It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

In Debate two we meet the next President Donald J. Trump

page: 6
68
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: TDawg61

Crooked Fly Face? Maybe Felon Fly Face?




posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I didn't watch it, nor will I. Makes my skin crawl listening to these two. Curious though, as I come from Wyoming where the coal industry is/was massive...what did she say/lie about the coal industry?



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: Assassin82
a reply to: Xcathdra

I didn't watch it, nor will I. Makes my skin crawl listening to these two. Curious though, as I come from Wyoming where the coal industry is/was massive...what did she say/lie about the coal industry?


I'm going from memory here, but she said the coal miners made tremendous sacrifices for this country and we need to do something to take care of these people.



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: LSU0408

originally posted by: Greggers

originally posted by: LSU0408
a reply to: Greggers

Still doesn't mean great. And Trump never said America is evil, so if that's how she meant it then she's lost and doesn't understand what's going on.

My "good" used in a sentence: "the schools here are good"
Your "good" used in a sentence: "a mysterious balance of good and evil"


Let me know if you're still not catching it.


I catch it just fine. She is saying that America is great because Americans are good people. They are righteous people.

It's pretty obvious.


America may be good morally but America is not good otherwise, and that's why Trump wants to make it great again. Hillary is misunderstanding what Trump means if this her retort to his slogan, and dumber than I originally thought.


I'm no fan of Clinton, but this "America is great because we're good" works just fine on its own, and gives Clinton a chance to use her typical rhetoric to talk about how she believes in the American people.

Trump has had every opportunity to say, "Yes, the American people are good. And these good people deserve a great country. And when I say "Make America Great Again," I'm talking about x, y, z....."


This is simply my opinion. I'm in NO WAY implying Trump would agree. The "American People" as we call all of us grouped together are "OK" as a whole. There was a time when we were "Good"...before BLM violence, threatening protests...before killing police...before trying to jail people who don't believe in man-made climate change, etc. There was a time when we were "Great"...how we pulled together after 9/11...how we help other countries during disasters or war...how we have tried to spread freedom (although often failing) around the world, etc.

I could give thousands of examples but this is my bottom line. We were "Great" and we were "Good". But we have taken the line that is titled "Satisfactory" and continually dropped it lower, and lower to support people as they go lower, and lower. We have instead of aspiring to be better, we have lowed "acceptable" so not to offend those who aren't. We have lowered our standards, morals and values to include the "not-so-good", the "pretty bad" and the "scum".

Yes...there is human scum in America. That is easy enough to clean up. But when you (typically the left) re-define unacceptable actions as acceptable to make people happy...or to have them vote for them...you end up with just an "OK" American public.

Sorry to tell the truth. I know THAT is one of those now unacceptable things.


Hey man, I was just explaining the proper definition of the word "Good" as used by Hillary. It was a semantic debate about the meaning of a particular word.

Oh, and I am not "The Left."



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 12:14 PM
link   
Non-biased focus group.




posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: xstealth
Non-biased focus group.



Very interesting - you can tell from some of the answers that many are still struggling with fully supporting Trump but they are leaning that way. The shift from the start to the beginning is pretty amazing.



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 01:11 PM
link   
As a Canadian, I can do nothing but sit back and watch, but I have to ask.............does it really matter what the polls say? It seems to me that everyone seems so concerned with this. "well, the polls say that Hilary is in the lead............."

Who cares what the polls say? I would want to have my own opinion on who I would vote for based on what the individual says, not what the majority of the people think.........

Is it just me?



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Its not over till its over!

I thought I would turn on the news and hear how great Trump did in the debate - I must have been dreaming - dreaming
I still lived in a free country wirh FREE PRESS - It no longer exists !

The spin doctors working for the New World Order criminal elite that controls the world are not going to let Trump win.

All they were talking about on the news was what Trump was recorded saying years ago conveniently released just befor the debate, and how Paul Ryan will not campaign for him:

Apparently they got a chunk of the Republican Party working for 'crooked Hilary' and what does that make them:
Crooked Republicans !

The extent of the corruption of the Clintons is beyond control - I fear the United States is lost.

Long live the New World Odor

edit on 10-10-2016 by AlienView because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gonzo1971
As a Canadian, I can do nothing but sit back and watch, but I have to ask.............does it really matter what the polls say? It seems to me that everyone seems so concerned with this. "well, the polls say that Hilary is in the lead............."

Who cares what the polls say? I would want to have my own opinion on who I would vote for based on what the individual says, not what the majority of the people think.........

Is it just me?

You can have an opinion on whatever you want with as little or as much research into the topic beforehand as you want. If you don't want to listen to the polls. Fine. Don't. There are plenty of Trump supporters or even just non-Hillary supporters who don't listen to the polls. So don't create a strawman that anyone is forcing you to listen to the polls.



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 02:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Greggers

Interesting. Obama made it a point 8 years ago to talk about how he was going to destroy the coal industry, and for the most part, he succeeded. I recall hearing Hillary make the same remarks over time. Yet, if they really wanted to do something for the industry, they would have before they put thousands out of work.

Now the witch tried to make them all feel better by saying they need to be taken care of. Too little too late.



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 02:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Assassin82
a reply to: Greggers

Interesting. Obama made it a point 8 years ago to talk about how he was going to destroy the coal industry, and for the most part, he succeeded. I recall hearing Hillary make the same remarks over time. Yet, if they really wanted to do something for the industry, they would have before they put thousands out of work.

Now the witch tried to make them all feel better by saying they need to be taken care of. Too little too late.


Trump is right - democrats promise gifts every 4 years, then run off to line their own pockets through their donors and pandering to lobbyists. The only strategy they engage in is how to create a class divide and flood the country with more DEM voters.



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: xstealth


Non-biased focus group.


Non-biased?


Frank I. Luntz (born February 23, 1962) is an American propagandist, political consultant,[2] pollster, and "public opinion guru"[3] best known for developing talking points and other messaging for various Republican causes. His work has included assistance with messaging for Newt Gingrich's Contract with America, promotion of the terms death tax instead of estate tax and climate change instead of global warming, and public relations support for pro-Israel policies in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Luntz's most recent work has been with the Fox News Channel as a frequent commentator and analyst, as well as running focus groups during and after presidential debates on CBSN.[4] Luntz describes his specialty as “testing language and finding words that will help his clients sell their product or turn public opinion on an issue or a candidate.”[5] He is also an author of business books dealing with communication strategies and public opinion. Luntz's current company, Luntz Global, LLC, specializes in message creation and image management for commercial and political clients.


en.wikipedia.org...

Unless, of course, the poll was by the etymologist of the same name.



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

His previous focus groups have favoured Clinton - including after the last debate.
I have actually worked with him. He is an unsavoury character for sure, but his live opinion scoring is interesting. Though not conclusive.



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: DJW001

His previous focus groups have favoured Clinton - including after the last debate.
I have actually worked with him. He is an unsavoury character for sure, but his live opinion scoring is interesting. Though not conclusive.


A man who specializes in crafting the narrative would understand the value of making the Chosen One to appear to be the underdog at first.
Oh, and thanks for admitting that it is inconclusive. There has yet to be a single poll favoring either candidate outside the margin of error!



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Having fallen victim to the guy, I am always wary of anything he says. He's a snake and I'd put nothing past him.



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: interupt42

Except that appears to only be the consensus among Trump supporters.


It is concensus with anyone who seeks the truth, and understands the BS coming from the media.

Anyone who thinks he didn't completely OWN her, actually answer questions, and thrash her record is an idiot.

And as usual she brushed it all off as lies, when EVERYONE has known about those things for ages.

Then she proceeded to NOT answer any questions, always deflect, and talk about Trump.

Too bad so sad....this is TRUMP'S world now, he will manhandle her FAR worse in round 3, hell they have not gotten to even a tiny bit of what they can thrash her with.

Trump DESTROYED her, looked presidential, and you could see it in everyones face that was there, they looked to HIM for cues, understood when she lied, (most of the time) and were amazed at his ability to totally expose her evil.



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 04:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Let's get real.

The American people by and large don't care about issues, they care about sensationalism and optics.

Trump looked like he had aged 10 years. He stood there, usually slightly hunched over, with a scowl on his face.

He delivered his usual garbage while sniffing again (so much for the "faulty mic" excuse).

The three women (I leave Kathy Shelton out of this, she's being very roughly used.) who are ostensibly there to condemn a male abuser are the guests of a man who has proven himself to be the exact same thing ... how does that make them "look"?

Keep telling yourself that the great Trumpkin has a YUUUGE win.

Remember what Karl Rove said about Ohio?


If they care about sensationalism and optics, then Trump wins in a landslide, Hillary is boring as hell, has nothing to say on any issues and has shown to be useless in everything she has done.

You think people who want sensationalism are going to pick her ?? LOL.



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Greggers

It wasn't about you. Just related to your post.



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: ParasuvO


...OWN her...thrash her...man handle her...thrash her...DESTROYED her...


So, beating up a woman makes him look presidential? And of course she turned it back on him he was attacking her. What did you expect her to do? Swoon into his manly arms?



posted on Oct, 10 2016 @ 05:12 PM
link   
if Trumpy really wants to win and he sees these opinion polls and hes getting beat, he will resort to anything to win, no secret is safe if it gets Trumpy Wumpy on the throne, i'm just really excited about what his final word will be before you guys hit the polls, i hope the Trumpster wins cause at least then you/we might get some positive change with some long held truths shared, or maybe not.... one things for sure with HC you get same old same old, cept this one really does have a thirst for WAR!



new topics

top topics



 
68
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join