Switch Theme:

US Politics  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

What does any of that have to do with a candidate for POTUS declaring that he will stop media companies if elected?
   
Made in us
Never Forget Isstvan!





Chicago

 d-usa wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
Trump is now also saying that he will shut down the liberal media. Every time I think he maxed out his dictator impersonation, he manages to kick it up another level.


Source?


http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/15/media/donald-trump-media-journalists/index.html

At one of his events on Friday, Trump said he will "stop" the "sick media."
"The media is, indeed, sick, and it's making our country sick, and we're going to stop it," he said.
He did not specify how.


So he is going to stop media companies who are in reality little more then political cheer leaders from calling themselves news companies Goodbye Fox, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, and a host of others.

Would it really be terrible if the news companies actually reported news instead of creating outrage over perceived slights?


It would be terrible if our government starts to decide what is news and what companies are allowed to report.



Well he supports a man who wants to jail political opponents, and opposes the 4th and 14th amendments so he probably would be okay with the 1st being opposed


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 djones520 wrote:
Well, that is the people's responsibility. The state has zero fething business being involved with that.

Trump hates how the media operates? Well he's got billions of dollars. Let him start his own news media company that adhere's to how he thinks news should be reported, and lets see how well it does.


Seeing how he has breitbart to be his shill news organization it is happening alreadyn

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/10/16 15:26:55


Ustrello paints- 30k, 40k multiple armies
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/614742.page 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I was going to comment about how we could make the system better, but realistically I doubt anyone would agree because the Left basically controls the media at this point so I doubt they would be willing to give up that. Regardless, I hope for a new era of responsible journalist instead of knee jerk ratings runs.

"Black man killed by WHITE COPS". Whoops he was shooting at the cops, dont report that, it would make it less newsworthy, WE NEED MORE OUTRAGE!

 Tomsug wrote:
Semper krumps under the radar

 
   
Made in us
Fate-Controlling Farseer





Fort Campbell

 Ustrello wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 djones520 wrote:
Well, that is the people's responsibility. The state has zero fething business being involved with that.

Trump hates how the media operates? Well he's got billions of dollars. Let him start his own news media company that adhere's to how he thinks news should be reported, and lets see how well it does.


Seeing how he has breitbart to be his shill news organization it is happening alreadyn


Drudgereport has basically become a Trump nobslobbing website as well unfortunately.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/10/16 15:30:48


Full Frontal Nerdity 
   
Made in us
Never Forget Isstvan!





Chicago

 djones520 wrote:
 Ustrello wrote:
 d-usa wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 djones520 wrote:
Well, that is the people's responsibility. The state has zero fething business being involved with that.

Trump hates how the media operates? Well he's got billions of dollars. Let him start his own news media company that adhere's to how he thinks news should be reported, and lets see how well it does.


Seeing how he has breitbart to be his shill news organization it is happening alreadyn


Drudgereport has basically become a Trump nobslobbing website as well unfortunately.


To be honest both of them have been jokes for years now. But now they got the angry white nationalists to boost their numbers


Automatically Appended Next Post:
SemperMortis wrote:
I was going to comment about how we could make the system better, but realistically I doubt anyone would agree because the Left basically controls the media at this point so I doubt they would be willing to give up that. Regardless, I hope for a new era of responsible journalist instead of knee jerk ratings runs.

"Black man killed by WHITE COPS". Whoops he was shooting at the cops, dont report that, it would make it less newsworthy, WE NEED MORE OUTRAGE!


Next thing you will tell us is that the Jews control all of the worlds money through the Illuminati

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/10/16 15:33:41


Ustrello paints- 30k, 40k multiple armies
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/614742.page 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




Brisbane, Australia

SemperMortis wrote:
I was going to comment about how we could make the system better, but realistically I doubt anyone would agree because the Left basically controls the media at this point so I doubt they would be willing to give up that. Regardless, I hope for a new era of responsible journalist instead of knee jerk ratings runs.

"Black man killed by WHITE COPS". Whoops he was shooting at the cops, dont report that, it would make it less newsworthy, WE NEED MORE OUTRAGE!


Feel better after that unnecessary racial interjection? Got it out of your system?

