of terrorists is so well known that the source is irrelevant. But here's CNN:

"The other thing with the terrorists is you have to take out their families, when you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. When they say they don't care about their lives, you have to take out their families," Trump said.

Donald Trump on terrorists: 'Take out their families' - CNNPolitics.com

So yeah, families are not off limits.

But you're right he said "take out," not "kill." Perhaps Trump meant take out, as in, "We should take out the families of terrorists...for a movie and a delicious meal at a Chinese restaurant!"
Click to expand...

So if a drone spots al-Baghdadi with a baba ganoush appetizer, will you call off an attack because his wife is sitting next to him?
 
Cardinal said:
His supporters believe it's okay to create a religious test for entry into the country, for creating a database on Muslims, defend Trump's infographic on black people, defend his statement that Mexican government is sending us its rapists and murderers, have specified that that they don't care when he lies, and shrug when it's revealed that his university is a giant con job. That reveals more about them than it does about me.
Click to expand...

Sure he's playing to people's bias.
Some/most of those biases, I'm in complete disagreement with.
Honestly I don't think those are anything but bait and switch statements.

I think the broader issue is that this election is less about politics and more about a cultural divide in politics.
Both Bernie and Trump are representative of this.

His supporters have been shown to be less conservative and more moderate than your standard GOP hardliner.
They are people who feel marginalized and have been told quite bluntly, "you don't pick the candidate, we do" by upper middle class and upper class elitists.
It's open class warfare, it's exposing that we have a system of pretend egalitarianism.

That alone has almost brought me from being a sympathizer to a supporter of Trump.
 
Cardinal said:
His supporters believe it's okay to create a religious test for entry into the country, for creating a database on Muslims, defend Trump's infographic on black people, defend his statement that Mexican government is sending us its rapists and murderers, have specified that that they don't care when he lies, and shrug when it's revealed that his university is a giant con job. That reveals more about them than it does about me.
Click to expand...

The thing that fascinates me about Trumps supporters in NOT that they believe what he says, it's that they know he's lying to them, but they don't care.

Round up 11 mil people and throw them out? Shut all Mosques? Have a 'religious test' to enter the country? Even the most conservative courts in the country wouldn't allow any of those things.

Make Mexico build a wall? Yep, but how? Declare war on Mexico when they don't build it?

None of these things are possible. Even his most rabid supporters know that.

His supporters say they are tired of politicians lying to them. But they seem OK when a non-politician, Donald Trump, is lying to them.
 
Chomsky said:
Years ago, I read a book written by a retired FBI agent concerning the life of of one of Chicago's longest reigning Outfit guys.

The agent-author is Fred Roemer, the subject is Tony Accardo, and the book is: "Accardo: The Genuine Godfather".

In the book the author describes a scene where in the early '70's an overzealous FBI field agent threatened Accardo's son, during a discussion that took place between the over-hyped agent and Accardo's wife in front of Accardo's house. Tony Accardo was not present in this discussion.

Subsequently, Accardo set-up a face-to-face meeting with Agent Frank Roemer, who was the lead agent assigned to investigate Accardo's crew. This turned-out to become a small group meeting of several members of both groups. Due to Accardo's initiative, an agreement was reached which declared families "off-limits" for the turmoil & struggles occuring between the Outfit & the FBI. The agreement apparently was successfully honored for the several remaining decades Accardo remained in power.

So if Agent Roemer is to be believed, and over the years nothing of substance in his book has been successfully factually challenged of which I'm aware, it would seem the guy that ran the outfit in it's modern heyday had higher standards in respecting an opponent's family, than Mr. Cruz!

And that's quite a statement!

Referece: Amazon - Accardo: The Genuine Godfather
Click to expand...

that is quite the story, thanks for sharing it

regardless of which side of the law people find themselves on, some have a code within that and others do not

I always respect the ones who do

At some point we all have to be willing to draw lines in the sand to be able to live with ourselves. Some lines are thinner than others.
 
Cardinal said:
Watching the GOP primaries is like rushing outside to watch the cops break up a domestic disturbance. My first reaction is entertainment, almost immediately to be taken over by sadness at the hardship and tragedy suffered by those involved. Then I go home, thank god nothing like that is happening in my own home, and hope as hard as I can that their dysfunction never spills over into my life in some way.
Click to expand...

yes that is a very good summation
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
The thing that fascinates me about Trumps supporters in NOT that they believe what he says, it's that they know he's lying to them, but they don't care.

Round up 11 mil people and throw them out? Shut all Mosques? Have a 'religious test' to enter the country? Even the most conservative courts in the country wouldn't allow any of those things.

Make Mexico build a wall? Yep, but how? Declare war on Mexico when they don't build it?

None of these things are possible. Even his most rabid supporters know that.

His supporters say they are tired of politicians lying to them. But they seem OK when a non-politician, Donald Trump, is lying to them.
Click to expand...

good points

irony eh, not a word that would come easily to his supporters

:shrug:
 
Chomsky said:
It from your source, Renae:

"Mr. Cruz did denounce the ad on Wednesday, calling it “completely inappropriate” and stressing that his campaign had nothing to do with it."



And your link (MSNBC) you just posted is time-stamped 3/23.

Again, I stand by my statement.
Click to expand...

The next ****ing da... oh ffs.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
The thing that fascinates me about Trumps supporters in NOT that they believe what he says, it's that they know he's lying to them, but they don't care.

Round up 11 mil people and throw them out? Shut all Mosques? Have a 'religious test' to enter the country? Even the most conservative courts in the country wouldn't allow any of those things.

Make Mexico build a wall? Yep, but how? Declare war on Mexico when they don't build it?

None of these things are possible. Even his most rabid supporters know that.

His supporters say they are tired of politicians lying to them. But they seem OK when a non-politician, Donald Trump, is lying to them.
Click to expand...

Why is a politician or non politician lying ok anyway?
Why is his lying more atrocious for him than Hillary, Cruz, Rubio, etc?

You know these others are lying, yet you'll still vote for or support one of them.
What does that say about you?
That because their lying is less hyperbolic, it makes your beliefs more valid?
 
_Sal said:
that is quite the story, thanks for sharing it

regardless of which side of the law people find themselves on, some have a code within that and others do not

I always respect the ones who do

At some point we all have to be willing to draw lines in the sand to be able to live with ourselves. Some lines are thinner than others.
Click to expand...
Yes.

But in issues of this sort, Sen Cruz has put himself in a more difficult set of standards than Mr. Trump, IMO.

Trump is a schmuck! He plays the part, and often revels in it! It's part of his cultivated persona.

Cruz on the other hand, presents hisself as the paragon of virtue, the anointed one with the higher calling, contrasting himself with the uncouth billionaire.

But when you claim moral superiority you limit yourself from getting in the mud & slinging it back, and if you're caught short of your elated moral highground, you take the hit. So Cruz has pretty much limited himself to defensive attacks against Trump's perceived transgressions, whereas Trump has free-reign to use whatever weapon he so chooses from his wide-ranging arsenal.

Irregardless of the prevailent public thought on ethical ramifications, I think Cruz might be bit caught here, unless Trump overplays his hand. I don't think Cruz is going to win this exchange, and WI (and indeed perhaps the nomination) may hang in balance. I believe WI to be that critical!
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Why is a politician or non politician lying ok anyway?
Why is his lying more atrocious for him than Hillary, Cruz, Rubio, etc?

You know these others are lying, yet you'll still vote for or support one of them.
What does that say about you?
That because their lying is less hyperbolic, it makes your beliefs more valid?
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was OK. I said why do Trump supporters get all bent out of shape about politicians lying, but they don't care the Trump, the non-politician, is lying to them?

The only reason I can think of is Trump is not being PC about his lying. I think the time he said he uses the 'build a wall' line to energize his crowds speaks volumes. He's just telling his crowds what they want to hear. he knows he could never get Mexico to build a wall, and his supporters know it too. But at his rallies he yells' build a wall' and everyone cheers.. Because it's what they want to hear.

But it's still a lie.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
I didn't say it was OK. I said why do Trump supporters get all bent out of shape about politicians lying, but they don't care the Trump, the non-politician, is lying to them?

