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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Does the conspiracy community turn on trump???

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 03:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

Well, I rather think that depends on what kind of experience he surrounds himself with.

Pence, for example, is allergic to the term "separation of church and state", and has been making an awful lot of noises about dragging the country backwards by about thirty years in some pretty key areas, all of which revolve around his desire to force his Christian-Conservative (or as I call it, oxymoronic) beliefs on people. Electroshock aversion therapy for young homosexuals, a roll back of transgender rights, overturning Roe V Wade, and a whole host of other utterly biased aims, which will harm more people than they help by a huge margin.

If Trump surrounds himself with people like Pence, then yes, you can bet your bottom dollar that people are going to turn on him in droves.

If he surrounds himself with people who will help him balance budgets without causing vast damage to the lives of innocent people, if he gathers teams of reasonable persons to help him assemble legitimate and peaceful foreign affairs policy, if he builds working groups of people who value scientific reality above ideological drivel to aid his understanding of issues pertaining to the environment and medicine, then he has a chance at not bringing the entire country down in flames. But the trouble is this...

The people who voted for him because right from the start, they could not have thought of a better candidate to represent them, those who want walls, and registration for people of different faiths to them, those who want mass deportations and to sidestep or destroy the constitution of the United States, those people would be angry beyond reason if he assembled effective and reasonable people, to help design and enact policy. That is not what those individuals voted for.

It may be that reasonable policy and sensible methodology is what SOME people who ended up voting Trump would have liked, but there again, that would have been what they were after from ANY candidate. But we have all seen examples of Trump voters expressing their desire to see the rights of those who have differing sexuality and gender identity, smacked down, their rights trampled and ground to dust before them. That is not a debatable point, because there is plenty of evidence of Trump voters saying impossibly divisive things about these very issues. YouTube videos, alt-right blogs, and so on make clear the intent and direction of that voting bloc.

The hope is, for those who voted for Trump in the absence of Bernie, to spite the evil harpy who harpooned his campaign, that this voter bloc I mentioned above will NOT get what they want from this President, will NOT be upheld in their backward looking, regressive attitudes, will not be permitted to destroy the hard won rights of those different than themselves, but its a damned slim hope with people like Pence in the pot.




posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

I agree. pence is more of a worry to me than trump. trump is an idiot in my eyes and always will be. I wonder if the establishment republicans will try to oust trump and replace with pense. yikes! it'll be an interesting year going forward that's for sure.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: TrueBrit

I agree. pence is more of a worry to me than trump. trump is an idiot in my eyes and always will be. I wonder if the establishment republicans will try to oust trump and replace with pense. yikes! it'll be an interesting year going forward that's for sure.



Any VP has almost zero power and is just a cheerleader for the president.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 11:46 AM
link   
I think the Left Wing Nuts are crumbling and getting less popular by the hour.

They've been exposed beyond help.

The more they keep talking, the more they damage themselves.




posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 12:24 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox
Started already. See this thread...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The conspiracy mindset will always be in a posture of defeat, because it will never believe that its enemy has not won.




edit on 10-11-2016 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

That may be true when the President is an experienced mover and shaker on The Hill, but Trump knows absolutely nothing about the arena he is going to be moving into. He has never dealt with the people, the places, the rules and the regulations, probably has not read the constitution more than five times in his whole life either, and because of that, he is going to be relying on those around him to make sense of the bits he does not understand.

This administrations VP is going to be VERY close to the action, making recommendations, suggestions, amending documents, perhaps proof reading a speech here or there...this is not business as usual.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 12:31 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Yes the CT community is always against those in power. Trump is now the establishment so there will soon lots of theory's surrounding him.

Alex Jones always makes his money around the theory of us living on a prison planet. How he does this being a shrill for Trump I have no idea. Maybe Alex Jones becomes mainstream



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Metallicus

Well, I rather think that depends on what kind of experience he surrounds himself with.

Pence, for example, is allergic to the term "separation of church and state", and has been making an awful lot of noises about dragging the country backwards by about thirty years in some pretty key areas, all of which revolve around his desire to force his Christian-Conservative (or as I call it, oxymoronic) beliefs on people. Electroshock aversion therapy for young homosexuals, a roll back of transgender rights, overturning Roe V Wade, and a whole host of other utterly biased aims, which will harm more people than they help by a huge margin.

If Trump surrounds himself with people like Pence, then yes, you can bet your bottom dollar that people are going to turn on him in droves.

If he surrounds himself with people who will help him balance budgets without causing vast damage to the lives of innocent people, if he gathers teams of reasonable persons to help him assemble legitimate and peaceful foreign affairs policy, if he builds working groups of people who value scientific reality above ideological drivel to aid his understanding of issues pertaining to the environment and medicine, then he has a chance at not bringing the entire country down in flames. But the trouble is this...

The people who voted for him because right from the start, they could not have thought of a better candidate to represent them, those who want walls, and registration for people of different faiths to them, those who want mass deportations and to sidestep or destroy the constitution of the United States, those people would be angry beyond reason if he assembled effective and reasonable people, to help design and enact policy. That is not what those individuals voted for.

It may be that reasonable policy and sensible methodology is what SOME people who ended up voting Trump would have liked, but there again, that would have been what they were after from ANY candidate. But we have all seen examples of Trump voters expressing their desire to see the rights of those who have differing sexuality and gender identity, smacked down, their rights trampled and ground to dust before them. That is not a debatable point, because there is plenty of evidence of Trump voters saying impossibly divisive things about these very issues. YouTube videos, alt-right blogs, and so on make clear the intent and direction of that voting bloc.

The hope is, for those who voted for Trump in the absence of Bernie, to spite the evil harpy who harpooned his campaign, that this voter bloc I mentioned above will NOT get what they want from this President, will NOT be upheld in their backward looking, regressive attitudes, will not be permitted to destroy the hard won rights of those different than themselves, but its a damned slim hope with people like Pence in the pot.



I don't think he tries to balance the budget...


History doesn't remember those who balance budgets.. it remembers those who start. Road sweeping social and inferstructure programs..and trump cares more about how he is remembered than most.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 12:38 PM
link   
How long til Trump turns on Alex Jones?



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: flatbush71
a reply to: projectvxn




My loyalty is to the constitution not a man.


Amen.

He has a chance to be a great president.
Will he seize the opportunity ??
Who will he pick / appoint ??
More over, how many of those dirty dogs will he fire ??
Its going to be a interesting 2017 (5777).

Buck

Edit :
Speaking of 7s
He Will Be 70 Years, 7 Months And 7 Days Old on His First Full Day in Office.



Now you have my rabbit hole tunneling deeper!!!

I was thinking about the name thing. What's in a name? The people written about in the bible usually had names that meant something and kind of pointed at their destinies and their purpose. I see similar things when reading about various people (sometimes) and wonder if a person's name has any power over their lives or if they're just somehow filling in the blanks with what they believe is that purpose. Kinda like how people do with star signs.

But...

Clinton - nothing worth noting (that I could find)
Kain - haha yeah, you know who came to mind.

Trump - Trump of Doom - 7th Trumpet - Trump as in power over another... etc
Pence - More than 1 penny (2 cents? - giving Trump his 2 cents?) This one has more:

- former bronze coin, the 12th part of a shilling
- the length of a nail
- of little worth

Just a few more rabbit hole thoughts for you.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

You have not been here in ATS long enough, we always turn around to debate the new president and his cabinet, yes conspiracies will always be part of that debate, just wait until he chose the people that will be in his cabinet.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 01:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: JoshuaCox

So...

Here's the thing. The reality of it is, that both the Republicans and the Democrats, the right and the left, the rich and the poor


So Democrats are poor now? lol

You keep on believing that. I'm a republican and I'm sure in hell not rich by any means. I struggle to make a living like any other poor fool. Remember the Democrats running for office are by no means poor. Don't relate Democrats to welfare... but then again, in some measure you can. But it's an ugly picture and not because it's the weak and downtrodden. It's often the useless and leeches of society that believe everything needs to be handed to them.

You're not in the US. Don't fall for what you read. I was raised DIRT POOR. Now I'm "middle class" if you want to call it that. There is no middle to it. I struggle just like anyone else.

When you're poor, you don't owe anyone anything. The higher you go up on the money ladder (unless you're a friggin millionaire) you will always have more and more bills. You want a higher paying job, you move to the city, thus housing and gas and supplies cost more.

We have a saying here... want cheep liquor? Go to the corner store on the poor side of town...

Prices rise with location so you always either break even or you end up paying more for just living in that area.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 03:01 PM
link   
My apologies.

I am in desperate need of a year off, ten years of therapy, and to wake up tomorrow in a world populated by zero haters.
edit on 10-11-2016 by TrueBrit because: Disgusting failure of good form



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: StallionDuck

That is not what I said. Please re-read the post, and reply to its actual contents, not to a grammatical choice that was made to make reading it more pleasurable, and easier to assimilate.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: StallionDuck

That is not what I said. Please re-read the post, and reply to its actual contents, not to a grammatical choice that was made to make reading it more pleasurable, and easier to assimilate.


I'm going off of exactly what you said. I'm not disagreeing or agreeing with the overall statement, I'm simply pointing out a huge inaccuracy in the opening.

You said:

The reality of it is

Republicans / Democrats
right / left
rich / poor


If the first two lines in each column compares, one could only correctly assume the third line and column is mentioned to do the same.

Repulicans - Right Wing - Rich
Democrats - Left Wing - Poor

No?


(ETA)
My reason for pointing it is out simply that many people do come to this conclusion and think that's exactly how it is.

Republicans are for the rich - it's all business
Democrats are for the people - the poor poor people

Perhaps once upon a time, it was this way back say... the 1800s? 1700s? 50 years ago? meh.... kinda. But not at all today.

Since you grouped them together, I assumed you were also of the same mindset.


edit on 10-11-2016 by StallionDuck because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: StallionDuck

No.

This is simply about sentence structure that does not feel like pushing a bowling ball out of ones rectum to read. There was no implied link between the items on that list.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 05:03 PM
link   
He messes up, and Wikileaks and the like will be on him like hungry wolves around sheep!



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: StallionDuck

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: StallionDuck

That is not what I said. Please re-read the post, and reply to its actual contents, not to a grammatical choice that was made to make reading it more pleasurable, and easier to assimilate.


I'm going off of exactly what you said. I'm not disagreeing or agreeing with the overall statement, I'm simply pointing out a huge inaccuracy in the opening.

You said:

The reality of it is

Republicans / Democrats
right / left
rich / poor


If the first two lines in each column compares, one could only correctly assume the third line and column is mentioned to do the same.

Repulicans - Right Wing - Rich
Democrats - Left Wing - Poor

No?


(ETA)
My reason for pointing it is out simply that many people do come to this conclusion and think that's exactly how it is.

Republicans are for the rich - it's all business
Democrats are for the people - the poor poor people

Perhaps once upon a time, it was this way back say... the 1800s? 1700s? 50 years ago? meh.... kinda. But not at all today.

Since you grouped them together, I assumed you were also of the same mindset.




I think it is fair to say the policies of each group benefit each economic tier.

Though of course all poor don't vote dem and rich vote GOP.. but policy wise..



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

That's almost exactly what's going to happen.

I'll give him about three months. So somewhere around April of next year. He won't even be out of his first hundred days.



posted on Nov, 10 2016 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Alex Jones support Nigel Farage, he's been an MEP for a long time. Brexit won. Has he or anyone in the conspiracy world turned on Farage yet?

Immigration is a very important issue to me. If mass amnesty was allowed and continued 3rd world immigration continued small government would die. PEW research has done the polls on groups and government beliefs. I'll pull up the data if need be if someone really believes government would not get larger if latinos were double their current amount.

Dems changed immigration on purpose because westernized american culture rejected collectivism so they changed immigration to stuff the ballots. The founders and many other americans pre-1950 knew the wrong kind of immigration was detrimental to the kind of ideas the country was built on. immigrants bring their ideas with them. The "melting pot" was mainly western europeans, who all grew up around enlightenment ideals. People think the melting pot is some sort of magic that cures immigrants of all their incompatible ideas and leaving only their quirks.

I have nothing against people of other countries, but their ability to nullify my vote in the future is a threat to american ideals and culture. And yes there is an american culture. Just as there is a japanese culture, french culture, mexican culture, etc.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join