If the election were held today...

[Chloe]

Who are you voting for?

Poll is public since I'm also curious who these mysterious 21 Trump supporters are on here.

Oh and writing in "deez nuts" is not an "other" choice

[FindersKeepers]

Just because I voted "Trump" doesn't mean I'm a Trump supporter. I'm just voting against Hillary.

[Private Pickle]

Who are you voting for?

Poll is public since I'm also curious who these mysterious 21 Trump supporters are on here.

Oh and writing in "deez nuts" is not an "other" choice

You had me at "deez nutz"!

[Cletus]

Just because I voted "Trump" doesn't mean I'm a Trump supporter. I'm just voting against Hillary.

I think that is a very common stance. I would prefer not to see Trump as President, but another Clinton as President, this one in particular, is just unthinkable.

[del]

i'm wondering what kind of mental gymnastics it takes to convince oneself that a vote for trump isn't an expression of support for trump.

[Green Arrow]

Just because I voted "Trump" doesn't mean I'm a Trump supporter. I'm just voting against Hillary.

No offense, but that's a cop-out. Whether you want to support Trump or not, voting for him is giving him your support and signing your name to anything and everything he does.

[Green Arrow]

I voted for Stein, obviously (and will vote for her in November).

[AZ Jim]

Just because I voted "Trump" doesn't mean I'm a Trump supporter. I'm just voting against Hillary.No. You are voting against yourself, me, and America.

[MisterVeritis]

No. You are voting against yourself, me, and America.
What do you believe Crooked Illary brings?
Gun confiscation through the Supreme Court?
A permanent one-party rule through open borders?
The end of liberty in the nation?
More taxes? More regulations? Less employment? Less wealth creation?

[AZ Jim]

What do you believe Crooked Illary brings?
Gun confiscation through the Supreme Court?
A permanent one-party rule through open borders?
The end of liberty in the nation?
More taxes? More regulations? Less employment? Less wealth creation?You are ridiculous.

[Safety]

i'm wondering what kind of mental gymnastics it takes to convince oneself that a vote for trump isn't an expression of support for trump.

Some think of it as a vote against the establishment and/or a vote of no confidence....if that was the case, Johnson or Stein should be the one they vote for.

[Bethere]

You are ridiculous.

You'll get the satisfaction of watching them hide on november 9.

Ask doc, utley, naprover, or ripmeister what I did starting with the conclusion of election 2012.

[Ravens Fan]

I am still undecided. I voted Trump on the non-public thread because that is probably the direction I will go. Like others, if Trump ends up my choice, it will be a vote against Hillary as opposed to actual support of Trump.

I have said all along that both Hillary and Trump are horrible choices, and I really want to vote for Johnson. But, he did not even get into the debates, and therefore I cannot see him winning. I do wish I could just vote my conscience, but the risk of Hillary getting in is just too great for me to ignore. There is no guarantee that my vote will mean anything anyways, since Maryland always goes Democrat both in popular vote and electoral, but on the slight chance, I must vote for the person who I think can beat Hillary.

At the same time though, I really like the idea of 3rd parties gaining ground in this election and Johnson more aligns with my views than the other 3 candidates. If I vote for him, I would have a clear conscience as to who I threw my support behind.

I will probably be undecided until right before I fill in my ballot...

[Chris]

Just because I voted "Trump" doesn't mean I'm a Trump supporter. I'm just voting against Hillary.


That too would make for an interesting poll: Why are you voting for Trump? a) I'm a Republican, b) He's anti-establishment, c) He's not hillary, d) I support his policies. --Not complete list, just throwing some out there. Could do another on hillary.

[MisterVeritis]

What do you believe Crooked Illary brings?
Gun confiscation through the Supreme Court?
A permanent one-party rule through open borders?
The end of liberty in the nation?
More taxes? More regulations? Less employment? Less wealth creation?

You are ridiculous.
So your argument is that Crooked Illary will put Scalia-quality justices on the court who will defend our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms?

And you think Illary is lying when she says amnesty for all?

And you foolishly believe that adding another 11-20 million democrats will not end the two-party system at the national level?

Will Illary lower taxes? Will she roll back regulations?

[AZ Jim]

As a result of this poll, I am removing some people from my Christmas list.

[Chris]

As a result of this poll, I am removing some people from my Christmas list.

And here I was so looking forward to charcoal and sticks.

[pjohns]

i'm wondering what kind of mental gymnastics it takes to convince oneself that a vote for trump isn't an expression of support for trump.

Well, I suppose you can describe it as "mental gymnastics" if you like.

But I do not like either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.

I just consider Donald Trump to be the lesser of the two evils.

And yes, there are third-party candidates available.

But I am a realist; so I know that either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be our next president.

Therefore, I prefer to vote against Hillary Clinton.

Note: Tennessee--where I reside--is a very red state; so Donald Trump will easily carry it, either with or without my vote.

But I wish to be able to say that I did what I could to defeat Hillary Clinton...

[Chloe]

Well, so far more people have voted than I thought they would. Thanks everybody. I'm still curious if the Trump number will get into the 20's like the one where the poll wasn't public.

[Crepitus]

What do you believe Crooked Illary brings?
Gun confiscation through the Supreme Court?
A permanent one-party rule through open borders?
The end of liberty in the nation?
More taxes? More regulations? Less employment? Less wealth creation?

Paranoia?

[del]

Well, I suppose you can describe it as "mental gymnastics" if you like.

But I do not like either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.

I just consider Donald Trump to be the lesser of the two evils.

And yes, there are third-party candidates available.

But I am a realist; so I know that either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump will be our next president.

Therefore, I prefer to vote against Hillary Clinton.

Note: Tennessee--where I reside--is a very red state; so Donald Trump will easily carry it, either with or without my vote.

But I wish to be able to say that I did what I could to defeat Hillary Clinton...


you prefer to think you're voting against hillary, but as only affirmative voting is allowed, you are, in fact, voting for trump.

you can put lipstick and mascara on a pig, it remains a pig.

the fact that tennessee is a very red state makes your rationale even more laughable

[Crepitus]

Who are you voting for?

Poll is public since I'm also curious who these mysterious 21 Trump supporters are on here.

Oh and writing in "deez nuts" is not an "other" choice

I am writing in "none of the above" and trying to get as many people as possible to do it with me. Think about it, what better way to express our disapproval than to get even just a few percentage points to actually do that? Let's send a message people!

Are You With Me?!?!?!

[Crepitus]

you prefer to think you're voting against hillary, but as only affirmative voting is allowed, you are, in fact, voting for trump.

you can put lipstick and mascara on a pig, it remains a pig.

the fact that tennessee is a very red state makes your rationale even more laughable

Damn del! You're getting all long winded and stuff!

[del]

Damn del! You're getting all long winded and stuff!

chris has inspired me

[Green Arrow]

But I wish to be able to say that I did what I could to defeat Hillary Clinton...

Just so long as you are also willing to take responsibility for whatever he does as president, I'm cool with that.

[pjohns]

you prefer to think you're voting against hillary, but as only affirmative voting is allowed, you are, in fact, voting for trump.


I do not merely "prefer to think" that I will be casting a vote to help disallow Hillary Clinton the presidency; I will be doing precisely that.

Of course, ever since the Civil War (1861-1865), East Tennessee--which was then Lincoln country--has been a Republican stronghold; and it helps catapult Tennessee into GOP territory...

[pjohns]

Just so long as you are also willing to take responsibility for whatever he does as president, I'm cool with that.

I will readily admit that Donald Trump is bombastic, and a bit if a bully.

But what do you think he might do "as president" that would adversely affect this country?

[Green Arrow]

I will readily admit that Donald Trump is bombastic, and a bit if a bully.

But what do you think he might do "as president" that would adversely affect this country?

Quite frankly, I don't know what he'll do as president. Nobody does. Nobody even has an idea what he might do. He contradicts himself so often, even in the course of the same speech or interview, that it's almost impossible to gauge his true ideals, if he even has any.

[valley ranch]

What he might do is what he said: Negotiate good trade deals for the United States. He may not enter our military in conflicts, but build our fighting force up so we Don't have to use them. He may stop the pouring across our border of people who haven't applied and been accepted for entry. He may do the things he said, Like: Help us to make America Great Again.

We had some snow here today.

[Dr. Who]

I will readily admit that Donald Trump is bombastic, and a bit if a bully.

But what do you think he might do "as president" that would adversely affect this country?
Alienate the entire western world with that mouth of his, just for starters. His SoS is going to be very busy.

[del]

I do not merely "prefer to think" that I will be casting a vote to help disallow Hillary Clinton the presidency; I will be doing precisely that.

Of course, ever since the Civil War (1861-1865), East Tennessee--which was then Lincoln country--has been a Republican stronghold; and it helps catapult Tennessee into GOP territory...

eyeliner doesn't change porky's nature either.

carry on

[Peter1469]

No. You are voting against yourself, me, and America.

A vote for Hillary is anti-American. It is pro-globalism. (And for a liar and failure).

[Peter1469]

Alienate the entire western world with that mouth of his, just for starters. His SoS is going to be very busy.


Maybe a world alienated by the US will actually take some responsibility for their regions. Although Trump wouldn't alienate them. Just shame them into doing their part.

[MisterVeritis]

What do you believe Crooked Illary brings?
Gun confiscation through the Supreme Court?
A permanent one-party rule through open borders?
The end of liberty in the nation?
More taxes? More regulations? Less employment? Less wealth creation?

Paranoia?
Was there something on the list she has not explicitly promised?
She will nominate judges who will find that the bill of rights does not protect individual liberties.
She has promised amnesty to everyone here illegally. That assures one-party rule at the national level from that moment on.
She promised more taxes including on the middle class.
She has promised more regulations.
Those drive down employment.
All of the above will stifle wealth creation.

[Crepitus]

What do you believe Crooked Illary brings?
Gun confiscation through the Supreme Court?
A permanent one-party rule through open borders?
The end of liberty in the nation?
More taxes? More regulations? Less employment? Less wealth creation?

Was there something on the list she has not explicitly promised?
She will nominate judges who will find that the bill of rights does not protect individual liberties.
She has promised amnesty to everyone here illegally. That assures one-party rule at the national level from that moment on.
She promised more taxes including on the middle class.
She has promised more regulations.
Those drive down employment.
All of the above will stifle wealth creation.
Paranoia.

[MisterVeritis]

Paranoia.
It is the truth. Why do you lie by omission?

[Crepitus]

It is the truth. Why do you lie by omission?
I don't.

[MisterVeritis]

I don't.
You do. You did. No doubt you will continue. It is your nature.

[Crepitus]

You do. You did. No doubt you will continue. It is your nature.
I do not. You are making things up as you go along.

[MisterVeritis]

I do not. You are making things up as you go along.
Are you willing to refute my claims? If you are not then you are lying by omission.

[Crepitus]

Are you willing to refute my claims? If you are not then you are lying by omission.
What's to refute? You asked questions and made no claims.

[MisterVeritis]

What's to refute? You asked questions and made no claims.
I just shake my head.

[Crepitus]

I just shake my head.
Well don't shake it so hard, the damage is starting to show.

[MisterVeritis]

Well don't shake it so hard, the damage is starting to show.
Once again you have been measured and found wanting.

[ripmeister]

Quite frankly, I don't know what he'll do as president. Nobody does. Nobody even has an idea what he might do. He contradicts himself so often, even in the course of the same speech or interview, that it's almost impossible to gauge his true ideals, if he even has any.

i would posit that the last few words of this post is the reality of Trump. Trump is a salesman. What matters is the sale. He'll say whatever it takes to make the sale.

[Peter1469]

i would posit that the last few words of this post is the reality of Trump. Trump is a salesman. What matters is the sale. He'll say whatever it takes to make the sale.

When Hillary opens her mouth what comes out is either a lie or a filthy lie.

[ripmeister]

What do you believe Crooked Illary brings?
Gun confiscation through the Supreme Court?
A permanent one-party rule through open borders?
The end of liberty in the nation?
More taxes? More regulations? Less employment? Less wealth creation?

Was there something on the list she has not explicitly promised?
She will nominate judges who will find that the bill of rights does not protect individual liberties.
She has promised amnesty to everyone here illegally. That assures one-party rule at the national level from that moment on.
She promised more taxes including on the middle class.
She has promised more regulations.
Those drive down employment.
All of the above will stifle wealth creation.

I've heard this claim that Clinton will do away with the second amedment and take everyone's guns. I have searched and searched for proof of her having this position yet can find none. Perhaps you can provide a quote where she takes this position.

[del]

I just shake my head.

is the rattling sound a comfort to you?

[ripmeister]

When Hillary opens her mouth what comes out is either a lie or a filthy lie.

Is that supposed to be refutation of what I wrote.

[Bethere]

Is that supposed to be refutation of what I wrote.

Yep. He's lame isn't he?

[zelmo1234]

No. You are voting against yourself, me, and America.

I don't know how you can say that. She will be a continuation of Obama, she is proposing nothing different.

And we have not been doing very well under his leadership.

[pjohns]

Alienate the entire western world with that mouth of his, just for starters.

I will agree that Donald Trump has a rather big mouth. (That is essentially what I meant when I noted that he is "bombastic.")

As for his "[a]lienat[ing] the entire Western world," however, I really do not wish for the US to be especially close to countries which have a democratic-socialist form of government...

[pjohns]

eyeliner doesn't change porky's nature either.

carry on

I have no idea what that is (supposed to) mean.

But let me be precise, in my language:

I really do not care for Donald Trump.

But I like Hillary Clinton even less.

In fact, I am not certain that this republic could survive four years--perhaps even eight--of a Hillary Clinton presidency.

However, I do believe that it could survive Donald Trump--for all his shortcomings.

So I will be voting for Donald Trump.

It would be fair to say that I am currently in my Stop Hillary mode.

And if the only serious way to stop Hillary from becoming our next president is to make Donald Trump our next president, instead--well, then so be it.

There.

I hope you understand now.

If not, there is probably no way that I can help...

[nic34]

Stein.

Could change last minute to Clinton if the polls show AZ close....

[nic34]

i would posit that the last few words of this post is the reality of Trump. Trump is a salesman. What matters is the sale. He'll say whatever it takes to make the sale.

He's a peddler. Worse yet, a TV peddler.

[nic34]

I have no idea what that is (supposed to) mean.

But let me be precise, in my language:

I really do not care for Donald Trump.

But I like Hillary Clinton even less.

In fact, I am not certain that this republic could survive four years--perhaps even eight--of a Hillary Clinton presidency.

However, I do believe that it could survive Donald Trump--for all his shortcomings.

So I will be voting for Donald Trump.

It would be fair to say that I am currently in my Stop Hillary mode.

And if the only serious way to stop Hillary from becoming our next president is to make Donald Trump our next president, instead--well, then so be it.

There.

I hope you understand now.

If not, there is probably no way that I can help...

Good luck with your pig.

http://www.brooklynron.com/images/2008/09/10/palin_piglipstick_palin.jpg

[MisterVeritis]

i would posit that the last few words of this post is the reality of Trump. Trump is a salesman. What matters is the sale. He'll say whatever it takes to make the sale.
Is this what you believe sales is about? To make a sale the salesman must identify an unmet need. Then he must show how his product meets the need. We need leadership and we need to undo the massive damage Obama-Clinton have done.

[MisterVeritis]

I've heard this claim that Clinton will do away with the second amedment and take everyone's guns. I have searched and searched for proof of her having this position yet can find none. Perhaps you can provide a quote where she takes this position.
No. But you can observe her comments on Youtube about how "if" the court determines that we have a right to keep and bear arms then that Constitutional right is subject to government regulation. But you must first decide to be honest with yourself.

[Cigar]

Brietbart/Gravis poll.... Hillary +4! Even Brietbart can't skew their own poll enough to help Trump. :laugh:
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/23/breitbartgravis-poll-clinton-holds-national-lead-at-44-trump-40/

[Bethere]

No. But you can observe her comments on Youtube about how "if" the court determines that we have a right to keep and bear arms then that Constitutional right is subject to government regulation. But you must first decide to be honest with yourself.

We went 232 years before anyone acknowledged an individual right to bear arms in America. Only after dc v heller in 2010 was such a right in existence.

I know you are unaware of that. Such ignorance makes you easy for them to manipulate.

[MisterVeritis]

Brietbart/Gravis poll.... Hillary +4!

Even Brietbart can't skew their own poll enough to help Trump. :laugh:

Within the article those who support Trump are enthusiastic. Those supporting Crooked Illary are not. Voter turnout will determine who wins, the people, or the statists.

[MisterVeritis]

We went 232 years before anyone acknowledged an individual right to bear arms in America. Only after dc v heller in 2010 was such a right in existence.

I know you are unaware of that. Such ignorance makes you easy for them to manipulate.
It was not under assault before then. I believe you are aware. That makes you a deceiver, doesn't it?

[Bethere]

It was not under assault before then. I believe you are aware. That makes you a deceiver, doesn't it?

No, it makes me someone who aced con law.

What's it make you?

[Bethere]

Brietbart/Gravis poll.... Hillary +4!

Even Brietbart can't skew their own poll enough to help Trump. :laugh:
http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/09/23/breitbartgravis-poll-clinton-holds-national-lead-at-44-trump-40/

Good times!

[The Xl]

Likely Gary Johnson. I do consider Hillary a real threat to the republic, and a threat to the stability of America and the rest of the world, and for that reason, I'm not ruling out a Trump vote although it's unlikely.

[Chloe]

Likely Gary Johnson. I do consider Hillary a real threat to the republic, and a threat to the stability of America and the rest of the world, and for that reason, I'm not ruling out a Trump vote although it's unlikely.

You can rationalize anything if you're not careful. Don't vote for either :)

[ripmeister]

Is this what you believe sales is about? To make a sale the salesman must identify an unmet need. Then he must show how his product meets the need. We need leadership and we need to undo the massive damage Obama-Clinton have done.

The point is he will say whatever he needs to say to make the sale. Look up his Gary Indiana casino deal. A perfect example.

[ripmeister]

No. But you can observe her comments on Youtube about how "if" the court determines that we have a right to keep and bear arms then that Constitutional right is subject to government regulation. But you must first decide to be honest with yourself.

You asked for a refutation of your claim earlier in the thread. I provided it and asked for proof otherwise. You have not shown it. :grin:

[Bethere]

You asked for a refutation of your claim earlier in the thread. I provided it and asked for proof otherwise. You have not shown it. :grin:

He would have you believe that a 'well regulated militia' is actually an individual who can't be regulated.

[ripmeister]

Likely Gary Johnson. I do consider Hillary a real threat to the republic, and a threat to the stability of America and the rest of the world, and for that reason, I'm not ruling out a Trump vote although it's unlikely.

Why do you see her as a threat to the stability of American and the rest of the world? I've said this about Trump which is why I will vote for Clinton. The primary reason I see Trump as this type of threat especially internationally is his shoot from the hip mentality, his impulsivity if you will. I don't think that's a good quality for any POTUS to have as the world hangs on every word uttered by the POTUS.

[MisterVeritis]

No, it makes me someone who aced con law.

What's it make you?
You need to get a refund. You were taught by liberals, weren't you?

[ripmeister]

You need to get a refund. You were taught by liberals, weren't you?

Ouch! :rollseyes:

[MisterVeritis]

The point is he will say whatever he needs to say to make the sale. Look up his Gary Indiana casino deal. A perfect example.
Were you part of that deal?

[Bethere]

You need to get a refund. You were taught by liberals, weren't you?

Actually I graduated from a very conservative and very exclusive college.

[ripmeister]

Were you part of that deal?

Nope

[MisterVeritis]

You asked for a refutation of your claim earlier in the thread. I provided it and asked for proof otherwise. You have not shown it. :grin:
You can do your own homework. Liberals are frequently both foolish and lazy. Oh, and denying a claim is not refutation.

[pjohns]

You can rationalize anything if you're not careful. Don't vote for either [Donald Trump of Hillary Clinton] :)

If you are implying that a vote of "conscience"--for a third-party candidate--is to be preferred, then you are clearly an idealist.

I, on the other hand, am a realist.

So I would prefer to help the lesser of two evils (as I view it) become president.

In other words, I emphatically wish to Stop Hillary...

[Bethere]

Ouch! :rollseyes:

We're used to more talented and persistent trolls aren't we?

[Chloe]

If you are implying that a vote of "conscience"--for a third-party candidate--is to be preferred, then you are clearly an idealist.

I, on the other hand, am a realist.

So I would prefer to help the lesser of two evils (as I view it) become president.

In other words, I emphatically wish to Stop Hillary...

So vote for Trump then. I'm not saying you can't.

[MisterVeritis]

He would have you believe that a 'well regulated militia' is actually an individual who can't be regulated.
Did you have a liberal teach you English as well?

Well regulated meant well ordered or well trained. "Shall not be infringed" always means something different to a statist, doesn't it?

[MisterVeritis]

We're used to more talented and persistent trolls aren't we?
No. I'd say you are about an average troll.

[MisterVeritis]

Nope
So you don't know what needs were met, then. Do you?

[ripmeister]

You can do your own homework. Liberals are frequently both foolish and lazy. Oh, and denying a claim is not refutation.

LOL! At least you are consistent.

[MisterVeritis]

Actually I graduated from a very conservative and very exclusive college.
Whoever taught you failed you.

[MisterVeritis]

LOL! At least you are consistent.
I have given you the clues you need. Go forth. Or not.

[ripmeister]

If you are implying that a vote of "conscience"--for a third-party candidate--is to be preferred, then you are clearly an idealist.

I, on the other hand, am a realist.

So I would prefer to help the lesser of two evils (as I view it) become president.

In other words, I emphatically wish to Stop Hillary...

I don't agree with your conclusion but I think your method for arriving at that conclusion is legitimate.

[ripmeister]

So you don't know what needs were met, then. Do you?

I know what I read about it. How he made the sale and how he then backed out of the promises that he made. Like I said, it was about the sale and saying what needed to be said to make the sale with no intention to follow through on the promises made.

[MisterVeritis]

I know what I read about it. How he made the sale and how he then backed out of the promises that he made. Like I said, it was about the sale and saying what needed to be said to make the sale with no intention to follow through on the promises made.
That is an impressive amount of conjecture.

[ripmeister]

You can do your own homework. Liberals are frequently both foolish and lazy. Oh, and denying a claim is not refutation.

No homework on my part is not required.

Your words from post #9, "Gun confiscation through the Supreme Court?".


You asked Crepitus in post #40, " Are you willing to refute my claims?"

I asked for an example from Hillary (her own words) that demonstrates this. You made the claim and I asked you to back it up with some facts. You haven't. It's not my responsibility to go out and find something to back up your claim, its yours.

[MisterVeritis]

No homework on my part is not required.

Your words from post #9, "Gun confiscation through the Supreme Court?".


You asked Crepitus in post #40, " Are you willing to refute my claims?"

I asked for an example from Hillary (her own words) that demonstrates this. You made the claim and I asked you to back it up with some facts. You haven't. It's not my responsibility to go out and find something to back up your claim, its yours.
Saying nuh-uh! is not a refutation. I have the same problem with Crep. He says "nuh-uh!" and expects me to do more.

If you were interested in the truth by now you would have it.

[ripmeister]

That is an impressive amount of conjecture.

No conjecture at all. He made promises in order to make the sale and once he got what he wanted he backed out of his promises. That's his MO.

http://www.businessinsider.com/trumps-spotty-casino-history-in-gary-indiana-2016-9

[ripmeister]

Saying nuh-uh! is not a refutation. I have the same problem with Crep. He says "nuh-uh!" and expects me to do more.

If you were interested in the truth by now you would have it.

Here we go again! You are not an honest debater. :rollseyes:

[MisterVeritis]

No conjecture at all. He made promises in order to make the sale and once he got what he wanted he backed out of his promises. That's his MO.

http://www.businessinsider.com/trumps-spotty-casino-history-in-gary-indiana-2016-9
There was talk in the cited piece about his proposal. What was in the contract?

[MisterVeritis]

Here we go again! You are not an honest debater. :rollseyes:
I have given you what you need to know. Is Crooked Illary pro-second amendment, pro-individual liberty, pro-gun? If so it should be very easy to prove.

Has Crooked Illary ever said anything supporting an individual's right to keep and bear arms other than if it is a right it is subject to government regulation?

The dishonesty is on your side. You know the nature of the monster. You pretend.

[ripmeister]

There was talk in the cited piece about his proposal. What was in the contract?

Don't know the specifics about the contract. I guess I'm old fashioned in that I think a persons word should be worth something. There were lawsuits that were settled etc. but that's not the point. He made the sale to the gaming commission and then reneged on his promises. From the article.......


"Asked about Trump's pitch, former Indiana gaming commissioner David Ross, who was on the board that awarded Trump the casino license, said it would be a bad bet. "What you have to know is that Trump is for Trump and he's not for any black voters or anybody," said Ross, a physician in Gary and a Democrat. "He's not a guy who's looking to help people. What he's looking for is to make some money for Trump.""

[MisterVeritis]

Don't know the specifics about the contract. I guess I'm old fashioned in that I think a persons word should be worth something. There were lawsuits that were settled etc. but that's not the point. He made the sale to the gaming commission and then reneged on his promises. From the article.......


"Asked about Trump's pitch, former Indiana gaming commissioner David Ross, who was on the board that awarded Trump the casino license, said it would be a bad bet. "What you have to know is that Trump is for Trump and he's not for any black voters or anybody," said Ross, a physician in Gary and a Democrat. "He's not a guy who's looking to help people. What he's looking for is to make some money for Trump.""
I get it. It was a hit piece. We use contracts for a reason. Your hit piece did not cover contract problems.

[birddog]

I voted for Trump, he's who we need to shake up Washington. He will be the smartest president in our history, so he will be smart enough to do what we need, listen to good advisers etc.

[ripmeister]

I have given you what you need to know. Is Crooked Illary pro-second amendment, pro-individual liberty, pro-gun? If so it should be very easy to prove.

Has Crooked Illary ever said anything supporting an individual's right to keep and bear arms other than if it is a right it is subject to government regulation?

The dishonesty is on your side. You know the nature of the monster. You pretend.

Ok. I'll play.


http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/11/politics/hillary-clinton-gun-control-second-amendment/

[Chris]

You need to get a refund. You were taught by liberals, weren't you?


MisterVeritis has been thread banned at the request of the OP, Chloe. Please do not respond to MisterVeritis any further in this thread. If you have questions contact the OP of this tPF thread in a PM.

[ripmeister]

I get it. It was a hit piece. We use contracts for a reason. Your hit piece did not cover contract problems.

Whatever dude. I love the "Hit Piece" defense. Believe what you want to believe. I'll continue to believe with plenty of examples to back it up that Trump is a salesman and out for himself. Nothing more, nothing less.

[ripmeister]

I voted for Trump, he's who we need to shake up Washington. He will be the smartest president in our history, so he will be smart enough to do what we need, listen to good advisers etc.

When you say he will be the "smartest president in our history" I bet The Donald gets a big grin on his face.

[Chris]

Whatever dude. I love the "Hit Piece" defense. Believe what you want to believe. I'll continue to believe with plenty of examples to back it up that Trump is a salesman and out for himself. Nothing more, nothing less.

People in the government are no different than people in the market. There are no angels in either.

[ripmeister]

People in the government are no different than people in the market. There are no angels in either.

True, but to varying degrees. The more I learn about Trump the more I come to the conclusion that he is in a league of his own when it comes to this type of behavior.

[Chris]

True, but to varying degrees. The more I learn about Trump the more I come to the conclusion that he is in a league of his own when it comes to this type of behavior.

He's in a league with most if not all politicians they just have different styles of con artistry. You just dislike some styles and trust others.

[Green Arrow]

I voted for Trump, he's who we need to shake up Washington. He will be the smartest president in our history, so he will be smart enough to do what we need, listen to good advisers etc.

Smartest president in our history?

Jesus...we're doomed.

[birddog]

When you say he will be the "smartest president in our history" I bet The Donald gets a big grin on his face.

I may have misspoke, he has the highest IQ which is 156. Being "smart" isn't always IQ I realize. I have a high IQ also, but sometimes do dumb things. However, in this election, I'm not dumb enough to vote for anyone but Trump!

[ripmeister]

Smartest president in our history?

Jesus...we're doomed.

LOL! And remember he's going to make really, really, really good deals too!

[ripmeister]

I may have misspoke, he has the highest IQ which is 156. Being "smart" isn't always IQ I realize. I have a high IQ also, but sometimes do dumb things. However, in this election, I'm not dumb enough to vote for anyone but Trump!

Well we probably don't know the IQ's of many of the past presidents so it is what it is. You bring up a good point though and that is the fact that there are different types of intelligence. I don't doubt that Trump is pretty cognitively intelligent. Another form of intelligence though is emotional intelligence, a quality that I think is important in the POTUS. Looking at that metric Trump is a moron, which is probably an insult to the morons.

[Bethere]

I may have misspoke, he has the highest IQ which is 156. Being "smart" isn't always IQ I realize. I have a high IQ also, but sometimes do dumb things. However, in this election, I'm not dumb enough to vote for anyone but Trump!

That's, "mispoken," you high IQ, Christian guy.

[Common Sense]

I think you guys may have different IQ tests than us.

You got some regional bellcurve thing going on?

[del]

I think you guys may have different IQ tests than us.

You got some regional bellcurve thing going on?

it's in base7

it converts to 80 base10, which sounds about right

[Tricia]

That's, "mispoken," you high IQ, Christian guy.

His religion has nothing to do with this thread.

[Bethere]

His religion has nothing to do with this thread.

Sure it does. He misrepresents himself a lot.

[Peter1469]

That's, "mispoken," you high IQ, Christian guy.

@Bethere has been thread banned at the request of the OP. Please do not respond to Bethere any further in this thread. If you have questions contact the OP of this tPF thread in a PM.

[pjohns]

I voted for Trump...

Yes, I did, too. Yesterday.

Do you also participate in early voting, or voting by mail?

[Tahuyaman]

Just because I voted "Trump" doesn't mean I'm a Trump supporter. I'm just voting against Hillary.


I'm doing the unthinkable and voting for someone I agree with on the important issues.

[birddog]

I saw a list, I'm sure several were educated guesses that listed IQs of many of the presidents, but I don't recall that it was from a biased source. The highest was not quite 140, and Dubya was higher than The Kenyan, but that's no surprise. Trump will be the highest at 156, and I do believe he has plenty of common sense and plenty of leadership ability unlike The Hildebeast!

[Common Sense]

People who brag about their IQ scores negate a high score by bragging about it.

[Chris]

I saw a list, I'm sure several were educated guesses that listed IQs of many of the presidents, but I don't recall that it was from a biased source. The highest was not quite 140, and Dubya was higher than The Kenyan, but that's no surprise. Trump will be the highest at 156, and I do believe he has plenty of common sense and plenty of leadership ability unlike The Hildebeast!

But by running for office he shows he not smart enough to know politics doesn't work.

[birddog]

Yes, I did, too. Yesterday.

Do you also participate in early voting, or voting by mail?

No, I believe voting should be done on election day unless there are valid reasons.

[ripmeister]

I saw a list, I'm sure several were educated guesses that listed IQs of many of the presidents, but I don't recall that it was from a biased source. The highest was not quite 140, and Dubya was higher than The Kenyan, but that's no surprise. Trump will be the highest at 156, and I do believe he has plenty of common sense and plenty of leadership ability unlike The Hildebeast!

Ok, as soon as you have Dubya over Obama I know you have false data. :cool2:

[Tahuyaman]

People who brag about their IQ scores negate a high score by bragging about it.


Generally, someone who has a high IQ doesn't need to brag about it.

[FindersKeepers]

I'm doing the unthinkable and voting for someone I agree with on the important issues.



I understand that, and it is your right to do so. Chloe and I joked once about me writing her name in on the ballot, and, while I think she would be much better than the two major party choices we have this time, I fear that my efforts would be wasted.

So -- unless something cataclysmic happens -- my intent is to vote against Hillary, because I feel she is a huge threat to the nation I love. I think she'll probably win, however, but at least I will feel as though I did my part to stop her.

We all have to follow our own guidance, after all.

[FindersKeepers]

Generally, someone who has a high IQ doesn't need to brag about it.

So true.

[birddog]

Ok, as soon as you have Dubya over Obama I know you have false data. :cool2:

How do you know? Doesn't it stand to reason that Obama, the worst president in our history, might have a lower IQ?

[birddog]

People who brag about their IQ scores negate a high score by bragging about it.

Who's bragging about it? Not me, I just state facts as I see them. Try it some time.

[Green Arrow]

I understand that, and it is your right to do so. Chloe and I joked once about me writing her name in on the ballot, and, while I think she would be much better than the two major party choices we have this time, I fear that my efforts would be wasted.

So -- unless something cataclysmic happens -- my intent is to vote against Hillary, because I feel she is a huge threat to the nation I love. I think she'll probably win, however, but at least I will feel as though I did my part to stop her.

We all have to follow our own guidance, after all.

I don't fault you for taking that approach, but I do have to point out that it's just as meaningless as writing in Chloe's name. No state's results will be decided by one vote (as fun as the movie "Swing Vote" was) and unless you live in a swing state, the result is already pretty much decided before a single vote is cast.

[FindersKeepers]

I don't fault you for taking that approach, but I do have to point out that it's just as meaningless as writing in Chloe's name. No state's results will be decided by one vote (as fun as the movie "Swing Vote" was) and unless you live in a swing state, the result is already pretty much decided before a single vote is cast.



In the long run -- perhaps. But, it allows me to live with myself.

A person who votes third-party is also taking part in a "meaningless" activity, but I assume it is one that makes them feel good about themselves.

[FindersKeepers]

How do you know? Doesn't it stand to reason that Obama, the worst president in our history, might have a lower IQ?

Obama's a bright guy. Perhaps not quite as bright as Bill Clinton -- but bright, nonetheless.

It's just too bad having a high IQ doesn't necessarily translate into having insight or integrity.

[Green Arrow]

In the long run -- perhaps. But, it allows me to live with myself.

A person who votes third-party is also taking part in a "meaningless" activity, but I assume it is one that makes them feel good about themselves.

I make no illusions that voting third party is meaningful. It's meaningful to me, but not to the actual outcome.

However, padding the vote totals for third party candidates IS meaningful in the long run because it makes it easier for those candidates to get on more state ballots in the future and build their resume for an eventual climb in the polls enough to make it into the debates. Johnson, for example, got 1% of the vote total in 2012, and Stein less than a percent. This year, Johnson is on track to get 10% or more, and Stein is close to 5%.

It's meaningless in the short term but in the long term is actually a successful strategy (so far).

[Peter1469]

I make no illusions that voting third party is meaningful. It's meaningful to me, but not to the actual outcome.

However, padding the vote totals for third party candidates IS meaningful in the long run because it makes it easier for those candidates to get on more state ballots in the future and build their resume for an eventual climb in the polls enough to make it into the debates. Johnson, for example, got 1% of the vote total in 2012, and Stein less than a percent. This year, Johnson is on track to get 10% or more, and Stein is close to 5%.

It's meaningless in the short term but in the long term is actually a successful strategy (so far).

It is meaningful because as more and more people vote 3rd party, the corrupt two will die off. And there should be criminal prosecutions. RICO statutes should work.

[Chris]

It's possible that by voting 3rd party it will encourage them to try again and possible that more and more will vote that way. But not a sure thing. The duopoly has too much a monopolistic grip and, barring catastrophe in one or the oher, won't let go for a long time.

[Green Arrow]

It's possible that by voting 3rd party it will encourage them to try again and possible that more and more will vote that way. But not a sure thing. The duopoly has too much a monopolistic grip and, barring catastrophe in one or the oher, won't let go for a long time.

It's working. Good enough for me.

[Cthulhu]

Who are you voting for?

Poll is public since I'm also curious who these mysterious 21 Trump supporters are on here.

Oh and writing in "deez nuts" is not an "other" choice
Realistically? Likely Johnson. Possibly a few other unknowns. Because a vote for Trillary is loathsome to me. And Johnson isn't perfect. Ion fact there are things I don't like about him.

In a purely principle vote? A cabbage.

For the cabbage is far more worthy and virtuous than the most saintly of politicians.

And if I become displeased with it, it makes for a great addition to almost any soup.

Sent from my evil, baby seal-clubbing cellphone.

[ripmeister]

How do you know? Doesn't it stand to reason that Obama, the worst president in our history, might have a lower IQ?


The he critiques of Obama have to do primarily with judgement and philosophy. That has little to do with IQ.

[ripmeister]

It's just too bad having a high IQ doesn't necessarily translate into having insight or integrity.

Not that I feel this way about Obama but very true.

[FindersKeepers]

I make no illusions that voting third party is meaningful. It's meaningful to me, but not to the actual outcome.

However, padding the vote totals for third party candidates IS meaningful in the long run because it makes it easier for those candidates to get on more state ballots in the future and build their resume for an eventual climb in the polls enough to make it into the debates. Johnson, for example, got 1% of the vote total in 2012, and Stein less than a percent. This year, Johnson is on track to get 10% or more, and Stein is close to 5%.

It's meaningless in the short term but in the long term is actually a successful strategy (so far).

All of what you say is true. There can be a long-term effect, if the candidate stays the course, or if supporters of a third party gain additional public support from a campaign.

In our nation's history, we've had relatively few major party changes for the length of time we've been a nation. But, there's always the possibility.