The only reason I can think of is Trump is not being PC about his lying. I think the time he said he uses to 'build a wall' line to energize his crowds speaks volumes. He's just telling his crowds what they want to hear. he knows he could never get Mexico to build a wall, and his supporters know it too. But it's what they want to hear.

But it's still a lie.
Click to expand...

He's website doesn't say Mexico is going to build it, but that the U.S. would levy fees and charges on things related to Mexico to pay for it.
I seriously doubt its about lies but more to do with breaking the hold of the "establishment."

One thing is clear, insiders hate him and to a lesser extent Bernie.
That's something that resonates more than walls, Muslims, etc.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
He's website doesn't say Mexico is going to build it, but that the U.S. would levy fees and charges on things related to Mexico to pay for it.
I seriously doubt its about lies but more to do with breaking the hold of the "establishment."

One thing is clear, insiders hate him and to a lesser extent Bernie.
That's something that resonates more than walls, Muslims, etc.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the establishment lies like hell. For decades the GOP has promised it's base it will stop illegals from entering the country, but they never have, and because businesses love illegals, the very business friendly GOP never will stop it. I think that is a BIG reason for this Trump revolution within the GOP.

But again, Trump's not going to do anything either.

I'm just talking about being realistic. I agree 100% we need a viable 3rd party. And that the establishment parties(both) need a swift kick in the balls.

But Trump ain't the guy.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Yeah, the establishment lies like hell. For decades the GOP has promised it's base it will stop illegals from entering the country, but they never have, and because businesses love illegals, the very business friendly GOP never will stop it. I think that is a BIG reason for this Trump revolution within the GOP.

But again, Trump's not going to do anything either.

I'm just talking about being realistic. I agree 100% we need a viable 3rd party. And that the establishment parties(both) need a swift kick in the balls.

But Trump ain't the guy.
Click to expand...

No one is the guy.
Trump is just a guy to break the status quo in many minds.

After this election, do you think there will be another chance to get through a reform candidate?
Likely not, neither with Dems or GOP.
They're going to modify the rules to make sure this doesn't happen again.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
He's website doesn't say Mexico is going to build it, but that the U.S. would levy fees and charges on things related to Mexico to pay for it.
I seriously doubt its about lies but more to do with breaking the hold of the "establishment."

One thing is clear, insiders hate him and to a lesser extent Bernie.
That's something that resonates more than walls, Muslims, etc.
Click to expand...

Hating him seems a little strong. But both Trump and BS are both worth blocking from the high chair.
 
Chomsky said:
Yes.

But in issues of this sort, Sen Cruz has put himself in a more difficult set of standards than Mr. Trump, IMO.

Trump is a schmuck! He plays the part, and often revels in it! It's part of his cultivated persona.

Cruz on the other hand, presents hisself as the paragon of virtue, the anointed one with the higher calling, contrasting himself with the uncouth billionaire.

But when you claim moral superiority you limit yourself from getting in the mud & slinging it back, and if you're caught short of your elated moral highground, you take the hit. So Cruz has pretty much limited himself to defensive attacks against Trump's perceived transgressions, whereas Trump has free-reign to use whatever weapon he so chooses from his wide-ranging arsenal.

Irregardless of the prevailent public thought on ethical ramifications, I think Cruz might be bit caught here, unless Trump overplays his hand. I don't think Cruz is going to win this exchange, and WI (and indeed perhaps the nomination) may hang in balance. I believe WI to be that critical!
Click to expand...

yes, good points there, Cruz should and must hold himself to a higher standard...the thing is, that is what will do him in, Trump is smart and basically panders to which ever crowd he is with, openly admitting it...except of course he does hold disdain for fellow billionaires I am not sure what that is about but the little guy seems to like it

he is the next President and I believed it from the moment he opened his mouth...he is crass and bigoted and full of himself, people eat it up

it's almost like the world has regressed by decades

we shall see how he handles himself
 
joG said:
Hating him seems a little strong. But both Trump and BS are both worth blocking from the high chair.
Click to expand...

I disagree on this for one reason and that is breaking the general dead lock on who controls the government.
That's not saying more Trumps or Bernies need to be in there, but that the status quo is unacceptable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom