• 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!

Political Assassination - the American Way

Are forces allied against him? Yes, absolutely.

And it is one of the very few cases of politicians showing some kind of moral compass and deciding to work together for the common good.

If you'll notice, the vast majority of the attacks on Trump have to do with truly meaningful aspects of protecting the interests of America. The fact that he encourages violence and courts conflict, the fact that he would likely either create disastrous foreign policy or the military would simply refuse to obey him, the fact that he is ignorant of everything related to government, his insane fiscal ideas, his blatantly anti-constitutional ideas, etc, etc, etc. They're being really substantive about it. Apart from some stupid jockeying in the primary, the criticism of Trump is largely grounded in stuff that's actually important, from both parties.

I see politicians, for once in their godforsaken lives, being genuinely interested in preserving America's fundamental well-being. Even when it involves slitting their own throats, as it has for some Republicans.

It's not as though we're all just learning now that Trump is an ignorant narcissist. Everyone's known that for decades. His history of saying and doing messed up things goes back much further than this election cycle.

I am still terminally jaded when it comes to our politicians, but actually, seeing the way they're talking about Trump has given me a small glimmer of hope that they're not all completely empty shells. Just mostly. But if it's critical enough, important enough, dangerous enough, they bring out their little sliver of humanity to play.

This is a load of horse crap.

The "moral compass" those politicians have points directly at money. They...and especially Hillary...don't give a rat's ass about "preserving America's fundamental well-being".
 
Are forces allied against him? Yes, absolutely.

Truth.

And it is one of the very few cases of politicians showing some kind of moral compass and deciding to work together for the common good.

Partial Truth. There are certainly some small fraction of political opponents who honestly believe this. But if one were being honest, then anyone arguing this "moral compass" position should expect to see those same people working together opposing Hillary as vehemently as they do Trump. Clearly, this is not the case. The fact that the Party leadership who are locking arms in opposition to the candidate that the vast majority of their own Party membership supports is not evidence of honest opposition, but rather evidence of fear for their own self-interests.

If you'll notice, the vast majority of the attacks on Trump have to do with truly meaningful aspects of protecting the interests of America. The fact that he encourages violence and courts conflict, the fact that he would likely either create disastrous foreign policy or the military would simply refuse to obey him, the fact that he is ignorant of everything related to government, his insane fiscal ideas, his blatantly anti-constitutional ideas, etc, etc, etc. They're being really substantive about it. Apart from some stupid jockeying in the primary, the criticism of Trump is largely grounded in stuff that's actually important, from both parties.

Absolutely FALSE! The vast majority of attacks on Trump are based on character assassination attempts exemplified in the OP article. You have bought into the propaganda of a media that is tightly controlled by six major conglomerates with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. A media that is creating news rather than honestly reporting it.

But we are a long way from the era of Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite these days, and we can no longer sincerely believe that what the media tells us is true must be true.

The "Important Stuff" you are talking about is maintaining the status quo of politics controlled by well-established special interests. The "Jockeying" you mention is for power positions in line of the deeply rooted network of corruption that propels our government.

I see politicians, for once in their godforsaken lives, being genuinely interested in preserving America's fundamental well-being. Even when it involves slitting their own throats, as it has for some Republicans.

Opinion successfully molded by propaganda.

You fail to see a group of politicians genuinely interested in preserving their power and the status quo. Blind to the fact that they no longer reflect the will of those they claim to represent. This is true in BOTH Parties, as shown by the strong support Sanders had which required the DNC to actively undermine HIS candidacy in favor of Hillary Clinton.

It's not as though we're all just learning now that Trump is an ignorant narcissist. Everyone's known that for decades. His history of saying and doing messed up things goes back much further than this election cycle.

And here we have the basic meme that the propaganda effort typically leads to: identifying the target as "the OTHER," someone who is such a social pariah that no rational person could possibly support them. That this "Other" is evil and insane. They start by labeling and end by labeling, always with just enough corrupted truth to make the Big Lie believable...all taken out of the propaganda playbook:

It would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise...The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over. Joseph Goebbels

Labels, repeated over and over: Racist! Misogynist! Xenophobe! Russophile! Mentally Ill (Narcissist!). You buy the labels and you don't have to think anymore. The square has become a circle, and that is all you need to know.
 
Last edited:
If there's one thing that Trump does well, it's that he creates enough doubt in what he says for people to spin what he's saying.

Yeah, the man who says what he means, and tells it like it is never says exactly what he means or says exactly what it is
 
Really? If she she's afraid to face and handle Trump in a debate, why should anyone think she can handle real problems of national and international politics effectively?

Odd thing for a Trump supporter to say when Trump refused many debate challenges from his republican opponents
 
Truth.

Partial Truth. There are certainly some small fraction of political opponents who honestly believe this. But if one were being honest, then anyone arguing this "moral compass" position should expect to see those same people working together opposing Hillary as vehemently as they do Trump. Clearly, this is not the case. The fact that the Party leadership who are locking arms in opposition to the candidate that the vast majority of their own Party membership supports is not evidence of honest opposition, but rather evidence of fear for their own self-interests.

Absolutely FALSE! The vast majority of attacks on Trump are based on character assassination attempts exemplified in the OP article. You have bought into the propaganda of a media that is tightly controlled by six major conglomerates with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. A media that is creating news rather than honestly reporting it.

But we are a long way from the era of Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite these days, and we can no longer sincerely believe that what the media tells us is true must be true.

The "Important Stuff" you are talking about is maintaining the status quo of politics controlled by well-established special interests. The "Jockeying" you mention is for power positions in line of the deeply rooted network of corruption that propels our government.

Opinion successfully molded by propaganda.

You fail to see a group of politicians genuinely interested in preserving their power and the status quo. Blind to the fact that they no longer reflect the will of those they claim to represent. This is true in BOTH Parties, as shown by the strong support Sanders had which required the DNC to actively undermine HIS candidacy in favor of Hillary Clinton.

And here we have the basic meme that the propaganda effort typically leads to: identifying the target as "the OTHER," someone who is such a social pariah that no rational person could possibly support them. That this "Other" is evil and insane. They start by labeling and end by labeling, always with just enough corrupted truth to make the Big Lie believable...all taken out of the propaganda playbook:

Labels, repeated over and over: Racist! Misogynist! Xenophobe! Russophile! Mentally Ill (Narcissist!). You buy the labels and you don't have to think anymore. The square has become a circle, and that is all you need to know.

Right, it's actually "the media" that made that petition of dozens of people from within the Republican party intelligence community against him -- including retirees mostly from non-elected professions with nothing to gain no matter who's elected -- purely on the basis of his foreign policy. And of course, we know that talking about his foreign policy is really just a cheap shot during a presidential election, right? How dare they!

The media is just "making things up" for reporting it, and they're just doing it for the benefits of... something... from somewhere... We know how much Republicans tend to be rewarded for breaking rank, especially the type who work behind the scenes and therefore are so very concerned with funding the campaigns they don't even have. And most especially when they're retired and not even in politics anymore.

I've just been "brainwashed" into believing these non-existent hallucinations, induced by Democrat-planted fluorine in water I'm sure, while you, of superior intellect, are enlightened for continuing to pretend they don't exist, and that somehow America trying to stay out of nuclear conflict is just "the establishment tryin' to control us, maaan."

Ok then. You keep right on keepin' on, dude. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Right, it's actually "the media" that made that petition of dozens of people from within the Republican party intelligence community against him -- including retirees mostly from non-elected professions with nothing to gain no matter who's elected -- purely on the basis of his foreign policy. And of course, we know that talking about his foreign policy is really just a cheap shot during a presidential election, right? How dare they!

The media is just "making things up" for reporting it, and they're just doing it for the benefits of... something... from somewhere... We know how much Republicans tend to be rewarded for breaking rank, especially the type who work behind the scenes and therefore are so very concerned with funding the campaigns they don't even have. And most especially when they're retired and not even in politics anymore.

I've just been "brainwashed" into believing these non-existent hallucinations, induced by Democrat-planted fluorine in water I'm sure, while you, of superior intellect, are enlightened for continuing to pretend they don't exist, and that somehow America trying to stay out of nuclear conflict is just "the establishment tryin' to control us, maaan."

Ok then. You keep right on keepin' on, dude. :lol:

Sarcasm is not a valid discussion tool. (unless, of course, you are not interested in discussion)
 
Sarcasm is not a valid discussion tool. (unless, of course, you are not interested in discussion)

Well, given that none of the concepts provided to me actually exist, I have precious few other options available. How do I discuss things that don't exist?

Some stuff just doesn't justify a serious response. Your prior post justified none at all -- also a fact-free glurge. Just a shorter one.
 
Right, it's actually "the media" that made that petition of dozens of people from within the Republican party intelligence community agains him -- including retirees with nothing to gain no mater who's elected -- purely on the basis of his foreign policy. And of course, we know that talking about his foreign policy is really just a cheap shot during a presidential election, right? How dare they! The media is just "making things up" for reporting it, and they're just doing it for the benefits of... something... from somewhere... We know how much Republicans tend to be rewarded for breaking rank, especially the type who work behind the scenes and therefore are so very concerned with funding the campaigns they even have. And most especially when they're retired and not even in politics anymore.

No! That was reflective of this part of my post:

...if one were being honest, then anyone arguing this "moral compass" position should expect to see those same people working together opposing Hillary as vehemently as they do Trump. Clearly, this is not the case. The fact that the Party leadership who are locking arms in opposition to the candidate that the vast majority of their own Party membership supports is not evidence of honest opposition, but rather evidence of fear for their own self-interests...

The "Important Stuff" you are talking about is maintaining the status quo of politics controlled by well-established special interests. The "Jockeying" you mention is for power positions in line of the deeply rooted network of corruption that propels our government...

You fail to see a group of politicians genuinely interested in preserving their power and the status quo. Blind to the fact that they no longer reflect the will of those they claim to represent. This is true in BOTH Parties, as shown by the strong support Sanders had which required the DNC to actively undermine HIS candidacy in favor of Hillary Clinton.

These "experts" have had decades in positions of power dealing in foreign affairs; and what is their track record? Have you been looking at our oh-so "successful" diplomatic affairs in Europe, the Middle East, and the Far East, or merely ignoring them?

As for this?

I've just been "brainwashed" into believing these non-existent hallucinations, induced by Democrat-planted fluorine in water I'm sure, while you, of superior intellect, are enlightened for continuing to pretend they don't exist, and that somehow America trying to stay out of nuclear conflict is just "the establishment tryin' to limit us, maaan."

Ok then. You keep right on keepin' on, dude. :lol:

I have no idea whether or not you've been brainwashed or were already of a lean that you are willing to buy into the memes presented. That's between you and your conscience.

That fact remains that both the OP article (except where it refers to Kennedy's assassination) and your own opening remark "Are forces allied against him? Yes, absolutely." show that there is an unprecedented effort to derail his candidacy using every dirty underhanded propaganda trick in the book, rather than simply reporting events and allowing the voters to make their own minds up. This includes the paid agent provocateurs, the hired demonstrators, the incessant misquotes and editorial attributions to his speeches in the media, and the RINO's active opposition from the very beginning of hid campaign despite their own constituents evidenced desires.
 
Well, given that none of the concepts provided to me actually exist, I have precious few other options available. How do I discuss things that don't exist?

Some stuff just doesn't justify a serious response. Your prior post justified none at all -- also a fact-free glurge. Just a shorter one.

Actually, you haven't even discussed any of the points you responded to, so how do you know they don't exist? Or...as is more likely...do you actually have NO reasoned discussion and must then respond in an invalid, sarcastic manner because you feel you MUST say something?

It would have been more honest...and useful for all involved...if you had just kept quiet.
 
Back
Top Bottom