It's true, the news media can be so unkind to white people. So unkind.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Back in real news though, there's some good news for you! A new FBI investigation has been opened into Clinton's emails.

I'm sure a lot of Donald's supporters will be happy with that.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/10/16 15:43:34


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




On a surly Warboar, leading the Waaagh!

 Kilkrazy wrote:
The foremost question that needs to be answered about the Trump debacle is why there are people who think a presidential candidate who thinks that kind of behaviour is acceptable, even normal , is worth defending.




Fething exactly!!!! The sheer lack of character and moral fiber in this individual alone should turn any American away with absolute disgust.
The fact that he's somehow viewed by a section of society as POTUS material just causes me to wonder what these individuals must be like in their actual life. The blind rage group, I get, to a point. The GOP loyalists, I used to get, but after all he's said and done, he's like cheering on cancer because you want to lose weight. The anti-HRC group, I once again get, but to a point. The rest, I can only imagine are truly the deplorables, and probably unaware of their deplorableness.
Anyone that can actually defend a person who can belittle a Gold Star family, support xenophobia with the whole wall nonsense, admit to...braggingly...being a lewd and crude human being, steal from his "charitable foundation" for personal use, run a scam university, shaft contractors, laborers and creditors that have done business with him, do insulting impersonations of the disabled, while all the while spouting his "ideas" for his potential Presidency that include using nukes, destroying the basis for the world's economy and abandoning and ransoming our allies, while engaging, like a teenage girl, in a week-long Twitter war with an ex-beauty queen has issues that I just don't understand and should bear the title "deplorable", because those actions and policies are deplorable to the essence of this nation. How anyone can think this "thing" is anyting that should be hoisted as the marquee representative of the USA is beyond me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
sirlynchmob wrote:
Relapse wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Relapse wrote:
 wuestenfux wrote:
Its unclear to me how somebody in the States could vote for Trump.
I've a TV report about cole miners. The majority of them seems to vote for Trump. What is he supposed to do for them? The white middle/lower class seems to love him. Scary.


Obama, and by extension, Clinton, has pretty much put many of them out of a job with new regulations. Right or wrong as right or wrong as these regulations are, I think she's reaping what was sown there.


If that were true, and it mostly isn't, in your experience, is the Secretary of State often responsible for issuing domestic energy regulation?



As I said, right or wrong. We have a lot of people here losing their jobs in coal mining and that's what I hear. In their minds, Clinton is in lock step with Obama and will continue what is perceived as his attack on coal.
No point arguing this with me, I'm just a messenger here.


you should remind the other side that coal is a dying industry, I'm sure those who made horse carriages blamed the president for their loss of jobs as well. those car things, such a fad. When you live in the past you'll get forgotten there.



Yup!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/10/16 15:50:37


 
   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




WA, USA

SemperMortis wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
Trump is now also saying that he will shut down the liberal media. Every time I think he maxed out his dictator impersonation, he manages to kick it up another level.


Source?


http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/15/media/donald-trump-media-journalists/index.html

At one of his events on Friday, Trump said he will "stop" the "sick media."
"The media is, indeed, sick, and it's making our country sick, and we're going to stop it," he said.
He did not specify how.


So he is going to stop media companies who are in reality little more then political cheer leaders from calling themselves news companies Goodbye Fox, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, and a host of others.

Would it really be terrible if the news companies actually reported news instead of creating outrage over perceived slights?


Yes, he is stopping liberal news media, like Saturday Night Live.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/16/media/donald-trump-snl/index.html

"In a tweet, the Republican nominee said that Baldwin's portrayal "stinks." He also called on NBC to end its "boring and unfunny" show. And he said that SNL was trying to rig the election against him. "

You are supporting a whining, petulant child.

 Ouze wrote:

Afterward, Curran killed a guy in the parking lot with a trident.
 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




On a surly Warboar, leading the Waaagh!

 curran12 wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
 djones520 wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
Trump is now also saying that he will shut down the liberal media. Every time I think he maxed out his dictator impersonation, he manages to kick it up another level.


Source?


http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/15/media/donald-trump-media-journalists/index.html

At one of his events on Friday, Trump said he will "stop" the "sick media."
"The media is, indeed, sick, and it's making our country sick, and we're going to stop it," he said.
He did not specify how.


