CDZ As if anyone needs more evidence that Trump cannot be relied upon....transsexuals and bathrooms

[Fair&Balanced]

Pogo that is hilarious that you are calling Trump a narcissist in light of who is sitting in the Oval right now. Of course Trummp is a narcissist, anyone who would want that job is.

No, not even close. You don't seem to understand the difference between Narcissism and "self-confidence". Obviously anybody running for anything, or setting out on any endeavour, needs the latter. That's not the issue here.

From my earlier link:

>> if you have narcissistic personality disorder, you may come across as conceited, boastful or pretentious. You often monopolize conversations. You may belittle or look down on people you perceive as inferior (1) You may feel a sense of entitlement (2) — and when you don't receive special treatment, you may become impatient or angry.(3) You may insist on having "the best" of everything (4) — for instance, the best car, athletic club or medical care.

At the same time, you have trouble handling anything that may be perceived as criticism. You may have secret feelings of insecurity, shame, vulnerability and humiliation. To feel better, you may react with rage or contempt and try to belittle the other person to make yourself appear superior. Or you may feel depressed and moody because you fall short of perfection. <<
​

Sound like anyone mentioned recently?

• "Losers"? "Disgusting Pigs"? (1)
• "(The Chinese/women/Mexicans) love me".... "I will be the greatest jobs President that God ever created" (2)
• Megyn Kelly, Carly Fiorina, the analyst who predicted (correctly) his casino would fail, the author who he sued for understating his net worth.... anyone who brings up his bankruptcies (3)
• Incessant braggadocio about his erectile functions (buildings) being the "greatest grandest" etc ad nauseum... skipping entire tens of floors to make a building appear bigger than it is... bringing up penis size in a Presidential debate.... (4)

--- shall I go on?

Ever seen O'bama stay up all night sending desperate tweets about somebody who dared criticize him? Ever see Dubya whine about a reporter with "blood coming out of her wherever"? Ever see Reagan bring up his penis size in a debate? Ever hear Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter or Jerry Ford say that "if she wasn't my daughter I'd be dating her"?

You're correct, Obama doesn't stay up all night tweeting about people who disagree with him, he just sicks the IRS on them.

Seriously, every time Obama opens his mouth its too tell someone else they are stupid, and only he knows the right way to do things. Don't give me that crap, he's as narcissistic as Trump , they just react differently when challenged.

 

[Correll]

Trump is not a conservative. He is a nationalist and a populist.

HIs platform is about defending and advancing American interests.

Which is long overdue and badly needed.

THAT is considered "anti-establishment and a positive attribute. "

Okay - now, each of the "major" parties has a relatively long list of issues that might be considered their "platform".

Would it be safe to say that Trump's list is shorter (certainly not a bad thing) and more focused, with everything else secondary, tertiary, or irrelevant?
.

I couldn't say, I don't follow everything Trump says, mostly the stuff I care about, ie Immigration and Trade.

I haven't "heard" him focus much on other issues, but that could be because I didn't care that much about other issues and thus didn't listen or at least care enough to retain the information.

But I'm willing to accept your premise for purposes of discussion.

If I'm correct about that, the implications are pretty far-reaching. There is clearly a battle for control of the party right now, going in three directions: Moderate, conservative and populist/nationalist. A narrowing of the breadth of the platform would, theoretically, attract more people.

However, the risk here is that the messenger is so unattractive outside of his base that he could do damage to the idea of populism/nationalism on a wider, long term scale. I'd argue that has already happened to a significant degree.

I admittedly don't have a dog in this hunt, but the nature of the party that remains after this mess is important to the country, which needs two strong opposing parties.
.

Trump is not a danger to the concept of nationalism.

If anything has been weakening American Nationalism it has been generations of anti-american lib propaganda.

The American Left will demonize anyone who challenges the Leftist Agenda and/or Political Correctness, and the bigger the threat the more the push back.

And Trump is the biggest threat for a long time.

That is the real source of his "unattractiveness".

Populism? Is a method, not really an ideology.

The real source of his unattractiveness is not "nationalism" but "narcissism".
Narcissistic Personality Disorder in the clinical term. That makes him a liar, among other untrustworthy things.

A subject with NPD will say whatever it takes, regardless of veracity, for the purpose of self-aggrandizement, including outright denials of his own words. Watch how he melts down when somebody brings up his bankruptcies, or any other failures. Or just read the previous post.

I did not say that NATIONALISM was the source of his "unattractiveness", but that the massive push back from the libs, more clearly in the form of a massive propaganda smear campaign was.

Your "diagnosis", doctor, is based on his public persona which is clearly not the real Donald Trump. Anyone with a Ivy League background has a higher level vocabulary than he demonstrates in his public speaking, for one example.

The real him, as reported in a thread I started awhile ago, from a behind the scene meeting with Newt Gingrich and others, is much different and very open to constructive criticism.

