It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Donald Trump Donald Trump Donald Trump Donald Trump

page: 20
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 06:19 PM
a reply to: Fromabove

And the fact is, people in this country discriminate every day. Even you and I. We discriminate about the people we hang around with, who we engage in conversation with, who we live near, where we shop, etc. and there's no stink about that. And you know why, because it's a "personal" decision.

Likewise, this country needs to make a "personal" decision about who we let into this country. This isn't the late 1800's or early 1900's, when the country needed cheap labor for manufacturing. In fact, with the exception of a lot of jobs that most Americans don't want, there is hardly the need for cheap labor anymore, but corporations (and politicians) will take it if they can get it.

There is no need for us to be a melting pot at this time. What we need to be is vigilant. Terrorism is a tactic, born from an idea. How you do identify every single individual that identifies with these beliefs?

And I honestly believe that most in this forum who disagree with suspending Muslims from entering would have a different outlook if a close loved one was a victim of a terrorist attack by a Muslim. It's ALWAYS different when it's personal.

And Donald is just voicing what has been reiterated on just about every major talk radio show for the past couple years. Heck, it's probably something discussed at a bar inside the beltway between pols every day of the week. It's just now someone has dared broach this at the national level.

No goosestepping, no brownshirt, just a desire to minimize the potential to import terrorists onto American soil.

Maybe we should be like Putin and threaten to nuke ISIS.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 06:22 PM
a reply to: whyamIhere

Err.... polling within the GOP isn't indicative of the pendulum swinging between the GOP and Dems.

Trump polls well with the decided within the GOP but 70% of those polled within the GOP are still undecided.

It is a bit early to celebrate.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 06:34 PM
Take note folks, it's on the rise, and echoes of nationalism and far right politics are creeping in to America.

This article is from August, however, it's well worth the read.

Donald Trump and the shadow of Europe’s far-right


The article's author, Evan Osnos, watched the first Republican debate in early August alongside Matthew Heimbach, a well-known young white supremacist, and a group of his friends. Heimbach, who claims Trump's barnstorming, nativist rhetoric has brought disaffected white youth "out of their slumber," is not just another basement-dwelling extremist. He's a regular on the far-right radical lecture circuit and "has met with European Fascists, including members of the Golden Dawn, in Greece," Osnos writes.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 06:36 PM

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: whyamIhere

Err.... polling within the GOP isn't indicative of the pendulum swinging between the GOP and Dems.

Trump polls well with the decided within the GOP but 70% of those polled within the GOP are still undecided.

It is a bit early to celebrate.

Not celebrating at all. Calling it like I see it.

I see Obama's lack of action as a bad sign for the Dems.

I don't really care other than the sheer amusement.

We learned in High School our vote doesn't matter for POTUS.

So, I won't pretend it does...

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 06:37 PM
In their quest for headlines, the republican party is seeking to gain as much attention and press coverage as possible. And it leaves many to wonder what is going through their minds, is what they say really what they believe or just merely for their attention.

Trump like so many of the Republican hopefuls, tend to forget that the president only runs 1/3 of the government. And many of the policies that Trump is suggesting would require not only backing from the Congress, but also to survive the court challenges that would rise up from such.

Many of the statements that Trump is stating, resembles that of the NAZI party, while the man, in his words and actions resemble that of Caser Caligula, where he is trying to get the people who support him so riled up, that they are willing to follow him either out of loyalty or via fear.

What more and more is finding so distasteful is that he is looking for and finding those he can scapegoat. He and others who are stating that the USA should be going after the Muslims, failed to see what the prior administrations saw and were taking great pains to avoid using, and with good reason. To quote the movie: Men in Black: A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals.

A person can be swayed, but a group, and one starts to see the flames of hatred and mob mentality going all out. And what Trump is stating, is making those who the USA need to accomplish their goals, are ultimately making them very nervous, and that kind of nervousness means trouble for the USA.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 06:37 PM

originally posted by: whyamIhere

We learned in High School our vote doesn't matter for POTUS.

So, I won't pretend it does...

Thank you for being awake!

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 06:53 PM

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: CornShucker

Your understanding of history is poor. Government in the US has always been made up of career politicians, with the exception of those at the local level.
-- snip --

Hmm... My understanding of "history", or rather your opinion of my understanding, depends completely on whether you are referring to the documents written by our Founding Fathers that serve as the foundation of our government OR you are referring to the actions of those who've held office over the years.

It would seem to me that much thought was put into the foibles of human nature and temptations that come with power. If not, then why expend such effort in laying out clearly defined separation of powers and setting limits to the extent to which the federal government could impose its will on the individual states making up the union?

Just look at how long it took for circumstances to show the necessity for a term limit on the presidency. The office was never intended to be a de-facto monarchy. As Mark Twain said, "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason.”

If you only are of a mind to discuss how those elected over the years have behaved, that is a different matter...

The old joke about how Some Honest Men DO go to Washington but d@mned few come home is sadly close to the truth.

It isn't 100% yet and for that we should be thankful. Our former governor, Evan Bayh, was good for our state and I was glad for the chance to cast my vote to help send him to Washington. While many read his return as a ploy to set a campaign for higher office, I believed him when he said that the day came when he could no longer stay in an environment based more on scoring political points than working to accomplish positive legislation for the country.

I am neither naive nor a rube...

You apparently haven't read my posts on the relationship between psychiatry and positions of power. Put simply:

Physical psychopaths will always make up some percentage of the general population because of a dysfunctional amygdala. When you take that information and apply the Peter principle, the 3% - 4% estimate of psychopaths in positions of power is probably far too low, imo. It would probably be more realistic to expect that in most cases those at the very top of the food chain will be the psychopaths who have successfully outmaneuvered all the "less effective" psychopaths.

Their history, though, doesn't change what the written documents our Founding Fathers created say.

For the time being, it is still a free country so I will paraphrase the current resident of the WH:
If you like your opinion, you can keep your opinion.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 07:12 PM

originally posted by: Freenrgy2

originally posted by: whyamIhere

We learned in High School our vote doesn't matter for POTUS.

So, I won't pretend it does...

Thank you for being awake!
The whole game is a con aimed at convincing you that political ideology has some real meaning in politics.
It doesn't.
It's a charade that hides the fact that no matter which party appears to be in power, there is an underlying continuity of agenda that moves forward regardless of which party "seems" to be in control.
Overall, both parties endorse and push big government and do nothing to rid government of banking and corporate control.
Things have gone so far that there is no longer any meaningful distinction between government and big business.
In the next election the powers-that-be will do their best to fixate everyone's attention on the totally controlled presidential race.
Most everyone will ignore the heart of the problem, the Congress and become caught up in the presidential circus.
The powers-that-be will once again con everyone into believing the most important issue is who the El Presidente is
The simple truth is, if Congress was doing its job, the Congress could set everything right.
It's not about El Presidente. It's about Congress. The Congress has more power than the executive branch. Sure the President can sign or veto bills but the important point to remember is it all starts with Congress. REMEMBER . . .

Even if the president vetoes a bill, the Congress can override the veto. We have to realize that the Congress encourages fixation on the President so they can pass the buck, blame what they are doing on the Executive branch.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 09:18 PM

originally posted by: ReadLeader
a reply to: IAMTAT

All of the Trump hate makes me kinda like the guy even more

If you think back, the media has been badmouthing this guy for at least 30 years.

Anytime you actually hear him speak on a topic, it is logical, tough and hard, brash yes....but it makes perfect sense most of the time.

I have to admit, since he announced he was running I started laughing, it is time for WW3 and what better candidate exists ???

All in all, he is the BIG BOSS MAN, time for a figurehead like this , it was just a matter of time.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 09:23 PM

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: ReadLeader
a reply to: IAMTAT

All of the Trump hate makes me kinda like the guy even more

You're not alone.
He's not MY choice...but I'm liking how he's able to manipulate and frustrate the media, establishment Republicans...and knee-jerk progressive poop-throwers.

How can you actually say you have a choice ???

Everyone in the race is an abject loser, at least Trump has a plan, and it is CLEAR that he also has the backing of people who usually keep very, very quiet in the background.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 09:26 PM

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
And even with the recent insane bombastic bellowing, Trump rises today in polls of likely New Hampshire voters.

And the band plays on...

The band is silent, it is telling that you think these bellows are insane and bombastic.

For the first time since I am born, I can see the finish line approaching.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 09:46 PM

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Perfect weather for a charismatic speaker to say all the right things to a desperate people looking to become "great" again.

All you have to do:

-promise to restore pride/greatness

-find an enemy

-focus the blame/hate on said enemy

1) Hope and Change
2) GOP, Bush, Republicans, Conservatives, Capitalism, Traditional values
2) War on Women, Blame Bush, Obamacare, Fundamental Transformation

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 10:11 PM
I think electing Donald Trump would be a terrible mistake.

Donald Trump is a winner and that is not a good thing in a national leader, particularly a leader of the United States, unless your notion of success for the United States is beating everybody.

Jesse Ventura made a very good point not long ago, and that is that government is different from business. A business leader is a dictator, but the best government leaders are compromisers, not dictators.

Trump has a reputation with two prominent characteristics. He is known as a deal maker and he is known as a liar. He calls his lying, "truthful hyperbole".

It is possible for a liar to be a good deal maker when he is operating within a framework of law, which gives business partners legal recourse to correct for his lies.

In the international arena, particularly the arena in which the United States and Russia operate, the legal framework for recourse is of the flimsiest and least dependable sort. In reality, diplomacy between these two countries is a high wire act done without a net. There is no room for error and no room for doubt. There is no room for "truthful hyperbole". There is no room for a congenital liar, who is also an egotistical "winner".

That kind of person does not inspire trust. Putting that sort of person in charge of the most important relationship on the planet borders on lunacy.

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 10:20 PM
a reply to: SLAYER69

If you don't vote Trump, please do not vote.

posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 12:01 AM

originally posted by: Enochstask
What color is the sky in your world?

Dark gray due to the clouds mainly. Sometimes it's blue, at night it's a black reminiscent of that of a bottomless abyss.

Since you don't believe me though, and note these are on results not rhetoric:
Reagan rose taxes atleast 10 times while in office, including the largest peacetime increase in American History. Obama lowered taxes by making the Bush cuts permanent. Reagan loved raising taxes so much that even his tax cuts were actually raises due to what he called base broadening, where he would lower the marginal rate for some but remove deductions for all.

Reagan massively grew the size of the federal government, more than doubling the number of federal employees, and created the Department of Veteran Affairs. As a testament to how much he grew government, the largest government office building in Washington bears his name. Obama has actually reduced the total number of government jobs to below 2008 levels.

Reagan was pro choice. He mostly avoided the issue but in two instances, once as president and once as governor he had bills on his desk on the subject. And each time he sided pro choice. Obama has somewhat compromised on the issue with most abortions being in the first trimester.

Reagan didn't care much for national defense. At one point, to the horror of his security advisers he started a rather serious attempt to completely dismantle the US's entire nuclear stockpile. That was later tempered into disarmament deals but the thought was there. To be honest I don't know what Obama has done on this front, but I'm pretty sure he didn't try to dismantle our nukes.

Reagan gave amnesty to illegals. Obama has tried to do the same thing but so far failed.

I could give other examples but that should be enough for now. Reagan was by no means a liberal, but his policies are to the left of Obama. That's because they both govern as moderate right in contrast with Obama's campaigning as center right or Reagan's as far right.

posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:32 AM
I think at this point we can, in good conscience, nominate a box of cereal or a can of pacific sardines and expect a result over its term no different than any other administration for the past several decades. The political saviour, and our desired true equality & freedoms, will always be just out of reach.

posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 06:56 AM
a reply to: MystikMushroom

You know there's one thing that becomes obviously clear throughout all your posts on this're against anyone having a free thought....if it disagrees with yours. Your liberal movement through the past couple of decades has succeeded at suppressing people's ability to express their own beliefs and now Trump has given them the courage to once again speak freely. There's nothing wrong with people having a difference of opinion.

A great example is look how all of a sudden the liberal outcry is to use the word "racist" about Trump because he wants to better secure America by vetting refugees that may be potential terrorists. What is so wrong about that policy? Liberals don't like the popularity of what he has suggested, so the only next thing is to put a radical label to it...if you support it, you must be a "racist" and this when it's not even about a race, but a religion.

It's so obvious how pathetic this "racist" outcry is that it's just firing up more people. Every move liberals make continues to backfire because we're just plain fed up with you "thought police." Hell, I am Native American and have dealt with real racism throughout my life, but I support vetting refugees that may be potential terrorists, so I guess I am a "racist." So be it!

posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 07:16 AM
I find it so amusing that people are complaining that Trump is only spewing rhetoric that people want to hear so he can get elected.

obama got himself elected twice doing exactly the same thing. Hope and change, bring jobs back to America, the most transparent administration ever.

Hope is lost, the only change is pocket change which is all we have left. obama appointed the CEO of GE as his Jobs Czar, one month after he closed a Wisconsin business that had been open for over one hundred years because he had a duplicate facility overseas and laid off hundreds of workers. His position on jobs was clearly outsourcing is better, yet obama went to him for advice on bringing jobs back to America. And the transparent administration...must have been so transparent that no one ever saw it.

Trump is a business man not a politician. Government is more business now than it is politics. Maybe it shouldn't be that way, but it is. I find it disheartening that Trump may be the next president. But if it takes a businessman to run this business then ok. I am convinced of one thing though. Nothing will ever really change until me make it law that politicians can be held accountable for their promises and their actions in office. Only then will we hear the truth in campaigns. Only then will we know we are electing people on policy rather than rhetoric.

posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 01:14 PM
a reply to: Rezlooper

So it's intolerant to not tolerate intolerant people? (try saying that five times fast!)

That's one circular argument if I've ever heard it.

You can think for yourself all you want, but treating entire groups of people with suspicion and prejudice isn't right. You'll never be able to convince me otherwise. We don't own slaves anymore, and we don't lynch people. We don't have segregated bathrooms and water fountains. If America has come as far as it claims, its time for her people to prove it.

posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 02:28 PM
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Like how the Obama Admin did to the Tea Party members? Treating entire groups of people with suspicion and prejudice...or how about how they were spying on the media?

I do not want another career politician. I have said it before and will. I also find it funny how some of the candidates took Trumps money when they needed it....and now shun him. Again...politics. Business is business.

new topics

top topics

<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in