doublegunshop.com - home Forums General Discussion DoubleGun BBS @ doublegunshop.com Hillary Clinton Lying for 12 Straight Minutes

When Trump said yesterday 'I don't care what the men think, I'm speaking to the women now'. Did he alienate all male voters?

I think the worse thing that Trump could've been saddled with was that he is a rich old white guy. It would have nothing to do with any issue, just a tactic that would make most fold up their tent and head home. How come dems can denigrate at least half the country, but no one can respond for fear of being labeled with an 'ist'.

Why can't an R alienate a few folks? The last two didn't loose because they alienated their voters, they just couldn't inspire them. I think you like his style, you just don't like him. Were you ever so offended by franken?

No Jay, that's not what I am saying at all. None of the Trump supporters I know take the showmanship seriously. They are more focused on his message of securing our borders, negotiating fair trade deals, returning good paying jobs to this country, rebuilding our military and making the world safer by projecting strength and resolve rather than weakness and backing down to those who cross red lines and scoff at resets. They are fed up with all of this PC crap and legitimizing of perverted behavior. They see the sheer stupidity and recklessness of spending more than we can afford and passing the enormous cost onto our kids and grandkids.

They see someone who has actually accomplished and built things. They realize that his unconventional style has netted him hundreds of millions in free national exposure which drove some of his failed competition nuts. Trump's strategy thus far has been sheer genius. He could have afforded to buy that much air-time, but he got it for a small fraction of the cost.

The statement about being able to shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose the support of his base was obviously a figure of speech to emphasize the loyalty he has generated. I'm surprised you'd actually make a big deal out of it. More mountains out of mole-hills. Meanwhile, Nero-bama is golfing while Rome burns, and his follow-up act is getting warmed up to finish us off.

I'd like to think you are at least equally concerned about that, but I'm not seeing any serious indications. Just a blank box or un-punched chad on your ballot.

Nope, you're way wrong to think I like Trump's style ... I don't distinguish between the man and his style. He shows me what he wants to show. There's little I can find to like.

As for Franken ... OMG. Minnesota's two great political shames IMO were electing Jesse Ventura to be governor, and electing Al Franken to be U.S. Senator.

Big deal Keith? It's a small deal, but it shows him to be a small man whose money has let him get away with saying whatever pops into his head regardless of consequences. His narcissistic compulsiveness shows in myriad small ways, and I think the total picture is a big deal: an immature man who doesn't have the psychological balance I think needed in a Commander-in-Chief.

George Bush 43 made the very serious mistake of pandering to those who were never going to like him, no matter how much he did for them. I'm glad to see that Trump isn't making the same mistake. Those who don't like him seem to be determined to dig through a mountain of Hillary's shit to try to find some warts on Trump.

Calling the lying anti-gunner Rosie O'Donnel a pig does not mean that Trump thinks all women are pigs. But that is the type of totally dishonest crap his supporters will have to recognize and show up in November to overcome.

Beer time. See ya later!

You have it wrong Jay. If an R is running for national public office and many local races, they faces consequences for being right of center. There are lefty friends of the gun here that have called all Republicans, racists, misogynists, and accused them of dozens of other intolerant afflictions.

Trump does not faces consequences because he bought off dems, lobbyists, attack lawyers and the media. He is not facing the typical consequences of pc because he has hit on some degree of resistance to pc attacks. If you're in the booth anyway, a non vote puts hill up one to nothing. Suck it up, if you do vote R, I've wasted many votes on garbage candidates that you haven't complained about like you do this one.

Craig, it seems to me that Trump is trying to turn the usual perception of "rich" on its head. Throughout the primary campaign, Trump pointed out that his opponents were taking money from PACs, "special interests", etc--while he was beholden to no one, because he was funding his own campaign. Seems to me that raises a question: Given the incredible expense involved in running for high office--president in particular--most candidates have no choice but to accept a lot of money from a lot of sources. What's the alternative? Are we left with only the very rich being able to run for president?

And of course what's happening now is that Trump is going to be accepting money from PACs and special interests. So I guess he's no longer his own man. Same criticism he leveled at his opponents.

Better four years of Trump then decades of goofy Supreme Court justices. They're goofy enough already.

Larry, you are correct that Trump may now be required, by the nature of his objective, to accept money rather than self fund. And that money will come, as it always does, from a combination of larger amounts from special interests who have an agenda to push who will anticipate that the size of their donations will afford them privileges and from a multitude of smaller donations from regular people who expect nothing but that Trump continue down the road he has begun.

But Trump isn't the first extremely wealthy man to run for office in the US. Or to harbour presidential ambitions. Names like Rockefeller and Kerry come to mind. To suggest that so far, because he has been mostly self funding, his success will mean only wealthy need apply is disingenuous.

The advantage of Trump's ability to self fund for some part of his campaign is that it LESSENS his dependence on the big money doners, not eliminates that dependence. It reduces their influence on him. In politics, like most of life, there are no absolutes.

I'd prefer a partially free man rather than a totally enslaved one. I'll take a wealthy Donald Trump over a Hillary Clinton, beholden to the Saudis, every single day.

Which would you choose?

Hahahaha! Really? Were you expecting something different from a politician? Do you feel the need to hold Trump to a higher standard than every single other politician you can name?

King and I disagree on many things....most things. But one thing we do agree on. They all lie. Every! Single! One! Get over it.

The electorate lies! The whole game is one of pretend and pretense. We just muddle along, trying to get the best we can out of it because a better system has yet to be invented. Because all the players are human and that comes with problems.

More important, IMHO, to focus on the quality of the lie, the nature of the subject involved and the longer term impact of the lie. To know whether to jump on it or to dismiss it out of hand.