 

[Pogo]

And it's a fair question, fueled by much history. Such as repudiating David Duke one day, and then the next day not being able to figure out who he is. Rump just makes it up as he goes along. He has no plan for anything except how to attract attention. If somebody gives him blowback for the present comment he'll just deny having said it. Perhaps try to blame a "lousy earpiece".

He has no principles. He just blurts out whatever he thinks will win him attention and adulation from the gullible in the moment.

How many times does one has to repudiate David Duke before you libs stop asking about him?

It's almost as though, you don't care about the answer and are just using the question to smear someone unfairly...

Red:
Unequivocally and unambiguously once during the 2016 Presidential campaign would be sufficient.

I don't like and should not need to infer what a Presidential candidate means when they say something. When a candidate is asked a question answerable by "yes" or "no," I expect them to say "yes" or "no." If after doing so, they want to qualify their response, fine, but still if the preponderance of their stance corresponds to yes, they need so say "yes." If it's mostly no, they need to say "no."

Why should we whose votes they solicit need to figure out which way they lean or what they "really meant?" Is it expecting too much of them to just be clear? I think it is not and unquestionably clear is not what Trump was re: repudiating David Duke's endorsement.

Donald Trump and David Duke: For the record

"
NBC’s Matt Lauer: “When you say the [Reform] party is self-destructing, what do you see as the biggest problem with the Reform Party right now?”

Trump: “Well, you’ve got David Duke just joined — a bigot, a racist, a problem. I mean, this is not exactly the people you want in your party.”

—remarks on NBC’s “Today Show,” Feb. 14, 2000"


"2015
Bloomberg’s John Heilemann: “How do you feel about the David Duke quasi-endorsement?”

Trump: “I don’t need his endorsement; I certainly wouldn’t want his endorsement."

Correct. I know those quotes --- I posted them myself a couple of months ago.
Why did I post them?
Because on February 28 he said this:

I don't know anything about David Duke. okay? I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don't know.

"I don't know, did he endorse me or what's going on, because, you know, I know nothing about David Duke. I know nothing about white supremacists. And so you're asking me a question that I'm supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about. …

"I don't know any -- honestly, I don't know David Duke. I don't believe I have ever met him. I'm pretty sure I didn't meet him. And I just don't know anything about him."
​

Again ---- whatever works in the moment. The actual content is just an inconvenience that you can run to Twitter and change retroactively if it backfires or if somebody does something outrageous like record what you just said.

Or maybe he was annoyed with the ass who was seriously asking him about David Duke.

HIs position is clearly anti-Duke.

Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda.

Then why can't he just give a consistent answer instead of hemming and hawing?
He needs the racist vote, that's why. He wants to have it both ways.
"You're not a racist? Here's my repudiation"
"You are a racist? Here's my wiggle" (which I quoted)

That's on the record. It doesn't go away by you simply denying it happened.

 

[Correll]

News reports today indicate there is a recording of Trump advisors telling Republican leadership that Trump has been projecting positions to gain support specifically for the first phase of his campaign, but will change as the campaign advances. His rally speeches and interview positions have been a scam. His whole life has been as a moderate or liberal Rockefeller-type Republican. He is far more liberal than the establishment or Rhino Republicans he attacks to gain fan support.

If that was true, we would see you and you leftist friends in the media easing up on your relentless lies.

Which we aren't and won't see.

It cracks me up when Trumper's whine about lies. Trump is a habitual pathological liar. His campaign is based on lying and talking point lies. His lies are endless. From Trump steaks and vodka to Muslims dancing in the streets of New Jersey and hijackers flying their families and wives home befor the 9/11 attack and his being against the Iraq war before it started.

Nothing in your post addressed my point.

 

[320 Years of History]

On the Today show, Trump says transsexuals should be permitted to use whatever bathroom they want to use.

Now this is the first time I've heard of him making any statement on that topic. He may have said something about it in the past. I don't know.

What I do know is his position and that of the GOP overall aren't at all the same things. I also know the man has had diametrically opposed positions or behaviors on multiple topics, sometimes all in one day. So the question in my mind is this, "how long will it be before he has a new position on the matter of transsexuals and restrooms?"

But of course the bigger issue is that nobody, not Republicans, not Democrats, can rely on what Trump says at any point in time. The man has time and again shown that he is as likely to change his mind as a teenager is to change boyfriends/girlfriends. That, of course, is one of the two biggest issues I have with Trump.

Did you ever stop to consider that maybe it is the GOP who is wrong on oh so many social issues and that is why Trump is so popular. More and more people who think the Democrats just go too far are starting to realize that you have to give a little to get a little.

Red:
???

Whether Trump or the GOP is right or wrong isn't the point. The point also has nothing to do with whether Dems or Reps have gone too far, not far enough, found the right balance, etc. What is the point is how long it'll be before Trump changes his position.

 

[Correll]

How many times does one has to repudiate David Duke before you libs stop asking about him?

It's almost as though, you don't care about the answer and are just using the question to smear someone unfairly...

