Voting for 'Trump' because 'Duck' isn't an option?

[eagle1462010]

Liberals trying to catch a Trump.

 

[LoneLaugher]

It is whining. If you didn't flame me without adding thread content, then you'd have a point. But...you did. And then you did the same to Jillian. You discussed Obama and not Trump while flaming her. You suck at this. Follow your own standards, chief.

Have you reported Wildman yet?

Your side side stepped the issue from the get go. Period. and your side can't make up your mind whether to Hate or love Trump. In one post you will flame the living hell out of him...........and then in another SAY YOU HOPE HE'S THE ONE......................

Perhaps you are confused.......................

Perhaps you just don't know whether or not he will actually pull it off.

Perhaps he's a Hillary Shill...........

Face it.........your side has been TRUMPED by TRUMP as well. Or you could actually make up your mind. On who you want to run AGAINST YOUR GIRL..................Your primary is nothing more than a show, yet you complain about the TRUMP SHOW....................You can't figure this guy out either.

Trust me when I say that I want Trump to win the GOP nomination. Nothing would make me happier than to watch every real nutbag on that stage lose their shit as the premier fake Republican grabs the top spot in your party.

RIddle me this..........Is there any candidate from the GOP you would vote for over Hillary/ Answer that one honestly.

No. Kasich comes close.....but he lost me with his Christian gestapo idea. Rand Paul comes close.....but he is a freak on labor and thinks a flat tax is a good idea. Plus....he's not all that genuine if you ask me.

Next riddle, joker.

Your answer was transparent...........you would never vote for a GOP candidate.......thus you answered the riddle even though you danced................Your strategy is to attack ANY CANDIDATE from the GOP..........and stay away from the horrible record of LYING and abuse of power from your side..............I understand this tactic..........because you have used it for decades.

Riddle me this.......you have had Dems who want the VAT here.........say it isn't so..........but only if it's just another tax.........Your side agrees with more taxation......Rand Paul's plan and strategy is a 14.5% VAT..............Cruz's plan is 16%.........................Your side favors more taxes.........Hillary favors more taxes................Riddle me this.................what is your answer to taxation........and does it hold water to your side's candidates?

I didn't say I'd never vote for a GOP candidate. You are having trouble reading. I've voted for GOP candidates many times.

You seem confused by the issue of taxes. I am in favor of protecting American industry. A VAT tax is a way to do that. Tax imports.....but not exports. Could be a way to promote American manufacturing.

My answer to taxation is to incentivize investment in said American manufacturing while funding the American pursuit of happiness. That includes education, infrastructure and health care.

Next riddle.

 

[eagle1462010]

Your side side stepped the issue from the get go. Period. and your side can't make up your mind whether to Hate or love Trump. In one post you will flame the living hell out of him...........and then in another SAY YOU HOPE HE'S THE ONE......................

Perhaps you are confused.......................

Perhaps you just don't know whether or not he will actually pull it off.

Perhaps he's a Hillary Shill...........

Face it.........your side has been TRUMPED by TRUMP as well. Or you could actually make up your mind. On who you want to run AGAINST YOUR GIRL..................Your primary is nothing more than a show, yet you complain about the TRUMP SHOW....................You can't figure this guy out either.

Trust me when I say that I want Trump to win the GOP nomination. Nothing would make me happier than to watch every real nutbag on that stage lose their shit as the premier fake Republican grabs the top spot in your party.

RIddle me this..........Is there any candidate from the GOP you would vote for over Hillary/ Answer that one honestly.

No. Kasich comes close.....but he lost me with his Christian gestapo idea. Rand Paul comes close.....but he is a freak on labor and thinks a flat tax is a good idea. Plus....he's not all that genuine if you ask me.

Next riddle, joker.

Your answer was transparent...........you would never vote for a GOP candidate.......thus you answered the riddle even though you danced................Your strategy is to attack ANY CANDIDATE from the GOP..........and stay away from the horrible record of LYING and abuse of power from your side..............I understand this tactic..........because you have used it for decades.

Riddle me this.......you have had Dems who want the VAT here.........say it isn't so..........but only if it's just another tax.........Your side agrees with more taxation......Rand Paul's plan and strategy is a 14.5% VAT..............Cruz's plan is 16%.........................Your side favors more taxes.........Hillary favors more taxes................Riddle me this.................what is your answer to taxation........and does it hold water to your side's candidates?

I didn't say I'd never vote for a GOP candidate. You are having trouble reading. I've voted for GOP candidates many times.

You seem confused by the issue of taxes. I am in favor of protecting American industry. A VAT tax is a way to do that. Tax imports.....but not exports. Could be a way to promote American manufacturing.

My answer to taxation is to incentivize investment in said American manufacturing while funding the American pursuit of happiness. That includes education, infrastructure and health care.

Next riddle.

So.......are you saying that the pundits are correct and the rest of the world is using VAT taxes as a unofficial Tariff?

Finally, would you agree that a VAT Imposed in the United States would raise the cost of BUYING ANYTHING by 16% under Ted's plan.

aka you just agreed to raising taxes..........would that be in addition to current taxes or as a tax bill as Ted is saying.

Your side says you protect the poor. Yet would make everything they buy more expensive. How is that helping them? Same question regarding your EPA policies which are making their utility rates go up...............You say your for the little guy, but Fuck them every time you get involved.............

Will you give the KY jelly to those you fuck while saying it's good for them as normal.

 

[Wilbur Right]

Your side says you protect the poor. Yet would make everything they buy more expensive. How is that helping them?

A strong, vibrant middle class is the best protection the poor could possibly have.

the middle class is what the poor aspire to be.

they (the poor) need an exmple of middle class success.

the poor knows they will never be in yhe wealthy class.

And thats why strengthing the middle class is the best thing we could focus on.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Trust me when I say that I want Trump to win the GOP nomination. Nothing would make me happier than to watch every real nutbag on that stage lose their shit as the premier fake Republican grabs the top spot in your party.

RIddle me this..........Is there any candidate from the GOP you would vote for over Hillary/ Answer that one honestly.

No. Kasich comes close.....but he lost me with his Christian gestapo idea. Rand Paul comes close.....but he is a freak on labor and thinks a flat tax is a good idea. Plus....he's not all that genuine if you ask me.

Next riddle, joker.

Your answer was transparent...........you would never vote for a GOP candidate.......thus you answered the riddle even though you danced................Your strategy is to attack ANY CANDIDATE from the GOP..........and stay away from the horrible record of LYING and abuse of power from your side..............I understand this tactic..........because you have used it for decades.

Riddle me this.......you have had Dems who want the VAT here.........say it isn't so..........but only if it's just another tax.........Your side agrees with more taxation......Rand Paul's plan and strategy is a 14.5% VAT..............Cruz's plan is 16%.........................Your side favors more taxes.........Hillary favors more taxes................Riddle me this.................what is your answer to taxation........and does it hold water to your side's candidates?

I didn't say I'd never vote for a GOP candidate. You are having trouble reading. I've voted for GOP candidates many times.

You seem confused by the issue of taxes. I am in favor of protecting American industry. A VAT tax is a way to do that. Tax imports.....but not exports. Could be a way to promote American manufacturing.

My answer to taxation is to incentivize investment in said American manufacturing while funding the American pursuit of happiness. That includes education, infrastructure and health care.

Next riddle.

So.......are you saying that the pundits are correct and the rest of the world is using VAT taxes as a unofficial Tariff?

Finally, would you agree that a VAT Imposed in the United States would raise the cost of BUYING ANYTHING by 16% under Ted's plan.

aka you just agreed to raising taxes..........would that be in addition to current taxes or as a tax bill as Ted is saying.

