If you HAD to Vote for One...

The identification of muslims in America will in fact include muslims who are legal Americans

Click to expand...

There is no broad public support for a mandated religious identification database to be implemented in the US.

The creation of one would be opposed by most liberal protestants, certainly Catholics, certainly Jews, certainly atheists and likely many more groups who come from a history of persecution such as Mormons and Hindus.

After 9/11, the worst attack from terrorists to take place occurred on US soil there was no broad support for such a database and there isn't support for it now.

The creation of a public database would be a great shame to America.

Now with that said, do the intelligence services consider religion when investigation terrorism? Yes. Should they be allowed to continue? Yes.

But I wouldn't worry about a religious identification bill occurring any time soon. The Donald can talk all the talk in the world but this kind of bill makes most Americans skin crawl and it wouldn't be effective anyways since religion is not a predictor of violence. Despite the trend of attackers coming from a specific belief system, that information does nothing to help law enforcement investigations.

BrianSD_42 said:

There is no broad public support for a mandated religious identification database to be implemented in the US

Click to expand...

I would argue that the support is growing though. Not shrinking. And any attack that can be tied loosely or tightly to extreme muslins will only help that growth.

If Trump becomes President, there is a more likely chance than not that his VP will also be President at some point during those 4 years. That choice is crucial. I honestly think that Trump, the adolescent that he is, will find a way to leave/abandon the position be it legally or illegally.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Hepar said:

But by voting for him is in fact a vote for it being OK. Whether you want to see that or not is up to you. I would hope that you would. And yes, yes he can. The identification of muslims in America will in fact include muslims who are legal Americans. That is running roughshod over the civil liberties of actual, legal Americans.

Click to expand...

I guess it's a risk I'm willing to take, as bad as it sounds or as horrible a person that makes me. It's not that I hate Muslims, I've been to a Muslim country and they let me tour a few of their Mosques (which were absolutely beautiful). But I see such a move by an "outsider" President to be suicide. No doubt Trump plays on fears and says dumb stuff to drive up the ratings, but I don't think he is stupid enough to actually try it. Therefore, I personally think the risk is low.

But that's also the point. The current leadership of BOTH parties has disenfranchised so many voters, so many Americans, has disgusted and angered us enough, that many are able to simply say "you know what? I don't GAF! I dislike the establishment so much, I'd rather put Trump in charge then any of YOU!"

THAT should be what concerns everyone. Our leadership has become so toxic... this is seen as a solution. Let's face it, if everyone was happily getting along and felt they were getting a fair shake from our country and our leadership, a candidate like Trump would never come about.

I say, put Sanders in and let's make the election really interesting. He'd be better than Hillary, and might actually be able to defeat Trump.

Jernik said:

I guess it's a risk I'm willing to take, as bad as it sounds or as horrible a person that makes me.

Click to expand...

I obviously oppose your decision, but the fact that you can admit that I respect. I would be far happier if more people that thought the same had the moxy to come out and say it.

A Dialogue With a 22-Year-Old Donald Trump Supporter


--> Donald Trump and the Backlash Against Political Correctness - The Atlantic

I read this and thought it was interesting. The Trump supporter makes several points that I agree with, in particular that PC-ness is out of control and a Hillary view would be a validation of PC culture and everything that comes with it.

The gentleman pointed out that a few days ago Google honored on its doodle picture, the birthday of an activist who just a few years ago praised Osama Bin Ladin (yes post 911) for standing up to the US. She also openly supported a leftist terrorist organization in Peru that according to Human Rights Watch (hardly right wingers) directly executed or disappeared over 30,000 people during their rise.

How could this be true? I didn't believe so I started searching and yep. It's true.

Yuri Kochiyama, today?s Google Doodle, fought for civil rights ? and praised Osama bin Laden - Vox

Google Honors Bin Laden Supporter With Google Doodle | The Daily Caller

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...roversial-civil-rights-figure-yuri-kochiyama/


WTF is going on Google. Get your act together.

lane:

First, I never excused Trump's comment(s). But for some here to criticize his comments, maybe one should look at the person of interest. Sure, he is wrong to say it...but the greater injustice to minority is Warren...yet no one talks about that. :loco:

This is why I pointed out above that people think Trump (and Republican) is attacking women, YET Obama and Obamacare make a much bigger attack against women. But you see liberals talk senselessly about Trump's attack. Bogus.

Second, can someone point to a definitive link showing Warren is Native American?

This is what I found when I googled: Is Elizabeth Warren Native American or What? - The Atlantic

Thai said:

First, I never excused Trump's comment(s). But for some here to criticize his comments, maybe one should look at the person of interest. Sure, he is wrong to say it...but the greater injustice to minority is Warren...yet no one talks about that. :loco:

This is why I pointed out above that people think Trump (and Republican) is attacking women, YET Obama and Obamacare make a much bigger attack against women. But you see liberals talk senselessly about Trump's attack. Bogus.

Second, can someone point to a definitive link showing Warren is Native American?

This is what I found when I googled: Is Elizabeth Warren Native American or What? - The Atlantic

Click to expand...

I think the point is, why should it even matter?

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk

Thai said:

Quote: “A few years ago, this guy would have been carrying our bags.”

Click to expand...

What does this have to do with the Sanders picture I posted?

Thai said:

Obamacare: “Covering contraception is cost neutral since it saves money by keeping women healthy and preventing spending on other health services,”

-----------------------------------------

So, pregnancy is a PUNISHMENT and a DISEASE. Abortion is the cure apparently.

Oh yeah, it is the Republicans that are waging war on women....reggers:

Click to expand...

No. Contraception is the cure, abortion is the health risk. :doh:

Thai said:

First, I never excused Trump's comment(s). But for some here to criticize his comments, maybe one should look at the person of interest. Sure, he is wrong to say it...but the greater injustice to minority is Warren...yet no one talks about that. :loco:

This is why I pointed out above that people think Trump (and Republican) is attacking women, YET Obama and Obamacare make a much bigger attack against women. But you see liberals talk senselessly about Trump's attack. Bogus.

Second, can someone point to a definitive link showing Warren is Native American?

This is what I found when I googled: Is Elizabeth Warren Native American or What? - The Atlantic

Click to expand...

Definitive link? You are familiar with the history of native americans, right? While the were being murdered, raped, having their children taken and 're-educated' they weren't exactly keeping official records. This kind of history being passed along solely by family is not all that uncommon. Can you provide a definitive link showing she is lieing?



I find it bizarre that conservatives seem to scrutinize every single detail or statement made by a democrat, but are then willing to completely overlook the things Trump says. Holding him accountable for NOTHING. He has blatantly lied so many times, then gone back on it, then lied again. None of his racist rhetoric or non sense of building walls is he ever held accountable for. Its a stunning example of confirmation bias.

Thai said:

First, I never excused Trump's comment(s). But for some here to criticize his comments, maybe one should look at the person of interest. Sure, he is wrong to say it...but the greater injustice to minority is Warren...yet no one talks about that. :loco:

This is why I pointed out above that people think Trump (and Republican) is attacking women, YET Obama and Obamacare make a much bigger attack against women. But you see liberals talk senselessly about Trump's attack. Bogus.

Second, can someone point to a definitive link showing Warren is Native American?

This is what I found when I googled: Is Elizabeth Warren Native American or What? - The Atlantic

Click to expand...

Obamacare is an attack against women? Really?

ndcent said:

Obamacare is an attack against women? Really?

Click to expand...

The fact that you believe that post is hilarious. Obamacare is an attack on women and if you believe otherwise than I guess I hope you don't have Daughters.

wadle5 said:

The fact that you believe that post is hilarious. Obamacare is an attack on women and if you believe otherwise than I guess I hope you don't have Daughters.

Click to expand...

Please, enlighten us with details...

I find it bizarre that conservatives seem to scrutinize every single detail or statement made by a democrat, but are then willing to completely overlook the things Trump says. Holding him accountable for NOTHING. He has blatantly lied so many times, then gone back on it, then lied again.

Click to expand...

I find that BOTH sides do this. Often.

I think that if Gary Johnson can just get himself into the conversation, he could win by simply not being Frump or Shillary. Can we add him to this poll?

Dont want to vote for Hilary? Don't want to vote from Trump?



They get to Trump at about the 6 minute mark

Well he would have to beat shillary first, and because the democrats aren't that interested in the opinion their voters, she has pre-purchased all the "super delagates" who get to override the masses.

At least Gary Johnson could face them in a general election.

-JD- said:

Please, enlighten us with details...

Click to expand...

Trump's rampant misogyny is justified because the Affordable Care Act is an attack against women and his racism is validated because Elizabeth Warren might have Native American ancestry.

Just go with it, dude.

The big problem as I see it, as that Hilary and Trump are both of the left. Big government, strong arm, lawless narcicissts. Whoever wins, the federal government will be bigger, less responsive to the best interests of the people, and more ambivalent, if not downright hostile toward civil liberties. Trump and Hillary are both a complete disaster. The OPs question is about who of only the two would I pick.

In favor of Trump the argument I could make is that Hillary is guaranteed to be 100% disaster. Her lawlessness is well documented, and a victory in November will only embolden her to further lavish herself with graft and to further weaponize the government against her enemies and enemies of the left. Trump is just as corruptible, but even if he's a nightmare 70% of the time, that's at least a 30% improvement.

In favor of Hillary, I can say this. I see, without question, that there is going to be a major crisis in the next four years, likely more than one. President Hillary would respond like a leftist with leftist policies that will make the problem worse. My hope is that people would finally see through the bullshit and realise leftism for the nightmare that it is and that Democrats would finally have to own their failure. Under Trump, when the crisis hits, the man who has no principles and always operates on instincts will respond with his leftist instincts to enact leftist policies, but under the false mantle of conservatism. His leftist policies as stated above will make the problem worse, but the public will associate the failure with conservatism and it'll be Herbert Hoover all over again.

I'm stuck, and can only keep praying for divine intercession between now and November.

Brique said:

In favor of Hillary, I can say this. I see, without question, that there is going to be a major crisis in the next four years, likely more than one. President Hillary would respond like a leftist with leftist policies that will make the problem worse. My hope is that people would finally see through the bullshit and realise leftism for the nightmare that it is and that Democrats would finally have to own their failure. Under Trump, when the crisis hits, the man who has no principles and always operates on instincts will respond with his leftist instincts to enact leftist policies, but under the false mantle of conservatism. His leftist policies as stated above will make the problem worse, but the public will associate the failure with conservatism and it'll be Herbert Hoover all over again.

Click to expand...

Do you see the House and Senate shifting to the democrats within this time too?

Hard to say at this point. When Cruz dropped out and Trump was polling nationally in the toilet for the general, I thought it was all but assured Republicans would lose big in Congress. Hillary may be managing to save the Republican Congress from themselves by being so terrible. So at this point anything could happen.

You do raise another good point though. Would I trust a Democrat Congress to resist Trump more or a Republican Congress to resist Hillary more? Given the Republicans' spinelessness over the last eight years, I think that a president Trump would be more held in check by a Democrat Congress.