Red:
Unequivocally and unambiguously once during the 2016 Presidential campaign would be sufficient.

I don't like and should not need to infer what a Presidential candidate means when they say something. When a candidate is asked a question answerable by "yes" or "no," I expect them to say "yes" or "no." If after doing so, they want to qualify their response, fine, but still if the preponderance of their stance corresponds to yes, they need so say "yes." If it's mostly no, they need to say "no."

Why should we whose votes they solicit need to figure out which way they lean or what they "really meant?" Is it expecting too much of them to just be clear? I think it is not and unquestionably clear is not what Trump was re: repudiating David Duke's endorsement.

Donald Trump and David Duke: For the record

"
NBC’s Matt Lauer: “When you say the [Reform] party is self-destructing, what do you see as the biggest problem with the Reform Party right now?”

Trump: “Well, you’ve got David Duke just joined — a bigot, a racist, a problem. I mean, this is not exactly the people you want in your party.”

—remarks on NBC’s “Today Show,” Feb. 14, 2000"


"2015
Bloomberg’s John Heilemann: “How do you feel about the David Duke quasi-endorsement?”

Trump: “I don’t need his endorsement; I certainly wouldn’t want his endorsement."

Correct. I know those quotes --- I posted them myself a couple of months ago.
Why did I post them?
Because on February 28 he said this:

I don't know anything about David Duke. okay? I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don't know.

"I don't know, did he endorse me or what's going on, because, you know, I know nothing about David Duke. I know nothing about white supremacists. And so you're asking me a question that I'm supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about. …

"I don't know any -- honestly, I don't know David Duke. I don't believe I have ever met him. I'm pretty sure I didn't meet him. And I just don't know anything about him."
​

Again ---- whatever works in the moment. The actual content is just an inconvenience that you can run to Twitter and change retroactively if it backfires or if somebody does something outrageous like record what you just said.

Or maybe he was annoyed with the ass who was seriously asking him about David Duke.

HIs position is clearly anti-Duke.

Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda.

Then why can't he just give a consistent answer instead of hemming and hawing?
He needs the racist vote, that's why. He wants to have it both ways.
"You're not a racist? Here's my repudiation"
"You are a racist? Here's my wiggle" (which I quoted)

That's on the record. It doesn't go away by you simply denying it happened.

"The racist vote"?


LOL!!!


Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda

 

[320 Years of History]

The issue and point of my OP isn't whether he's for or against LGBT folks. It's also not whether you or I are for or against them. The issue is that Trump's position today is as likely as not to not be his position at sometime within the foreseeable future.

And to support that you pick an issue he did not have a previous public position on and....


Err, what?

I did because I've already got plenty of posts discussing/identifying the others.

I really don't care that much what position he takes on the transgender issue. I care that whatever position he articulates now, he holds true to it during his Presidency. My problem with Trump is that I don't think he can be trusted. I've seen so many contradictions from that man that I haven't even gotten to the point whereby what be his actual positions on the issues even matter.

Is that really your problem with him?

If someone was to magically brainwash you into trusting him, would you really then be open to the idea of being a Trump supporter?

Red:
Did I stutter? I have at least since December 2015 been saying exactly that.

Am I "anti-Trump?" As someone to have lunch with or play a game of tennis with? No. As a politician who I trust to be true to his word? Yes.

...when he first announced his candidacy, I was keen on him -- businessman, charismatic, independently wealthy enough not to have to pander to "big corporate money," calling out existing politicians for their "partnership" with lobbyists and political fundraising, etc. -- but now, I just do not trust Mr. Trump because I don't see the alignment between his words/ideology and his actions, actions that he had to answer to nobody else to take.

I am now convinced that Mr. Trump's early acts/remarks that I thought boded well for him were little but him pandering to voters just to get their votes, not because he genuinely believed in and espoused the ideas and themes he articulated.

Now, with regard to his 2008 remarks, Mr. Trump has said, "the Clintons and I get along with everybody virtually, because that was -- when I needed approvals, when I needed something from Washington, I always got what I wanted." ....

Why are Mr. Trump's age, 2008 and present remarks all relevant? Because taken together, it becomes clear there's no telling what the man actually stands for. I honestly have no idea what that man will do if he becomes President.

The fact of the matter is that I can honestly say that aside from small children and adolescents (or adults now whom I knew before they were not adults), I don't know, know of, or have one person in my entire circle of friends, acquaintances, family members, or random folks on whom I've relied and about whom I can say they repeatedly say/do A and then later do/say -A.

I understand that people will lie, exaggerate, whatever you want to call material and deliberate misrepresentations of facts, facts great and small. I don't care for that either. The thing is that few people will do that in public and on the record. Even fewer are they who will will go back on their word.

I have no idea or way to anticipate what he actually will do on any given matter. Therefore I do not trust him.

...it really doesn't matter whether he's "right" IMO on "this or that" matter of policy. His demonstrated willingness to say/do X and later say/do -X tells me that I can't rely on him actively doing X (or trying to) even though he said that X was what he thinks needs to be done. Therefore, I do not trust him.

I'm not saying that those things aren't so. I'm saying that, unlike what I know or don't know about his fellow Republican candidates, I know for a fact that Mr. Trump does not reliably keep his word, and it's clear that whether he will or will not keep his word depends not on what he wants at any given time, not on whether he has stated "such and such" a course of intended action on a given matter. ....

I don't trust people who do that. Do you?

As if the above (and more) isn't bad enough, coming out of the GOP's recent Florida meeting, we hear that Trump was "playing a part." So now, not only is it his statements about his views that we cannot rely upon, we are now told that the personality we've been observing over the past nine months or so is also a charade. Puh-lease!

SO, who do you support instead that you think is more trustworthy?

Whom I support: Undetermined.

Who among the remaining Presidential hopefuls I think is more trustworthy than Trump: All of them.

 

[Pogo]

Red:
Unequivocally and unambiguously once during the 2016 Presidential campaign would be sufficient.

I don't like and should not need to infer what a Presidential candidate means when they say something. When a candidate is asked a question answerable by "yes" or "no," I expect them to say "yes" or "no." If after doing so, they want to qualify their response, fine, but still if the preponderance of their stance corresponds to yes, they need so say "yes." If it's mostly no, they need to say "no."

Why should we whose votes they solicit need to figure out which way they lean or what they "really meant?" Is it expecting too much of them to just be clear? I think it is not and unquestionably clear is not what Trump was re: repudiating David Duke's endorsement.

Donald Trump and David Duke: For the record

"
NBC’s Matt Lauer: “When you say the [Reform] party is self-destructing, what do you see as the biggest problem with the Reform Party right now?”

Trump: “Well, you’ve got David Duke just joined — a bigot, a racist, a problem. I mean, this is not exactly the people you want in your party.”

—remarks on NBC’s “Today Show,” Feb. 14, 2000"


"2015
Bloomberg’s John Heilemann: “How do you feel about the David Duke quasi-endorsement?”

Trump: “I don’t need his endorsement; I certainly wouldn’t want his endorsement."

Correct. I know those quotes --- I posted them myself a couple of months ago.
Why did I post them?
Because on February 28 he said this:

I don't know anything about David Duke. okay? I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don't know.

"I don't know, did he endorse me or what's going on, because, you know, I know nothing about David Duke. I know nothing about white supremacists. And so you're asking me a question that I'm supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about. …

"I don't know any -- honestly, I don't know David Duke. I don't believe I have ever met him. I'm pretty sure I didn't meet him. And I just don't know anything about him."
​

Again ---- whatever works in the moment. The actual content is just an inconvenience that you can run to Twitter and change retroactively if it backfires or if somebody does something outrageous like record what you just said.

Or maybe he was annoyed with the ass who was seriously asking him about David Duke.

HIs position is clearly anti-Duke.

Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda.

Then why can't he just give a consistent answer instead of hemming and hawing?
He needs the racist vote, that's why. He wants to have it both ways.
"You're not a racist? Here's my repudiation"
"You are a racist? Here's my wiggle" (which I quoted)

That's on the record. It doesn't go away by you simply denying it happened.

"The racist vote"?


LOL!!!


Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda

Why are you trying to dance away from the claim that it never happened?
I didn't vacillate on anything about David Duke. Rump did. As you already pointed out, he knew very well who David Duke was, years ago. Why did he suddenly "forget"?

Why indeed....

 

[Camp]

News reports today indicate there is a recording of Trump advisors telling Republican leadership that Trump has been projecting positions to gain support specifically for the first phase of his campaign, but will change as the campaign advances. His rally speeches and interview positions have been a scam. His whole life has been as a moderate or liberal Rockefeller-type Republican. He is far more liberal than the establishment or Rhino Republicans he attacks to gain fan support.

If that was true, we would see you and you leftist friends in the media easing up on your relentless lies.

Which we aren't and won't see.

It cracks me up when Trumper's whine about lies. Trump is a habitual pathological liar. His campaign is based on lying and talking point lies. His lies are endless. From Trump steaks and vodka to Muslims dancing in the streets of New Jersey and hijackers flying their families and wives home befor the 9/11 attack and his being against the Iraq war before it started.

Nothing in your post addressed my point.

Sure it did. You were whining about the left and the media lying and I pointed out with examples that Trump is the real liar. I used specific examples to counter the point that you did not use any examples to substantiate your claim. Plus, I was not really trying to focus on your post, I was using it as an example of how Trumpers are delusional to the point of dishonesty.

 

[Correll]

And to support that you pick an issue he did not have a previous public position on and....


Err, what?

I did because I've already got plenty of posts discussing/identifying the others.

I really don't care that much what position he takes on the transgender issue. I care that whatever position he articulates now, he holds true to it during his Presidency. My problem with Trump is that I don't think he can be trusted. I've seen so many contradictions from that man that I haven't even gotten to the point whereby what be his actual positions on the issues even matter.

Is that really your problem with him?

If someone was to magically brainwash you into trusting him, would you really then be open to the idea of being a Trump supporter?

Red:
Did I stutter? I have at least since December 2015 been saying exactly that.

Am I "anti-Trump?" As someone to have lunch with or play a game of tennis with? No. As a politician who I trust to be true to his word? Yes.

...when he first announced his candidacy, I was keen on him -- businessman, charismatic, independently wealthy enough not to have to pander to "big corporate money," calling out existing politicians for their "partnership" with lobbyists and political fundraising, etc. -- but now, I just do not trust Mr. Trump because I don't see the alignment between his words/ideology and his actions, actions that he had to answer to nobody else to take.

I am now convinced that Mr. Trump's early acts/remarks that I thought boded well for him were little but him pandering to voters just to get their votes, not because he genuinely believed in and espoused the ideas and themes he articulated.

Now, with regard to his 2008 remarks, Mr. Trump has said, "the Clintons and I get along with everybody virtually, because that was -- when I needed approvals, when I needed something from Washington, I always got what I wanted." ....

Why are Mr. Trump's age, 2008 and present remarks all relevant? Because taken together, it becomes clear there's no telling what the man actually stands for. I honestly have no idea what that man will do if he becomes President.

The fact of the matter is that I can honestly say that aside from small children and adolescents (or adults now whom I knew before they were not adults), I don't know, know of, or have one person in my entire circle of friends, acquaintances, family members, or random folks on whom I've relied and about whom I can say they repeatedly say/do A and then later do/say -A.

I understand that people will lie, exaggerate, whatever you want to call material and deliberate misrepresentations of facts, facts great and small. I don't care for that either. The thing is that few people will do that in public and on the record. Even fewer are they who will will go back on their word.

I have no idea or way to anticipate what he actually will do on any given matter. Therefore I do not trust him.

...it really doesn't matter whether he's "right" IMO on "this or that" matter of policy. His demonstrated willingness to say/do X and later say/do -X tells me that I can't rely on him actively doing X (or trying to) even though he said that X was what he thinks needs to be done. Therefore, I do not trust him.

I'm not saying that those things aren't so. I'm saying that, unlike what I know or don't know about his fellow Republican candidates, I know for a fact that Mr. Trump does not reliably keep his word, and it's clear that whether he will or will not keep his word depends not on what he wants at any given time, not on whether he has stated "such and such" a course of intended action on a given matter. ....

I don't trust people who do that. Do you?

As if the above (and more) isn't bad enough, coming out of the GOP's recent Florida meeting, we hear that Trump was "playing a part." So now, not only is it his statements about his views that we cannot rely upon, we are now told that the personality we've been observing over the past nine months or so is also a charade. Puh-lease!

SO, who do you support instead that you think is more trustworthy?

Whom I support: Undetermined.

Who among the remaining Presidential hopefuls I think is more trustworthy than Trump: All of them.

IF it comes down to Hillary and Trump, who will you vote for?

 

[Correll]

Donald Trump and David Duke: For the record

"
NBC’s Matt Lauer: “When you say the [Reform] party is self-destructing, what do you see as the biggest problem with the Reform Party right now?”

Trump: “Well, you’ve got David Duke just joined — a bigot, a racist, a problem. I mean, this is not exactly the people you want in your party.”

—remarks on NBC’s “Today Show,” Feb. 14, 2000"


"2015
Bloomberg’s John Heilemann: “How do you feel about the David Duke quasi-endorsement?”

Trump: “I don’t need his endorsement; I certainly wouldn’t want his endorsement."

Correct. I know those quotes --- I posted them myself a couple of months ago.
Why did I post them?
Because on February 28 he said this:

I don't know anything about David Duke. okay? I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don't know.

"I don't know, did he endorse me or what's going on, because, you know, I know nothing about David Duke. I know nothing about white supremacists. And so you're asking me a question that I'm supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about. …

"I don't know any -- honestly, I don't know David Duke. I don't believe I have ever met him. I'm pretty sure I didn't meet him. And I just don't know anything about him."
​

Again ---- whatever works in the moment. The actual content is just an inconvenience that you can run to Twitter and change retroactively if it backfires or if somebody does something outrageous like record what you just said.

Or maybe he was annoyed with the ass who was seriously asking him about David Duke.

HIs position is clearly anti-Duke.

Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda.

Then why can't he just give a consistent answer instead of hemming and hawing?
He needs the racist vote, that's why. He wants to have it both ways.
"You're not a racist? Here's my repudiation"
"You are a racist? Here's my wiggle" (which I quoted)

That's on the record. It doesn't go away by you simply denying it happened.

"The racist vote"?


LOL!!!


Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda

Why are you trying to dance away from the claim that it never happened?
I didn't vacillate on anything about David Duke. Rump did. As you already pointed out, he knew very well who David Duke was, years ago. Why did he suddenly "forget"?

Why indeed....

Senior moment, tired, tired of reporters bullshit, distracted by make up girl's big tits., who knows, who cares?

I know you don't care.

You just want to use it as an excuse to attack Trump.

"Racist vote"? lol!

 

[Correll]

News reports today indicate there is a recording of Trump advisors telling Republican leadership that Trump has been projecting positions to gain support specifically for the first phase of his campaign, but will change as the campaign advances. His rally speeches and interview positions have been a scam. His whole life has been as a moderate or liberal Rockefeller-type Republican. He is far more liberal than the establishment or Rhino Republicans he attacks to gain fan support.

If that was true, we would see you and you leftist friends in the media easing up on your relentless lies.

Which we aren't and won't see.

It cracks me up when Trumper's whine about lies. Trump is a habitual pathological liar. His campaign is based on lying and talking point lies. His lies are endless. From Trump steaks and vodka to Muslims dancing in the streets of New Jersey and hijackers flying their families and wives home befor the 9/11 attack and his being against the Iraq war before it started.

Nothing in your post addressed my point.

Sure it did. You were whining about the left and the media lying and I pointed out with examples that Trump is the real liar. I used specific examples to counter the point that you did not use any examples to substantiate your claim. Plus, I was not really trying to focus on your post, I was using it as an example of how Trumpers are delusional to the point of dishonesty.

Like I said, a counter accusation does not address my point about the media lying. Regardless of whether your accusation is true or not, it does not address whether my accusation is true or not.


xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

My point stands.


If what you claimed about Trump being liberal was true, we would see you and you leftist friends in the media easing up on your relentless lies.

Which we aren't and won't see.

 

[Pogo]

Correct. I know those quotes --- I posted them myself a couple of months ago.
Why did I post them?
Because on February 28 he said this:

I don't know anything about David Duke. okay? I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists. So, I don't know.

"I don't know, did he endorse me or what's going on, because, you know, I know nothing about David Duke. I know nothing about white supremacists. And so you're asking me a question that I'm supposed to be talking about people that I know nothing about. …

"I don't know any -- honestly, I don't know David Duke. I don't believe I have ever met him. I'm pretty sure I didn't meet him. And I just don't know anything about him."
​

Again ---- whatever works in the moment. The actual content is just an inconvenience that you can run to Twitter and change retroactively if it backfires or if somebody does something outrageous like record what you just said.

Or maybe he was annoyed with the ass who was seriously asking him about David Duke.

HIs position is clearly anti-Duke.

Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda.

Then why can't he just give a consistent answer instead of hemming and hawing?
He needs the racist vote, that's why. He wants to have it both ways.
"You're not a racist? Here's my repudiation"
"You are a racist? Here's my wiggle" (which I quoted)

That's on the record. It doesn't go away by you simply denying it happened.

"The racist vote"?


LOL!!!


Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda

Why are you trying to dance away from the claim that it never happened?
I didn't vacillate on anything about David Duke. Rump did. As you already pointed out, he knew very well who David Duke was, years ago. Why did he suddenly "forget"?

Why indeed....

Senior moment, tired, tired of reporters bullshit, distracted by make up girl's big tits., who knows, who cares?

I know you don't care.

You just want to use it as an excuse to attack Trump.

"Racist vote"? lol!

Yyyyyyyeah um... he already got the racist vote. That was inherent in the Duke statement in the first place. As well as the quote in my sigline for another example.

Desperation noted.

 

[Pogo]

Pogo that is hilarious that you are calling Trump a narcissist in light of who is sitting in the Oval right now. Of course Trummp is a narcissist, anyone who would want that job is.

No, not even close. You don't seem to understand the difference between Narcissism and "self-confidence". Obviously anybody running for anything, or setting out on any endeavour, needs the latter. That's not the issue here.

From my earlier link:

>> if you have narcissistic personality disorder, you may come across as conceited, boastful or pretentious. You often monopolize conversations. You may belittle or look down on people you perceive as inferior (1) You may feel a sense of entitlement (2) — and when you don't receive special treatment, you may become impatient or angry.(3) You may insist on having "the best" of everything (4) — for instance, the best car, athletic club or medical care.

At the same time, you have trouble handling anything that may be perceived as criticism. You may have secret feelings of insecurity, shame, vulnerability and humiliation. To feel better, you may react with rage or contempt and try to belittle the other person to make yourself appear superior. Or you may feel depressed and moody because you fall short of perfection. <<
​

Sound like anyone mentioned recently?

• "Losers"? "Disgusting Pigs"? (1)
• "(The Chinese/women/Mexicans) love me".... "I will be the greatest jobs President that God ever created" (2)
• Megyn Kelly, Carly Fiorina, the analyst who predicted (correctly) his casino would fail, the author who he sued for understating his net worth.... anyone who brings up his bankruptcies (3)
• Incessant braggadocio about his erectile functions (buildings) being the "greatest grandest" etc ad nauseum... skipping entire tens of floors to make a building appear bigger than it is... bringing up penis size in a Presidential debate.... (4)

--- shall I go on?

Ever seen O'bama stay up all night sending desperate tweets about somebody who dared criticize him? Ever see Dubya whine about a reporter with "blood coming out of her wherever"? Ever see Reagan bring up his penis size in a debate? Ever hear Bill Clinton or Jimmy Carter or Jerry Ford say that "if she wasn't my daughter I'd be dating her"?

You're correct, Obama doesn't stay up all night tweeting about people who disagree with him, he just sicks the IRS on them.

Seriously, every time Obama opens his mouth its too tell someone else they are stupid, and only he knows the right way to do things. Don't give me that crap, he's as narcissistic as Trump , they just react differently when challenged.

Great. Find us an O'bama video comparable to the one in post 99. Find one even vaguely remotely close at all.

Matter of fact, find me any comparable video from anybody anywhere. This can be my Rump Challenge Number Three.

(Just to recap my Rump Challenges Numbers One and Two, neither of which have ever been met:

Challenge one: find me any instance anywhere, any time, inside or outside politics, where Rump has ever taken responsibility for a snafu, admitted to a mistake, or apologized to anyone for anything;

Challenge two: Find me any instance where Donald Rump has ever held a job. Meaning being an employee, who has to meet somebody else's expectations, at the risk of being fired, like, you know, normal people. Any job. Ever.

They're all related)

 

[Correll]

Or maybe he was annoyed with the ass who was seriously asking him about David Duke.

HIs position is clearly anti-Duke.

Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda.

Then why can't he just give a consistent answer instead of hemming and hawing?
He needs the racist vote, that's why. He wants to have it both ways.
"You're not a racist? Here's my repudiation"
"You are a racist? Here's my wiggle" (which I quoted)

That's on the record. It doesn't go away by you simply denying it happened.

"The racist vote"?


LOL!!!


Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda

Why are you trying to dance away from the claim that it never happened?
I didn't vacillate on anything about David Duke. Rump did. As you already pointed out, he knew very well who David Duke was, years ago. Why did he suddenly "forget"?

Why indeed....

Senior moment, tired, tired of reporters bullshit, distracted by make up girl's big tits., who knows, who cares?

I know you don't care.

You just want to use it as an excuse to attack Trump.

"Racist vote"? lol!

Yyyyyyyeah um... he already got the racist vote. That was inherent in the Duke statement in the first place. As well as the quote in my sigline for another example.

Desperation noted.

I answered your question and you ignored that fact, showing that you didn't care about your question.

and NO, it's not inherent in the Duke Statement.

But thanks for revealing what this little exercise is all about. You think that just mentioning, over and over again that David Duke "endorsed" Trump that it supports the lie that Trump and his supporters are racist.

 

[Pogo]

Then why can't he just give a consistent answer instead of hemming and hawing?
He needs the racist vote, that's why. He wants to have it both ways.
"You're not a racist? Here's my repudiation"
"You are a racist? Here's my wiggle" (which I quoted)

That's on the record. It doesn't go away by you simply denying it happened.

"The racist vote"?


LOL!!!


Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda

Why are you trying to dance away from the claim that it never happened?
I didn't vacillate on anything about David Duke. Rump did. As you already pointed out, he knew very well who David Duke was, years ago. Why did he suddenly "forget"?

Why indeed....

Senior moment, tired, tired of reporters bullshit, distracted by make up girl's big tits., who knows, who cares?

I know you don't care.

You just want to use it as an excuse to attack Trump.

"Racist vote"? lol!

Yyyyyyyeah um... he already got the racist vote. That was inherent in the Duke statement in the first place. As well as the quote in my sigline for another example.

Desperation noted.

I answered your question and you ignored that fact, showing that you didn't care about your question.

and NO, it's not inherent in the Duke Statement.

But thanks for revealing what this little exercise is all about. You think that just mentioning, over and over again that David Duke "endorsed" Trump that it supports the lie that Trump and his supporters are racist.

I've crossed no such bridge. Not here, not anywhere. Go check me. Matter of fact I've stated the opposite numerous times. YOU made that leap about "what it means" -- not me.

I simply pointed out that he can't get his story straight. Then when you denied that was true, I proved it. With a direct quote.

 

[Camp]

News reports today indicate there is a recording of Trump advisors telling Republican leadership that Trump has been projecting positions to gain support specifically for the first phase of his campaign, but will change as the campaign advances. His rally speeches and interview positions have been a scam. His whole life has been as a moderate or liberal Rockefeller-type Republican. He is far more liberal than the establishment or Rhino Republicans he attacks to gain fan support.

If that was true, we would see you and you leftist friends in the media easing up on your relentless lies.

Which we aren't and won't see.

It cracks me up when Trumper's whine about lies. Trump is a habitual pathological liar. His campaign is based on lying and talking point lies. His lies are endless. From Trump steaks and vodka to Muslims dancing in the streets of New Jersey and hijackers flying their families and wives home befor the 9/11 attack and his being against the Iraq war before it started.

Nothing in your post addressed my point.

Sure it did. You were whining about the left and the media lying and I pointed out with examples that Trump is the real liar. I used specific examples to counter the point that you did not use any examples to substantiate your claim. Plus, I was not really trying to focus on your post, I was using it as an example of how Trumpers are delusional to the point of dishonesty.

Like I said, a counter accusation does not address my point about the media lying. Regardless of whether your accusation is true or not, it does not address whether my accusation is true or not.


And your childish and moronic "trumpers" nonsense is even less on point.

My point stands.


If what you claimed about Trump being liberal was true, we would see you and you leftist friends in the media easing up on your relentless lies.

Which we aren't and won't see.

What lies have the media and or what you call the left told about Trump?

 

[Correll]

"The racist vote"?


LOL!!!


Why are you harping on this?

Because of the smear that comes with mentioning Trump and Duke in the same post.

Standard Leftist propaganda

Why are you trying to dance away from the claim that it never happened?
I didn't vacillate on anything about David Duke. Rump did. As you already pointed out, he knew very well who David Duke was, years ago. Why did he suddenly "forget"?

Why indeed....

Senior moment, tired, tired of reporters bullshit, distracted by make up girl's big tits., who knows, who cares?

I know you don't care.

You just want to use it as an excuse to attack Trump.

"Racist vote"? lol!

Yyyyyyyeah um... he already got the racist vote. That was inherent in the Duke statement in the first place. As well as the quote in my sigline for another example.

Desperation noted.

I answered your question and you ignored that fact, showing that you didn't care about your question.

and NO, it's not inherent in the Duke Statement.

But thanks for revealing what this little exercise is all about. You think that just mentioning, over and over again that David Duke "endorsed" Trump that it supports the lie that Trump and his supporters are racist.

I've crossed no such bridge. Not here, not anywhere. Go check me. Matter of fact I've stated the opposite numerous times. YOU made that leap about "what it means" -- not me.

I simply pointed out that he can't get his story straight. Then when you denied that was true, I proved it. With a direct quote.

Your words.

" he already got the racist vote. That was inherent in the Duke statement "

If you believe that, then simply keeping the Duke Statement in play is a propaganda technique to smear Trump.

The actual debate or points made are irrelevant.

 

[Correll]

If that was true, we would see you and you leftist friends in the media easing up on your relentless lies.

Which we aren't and won't see.

It cracks me up when Trumper's whine about lies. Trump is a habitual pathological liar. His campaign is based on lying and talking point lies. His lies are endless. From Trump steaks and vodka to Muslims dancing in the streets of New Jersey and hijackers flying their families and wives home befor the 9/11 attack and his being against the Iraq war before it started.

Nothing in your post addressed my point.

Sure it did. You were whining about the left and the media lying and I pointed out with examples that Trump is the real liar. I used specific examples to counter the point that you did not use any examples to substantiate your claim. Plus, I was not really trying to focus on your post, I was using it as an example of how Trumpers are delusional to the point of dishonesty.

Like I said, a counter accusation does not address my point about the media lying. Regardless of whether your accusation is true or not, it does not address whether my accusation is true or not.


And your childish and moronic "trumpers" nonsense is even less on point.

My point stands.


If what you claimed about Trump being liberal was true, we would see you and you leftist friends in the media easing up on your relentless lies.

Which we aren't and won't see.

What lies have the media and or what you call the left told about Trump?

Wanting to enforce Immigration laws being racist, or even worthy of being compared to Hitler is a big one.

That has been CONSTANT.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

It cracks me up when Trumper's whine about lies. Trump is a habitual pathological liar. His campaign is based on lying and talking point lies. His lies are endless. From Trump steaks and vodka to Muslims dancing in the streets of New Jersey and hijackers flying their families and wives home befor the 9/11 attack and his being against the Iraq war before it started.

Nothing in your post addressed my point.

Sure it did. You were whining about the left and the media lying and I pointed out with examples that Trump is the real liar. I used specific examples to counter the point that you did not use any examples to substantiate your claim. Plus, I was not really trying to focus on your post, I was using it as an example of how Trumpers are delusional to the point of dishonesty.

Like I said, a counter accusation does not address my point about the media lying. Regardless of whether your accusation is true or not, it does not address whether my accusation is true or not.


And your childish and moronic "trumpers" nonsense is even less on point.

My point stands.


If what you claimed about Trump being liberal was true, we would see you and you leftist friends in the media easing up on your relentless lies.

Which we aren't and won't see.

What lies have the media and or what you call the left told about Trump?

Wanting to enforce Immigration laws being racist, or even worthy of being compared to Hitler is a big one.

That has been CONSTANT.

What is racist about his proposed immigration policies? Be specific.