Your side says you protect the poor. Yet would make everything they buy more expensive. How is that helping them? Same question regarding your EPA policies which are making their utility rates go up...............You say your for the little guy, but Fuck them every time you get involved.............

Will you give the KY jelly to those you fuck while saying it's good for them as normal.

You are rambling.

 

[eagle1462010]

RIddle me this..........Is there any candidate from the GOP you would vote for over Hillary/ Answer that one honestly.

No. Kasich comes close.....but he lost me with his Christian gestapo idea. Rand Paul comes close.....but he is a freak on labor and thinks a flat tax is a good idea. Plus....he's not all that genuine if you ask me.

Next riddle, joker.

Your answer was transparent...........you would never vote for a GOP candidate.......thus you answered the riddle even though you danced................Your strategy is to attack ANY CANDIDATE from the GOP..........and stay away from the horrible record of LYING and abuse of power from your side..............I understand this tactic..........because you have used it for decades.

Riddle me this.......you have had Dems who want the VAT here.........say it isn't so..........but only if it's just another tax.........Your side agrees with more taxation......Rand Paul's plan and strategy is a 14.5% VAT..............Cruz's plan is 16%.........................Your side favors more taxes.........Hillary favors more taxes................Riddle me this.................what is your answer to taxation........and does it hold water to your side's candidates?

I didn't say I'd never vote for a GOP candidate. You are having trouble reading. I've voted for GOP candidates many times.

You seem confused by the issue of taxes. I am in favor of protecting American industry. A VAT tax is a way to do that. Tax imports.....but not exports. Could be a way to promote American manufacturing.

My answer to taxation is to incentivize investment in said American manufacturing while funding the American pursuit of happiness. That includes education, infrastructure and health care.

Next riddle.

So.......are you saying that the pundits are correct and the rest of the world is using VAT taxes as a unofficial Tariff?

Finally, would you agree that a VAT Imposed in the United States would raise the cost of BUYING ANYTHING by 16% under Ted's plan.

aka you just agreed to raising taxes..........would that be in addition to current taxes or as a tax bill as Ted is saying.

Your side says you protect the poor. Yet would make everything they buy more expensive. How is that helping them? Same question regarding your EPA policies which are making their utility rates go up...............You say your for the little guy, but Fuck them every time you get involved.............

Will you give the KY jelly to those you fuck while saying it's good for them as normal.

You are rambling.

You are avoiding.

 

[Papageorgio]

In other words, it's kind of a "protest vote" of sorts... Politics have simply become such a joke that you may as well vote for someone like Trump, just to demonstrate the absurdity and spectacle.

My guess is that this is exactly what's going on. It might explain why so many conservatives are so passionate in their defense of a guy who would be called a RINO if he were not so bombastic and, uh, ridiculous.

And it's a great example of the dangers of binary thinking and echo chambers. This guy is a testosterone-infused, turbo-charged version of Sarah Palin. They say things that would cause any reasonable person to shake their head, but because it's so ridiculous, that's somehow a good thing now.

No one is more cynical about professional politicians than I am, but this has become absurd. No one is more anti-PC than I am, but celebrating the fact that you're annoying people by purposely saying abrasive things is not the point.

Life simply isn't either/or.

As wildly entertaining as this campaign season has been, at its foundation, it's troubling, too.
.

I hear people say, what we have isn't working, our current Washington cronies are just making things worse, so why not elect Trump, he can't be any worse and things may change in Washington.

Shows the dissatisfaction with our politicians and wanting to take Washington back. I see the frustration but he is not a solution.

 

[Mac1958]

I see the frustration but he is not a solution.

Exactly.
.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Trump Bump?

 

[Montrovant]

In other words, it's kind of a "protest vote" of sorts... Politics have simply become such a joke that you may as well vote for someone like Trump, just to demonstrate the absurdity and spectacle.

My guess is that this is exactly what's going on. It might explain why so many conservatives are so passionate in their defense of a guy who would be called a RINO if he were not so bombastic and, uh, ridiculous.

And it's a great example of the dangers of binary thinking and echo chambers. This guy is a testosterone-infused, turbo-charged version of Sarah Palin. They say things that would cause any reasonable person to shake their head, but because it's so ridiculous, that's somehow a good thing now.

No one is more cynical about professional politicians than I am, but this has become absurd. No one is more anti-PC than I am, but celebrating the fact that you're annoying people by purposely saying abrasive things is not the point.

Life simply isn't either/or.

As wildly entertaining as this campaign season has been, at its foundation, it's troubling, too.
.

I hear people say, what we have isn't working, our current Washington cronies are just making things worse, so why not elect Trump, he can't be any worse and things may change in Washington.

Shows the dissatisfaction with our politicians and wanting to take Washington back. I see the frustration but he is not a solution.

Trump seems like a more establishment-leaning version of Perot to me, at least for people who might vote for him as a 'FU' to the usual Dem/Rep candidates.

 

[Montrovant]

I was having an interesting conversation this evening and it was mentioned that someone thought the reason a lot of people were saying they planned to vote for Donald Trump is because Donald Duck isn't an option. In other words, it's kind of a "protest vote" of sorts... Politics have simply become such a joke that you may as well vote for someone like Trump, just to demonstrate the absurdity and spectacle.

I had never really considered this. I hear people passionately telling me why they support Trump and I can't really fault them for their arguments. I also hear people bashing and railing on Trump like he is the Anti-Christ or something. Other conservatives tell me that Trump isn't their first choice but they would vote for him over Hillary.... but the proposal intrigued me so I thought I would bring the question here to the all-knowing brain trust of USMB.

Is there any merit to this argument that people are supporting Trump in protest and it's akin to voting for Donald Duck?

how stupid do you have to be to vote for someone just because you think he pisses people off?

dumbass right-wingers.

That's not really the argument but I actually think a LOT of people voted for Barack Obama because he pissed off the right... and for that reason alone.

Again... in elections past, Donald Duck has had write-in votes as well as a host of other non-real and real spoof candidates. I remember Pat Paulsen running for president. There is always a contingent of disgruntled voters who are just fed up with BOTH parties and voice their disgust by casting such a vote.... The argument is, do you think that might be the case with Trump? Is his support kind of a "protest" thing against politics as usual? I think, given his anti-establishment message and rhetoric, that could be possible.

It's not that anyone is trying to piss you off by not supporting your queen-apparent, Hillary. It's more that people are simply done with Republicans AND Democrats and they see Trump as a way to voice their disdain with politics as usual.

BTW... The person I happened to be talking to was a moderate liberal who usually votes Democrat. He can't stand Hillary or Bernie. He said, the Republicans can't make up their minds what a Republican is and the Democrats have gone bat-shit crazy... so why not elect a joke of a president and have 4 years of prime entertainment value watching Congress have to deal with the asshole? If nothing else, SNL will be interesting again!

Hey... don't shoot me, I am only the messenger here!

I think very few people voted for Obama just to 'piss off the right'. I would say, at least for his first term, it was much more an 'anti-Bush' vote.

I don't think a significant number of people will vote for Trump because they are fed up with both parties. This is especially true with Trump running as a Republican; just how much are you protesting the political dichotomy in this country by voting for a major party candidate?

 

[Dr Grump]

Say "Hillary is the best Dem Candidate" without laughing!!!!

Greg

Hillary is the best candidate. Not saying they're not better Dems out there, but she is the best for them

Trump isn't even in the same ball park.

 

[Mac1958]

In other words, it's kind of a "protest vote" of sorts... Politics have simply become such a joke that you may as well vote for someone like Trump, just to demonstrate the absurdity and spectacle.

My guess is that this is exactly what's going on. It might explain why so many conservatives are so passionate in their defense of a guy who would be called a RINO if he were not so bombastic and, uh, ridiculous.

And it's a great example of the dangers of binary thinking and echo chambers. This guy is a testosterone-infused, turbo-charged version of Sarah Palin. They say things that would cause any reasonable person to shake their head, but because it's so ridiculous, that's somehow a good thing now.

No one is more cynical about professional politicians than I am, but this has become absurd. No one is more anti-PC than I am, but celebrating the fact that you're annoying people by purposely saying abrasive things is not the point.

Life simply isn't either/or.

As wildly entertaining as this campaign season has been, at its foundation, it's troubling, too.
.

I hear people say, what we have isn't working, our current Washington cronies are just making things worse, so why not elect Trump, he can't be any worse and things may change in Washington.

Shows the dissatisfaction with our politicians and wanting to take Washington back. I see the frustration but he is not a solution.

Trump seems like a more establishment-leaning version of Perot to me, at least for people who might vote for him as a 'FU' to the usual Dem/Rep candidates.

Yeah, the closest comparison I've been able to think of is Perot.

Although Trump makes Perot look like a seasoned statesman.


.

 

[Montrovant]

In other words, it's kind of a "protest vote" of sorts... Politics have simply become such a joke that you may as well vote for someone like Trump, just to demonstrate the absurdity and spectacle.

My guess is that this is exactly what's going on. It might explain why so many conservatives are so passionate in their defense of a guy who would be called a RINO if he were not so bombastic and, uh, ridiculous.

And it's a great example of the dangers of binary thinking and echo chambers. This guy is a testosterone-infused, turbo-charged version of Sarah Palin. They say things that would cause any reasonable person to shake their head, but because it's so ridiculous, that's somehow a good thing now.

No one is more cynical about professional politicians than I am, but this has become absurd. No one is more anti-PC than I am, but celebrating the fact that you're annoying people by purposely saying abrasive things is not the point.

Life simply isn't either/or.

As wildly entertaining as this campaign season has been, at its foundation, it's troubling, too.
.

I hear people say, what we have isn't working, our current Washington cronies are just making things worse, so why not elect Trump, he can't be any worse and things may change in Washington.

Shows the dissatisfaction with our politicians and wanting to take Washington back. I see the frustration but he is not a solution.

Trump seems like a more establishment-leaning version of Perot to me, at least for people who might vote for him as a 'FU' to the usual Dem/Rep candidates.

Yeah, the closest comparison I've been able to think of is Perot.

Although Trump makes Perot look like a seasoned statesman.


.

 

[candycorn]

GEORGE W BUSH was deemed qualified?

Dude, I dont think much of your opinions, but to imply that George W was deemed qualified to be President makes you look fucking stupid.

Well sorry you obviously flunked government in school but the president is deemed qualified by getting 270 electoral votes, which Bush did twice. Now, you may not be of the opinion he was qualified and that was equivalent to my opinion that Obama wasn't qualified. Neither of our opinions have anything to do with who was DEEMED to be qualified.

Make up your mind dude. Obama won, twice, by getting the requisite number of electoral votes.

Obama was qualified to be President under your own criteria.

LMAO.

No, he was DEEMED qualified but I don't believe he was qualified and I don't think you've made an argument for his qualifications.

Of the remaining contenders for the GOP nomination, Obama had roughly the same experience as Rubio, Cruz, and Paul. So by definition, they are not qualified. Trump, Fiorina, and Carson have no experience in government so they are not qualified. That leaves Christie, Bush, Santorum, and Kasich as supposed qualified persons.

You're qualified if you meet the constitutional mandates. Its up to the voters to place values on what you've done. They've deemed Obama qualified twice.

Well we probably have birth certificates, college transcripts and documented past on all those candidates so that puts them light years ahead of Obama in terms of qualifications.

Again... this is MY opinion and reality remains that the only real qualification is 270 electoral votes.

And the more those "documented pasts" are examined what are you left with as far as qualifications. Oh, and by the way, if something in your past can "qualify" you, something from that same past can "disqualify" you just as easily.

• For example, Marco Rubio would likely be charged (convicted is a much different matter) with credit card abuse if he were not an elected official. That is what they call it when you use a credit card designed for official business for personal purchases; is it not?
• For example, it has come (or is coming to light more and more) that Ted Cruz has taken Wall Street money and, at the same time, his rhetoric was railing against others taking the same money. The fact that he just happened to leave those specific contributions off of his required disclosures, I'm sure, is just a conincidence.
• For example, Christie has bridge-gate which you can tell was his brainchild; a subordinate acting with such gusto either means that they are acting of their boss's behalf or he was not aware of what his right hand was doing...neither is much of a "qualification".
• For example, Trump's bankruptcies and filandering.
• For example, Fiorina's shameful operation of HP right before she deployed her golden parachute, etc....

Need we go on....Light years ahead? Hardly.

Again, voters apply weight to what one did in their past. Bush partied in Alabama during Vietnam (when he bothered to show up). John Kerry was in country. Yet somehow, voters gave Bush the edge no military matters. It was a masterful operation by Rove and company.

 

[Boss]

For example, it has come (or is coming to light more and more) that Ted Cruz has taken Wall Street money
and, at the same time, his rhetoric was railing against others taking the same money. The fact that he just happened to leave those specific contributions off of his required disclosures, I'm sure, is just a conincidence.
...

Nope... False. Cruz took out a loan against he and his wife's stock in Goldman Sachs. You understand what a "loan" is, right? It's NOT a "contribution" ...it's a loan against collateral. So get your facts straight, bitch. Stop trying to LIE about a good man.

You really need to be worrying about how to keep Hillary out of prison. Word has it indictments are coming down soon.

 

[candycorn]

For example, it has come (or is coming to light more and more) that Ted Cruz has taken Wall Street money
and, at the same time, his rhetoric was railing against others taking the same money. The fact that he just happened to leave those specific contributions off of his required disclosures, I'm sure, is just a conincidence.
...

Nope... False. Cruz took out a loan against he and his wife's stock in Goldman Sachs. You understand what a "loan" is, right? It's NOT a "contribution" ...it's a loan against collateral. So get your facts straight, bitch. Stop trying to LIE about a good man.

You really need to be worrying about how to keep Hillary out of prison. Word has it indictments are coming down soon.

So he took Wall Street money and forgot to document it. Thanks for the confirmation. Well done.

 

[candycorn]

Yadda Yadda Yadda... same song, different day.

Maybe one day you fuckwits will get over Bush? .

But thousands of dead soldiers' families will always remember his lies that lead to their son's deaths.

I'm afraid that sort of betrayal doesn't go away overnight.

 

[Boss]

For example, it has come (or is coming to light more and more) that Ted Cruz has taken Wall Street money
and, at the same time, his rhetoric was railing against others taking the same money. The fact that he just happened to leave those specific contributions off of his required disclosures, I'm sure, is just a conincidence.
...

Nope... False. Cruz took out a loan against he and his wife's stock in Goldman Sachs. You understand what a "loan" is, right? It's NOT a "contribution" ...it's a loan against collateral. So get your facts straight, bitch. Stop trying to LIE about a good man.

You really need to be worrying about how to keep Hillary out of prison. Word has it indictments are coming down soon.

So he took Wall Street money and forgot to document it. Thanks for the confirmation. Well done.

No, he took a loan on collateral... that's not taking Wall Street money. If you want an example of THAT... look at Hillary Clinton's FEC donor page. I think she is up to about 30 million from Wall Street so far.

 

[Boss]

...and forgot to document it.

Again, this is a lie. He did document it. It was not reported on his FEC form because he didn't realize he needed to report a personal loan... when he discovered the error, he reported it. It was already documented through the IRS.