Topic: Up Like Trump - page 93. (Read 572791 times)

I strongly agree. Stick to the constitution and bill of rights, forget the toxic and intolerant narrative from the radical evangelicals, accept reality and tell the truth about issues, difficulties and possible solutions, open discussion, fight corruption, neopotism and cronyism as much as possible, respecting the individual and his independence and responsibility toward himself, lean and efficient gov and above all USA 1st and safe.

RNC weighs dumping Trump, who's now entirely at their mercy

"Sorry, but the idea that they can do anything to truly mitigate Trump's down-ticket damage starting as late as mid-October is laughable. Certainly they know that.

What's perhaps funniest about this is the fact that Trump—who's going to negotiate "the best" deals around the world as president—has left himself entirely at the mercy of the RNC because he was too lazy and undisciplined to develop his own ground game. "

http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/8/15/1560342/-RNC-weighs-dumping-Trump-who-s-now-entirely-at-their-mercy?detail=emailclassic&link_id=1&can_id=97f6faa5bb95417166281e19fc7d0e57&source=email-rnc-weighs-dumping-trump-whos-now-entirely-at-their-mercy&email_referrer=rnc-weighs-dumping-trump-whos-now-entirely-at-their-mercy&email_subject=rnc-weighs-dumping-trump-whos-now-entirely-at-their-mercy

Well, do you imply the culture of corruption is more firmly established than in 2012?



http://www.newsmax.com/Health/donald-trump-never-voted-bill-clinton/2016/01/19/id/710093/

O'Reilly: Did you vote for any Democrats in the last 30 years for president?
Special:
Trump: It's probable. I mean, I would always vote for the best person.

O'Reilly: Did you vote for Bill Clinton?

Trump: No, I didn't.

O'Reilly: Did you vote for Bush the Younger twice?

Trump: Did I vote for [George W.] Bush twice? Yes. I mean, I don't think he did a particularly good job. I think he got us into Iraq, which was a disaster. But I voted for Bush, yes.

O'Reilly: And then you voted for McCain against Obama the first time?
Trump: I was on his committee. I raised a lot of money for McCain. … In all fairness to McCain, I don't think Abraham Lincoln could have won that election. I voted for McCain.

Trump NEVER voted for Obama.

Just wait until Trump loses even WORSE than Romney, whom he criticizes ad nauseum for losing to Obama.....

He didn't register Republican until a year after voting for Obama.

Bah.  "Nevertrumpers," as well as the Libertarian jokers, and others, only act from the point of view of Democratic power structure to fragment and divide enemy forces. 

Divide, and Conquer.

Yes indeed!

The Democratic party has shown itself as a honey-pot for all of the slimy neo-cons, crony corporatists, war profiteering leaches, etc from the Republican party.  To a degree these scum, who caused me to never even consider being a Republican, are neatly packaging and labeling themselves 'Never Trumpers'.  This would be a golden opportunity for the Republican party to be re-born since the bottom feeders are self segregating and flocking to the Democratic side on their own.

On top of that, I'm certain that the Democratic party contains a lot of decent people who are very disenchanted.  A 'rebirth' of the Republicans who tried to document and adhere to a better set of principles could probably attract many of these folks.

I won't vote for a DemoCrip OR a ReBloodlican.

I see these current events as a reshaping of both the Democratic and Republican parties, similar to what happened in 1967-1972.   In that gradual context, the likes of Sanders, Clinton, and Trump emerge.  But the process is in play regardless.

I think if that were true in a technical sense, I would have heard about it.  It is clear that Trump is quite 'liberal' in a lot of technical ways as am I and as are a lot of his friends.  The modern left have not let go the term 'liberal' and have dragged it behind their politics which are increasingly regressive in practice.

Trump and Sanders are, to me, in the same category: Insurgents.  Both attempted to capture and ride the machinery of the Republican and Democrat parties respectively.  Unfortunately for Sanders, his skill levels did not rise to the level necessary to win his battle.  Trump's did.  Sanders had a somewhat tougher struggle as well since the Democrat machine was more corrupt (e.g., Wasserman-Shultz), more rigged (e.g., 'superdelagates') and generally more efficient.

While Sanders and Trump both had the advantage of popular support in their respective insurgencies, Trump's was much more overwhelming and it includes Dems, Liberals, and Progressives who label themselves as such under older and more technically and logically consistent definitions.

At the end of the day, Sanders runs out the clock in his newly acquired third home on the lake and is unlikely to be heard from again.  Trump (hopefully) goes on to save our nation from it's near-death close call and I hope will also forge the Republican party into a lean, mean fighting machine with elements of real liberalism and progressivism when these are of use in Making America Great Again and trying to keep it that way.

(or Trump turns out to be a phony which is also possible.)

You're in good company. So is Trump.

I disagree on one point: they are only shaping it in their heads... Their real preoccupation is to get money... Some Romans did it while the barbarians knocked on the doors... They did keep their newly acquired wealth long

In case you haven't noticed, over the years the two parties have swapped positions several times. And both have adopted platform points of the other multitudes of times.

The only two differences between the parties are:
1. The names, Democrat, Republican;
2. Some of the points that they have swapped this time around.

The whole thing is about big business and the one-worlders keeping the people so occupied with non-essentials that the people don't see how these behind-the-scenes wealthy are shaping the world.

Very true. The republican establishment is unable to win against the democrats and not interested in it. They want the money from pay to play... They are just less efficient than the foundation in raking the big bucks worldwide. The republicans establishment should have been taken over by the tea party long time ago... But they successfully merged it.

Furthermore the so called evangelical right is in total desillusion. It's over for them.

It is ridiculous to label Trump as a Democrat agent. He is just anti-establishment, and is against any sort of compromise with the Democrats. That's it. It is the Republican leadership figures, such as John Boner and Lindsey Graham, who are acting like Democrat agents. These people want Hitlery as the POTUS, and they are doing everything they can to harm the Trump campaign.

If Trump is 'working for' anyone, he's certainly not been being reimbursed very well.  Seems to have nearly zero friends in the establishment or corporate world.

I'm still a registered Democrat.  When I registered 30 years ago or so the reasons made sense to me.  To be sure I had some mis-information and mis-conceptions, and various philosophies of mind have shifted.  Sometimes they have done a 180.  'Democrat' is not a dirty word to me, and compared to 'Republican' from back in the day I continue to believe that it is preferable for the timeframe.

Trump was asked back then why he was a Republican and the best he could come up with is 'I don't know.'  Trump was from an earlier generation than I and there had been shifts and upheavals in political party direction between when Trump made his choice and when I did.

Gen. Flynn who nearly became Trump's VP pick seems to be in my situation wrt party affiliation (and demoralization.)

Anyway, the cross-over seen in a lot of Trump's friends and associates is a big plus in my mind.  I like flexibility and adaptability which happens to be the biggest reason I avoid the Libertarians.  They seem hopelessly ossified to me and easily drawn in the wrong direction because of it.

My hope is that win, lose, or draw, the Trump-driven populist movement has pocketed the Republican party and will turn it into something I can actually support to a degree.  Seems possible.

Sorry.  Trump now and his history of actions simply don't show him "working for a set of people."

Also, he's pretty much got a history of paying off all parties as was required.

Looks like there are still a bunch of Trump supporters who don't know he's a Democrat working for the same people Hillary is.

Notice how much media attention he gets vs Hillary?

When they wanted to stop Ron Paul did they report on the "crazy" things he said?

Or did they just ignore him?

Ignoring worked against Ron Paul, why would they not do the same to Trump if they truly did not support him?

I have stacks of CD's left over.  In fact, I think I still have some re-used AOL floppy disks in a box somewhere (and if Assange's 'insurance.aes256' file was on one and the passphrase was [suddenly, for some reason, made] public, I could probably dig it up...)

But you are right (...in terms of technology although few people of 'distributor' class should have much trouble figuring out how to burn an .iso image to CD.)  That is why I suggested several different size-flavors of image, and I expect that the 16G mem stick would be a common size and form factor at the moment.  If the distributor is 'close' to the consumer, as would be the case as I imagine things, then the decision could be a customized one.

A common attack mode is to bait the adversary into a position favorable to one's own strategy.  Having people rely on cloud-based and real-time delivered data is a good strategy because it introduces a control point.  I think it would be healthy to have a workable alternative in case attacks against this weak point are undertaken right here in 'the land of the free.'

[edit: slight boxed to make a currently relevant point]