So he is going to stop media companies who are in reality little more then political cheer leaders from calling themselves news companies Goodbye Fox, CNN, MSNBC, NBC, and a host of others.

Would it really be terrible if the news companies actually reported news instead of creating outrage over perceived slights?


Yes, he is stopping liberal news media, like Saturday Night Live.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/16/media/donald-trump-snl/index.html

"In a tweet, the Republican nominee said that Baldwin's portrayal "stinks." He also called on NBC to end its "boring and unfunny" show. And he said that SNL was trying to rig the election against him. "

You are supporting a whining, petulant child.



You got that right, but I believe Bill Maher said it better when he called him a "whiny, thin-skinned little b*tch".
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





SemperMortis wrote:
the Left basically controls the media


Ummm...Nope.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

The irony is that Trump would be nobody without the media.
   
Made in us
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard




Catskills in NYS

The only thing "the media" is biased towards is viewership.

Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
 kronk wrote:
Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
 sebster wrote:
Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
 
   
Made in us
Fate-Controlling Farseer





Fort Campbell

 d-usa wrote:
The irony is that Trump would be nobody without the media.


I know. The whole reason he won the primary was because of the media. He spent 1/4 of the money that Clinton did during the Primaries, yet curbstomped all of his competition. Solely due to the media.

Full Frontal Nerdity 
   
Made in us
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?





Fort Worth, TX

sirlynchmob wrote:
Relapse wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Relapse wrote:
 wuestenfux wrote:
Its unclear to me how somebody in the States could vote for Trump.
I've a TV report about cole miners. The majority of them seems to vote for Trump. What is he supposed to do for them? The white middle/lower class seems to love him. Scary.


Obama, and by extension, Clinton, has pretty much put many of them out of a job with new regulations. Right or wrong as right or wrong as these regulations are, I think she's reaping what was sown there.


If that were true, and it mostly isn't, in your experience, is the Secretary of State often responsible for issuing domestic energy regulation?



As I said, right or wrong. We have a lot of people here losing their jobs in coal mining and that's what I hear. In their minds, Clinton is in lock step with Obama and will continue what is perceived as his attack on coal.
No point arguing this with me, I'm just a messenger here.


you should remind the other side that coal is a dying industry, I'm sure those who made horse carriages blamed the president for their loss of jobs as well. those car things, such a fad. When you live in the past you'll get forgotten there.



CNN just had an article about what people involved in the coal industry in Ohio thought about Hillary's stance on it.
Here's the interesting bit:
"We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business," Clinton stated at a CNN Democratic Town Hall in Columbus, Ohio.
That was back in March. But when CNNMoney visited Ohio six months later, it was remarkable to see how many people remembered that line, word for word.
Clinton's very next line at that fateful town hall was, "And we're going to make it clear that we don't want to forget those people." But not a single soul that CNNMoney spoke to remembered the second line. Clinton went on to promise to help get coal workers into green energy jobs


Truth is, that is the price of progress. Things change. Cars replaced horse carts. Diesel trains replaced steam engines. Combine harvesters replaced lots of extra farm laborers. Streaming video services and Red Box are replacing video rental stores. The Interstate system replaced the need to travel lesser highway systems, shutting down minor tourist spots and services. The list goes on, as new industries replace old. Even the oil industry will have to largely go at some point, as we develop alternative energy sources for cars and other things, leaving oil to be used for manufacturing purposes instead of fuel. It sucks for those adversely affected by progress and change, I admit.

 BigWaaagh wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
The foremost question that needs to be answered about the Trump debacle is why there are people who think a presidential candidate who thinks that kind of behaviour is acceptable, even normal , is worth defending.




Fething exactly!!!! The sheer lack of character and moral fiber in this individual alone should turn any American away with absolute disgust.
The fact that he's somehow viewed by a section of society as POTUS material just causes me to wonder what these individuals must be like in their actual life. The blind rage group, I get, to a point. The GOP loyalists, I used to get, but after all he's said and done, he's like cheering on cancer because you want to lose weight. The anti-HRC group, I once again get, but to a point. The rest, I can only imagine are truly the deplorables, and probably unaware of their deplorableness.
Anyone that can actually defend a person who can belittle a Gold Star family, support xenophobia with the whole wall nonsense, admit to...braggingly...being a lewd and crude human being, steal from his "charitable foundation" for personal use, run a scam university, shaft contractors, laborers and creditors that have done business with him, do insulting impersonations of the disabled, while all the while spouting his "ideas" for his potential Presidency that include using nukes, destroying the basis for the world's economy and abandoning and ransoming our allies, while engaging, like a teenage girl, in a week-long Twitter war with an ex-beauty queen has issues that I just don't understand and should bear the title "deplorable", because those actions and policies are deplorable to the essence of this nation. How anyone can think this "thing" is anyting that should be hoisted as the marquee representative of the USA is beyond me.


Well, to be fair, Hillary did feth up big time on her IT security, and there is that unfortunate coincidence that people who happened to donate lots of money to her charity got to actually meet her.
So, they're both bad.

"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me."
- Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






Leerstetten, Germany

 djones520 wrote:
 d-usa wrote:
The irony is that Trump would be nobody without the media.


I know. The whole reason he won the primary was because of the media. He spent 1/4 of the money that Clinton did during the Primaries, yet curbstomped all of his competition. Solely due to the media.


Even before that:

- free exposure in the tabloids
- free exposure as a celebrity on WWE, SNL, etc
- his own reality show hosted and paid for by the media

His main worth is whatever value he randomly assigns to his "brand", and that brand wouldn't exist without the media creating it over the past decades.
   
Made in us
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?





Fort Worth, TX

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
The only thing "the media" is biased towards is viewership.


And finding planes, don't forget that.

"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me."
- Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks 
   
Made in us
Pyromaniac Hellhound Pilot





I can absolutely see the ticket of the man whose morning news briefing consists of articles that say nice things about him and the man that tried to start a state-owned newspaper to compete with the free press making sure that the media puts actual news first.

That Cracked article was right, right? He's Borat-ing us? He's been Borat-ing us the entire time, and his concession speech is going to be a giant 'shame on you'?
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





I just had an amusing thought...The party that has the mantra that we should privatize everything because anything the government produces is worse and incompetent claims to be upset with someone privatizing their IT security because the government version is more secure...
   
Made in us
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?





Fort Worth, TX

 skyth wrote:
I just had an amusing thought...The party that has the mantra that we should privatize everything because anything the government produces is worse and incompetent claims to be upset with someone privatizing their IT security because the government version is more secure...


Who knows who's been hacked and who hasn't at this point?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/10/16 16:35:50


"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me."
- Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle






 Spinner wrote:
I can absolutely see the ticket of the man whose morning news briefing consists of articles that say nice things about him and the man that tried to start a state-owned newspaper to compete with the free press making sure that the media puts actual news first.

That Cracked article was right, right? He's Borat-ing us? He's been Borat-ing us the entire time, and his concession speech is going to be a giant 'shame on you'?
Unfortunately no, Americans are just that blind. Even in this thread you can see the normal political bias has become a cult-like mentality. Kool-Aid! More Kool-Aid! I need my daily laughs.

Road to Renown! It's like classic Path to Glory, but repaired, remastered, expanded! https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/778170.page

I chose an avatar I feel best represents the quality of my post history.

I try to view Warhammer as more of a toolbox with examples than fully complete games. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




On a surly Warboar, leading the Waaagh!

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
sirlynchmob wrote:
Relapse wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
Relapse wrote:
 wuestenfux wrote:
Its unclear to me how somebody in the States could vote for Trump.
I've a TV report about cole miners. The majority of them seems to vote for Trump. What is he supposed to do for them? The white middle/lower class seems to love him. Scary.


Obama, and by extension, Clinton, has pretty much put many of them out of a job with new regulations. Right or wrong as right or wrong as these regulations are, I think she's reaping what was sown there.


If that were true, and it mostly isn't, in your experience, is the Secretary of State often responsible for issuing domestic energy regulation?



As I said, right or wrong. We have a lot of people here losing their jobs in coal mining and that's what I hear. In their minds, Clinton is in lock step with Obama and will continue what is perceived as his attack on coal.
No point arguing this with me, I'm just a messenger here.


you should remind the other side that coal is a dying industry, I'm sure those who made horse carriages blamed the president for their loss of jobs as well. those car things, such a fad. When you live in the past you'll get forgotten there.



CNN just had an article about what people involved in the coal industry in Ohio thought about Hillary's stance on it.
Here's the interesting bit:
"We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business," Clinton stated at a CNN Democratic Town Hall in Columbus, Ohio.
That was back in March. But when CNNMoney visited Ohio six months later, it was remarkable to see how many people remembered that line, word for word.
Clinton's very next line at that fateful town hall was, "And we're going to make it clear that we don't want to forget those people." But not a single soul that CNNMoney spoke to remembered the second line. Clinton went on to promise to help get coal workers into green energy jobs


Truth is, that is the price of progress. Things change. Cars replaced horse carts. Diesel trains replaced steam engines. Combine harvesters replaced lots of extra farm laborers. Streaming video services and Red Box are replacing video rental stores. The Interstate system replaced the need to travel lesser highway systems, shutting down minor tourist spots and services. The list goes on, as new industries replace old. Even the oil industry will have to largely go at some point, as we develop alternative energy sources for cars and other things, leaving oil to be used for manufacturing purposes instead of fuel. It sucks for those adversely affected by progress and change, I admit.

 BigWaaagh wrote:
 Kilkrazy wrote:
The foremost question that needs to be answered about the Trump debacle is why there are people who think a presidential candidate who thinks that kind of behaviour is acceptable, even normal , is worth defending.




Fething exactly!!!! The sheer lack of character and moral fiber in this individual alone should turn any American away with absolute disgust.
The fact that he's somehow viewed by a section of society as POTUS material just causes me to wonder what these individuals must be like in their actual life. The blind rage group, I get, to a point. The GOP loyalists, I used to get, but after all he's said and done, he's like cheering on cancer because you want to lose weight. The anti-HRC group, I once again get, but to a point. The rest, I can only imagine are truly the deplorables, and probably unaware of their deplorableness.
Anyone that can actually defend a person who can belittle a Gold Star family, support xenophobia with the whole wall nonsense, admit to...braggingly...being a lewd and crude human being, steal from his "charitable foundation" for personal use, run a scam university, shaft contractors, laborers and creditors that have done business with him, do insulting impersonations of the disabled, while all the while spouting his "ideas" for his potential Presidency that include using nukes, destroying the basis for the world's economy and abandoning and ransoming our allies, while engaging, like a teenage girl, in a week-long Twitter war with an ex-beauty queen has issues that I just don't understand and should bear the title "deplorable", because those actions and policies are deplorable to the essence of this nation. How anyone can think this "thing" is anyting that should be hoisted as the marquee representative of the USA is beyond me.


Well, to be fair, Hillary did feth up big time on her IT security, and there is that unfortunate coincidence that people who happened to donate lots of money to her charity got to actually meet her.
So, they're both bad.



It still elicits a chuckle from me. Thanks, I needed that.
   
Made in gb
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle





 Ustrello wrote:

Well he supports a man who wants to jail political opponents, and opposes the 4th and 14th amendments so he probably would be okay with the 1st being opposed


So if I have this right, some people are voting for Trump, saying he will defend the constitution because Clinton has said she wants to put some further restrictions on gun ownership, which may or may not fall: within the 2nd amendment where as Trupms position on it is:

Amendments
1st: Wants to restrict the freedom of the press to report anything against him. He also wants to be able to use violence to prevent protests against him.
4th: wants abolish this
5th: wants his political opponents put in prison without due process. Also thinks that due process should not apply to some people (namely anyone accused of being an illegal immigrant or terrorist)
6th: as per the 5th
8th: Feels this should not apply to anyone accused of terrorist offences.
13th: Trump has used companies that use indentured slaves to build his golf courses, and has refused to condemn them.
14th: He wants to repeal the 14th
19th: Whilst Trump himself has not come out against this, his supporters and his own son have, and he has not condemned them.

So out of 26 current amendments (25 if you ignore the one that was just repealing another) he is against 8. So he is against 1/3rd of the amendments. Never mind the ones that are not really relevant, and his other issues with other parts of the constitution, like article 3 and 7.

So, which candidate will protect the constitution and which one supports America?

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/10/16 18:12:48


 insaniak wrote:
Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons...
 
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo







*scratch head* So Clinton is energetic at the START of the debate and completely exhausted at the END of the debate? Ummm...I could see logic behind the claim if she was still all fine and dandy at the end(no way she can have that much energy without doping!) but isn't getting tired during exhausting thing pretty common without need for dopings? I know I'm exhausted even physically after speech and I'm not doing over hour long debates in her age!

Would be more logical to use that as arqument "her health is too poor" but then again...Logic and Trump?

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in us
Douglas Bader






 Steve steveson wrote:
So if I have this right, some people are voting for Trump, saying he will defend the constitution because Clinton has said she wants to put some further restrictions on gun ownership, which may or may not fall: within the 2nd amendment where as Trupms position on it is:

Amendments
1st: Wants to restrict the freedom of the press to report anything against him. He also wants to be able to use violence to prevent protests against him.
4th: wants abolish this
5th: wants his political opponents put in prison without due process. Also thinks that due process should not apply to some people (namely anyone accused of being an illegal immigrant or terrorist)
6th: as per the 5th
8th: Feels this should not apply to anyone accused of terrorist offences.
13th: Trump has used companies that use indentured slaves to build his golf courses, and has refused to condemn them.
14th: He wants to repeal the 14th
19th: Whilst Trump himself has not come out against this, his supporters and his own son have, and he has not condemned them.

So out of 26 current amendments (25 if you ignore the one that was just repealing another) he is against 8. So he is against 1/3rd of the amendments. Never mind the ones that are not really relevant, and his other issues with other parts of the constitution, like article 3 and 7.

So, which candidate will protect the constitution and which one supports America?


Yeah, it's pretty amusing how just a few pages back we had someone saying how they're voting for Trump because it's important to pick supreme court justices who will protect our rights. Unfortunately they avoided the question of how exactly Trump is in favor of protecting constitutional rights.

There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. 
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





SemperMortis wrote:
Hell no, but I would love for these fake news companies to get the hell out of the business. Independent review is basically the responsibility of the consumer at this point. And if you judge the average person, this is to much for them to handle. How many on here are DIE HARD democrats and will never vote republican and vice versa? Politics in the US has stopped being Politics and has become a National Sport. YAY MY TEAM WON! Absolute garbage.


Well here's news. There is no "independent" news or whatever. Not ONE news site out there that doesn't have it's own agenda and work for it. Not ONE person who doesn't have agenda and work for it.

So Trump accuses of news sites doing what everybody(including himself) does. Gee. Thanks for stating obvious. Trump really thinks everybody else but him is an idiot?

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Steve steveson wrote:
 Ustrello wrote:

Well he supports a man who wants to jail political opponents, and opposes the 4th and 14th amendments so he probably would be okay with the 1st being opposed


So if I have this right, some people are voting for Trump, saying he will defend the constitution because Clinton has said she wants to put some further restrictions on gun ownership, which may or may not fall: within the 2nd amendment where as Trupms position on it is:

Amendments
1st: Wants to restrict the freedom of the press to report anything against him. He also wants to be able to use violence to prevent protests against him.
4th: wants abolish this
5th: wants his political opponents put in prison without due process. Also thinks that due process should not apply to some people (namely anyone accused of being an illegal immigrant or terrorist)
6th: as per the 5th
8th: Feels this should not apply to anyone accused of terrorist offences.
13th: Trump has used companies that use indentured slaves to build his golf courses, and has refused to condemn them.
14th: He wants to repeal the 14th
19th: Whilst Trump himself has not come out against this, his supporters and his own son have, and he has not condemned them.

So out of 26 current amendments (25 if you ignore the one that was just repealing another) he is against 8. So he is against 1/3rd of the amendments. Never mind the ones that are not really relevant, and his other issues with other parts of the constitution, like article 3 and 7.

So, which candidate will protect the constitution and which one supports America?


Don't forget that he is also against the freedom of religion part of the 1st if it's the 'wrong' religion.
   
Made in us
Hangin' with Gork & Mork






 Steve steveson wrote:
So out of 26 current amendments (25 if you ignore the one that was just repealing another) he is against 8. So he is against 1/3rd of the amendments. Never mind the ones that are not really relevant, and his other issues with other parts of the constitution, like article 3 and 7.


But guns Steve...guns.

*places hand comfortingly on shoulder*

But guns.

Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
 
   
Made in us
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?





Fort Worth, TX

 skyth wrote:
 Steve steveson wrote:
 Ustrello wrote:

Well he supports a man who wants to jail political opponents, and opposes the 4th and 14th amendments so he probably would be okay with the 1st being opposed


So if I have this right, some people are voting for Trump, saying he will defend the constitution because Clinton has said she wants to put some further restrictions on gun ownership, which may or may not fall: within the 2nd amendment where as Trupms position on it is:

Amendments
1st: Wants to restrict the freedom of the press to report anything against him. He also wants to be able to use violence to prevent protests against him.
4th: wants abolish this
5th: wants his political opponents put in prison without due process. Also thinks that due process should not apply to some people (namely anyone accused of being an illegal immigrant or terrorist)
6th: as per the 5th
8th: Feels this should not apply to anyone accused of terrorist offences.
13th: Trump has used companies that use indentured slaves to build his golf courses, and has refused to condemn them.
14th: He wants to repeal the 14th
19th: Whilst Trump himself has not come out against this, his supporters and his own son have, and he has not condemned them.

So out of 26 current amendments (25 if you ignore the one that was just repealing another) he is against 8. So he is against 1/3rd of the amendments. Never mind the ones that are not really relevant, and his other issues with other parts of the constitution, like article 3 and 7.

So, which candidate will protect the constitution and which one supports America?


Don't forget that he is also against the freedom of religion part of the 1st if it's the 'wrong' religion.


Not just freedom of religion, but also the entire concept of the separation of church and state is something the current GOP has problems with.

"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me."
- Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




On a surly Warboar, leading the Waaagh!

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
 skyth wrote:
 Steve steveson wrote:
 Ustrello wrote:

Well he supports a man who wants to jail political opponents, and opposes the 4th and 14th amendments so he probably would be okay with the 1st being opposed


So if I have this right, some people are voting for Trump, saying he will defend the constitution because Clinton has said she wants to put some further restrictions on gun ownership, which may or may not fall: within the 2nd amendment where as Trupms position on it is:

Amendments
1st: Wants to restrict the freedom of the press to report anything against him. He also wants to be able to use violence to prevent protests against him.
4th: wants abolish this
5th: wants his political opponents put in prison without due process. Also thinks that due process should not apply to some people (namely anyone accused of being an illegal immigrant or terrorist)
6th: as per the 5th
8th: Feels this should not apply to anyone accused of terrorist offences.
13th: Trump has used companies that use indentured slaves to build his golf courses, and has refused to condemn them.
14th: He wants to repeal the 14th
19th: Whilst Trump himself has not come out against this, his supporters and his own son have, and he has not condemned them.

So out of 26 current amendments (25 if you ignore the one that was just repealing another) he is against 8. So he is against 1/3rd of the amendments. Never mind the ones that are not really relevant, and his other issues with other parts of the constitution, like article 3 and 7.

So, which candidate will protect the constitution and which one supports America?


Don't forget that he is also against the freedom of religion part of the 1st if it's the 'wrong' religion.


Not just freedom of religion, but also the entire concept of the separation of church and state is something the current GOP has problems with.


Just reason #318 why, when I see the little bands of deplorables with their 'Make America Great Again' paraphanalia on, I shake my head at the fact that the guy they're backing is basically looking to tear apart the very foundation of America and the fabric of it's culture. Fething fools. Fething sheeple.
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

 d-usa wrote:
What does any of that have to do with a candidate for POTUS declaring that he will stop media companies if elected?


Because anyone who invades my echo chamber of unjustified and misdirected righteous indignation is just a liberal conspiracy and deserves to go anyway.

First they came for the MSNBC, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a bleeding heart liberal.

Then they came for the Fox, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a right wing partisan.

Then they came for the CNN, and I did not speak out—
Because left or right they don't seem to be on my side.

Then they came for my my blog—and Trump News said I it was seditionist and reforming Nazism for pointing out that the last time the US turned away fleeing refugees most of them died.

Then they came for me - and the FBI said I was a terrorist and no one asked any more questions.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/10/16 22:40:27


   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: