What's new

The official "let's reelect Trump" thread

I love the subject of history. Always have. And a study of history informs the present. I understand our present times in a clearer light as a result. That's a real bonus when one is living through pivotal moments in the history of one's nation. So, for myself, being an eyewitness to such heady times is actually very exciting, and something to be appreciated as such, beyond how I interpret the times in which I live. Not sleepwalking through that portion of history in which I live enriches my life, as far as I am concerned. And, of course I will take a stance, make a stand. And that too is as it should be. I am proud of being on the right side of history, as arrogant as that may sound. I will leave this earthly paradise knowing I took a stand, regardless of history's judgement of what we are living through. I view this as a responsibility to be embraced, not a burden.

I get the sentiment. I really do. But, Ive seen people be sure they were so right before, and then turn out they werent.

I still think y'all need to take a deep breathe and relax. We aren't seeing the rise of Hitler 2.0. More like the rise of cocky different kind of president that will just come and go.

I think what we are actually witnessing is the power of the media and how easily it can manipulate the masses. Especially now that its at a fever pitch where you can access it anywhere anytime and participate in the discussion anywhere anytime. Which is amplifying the feel of it all. I think that is the more interesting thing going on here.
 


And 99.7% of jazzfanz.


LOL how many times do people have to spell this out for you. Jazzfanz is not liberal. As a demographic, Jazzfanz probably skews slightly conservative. I like reading the political discussion here because, it's not the echo chamber most places end up being. You gotta stop repeating this ****. Get smarter. Grow.

The political discussion in here only seems be dominated by "libs" because:

1.) Thriller posts a lot.

and

2.) Most Conservatives that come in here just get their weak **** pwned so hard, they leave and don't come back. You haven't left yet because, despite being pwned consistently, you just ignore any good faith inquiry or request to defend your positions. Put up or shut up. Welcome to the not echo-chamber.

Shout-out to Stoked, Colton, and other conservatives (jazzspazz and archie?) who I can't remember, that stick to a discussion in good faith and grow as a result. I have a lot of respect for smart conservative politics and common sense capitalism.
 
Democrats want open borders.

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/n...-ny-times-no-democrats-dont-want-open-borders

The New York Times whines whenever Republicans dare suggest that Democrats support socialist policies. The paper tried to rebut the charge in its latest “Fact Check” with political reporter Reid Epstein joining regular fact-checker Linda Qiu for “Attaching Democrats to Radical Socialists,” which assured readers that “On economic issues, Democrats in the United States are far to the right of the governing parties in most other Western democracies.”

It’s an odd defense, given the Times ardor for “Democratic Socialists” in America, and communism everywhere else.

But one interesting omission from the latest round of fact checking is a vital 2020 issue that the Times isn’t fact-checking Donald Trump on anymore: His accusations that Democrats favor “open borders.” Trump hasn’t stopped talking about Democrats wanting open borders in his stump speeches, but the fact checkers have stopped flagging it.

Perhaps that’s because even some of the paper’s liberal columnists are worried that too many Democratic candidates, by pushing for the abolition of ICE and decriminalization of illegal border crossings, are in favor of de facto “open borders.”

Qiu did so most vigorously in June 2018 with the bluntly headlined “No, Democrats Don’t Want ‘Open Borders.’” She has repeated that stand a dozen or so times afterward, apparently most recently in late December 2018.

The issue went dead as the Democratic candidates for president showed their radical stand on border crossing. Liberal columnist Frank Bruni fretted in the Sunday Review that “anything that smacks of open borders -- which is how President Barack Obama’s secretary for homeland security, Jeh Johnson, described Democratic presidential candidates’ positions in a recent op-ed essay in The Washington Post -- puts those candidates at odds with public opinion.”

Bruni made the same point in a column last week as well.

Also, columnist Thomas Friedman did a Q&A with readers after last week’s controversial column, and used the term to describe the stance of many of the Democrats on the debate stage:

What I worry about from the first Democratic debates was that by so many candidates offering so many free things to so many people -- some of them not even American citizens -- the gut message being conveyed by the party was that it’s for open borders and for taking care of people who just walked into our country illegally....

Here's political reporter Jonathan Martin arching his brow in concern:

[Three Democratic governors] were just as emphatic about immigration, warning 2020 candidates that their support for decriminalizing illegal migration would allow Republicans to cast Democrats as the party of open borders.

We eagerly await the paper’s follow-up fact check, “OK, So Maybe Democrats Do Want ‘Open Borders.’”
 
Democrats want open borders.

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/n...-ny-times-no-democrats-dont-want-open-borders

The New York Times whines whenever Republicans dare suggest that Democrats support socialist policies. The paper tried to rebut the charge in its latest “Fact Check” with political reporter Reid Epstein joining regular fact-checker Linda Qiu for “Attaching Democrats to Radical Socialists,” which assured readers that “On economic issues, Democrats in the United States are far to the right of the governing parties in most other Western democracies.”

It’s an odd defense, given the Times ardor for “Democratic Socialists” in America, and communism everywhere else.

But one interesting omission from the latest round of fact checking is a vital 2020 issue that the Times isn’t fact-checking Donald Trump on anymore: His accusations that Democrats favor “open borders.” Trump hasn’t stopped talking about Democrats wanting open borders in his stump speeches, but the fact checkers have stopped flagging it.

Perhaps that’s because even some of the paper’s liberal columnists are worried that too many Democratic candidates, by pushing for the abolition of ICE and decriminalization of illegal border crossings, are in favor of de facto “open borders.”

Qiu did so most vigorously in June 2018 with the bluntly headlined “No, Democrats Don’t Want ‘Open Borders.’” She has repeated that stand a dozen or so times afterward, apparently most recently in late December 2018.

The issue went dead as the Democratic candidates for president showed their radical stand on border crossing. Liberal columnist Frank Bruni fretted in the Sunday Review that “anything that smacks of open borders -- which is how President Barack Obama’s secretary for homeland security, Jeh Johnson, described Democratic presidential candidates’ positions in a recent op-ed essay in The Washington Post -- puts those candidates at odds with public opinion.”

Bruni made the same point in a column last week as well.

Also, columnist Thomas Friedman did a Q&A with readers after last week’s controversial column, and used the term to describe the stance of many of the Democrats on the debate stage:

What I worry about from the first Democratic debates was that by so many candidates offering so many free things to so many people -- some of them not even American citizens -- the gut message being conveyed by the party was that it’s for open borders and for taking care of people who just walked into our country illegally....

Here's political reporter Jonathan Martin arching his brow in concern:

[Three Democratic governors] were just as emphatic about immigration, warning 2020 candidates that their support for decriminalizing illegal migration would allow Republicans to cast Democrats as the party of open borders.

We eagerly await the paper’s follow-up fact check, “OK, So Maybe Democrats Do Want ‘Open Borders.’”
Roughly 15% of Democrats and 7% of Republicans support open borders. So it's a small minority that support open borders. No politician supports open borders to my knowledge.
 

That's nice for him to claim that. But his statement is verifiable false. Trump has been called racist long before winning against Clinton.

He was sued and settled a case in 1973 for housing discrimination against black people. He was accused of being racist for his silly birther stance. He said racist things and was accused of being racist his entire campaign.
 
I still think y'all need to take a deep breathe and relax. We aren't seeing the rise of Hitler 2.0. More like the rise of ****y different kind of president that will just come and go.

Nothing just comes and goes when you normalize it. It becomes part of the playbook. It's simple, really. We've elevated the least among us. We may not find what we really need to replace the dark turn he represents. We may not find someone who can inspire our best nature. But we should be awake to this juncture for what it is.
 
That's nice for him to claim that. But his statement is verifiable false. Trump has been called racist long before winning against Clinton.

He was sued and settled a case in 1973 for housing discrimination against black people. He was accused of being racist for his silly birther stance. He said racist things and was accused of being racist his entire campaign.

So he settled a case in 1973 and that makes him guilty? You dont think that with all the properties he has owned that its possible one false claim could have popped up from some money hungry disgruntled people for other reasons?

That's your big proof that he is a racist?

Do you think you could actually provide some real substance please? And no, pro immigration laws are not racist. Barrack Obama, Hillary and Bill Clinton all held the same views on border security.

You literally have zero proof he is a racist. The funny thing is he actually does the exact opposite of what you clowns say he is. On numerous occasions he's gone out of his way to help minorities. Just recently he tried to help with the release from jail of a black rapper in Sweden. Why do you choose to ignore these things? Why do they not weigh on your mind when you cast so much judgment on a person you dont know and have never met?

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/20/politics/asap-rocky-jail-trump-sweden-prime-minister/index.html
 
Back
Top