• 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!

Trumps hillariously stupid plan to make our military great agai.

calamity said:
She seems to have been a good one in the 90's. Better than the two Bushes at least.
Click to expand...

Really??

Okay, I'll let my sarcasm out here.

[sarc] Oh, yeah...a good one. Her attempted health care takeover as first lady was ample evidence of how good a president she would be.[/sarc]
 
Rico Suave said:
As usual the Daily Kos nails the fat bastard to the wall.

Donald Trump and the really big military
Click to expand...
While I have a solid history of Trump critique, and am never shy to call out that orangish moron for what he is, the likelihood of Daily Kos having an insightful and well-thought-out critique of a military expansion plan is approximately equivalent to the chances that tomorrow Hillary Clinton rips off her mask, and we find out that Alex Jones was right about the Lizard People all along.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
 
MaggieD said:
I stopped reading when it said Trump doesn't pay any taxes. Garbage.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, Maggie, because we just KNOW he pays taxes, don't we?
Trump as a candidate has, of course, refused to release his tax returns. But many years ago he was obliged to release them for casino regulatory filings — and at that time he paid no federal income tax at all. Because of tax loopholes, he managed to report zero income (actually losses!) for both 1978 and 1979.
Click to expand...

Why is he hiding his tax returns from the voters? It's obvious.
 
Last edited:
Here's what the guy who wants to be commander in chief of the most powerful military in the world says about defeating ISIS:

November 13: "I know more about ISIS than the generals do, believe me."

So Trump must have a plan of his own for defeating ISIS? Why yes, but you see, it's a secret:

May 27: "All I can tell you is that it is a foolproof way of winning."

Oh come on, man, tell us the plan!

September 7: "I am also going to convene my top generals and give them a simple instruction: They will have 30 days to submit to the Oval Office a plan for defeating ISIS."

Oh, I get it. Trump's "foolproof way of winning" is to have the generals who don't know as much about ISIS as Trump does give Trump the plan. You know, the secret, foolproof plan.

This is about as logical and coherent as Trump ever gets about any policy issue. I can't believe conservatives actually support this dictator-loving ignorant clown.
 
Last edited:
jpn said:
Oh yeah, Maggie, because we just KNOW he pays taxes, don't we?

Why is he hiding his tax returns from the voters? It's obvious.
Click to expand...

I sure don't understand the focus on candidates' income tax returns. Never have. There is no American on EARTH that wants to pay more income tax than required. The "loopholes" so often referred to as CHEATING are called, wait-for-it, [BOLD]legal deductions[/BOLD] that our legislature has put in place to, wait-for-it, encourage investment and infuse fairness into the God-awful mess that are our tax codes.

Especially when one is investing in real estate development, it is not unusual for depreciation to eat up and cancel out profits. And if you don't know how that works? You have no business throwing rocks.

The IRS is apparently doing a full-scale audit on Donald Trump. Everyone's worst nightmare. He would be a fool to release his tax records to the Sharks whose main purpose in life is to destroy Republican candidates and whose understanding of our tax codes ends at the W2 they receive every January.

Now. What I'd like to know is how much "expense money" the Clintons receive from the Clinton Foundation that never MAKES it to a W2 yet finances their lavish lifestyle. THAT would be an interesting number, wouldn't it? But perhaps you don't understand how THAT works either.

If you have a problem with our tax code, the most ridiculous and self-serving documents on planet earth, blame the idiot savants who wrote them - not the American businessmen who use them, EXACTLY AS THEY ARE INTENDED, to reduce their tax liability.
 
jpn said:
Here's what the guy who wants to be commander in chief of the most powerful military in the world says about defeating ISIS:

November 13: "I know more about ISIS than the generals do, believe me."

So Trump must have a plan of his own for defeating ISIS? Why yes, but you see, it's a secret:

May 27: "All I can tell you is that it is a foolproof way of winning."

Oh come on, man, tell us the plan!

September 7: "I am also going to convene my top generals and give them a simple instruction: They will have 30 days to submit to the Oval Office a plan for defeating ISIS."

Oh, I get it. Trump's "foolproof way of winning" is to have the generals who don't know as much about ISIS as Trump does give Trump the plan. You know, the secret, foolproof plan.

This is about as logical and coherent as Trump ever gets about any policy issue. I can't believe conservatives actually support this dictator-loving ignorant clown.
Click to expand...

Tell us the plan? How foolish you sound. Yes! By all means, let us give ISIS the blueprint of our strategy as Hillary Clinton STUPIDLY did when she said, "There'll be no boots on the ground." What an idiotic statement she made. And ridiculous that the left somehow believes our gvmt should disclose strategy to our enemies.
 
MaggieD said:
I sure don't understand the focus on candidates' income tax returns. Never have. There is no American on EARTH that wants to pay more income tax than required. The "loopholes" so often referred to as CHEATING are called, wait-for-it, [BOLD]legal deductions[/BOLD] that our legislature has put in place to, wait-for-it, encourage investment and infuse fairness into the God-awful mess that are our tax codes.

Especially when one is investing in real estate development, it is not unusual for depreciation to eat up and cancel out profits. And if you don't know how that works? You have no business throwing rocks.

The IRS is apparently doing a full-scale audit on Donald Trump. Everyone's worst nightmare. He would be a fool to release his tax records to the Sharks whose main purpose in life is to destroy Republican candidates and whose understanding of our tax codes ends at the W2 they receive every January.

Now. What I'd like to know is how much "expense money" the Clintons receive from the Clinton Foundation that never MAKES it to a W2 yet finances their lavish lifestyle. THAT would be an interesting number, wouldn't it? But perhaps you don't understand how THAT works either.

If you have a problem with our tax code, the most ridiculous and self-serving documents on planet earth, blame the idiot savants who wrote them - not the American businessmen who use them, EXACTLY AS THEY ARE INTENDED, to reduce their tax liability.
Click to expand...

If you took the time to read non wingnut stuff, you'd realize that the Clintons don't take any personal expense money from the foundation.

https://www.clintonfoundation.org/about/frequently-asked-questions

In fact, the Clintons fund the charity an average of a couple million a year, so it clearly costs them money.

I have no doubt that they wouldn't use their direct expenses on behalf of the foundation as a charitable donation in kind, and deduct it from their taxes though, but I know you are a champion of paying less taxes.
 
Threegoofs said:
If you took the time to read non wingnut stuff, you'd realize that the Clintons don't take any personal expense money from the foundation.

https://www.clintonfoundation.org/about/frequently-asked-questions

In fact, the Clintons fund the charity an average of a couple million a year, so it clearly costs them money.

I have no doubt that they wouldn't use their direct expenses on behalf of the foundation as a charitable donation in kind, and deduct it from their taxes though, but I know you are a champion of paying less taxes.
Click to expand...

I appreciate this information. Your link does state that they receive no salaries and no expense reimbursements. I've learned to parse the words of our politicians. So I'm not at all certain, and the web site fails to clarify, whether or not the foundation pays vendors directly and in THAT way helps fund their lifestyle. Having owned for own business for 20 years, I'm quite familiar with the games people play.
 
Mycroft said:
I stopped reading, since that is nothing but spin.

(I try to avoid spin)
Click to expand...
:lamo:lamo:lamo

This coming from the one who re-posted a blatant lie from The Canadian Free Press and then repeatedly refused to acknowledge the lie they posted from the biased source.

What you REALLY mean to say is you try to avoid spin unless the spin aligns with what you want to believe.

I browsed the article in the OP a bit and it seemed pretty partisan to me (though, in fairness, Trump does leave himself open to these types of attacks). But for someone who posts lies from the Canadian Free Press and apparently reads The Conservative Tree House, I just don't believe you try to avoid spin.
 
Slyfox696 said:
:lamo:lamo:lamo

This coming from the one who re-posted a blatant lie from The Canadian Free Press and then repeatedly refused to acknowledge the lie they posted from the biased source.

What you REALLY mean to say is you try to avoid spin unless the spin aligns with what you want to believe.

I browsed the article in the OP a bit and it seemed pretty partisan to me (though, in fairness, Trump does leave himself open to these types of attacks). But for someone who posts lies from the Canadian Free Press and apparently reads The Conservative Tree House, I just don't believe you try to avoid spin.
Click to expand...

And I should care what you believe...why?
 
MaggieD said:
I appreciate this information. Your link does state that they receive no salaries and no expense reimbursements. I've learned to parse the words of our politicians. So I'm not at all certain, and the web site fails to clarify, whether or not the foundation pays vendors directly and in THAT way helps fund their lifestyle. Having owned for own business for 20 years, I'm quite familiar with the games people play.
Click to expand...

The Clintons donate a million or two a year directly to their foundation.

Seems like whatever machinations you're imagining would be a bit silly.
 
Threegoofs said:
The Clintons donate a million or two a year directly to their foundation.

Seems like whatever machinations you're imagining would be a bit silly.
Click to expand...

Yeah, well, that's what people think about using hammers on Blackberrys.
 
MaggieD said:
Yeah, well, that's what people think about using hammers on Blackberrys.
Click to expand...

And if those blackberrys werent destroyed, you'd be whining about how Hillary has potentially sensitive State information sitting on undestroyed unsecure devices.
 
Utility Man said:


:applaud
Click to expand...


Who cares about FDR. The man that wasted money building useless walls everywhere while Germany built the autobahn. A clear looser. The Commander in Chief of our military that left our pacific navy defenseless during a world and let it get destroyed. He lied to the American people about how he was not for our involvement in the war and behind our backs was telling Britain he would get us in the war. Typical Liar in Chief. Luckily the American people had enough backbone to get us through those times despite FDR.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
Who cares about FDR. The man that wasted money building useless walls everywhere while Germany built the autobahn. A clear looser. The Commander in Chief of our military that left our pacific navy defenseless during a world and let it get destroyed. He lied to the American people about how he was not for our involvement in the war and behind our backs was telling Britain he would get us in the war. Typical Liar in Chief. Luckily the American people had enough backbone to get us through those times despite FDR.
Click to expand...

Yeah, those German leaders in the 30s were so much better than FDR!
 
Reagan built up our military and got more done without going to war.;)

I am all for talking softly and having the biggest stick.:thumbs:

Useless wars are more expensive than maintaining a strong military.:thumbs:

Yes it is way past time other countries paid their fair share for their protection. Either by building their own military or helping to pay for our protection. If you think this idea is stupid maybe you need to take a look in the mirror.

I am still waiting to hear how flooding this country with 10's of millions of illegal workers is going to help labor rates go up.:lamo
 
Threegoofs said:
Yeah, those German leaders in the 30s were so much better than FDR!
Click to expand...

So you think building useless walls is smarter than building infrastructure and a highway system. Please.
 
Threegoofs said:
Yeah, those German leaders in the 30s were so much better than FDR!
Click to expand...
If only Ronald Reagan had been president in the 30s, Hitler would have NEVER invaded Poland or killed Jews. At least that is what Pipewrench apparently believes.
PIPEWRENCH said:
So you think building useless walls is smarter than building infrastructure and a highway system. Please.
Click to expand...
Oh, so you're voting for Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump then, huh?
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
He doesn't need to offer specifics. All he has to do is make vague comments and his fanboys will think he's going to lead them to paradise. No questions asked.

It's almost scary. Like a cult.
Click to expand...

As opposed to Hillary who makes very specific lles.

Hillary Clinton on Wednesday said she wouldn't put ground troops in Iraq "ever again" and would not use boots on the ground to defeat ISIS.

"We are not putting ground troops into Iraq ever again and we are not putting ground troops into Syria," the Democratic presidential nominee, who has consistently said she does not want to put ground troops into Iraq, said during a forum on national security on NBC News.

"We're going to defeat ISIS without committing American ground troops."

Clinton's remark came in response to a question from an Army veteran who asked the former secretary of state how she would determine when and where to deploy troops overseas, particularly when it comes to fighting ISIS.
Click to expand...

Hillary Clinton Says No Ground Troops in Iraq 'Ever Again' - ABC News
 
ttwtt78640 said:
As opposed to Hillary who makes very specific lles.



Hillary Clinton Says No Ground Troops in Iraq 'Ever Again' - ABC News
Click to expand...

Since she's not POTUS, I don't follow you. How can she lie about her putting troops in Iraq when she's not even in charge? How has something that hasn't happened yet a 'lie'?

I know you guys are so indoctrinated with her lying all the time, even if she says the sky is blue the Cons will say she's lying. BUT HOW is what she said about not putting troops back into Iraq a lie?
 
Slyfox696 said:
If only Ronald Reagan had been president in the 30s, Hitler would have NEVER invaded Poland or killed Jews. At least that is what Pipewrench apparently believes.
Click to expand...

I see your crystal ball is working again and you know what I believe.:lamo:lamo

I think if he had half a brain he would have spent the money improving our military. Japan was at war with China and clearly taking over the pacific. Germany was allying with Italy and took over Austria and building their military. Anyone who couldn't see the war coming was inept at best if not an idiot. There was clearly a need to upgrade our military and for sure our infrastructure. We needed a strong leader with vision who could see what was coming and start preparing for it. At the outbreak of the war we were caught with our pants down and even worse was the debacle of Pearl Harbor. We could have used a strong leader such as Reagan who might have prevented a lot of the deaths by being better prepared for the inevitable war.
 
PirateMk1 said:
I suspect that kind of action by the DOD wont be tolerated much longer if Trump gets in. Businessmen have certain pet peeves and accounting is one of those.
Click to expand...
Businessman?

Trump's a con artist and a bankruptcy machine.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
I see your crystal ball is working again and you know what I believe.
Click to expand...
I don't have a crystal ball. I'm just going off your implication. :shrug:

Also, you didn't answer my question. Since you apparently favor infrastructure and highways over useless walls, you'll be voting for Clinton instead of Trump, correct?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom