Please wake up, Americans. You are absolutely being suckered, used, and bled dry by Donald Trumo

a reply to: bw1000

Gee another baseless post,once again ignorance being shared by a liberal,because it sounds good,doesn't need any truth,another downfall to this website

Quote is fake as many have stated. Pretty sure that picture from your fake meme was taken of him while on stage on the Oprah show. He was actually being cheered by her and her crowd for what he had to say hat day. Funny thing is that message they cheered is the same message he had during his campaign. Another perfect example of FAKE NEWS!

Link

What a bunch of Crao.

I didn't vote at all...!!!

They're both crooked as can be. Trump is NOT working for the lower class/middle or poor. Just another liar with a sensitive ego who plays on Twitter like a fifteen year old.

I hope he doesn't get elected again.

originally posted by: RazorV66
a reply to: TacSite18

This guy?

www.cnn.com...

The spokesman for the legal team....nice try.
Hardly the head of the legal team, not even a lawyer....he is supposedly a public relations guy.[/q[ex

]Marc Kasowitz is out as Mr. Trump's personal attorney, CBS News chief White House correspondent Major Garrett reports. And Kasowitz's spokesman, Mark Corallo, has resigned, Garrett says.

Source

originally posted by: RazorV66

originally posted by: bw1000
Is the Trump phenomenon mostly about escapism?
Not one wants politics for one or two adminstrations.

(Not no-one I know, many voted against Trump.
The irony of this place is huge - hich celebrates its democracy , where most people voted against Trump.
Also despite Hilary being one of the most unpopular president candidates for many years, 3 million more votes.)

Jesus Christ....not the 3 million more votes story again?
For anyone not following along for the last 8-9 months....that is why we have the Electoral College.
Commiefornia(I really like whoever came up with that name) shouldn't get to elect a President by themselves.

Trump is the one who keeps bringing this up, not the media outlets. He has this $500,000 commission that is a complete waste of money, all because his ego won't allow him to accept that Hillery is more popular among American voters than he is.

a reply to: IAMTAT

HA! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! LOLOLOLOLOL!! ROFLMAO!!! (smackin' leg) (snort) LOLOL!!!

If that isn't the greatest comeback in the history of the Universe, I don't know what is!!

The irony of that just hits like a great big fat BRICK right to the middle of the forehead of the OP!! LOL!!

Snopes, the most biased, foaming at the mouth, dyed in the wool, liberal outlet on Earth (posing as a balance site) can't even deny the falsity of the OP!

How incredibly fantastic!!!! WAY TO GO!!

a reply to: Bigburgh

What a dilemna...

originally posted by: bw1000

originally posted by: RazorV66

Jesus Christ....not the 3 million more votes story again?
For anyone not following along for the last 8-9 months....that is why we have the Electoral College.
Commiefornia(I really like whoever came up with that name) shouldn't get to elect a President by themselves.

It is a fundamental point about what democracy means and if we want to have half a brain each, the question is never going to go away.

Obviously everyone knows about the electoral college - that is how Trump got there, we do realise that.

The fundamental question which will not go away is ...

... how can a nation which calls itself a democracy, based upon populism itself - the fundamental idea of the choice of the people - have a president and main party voted by millions less than the losers?

Democracy to most people means populism - choice of the majority.

It is possible to retain the electoral college system with newer vote transfer systems accurately reflecting what the majority of American people voted for.

In the UK, there was a referendum last year about whether to stay in or leave the European Union.
What kind of referendum (expression of the people's choice) would it be if "leave" had gained 3 million more votes than "stay", but some archaic systems made for a bygone era, forced the UK to stay in the EU?

Similarly, in the Scottish independence referendum there a couple of years ago, what nonsense would it be to choose the option which got many percentage points less than the biggest voted option?

We know about the electoral colleges - made for a different era, and which today fan easily be improved to reflect real democratic choices.

Sigh, let me fill you in on something. These 3 million votes you are harping on came almost exclusively from California, my home state. The dems pretty much have a lock on everything here. Still, I make my way to the polls and vote knowing full well it is a pointless exercise. Conservatives have virtually no chance of becoming the majority here so many stay home. Now, imagine the libs got their wish and abolished the EC. Suddenly, a Republican vote in California would matter on a national level, which would prompt all the millions of disillusioned stay at home conservatives to get their a$$es off the couch and get to the polls. We still wouldn't be a majority in the state, but who cares? Those millions of votes would completely erase any advantage for the dems on a national level. Every time. See? As usual the libs don't even know what they're asking for.

Time to pull your head out of the sand. a reply to: bw1000

There is only one problem with your thread, OP. It's fake news.
Trump never said that - buy hey, I understand you guys don't actually care about reality.
This thread might be the most humiliating for an OP in this whole campaign, election and Presidency.

originally posted by: Variable2027
a reply to: bw1000

May I politely ask your age, political affiliation and general consensus on America as it stands?

Early 40s, I have no general political affiliation though supported most of what Bernie Sanders stood for in his campaigns.
And, now with what I have been calling the Trump phenomenon, what can anyone say?
I don't know if anyone can answer that question anymore, at this time anyway, in terms of traditional or even recent US politics before the day Trump was elected.


This phenomenon of Trump and his elitist multi-millionaire, CEO style possee, is not Democrat, this is not Republican, and is not even politics as we know it, let alone, probably, serious politics.

(In a way I think that was exactly the point of why a lot of disaffected people voted Trump. The anti-political protest vote. But why Trump, he is not one of the people!!! He will use the people much more than most career politicians.)

What can be and will be interesting is the degree to which the Republicans support Trump in his obsessions.
They are all, of course, unlike Trump career politicians - maybe the pariah of this new, modern USA, yes, but they take up newrly every other post in the party and Trump is the outsider.

I understand one thing.
The Republicans' other candidates last year were all so bad or unappealing that in a way I can almost see why Republicans went with the popular Apprentice presenter and billionaire rather than favour any other candidate against him.

I don't think Hilary was that bad.
I understand it does look like kabals - Bushes and Clintons - and for ordinary people just reading about clones associated with clubs and upper middle class clones, a handful of colleges or law schools day in, day out, who all know each other or basically are each other - I can in a way understand the desire for change.

(But oh my God - what a way to do it - Trump? He is only going to be worse than the usual faces by as many times as he is more wealthy than they are, or many more times.)

I do believe that the old faces, career politicians, do often care reasonably for the people, but are often undeniably complacent at best. Terribly destructive at worst - GW Bush.
(If people are looking to blame somewhere for squandering trillions or taxes - why the hell vote Republican not a decade after Bush's absolutely pointless, treacherous, trillions wasting Iraq War?)

I think Hilary was ok, but Bernie really good, and it is a shame that Hilary stood in the way.
She has had a very successful life, from First Lady to Home Secretary.
I don't have anything against her except that she ought to have judged the mood much better - did she really think that people wanted another Clinton, even though he was liked,, and are we to expect Chelsea standing in the future?
It just quite blind and selfish and there was no need to stand in the way of Bernie for that.

While I don't understand the personal stuff against Hilary, who has always worked hard for her version of "for the good", whether it is your version or not also - I do feel some way bitter that she stood in the way of Bernie.
Bernie would easily have beaten Trump.

I do understand that US industry has been downgraded over the decades, while it is the story of much of the west, except Germany and very few other nations, maybe.

People need social guarantees and rights. Americans talk about the Constitution and the rights or the free world, but the USA is still in a place or low development re. rights and there is a lot to be done.
People often just talk and shout in the USA, while the reality can be much worse than you hear from them. "Nothing like being positive" is not an attitude to rely on forever.

For one thing I was sure Hilary was going to be the person to at last introduce proper minimum wages across the board, and stop the millions of workers in service industries having to rely on tips to feed their children even two meals a day.

That needs to be done, badly
I doubt Trump will do it, it doesn't seem important to him (he only knows three quarters of a million dollars a days including Sundays for God's sake).
But I hope he does.

Obama NEEDED to make the first moves to introduce a workable health system which does not exclude those who are in unfortunate circumstances.
I saw Bernie improving that, if he'd gotten a chance, even Hilary too, but now something which was started - only started - might be in absolute jeopardy.
Still there is a chance that this man (who earns in a day more than most workers pay in medical insurance in a lifetime) might be prevented from ruining necessary developments.

Some things of Trump can make good sense - reduced military spending, not paying as much to police the world (while he has substantially bumped up the figures), he knows 9/11 involved pre-rigged bombs in the building and thinks it likely it was an inside job.

But I am fairly sure half the things he says are just lies to win favour among tired, dejected voters
He saw in advance how anti-establishment many ordinary people were going and he is taking every advantage of it he can.

Yes, including many lies.

We will see if what he has said actually counts for anything.
To be honest, for most of the dejected people, I think this time is "their time" to hold 2 fingers up and shout, and they don't even truly expect Trump to come good.
It's a kind of party - in your face to those cliques they feel have ignored their classes for decades.