• 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!

If Texas Turns Blue in 2016.....

If Hillary Clinton wins Texas, do you view it as a....

  • Rejection of Trump

    Votes: 27 62.8%

  • Endorsement of Hillary Clinton

    Votes: 2 4.7%

  • A mix of both

    Votes: 6 14.0%

  • Neither/other/something unique about this election/Texan electorate

    Votes: 8 18.6%
  • Total voters
    43
DarkWizard12 said:
I don't believe that. You wanted control of the party, and you got it! it's your responsiblity to convince voters to agree with you. maybe the party shouldn't have railroaded everyone in the opposition?

I don't think trump, or his supporters, need me to stir up hate for trump. I sincerely, literally believe that he needs no help on that front. I'm just airing my grievances as a voter. I am no hillary supporter, I would hate to vote for Hillary, and then every media personality pretend that it means that I actually like her, when I don't.

I just reject trump that much. THE REPUBLICANS HAD 16 OTHER CHOICES AND YOU CHOSE THE WORST ONE.

If you want to consider me "team hillary", then I don't care. You're just another mindless drone of the republican party that I am ashamed to associate myself with.
Click to expand...
You don't get off that easy. You have conveniently failed to yet make your case, any case, giving specifics on why it is you hate Trump so much. Can you please do so?

You hate Trump. Why? Hate him more than you do a proven felon, more than you hate one that is 99% most certainly running a political machined controlling a "not for profit" of anyone else but the Clinton's and their cronies. Besides that, how do you match anything Trump has done with that and the lousy job Hillary did at State? Pay for play, reduced prestige worldwide, the Middle East in utter chaos, 4 fellow American lives lost due to her negligence in Benghazi, her lack of competence if only in the safeguarding of state secrets? Then the collusion with the DNC to corrupt the nomination process? That and she will continue the downward trends in social experimentation under Obama, sure to be exacerbated under her "leadership" with more left bias appointees on the Supreme Court?

You could not have been a very good Republican if you actually ever were one. Now we just know your stripes. I just hope there are not sufficient others out there to stupidly usher in another Clinton presidency.
 
Last edited:
Casper said:
You do have a lot of accusations and make many claims, yet you have yet to be able to prove even one of them, so very typical of the "intellectually honest".
Click to expand...
Most who know history already know my claims to be true. Which do you dispute? That Reagan was a Democrat? That he was a B movie actor? That he, without previous political office started running the state with the then 4th largest economy in the world?

Everything obvious to a regular political observer you have to have proven to you? Dispute something I said, anything I said, prove me wrong. That is debate. Your blanket refusal to do much of anything is not debate, its denial, deflection and avoidance.
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
Most who know history already know my claims to be true. Which do you dispute? That Reagan was a Democrat? That he was a B movie actor? That he, without previous political office started running the state with the then 4th largest economy in the world?

Everything obvious to a regular political observer you have to have proven to you? Dispute something I said, anything I said, prove me wrong. That is debate. Your blanket refusal to do much of anything is not debate, its denial, deflection and avoidance.
Click to expand...

LOL, funny how you picked the few things that were true but avoided those you cannot prove, Noted. Yes, denial is common for some.
 
Casper said:
LOL, funny how you picked the few things that were true but avoided those you cannot prove, Noted. Yes, denial is common for some.
Click to expand...
Also noted and funny that you have not picked ONE DAMN THING to dispute. At minimum by so saying you are are indicating that those above assertions are specifically true... so that your assertion I have proven nothing is now false.

I accept your concession on the rest as well.
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
Also noted and funny that you have not picked ONE DAMN THING to dispute. At minimum by so saying you are are indicating that those above assertions are specifically true... so that your assertion I have proven nothing is now false.

I accept your concession on the rest as well.
Click to expand...
Accept whatever makes your little brain feel better, as I said, you cannot back up your claims of cheating or criminal actions, typical of the far right, yes that would include You.
 
Crovax said:
Perot got 22% in 92 and Clinton still lost Texas
Click to expand...
Click to expand...



Trump will lose in November no matter how Texas votes.

Do the math.

40 or 50 years from now Texas will probably turn blue but that doesn't really matter right now.
 
Last edited:
Casper said:
Accept whatever makes your little brain feel better, as I said, you cannot back up your claims of cheating or criminal actions, typical of the far right, yes that would include You.
Click to expand...

Actually it was you that said I could not prove even one of my claims, then readily admitted not just one but several of my claims to be true. Hat tip for helping make my points.

Typical of the far left, does that include YOU, blanket dispute everything asserted by those of us on the right... but often, for example in this case, somehow cannot/will not dispute the specifics... because why? fear of loss?

Informed folks know a bit about the DNC going against its own charter... seems they were supporting one candidate over another... now sure, I do not expect low information lefties to muddle through the blizzard of crap the left wing [ read: MSM ] tosses out with the kitchen sink, but I would expect if you are here you might well be aware. But if you did not keep up with the email scandal either? FBI Director Comey admits Clinton did not do that required by law [thus breaking the law\, felony misconduct, even though the Justice Department did not indict, that has not made it through the liberal filters yet, eh?

Now if one is aware and still deniesl, that simply confirms left partisanship.... and/or inability to debate perhaps. I am still making my assessment.
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
Actually it was you that said I could not prove even one of my claims, then readily admitted not just one but several of my claims to be true. Hat tip for helping make my points.

Typical of the far left, does that include YOU, blanket dispute everything asserted by those of us on the right... but often, for example in this case, somehow cannot/will not dispute the specifics... because why? fear of loss?

Informed folks know a bit about the DNC going against its own charter... seems they were supporting one candidate over another... now sure, I do not expect low information lefties to muddle through the blizzard of crap the left wing [ read: MSM ] tosses out with the kitchen sink, but I would expect if you are here you might well be aware. But if you did not keep up with the email scandal either? FBI Director Comey admits Clinton did not do that required by law [thus breaking the law\, felony misconduct, even though the Justice Department did not indict, that has not made it through the liberal filters yet, eh?

Now if one is aware and still deniesl, that simply confirms left partisanship.... and/or inability to debate perhaps. I am still making my assessment.
Click to expand...

You mean the claim that RR was a Dem at one point? You have not managed to prove one DAMN POINT when it comes to Hillary, but yes we get it, you are a blind hater.
Now back to whatever it is you were doing, remember to play nice with the other children and have fun.
 
Casper said:
You mean the claim that RR was a Dem at one point? You have not managed to prove one DAMN POINT when it comes to Hillary, but yes we get it, you are a blind hater.
Now back to whatever it is you were doing, remember to play nice with the other children and have fun.
Click to expand...
As stated earlier, avoidance, deflection etc... plus, plainly laid out, for all who keep up, the sufficiency of evidence. You have yet to actually attempt to take apart a single point specifically, have instead confirmed many of mine.

Again, 'preciate it.
 
Definitely a rejection of Trump and nothing more. Still, Texas would vote for Satan before it turns blue.
 
Gaztopian said:
Definitely a rejection of Trump and nothing more. Still, Texas would vote for Satan before it turns blue.
Click to expand...

texas will stay red and will stay red with secediing if needed and then have a wisdom test for its voters as law so that texas will stay conservative... IF hillary wins that could trigger 30 conservative states to secede and they also make wisdom tests for their voters
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom