CDZ Should Republicans support Trump because, if nothing else, he's the Republican nominee?

[Fair&Balanced]

It's an EXACT ******* equivalency because MANY MANY Sanders supporters simply don't believe Clinton is fit to be President, they were called babies at the convention no less.

A tiny percentage of Bernie supporters won't fall in line. Meanwhile, half the GOP establishment thinks Trump is a cartoon villain while Democrats look on and laugh hysterically.

Keep thinking they're similar, though. That's half the GOP's problem: Complete and utter denial of reality.

See , right here you prove the point. "bernie supporters won't fall in line" Meanwhile you're okay with Republicans not supporting Trump. Gee, I wonder why that is GaryDog.

I wouldn't want them to fall in line if Hillary was as batshit crazy as Trump. Therein lies the difference. Trump is not the republican equivalent of Hillary. He's in his own class.

And therein lies the crux of the matter. You deny reality RE: Hillary Clinton

LMAO ok.

What's Trump got going today? Oh yeah, direct cash payments from Russia. On the heels of insisting Obama is the founder of ISIS.

You're LITERALLY insane if you think Trump's not the worst candidate in American history.

Meanwhile, Hillary has scandal after scandal after scandal and Democrats just shrug and say "that's not a big deal"

Oh, and I'll remind you, this is the CDZ, calling people insane and such is completely counter to the goals of a zone such as this.

 

[OldLady]

there are some career politicians who put their own personal power before country.....most if not all politicians have only personal interests in mind or that they are calculatingly dishonest as a matter of routine.

Power is addictive, but I don't know if I can say "all;" certainly it's not all of them who are motivated by personal power. I think many of them are, but more often I think that most of them truly think their policy ideas are truly in the nation's best interest. The bigger and more specific problem is that too few of them are objective enough about the facts, their own views and those of others to discern what policies offer the greatest opportunity for indeed being "the best" choice ("the best" policy) they could make at the time.

There's also the reality that the nature and scope of information that is today available to inform sage policy making is so vast that it's all but impossible for elected leaders to learn it all, apply it all and arrive at what is indeed "the best" choice at the time. That the world isn't as simple as it was some 100+ years ago presents a very real challenge to any individual or group's ability to govern well.

Combine that reality with human nature and, well, here we are. What we need are elected leaders who can separate themselves from the decisions they must make. How does one reliably find folks capable of doing that? Frankly, I don't know. Short of being personally and closely associated with an individual, I don't think it's possible to tell whether s/he is such a person and I'm certain that individuals are able to make themselves seem to be such a person. At the end of the day, one can only judge retroactively and commit to "tossing out" the ones who don't live up to that ideal.

Either I typed that wrong or something happened to the quote. I think I said I don't agree that most if not all have only personal interests in mind. The theory that NO ONE in Washington is fit for the task is a simplistic and inaccurate statement.

Politicians are quite aware that they need to please their constituency but their real "end game" is to push for policies and laws that they believe will improve life for everyone they represent. This is the truth of it. They aren't all monsters.

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.

I think you're beginning to believe some of the silliness being spewed by off-news sites and the tireless posters here.

No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.

A few quotes from our founders:

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” – Thomas Jefferson

“When a government betrays the people by amassing too much power and becoming tyrannical, the people have no choice but to exercise the original rights of self defense – to fight the government.” – Alexander Hamilton

“We need a revolution every 200 years, because all governments become stale and corrupt after 200 years.” – Ben Franklin

Our country, our 'backyard,' still invites us to participate in democracy in a loud and active sense

Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today. As founded though, you are correct.

Too many people say the sky is falling. Too many people are believing it. Remember who you are, who we are. We are a good people and we have a form of government that can bend to our will. It is there already, in our own backyard. Don't give up looking for it.

I have not and will not. I, however, realize that the "critical mass" necessary to exact the changes needed, is a long way off. So far off, I fear, I will not live to see it come to fruition, my last great hope is to instill the values and beliefs necessary in my children to continue the fight. Hoping that, one day, they may see this change come to pass.

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.
No sense in that; you would laugh, call them RINO's or worse, I'm sure. Since neither of us know any of these people personally (at least I don't), it's all intuitive/instinctive judgment, anyway, and seeing how they vote (or don't).
No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.
Do you live there, are you part of it? Otherwise, what do you see that shows you they are all corrupt? That they are besieged by lobbyists? That Washington and the two major parties are heavily influenced by Big Money? Those are problems, I agree (unless you are Big Money, Big Oil, Big Pharma...). But the bottom line is, if politicians don't do what we want them to, they get the heave-ho. Having a craving for personal power, as 320 points out, is certainly part of the recipe, but does that necessarily rule them out as good leaders? I don't believe it does. Power is part of being a leader.
Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today.
Okay. I will go as far as saying that we need a good house cleaning, starting with the RNC/DNC and strict campaign finance regulation. But like you said, the "critical mass" for that is a long way off. I think it's gotten a good start this year, though, don't you?

 

[Fair&Balanced]

there are some career politicians who put their own personal power before country.....most if not all politicians have only personal interests in mind or that they are calculatingly dishonest as a matter of routine.

Power is addictive, but I don't know if I can say "all;" certainly it's not all of them who are motivated by personal power. I think many of them are, but more often I think that most of them truly think their policy ideas are truly in the nation's best interest. The bigger and more specific problem is that too few of them are objective enough about the facts, their own views and those of others to discern what policies offer the greatest opportunity for indeed being "the best" choice ("the best" policy) they could make at the time.

There's also the reality that the nature and scope of information that is today available to inform sage policy making is so vast that it's all but impossible for elected leaders to learn it all, apply it all and arrive at what is indeed "the best" choice at the time. That the world isn't as simple as it was some 100+ years ago presents a very real challenge to any individual or group's ability to govern well.

Combine that reality with human nature and, well, here we are. What we need are elected leaders who can separate themselves from the decisions they must make. How does one reliably find folks capable of doing that? Frankly, I don't know. Short of being personally and closely associated with an individual, I don't think it's possible to tell whether s/he is such a person and I'm certain that individuals are able to make themselves seem to be such a person. At the end of the day, one can only judge retroactively and commit to "tossing out" the ones who don't live up to that ideal.

Either I typed that wrong or something happened to the quote. I think I said I don't agree that most if not all have only personal interests in mind. The theory that NO ONE in Washington is fit for the task is a simplistic and inaccurate statement.

Politicians are quite aware that they need to please their constituency but their real "end game" is to push for policies and laws that they believe will improve life for everyone they represent. This is the truth of it. They aren't all monsters.

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.

I think you're beginning to believe some of the silliness being spewed by off-news sites and the tireless posters here.

No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.

A few quotes from our founders:

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” – Thomas Jefferson

“When a government betrays the people by amassing too much power and becoming tyrannical, the people have no choice but to exercise the original rights of self defense – to fight the government.” – Alexander Hamilton

“We need a revolution every 200 years, because all governments become stale and corrupt after 200 years.” – Ben Franklin

Our country, our 'backyard,' still invites us to participate in democracy in a loud and active sense

Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today. As founded though, you are correct.

Too many people say the sky is falling. Too many people are believing it. Remember who you are, who we are. We are a good people and we have a form of government that can bend to our will. It is there already, in our own backyard. Don't give up looking for it.

I have not and will not. I, however, realize that the "critical mass" necessary to exact the changes needed, is a long way off. So far off, I fear, I will not live to see it come to fruition, my last great hope is to instill the values and beliefs necessary in my children to continue the fight. Hoping that, one day, they may see this change come to pass.

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.
No sense in that; you would laugh, call them RINO's or worse, I'm sure. Since neither of us know any of these people personally (at least I don't), it's all intuitive/instinctive judgment, anyway, and seeing how they vote (or don't).
No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.
Do you live there, are you part of it? Otherwise, what do you see that shows you they are all corrupt? That they are besieged by lobbyists? That Washington and the two major parties are heavily influenced by Big Money? Those are problems, I agree (unless you are Big Money, Big Oil, Big Pharma...). But the bottom line is, if politicians don't do what we want them to, they get the heave-ho. Having a craving for personal power, as 320 points out, is certainly part of the recipe, but does that necessarily rule them out as good leaders? I don't believe it does. Power is part of being a leader.
Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today.
Okay. I will go as far as saying that we need a good house cleaning, starting with the RNC/DNC and strict campaign finance regulation. But like you said, the "critical mass" for that is a long way off. I think it's gotten a good start this year, though, don't you?

Old Lady, the truth is every one of the 70 are people who were in the power circle when Bush the little was President and they know they will have more power under Clinton than they would have under Trump.

They don't care about your , or me, or this country. They care about their power.

 

[GaryDog]

A tiny percentage of Bernie supporters won't fall in line. Meanwhile, half the GOP establishment thinks Trump is a cartoon villain while Democrats look on and laugh hysterically.

Keep thinking they're similar, though. That's half the GOP's problem: Complete and utter denial of reality.

See , right here you prove the point. "bernie supporters won't fall in line" Meanwhile you're okay with Republicans not supporting Trump. Gee, I wonder why that is GaryDog.

I wouldn't want them to fall in line if Hillary was as batshit crazy as Trump. Therein lies the difference. Trump is not the republican equivalent of Hillary. He's in his own class.

And therein lies the crux of the matter. You deny reality RE: Hillary Clinton

LMAO ok.

What's Trump got going today? Oh yeah, direct cash payments from Russia. On the heels of insisting Obama is the founder of ISIS.

You're LITERALLY insane if you think Trump's not the worst candidate in American history.

Meanwhile, Hillary has scandal after scandal after scandal and Democrats just shrug and say "that's not a big deal"

Oh, and I'll remind you, this is the CDZ, calling people insane and such is completely counter to the goals of a zone such as this.

You mean she's cleared in scandal after scandal? Seriously, when is a republican-led witch hu-, er, investigation of Clinton going to actually find something illegal? You guys are pathetic.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

See , right here you prove the point. "bernie supporters won't fall in line" Meanwhile you're okay with Republicans not supporting Trump. Gee, I wonder why that is GaryDog.

I wouldn't want them to fall in line if Hillary was as batshit crazy as Trump. Therein lies the difference. Trump is not the republican equivalent of Hillary. He's in his own class.

And therein lies the crux of the matter. You deny reality RE: Hillary Clinton

LMAO ok.

What's Trump got going today? Oh yeah, direct cash payments from Russia. On the heels of insisting Obama is the founder of ISIS.

You're LITERALLY insane if you think Trump's not the worst candidate in American history.

Meanwhile, Hillary has scandal after scandal after scandal and Democrats just shrug and say "that's not a big deal"

Oh, and I'll remind you, this is the CDZ, calling people insane and such is completely counter to the goals of a zone such as this.

You mean she's cleared in scandal after scandal? Seriously, when is a republican-led witch hu-, er, investigation of Clinton going to actually find something illegal? You guys are pathetic.

Gary, I'm gonna make this easy on both of us, when you finally respond to this thread which is in the CDZ like an adult , that means no name calling or denying simple facts are true, just tag me so I know you're ready for a real response. Not until then though please.

 

[OldLady]

there are some career politicians who put their own personal power before country.....most if not all politicians have only personal interests in mind or that they are calculatingly dishonest as a matter of routine.

Power is addictive, but I don't know if I can say "all;" certainly it's not all of them who are motivated by personal power. I think many of them are, but more often I think that most of them truly think their policy ideas are truly in the nation's best interest. The bigger and more specific problem is that too few of them are objective enough about the facts, their own views and those of others to discern what policies offer the greatest opportunity for indeed being "the best" choice ("the best" policy) they could make at the time.

There's also the reality that the nature and scope of information that is today available to inform sage policy making is so vast that it's all but impossible for elected leaders to learn it all, apply it all and arrive at what is indeed "the best" choice at the time. That the world isn't as simple as it was some 100+ years ago presents a very real challenge to any individual or group's ability to govern well.

Combine that reality with human nature and, well, here we are. What we need are elected leaders who can separate themselves from the decisions they must make. How does one reliably find folks capable of doing that? Frankly, I don't know. Short of being personally and closely associated with an individual, I don't think it's possible to tell whether s/he is such a person and I'm certain that individuals are able to make themselves seem to be such a person. At the end of the day, one can only judge retroactively and commit to "tossing out" the ones who don't live up to that ideal.

Either I typed that wrong or something happened to the quote. I think I said I don't agree that most if not all have only personal interests in mind. The theory that NO ONE in Washington is fit for the task is a simplistic and inaccurate statement.

Politicians are quite aware that they need to please their constituency but their real "end game" is to push for policies and laws that they believe will improve life for everyone they represent. This is the truth of it. They aren't all monsters.

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.

I think you're beginning to believe some of the silliness being spewed by off-news sites and the tireless posters here.

No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.

A few quotes from our founders:

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” – Thomas Jefferson

“When a government betrays the people by amassing too much power and becoming tyrannical, the people have no choice but to exercise the original rights of self defense – to fight the government.” – Alexander Hamilton

“We need a revolution every 200 years, because all governments become stale and corrupt after 200 years.” – Ben Franklin

Our country, our 'backyard,' still invites us to participate in democracy in a loud and active sense

Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today. As founded though, you are correct.

Too many people say the sky is falling. Too many people are believing it. Remember who you are, who we are. We are a good people and we have a form of government that can bend to our will. It is there already, in our own backyard. Don't give up looking for it.

I have not and will not. I, however, realize that the "critical mass" necessary to exact the changes needed, is a long way off. So far off, I fear, I will not live to see it come to fruition, my last great hope is to instill the values and beliefs necessary in my children to continue the fight. Hoping that, one day, they may see this change come to pass.

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.
No sense in that; you would laugh, call them RINO's or worse, I'm sure. Since neither of us know any of these people personally (at least I don't), it's all intuitive/instinctive judgment, anyway, and seeing how they vote (or don't).
No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.
Do you live there, are you part of it? Otherwise, what do you see that shows you they are all corrupt? That they are besieged by lobbyists? That Washington and the two major parties are heavily influenced by Big Money? Those are problems, I agree (unless you are Big Money, Big Oil, Big Pharma...). But the bottom line is, if politicians don't do what we want them to, they get the heave-ho. Having a craving for personal power, as 320 points out, is certainly part of the recipe, but does that necessarily rule them out as good leaders? I don't believe it does. Power is part of being a leader.
Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today.
Okay. I will go as far as saying that we need a good house cleaning, starting with the RNC/DNC and strict campaign finance regulation. But like you said, the "critical mass" for that is a long way off. I think it's gotten a good start this year, though, don't you?

Old Lady, the truth is every one of the 70 are people who were in the power circle when Bush the little was President and they know they will have more power under Clinton than they would have under Trump.

They don't care about your , or me, or this country. They care about their power.

What 70 people are you referring to? The latest "I won't vote for him" letter? We all find what we look for, F&B, and you can call me naive, blind, or (my favorite) a pathological altruist, but I don't believe you.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Power is addictive, but I don't know if I can say "all;" certainly it's not all of them who are motivated by personal power. I think many of them are, but more often I think that most of them truly think their policy ideas are truly in the nation's best interest. The bigger and more specific problem is that too few of them are objective enough about the facts, their own views and those of others to discern what policies offer the greatest opportunity for indeed being "the best" choice ("the best" policy) they could make at the time.

There's also the reality that the nature and scope of information that is today available to inform sage policy making is so vast that it's all but impossible for elected leaders to learn it all, apply it all and arrive at what is indeed "the best" choice at the time. That the world isn't as simple as it was some 100+ years ago presents a very real challenge to any individual or group's ability to govern well.

Combine that reality with human nature and, well, here we are. What we need are elected leaders who can separate themselves from the decisions they must make. How does one reliably find folks capable of doing that? Frankly, I don't know. Short of being personally and closely associated with an individual, I don't think it's possible to tell whether s/he is such a person and I'm certain that individuals are able to make themselves seem to be such a person. At the end of the day, one can only judge retroactively and commit to "tossing out" the ones who don't live up to that ideal.

Either I typed that wrong or something happened to the quote. I think I said I don't agree that most if not all have only personal interests in mind. The theory that NO ONE in Washington is fit for the task is a simplistic and inaccurate statement.

Politicians are quite aware that they need to please their constituency but their real "end game" is to push for policies and laws that they believe will improve life for everyone they represent. This is the truth of it. They aren't all monsters.

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.

I think you're beginning to believe some of the silliness being spewed by off-news sites and the tireless posters here.

No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.

A few quotes from our founders:

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” – Thomas Jefferson

“When a government betrays the people by amassing too much power and becoming tyrannical, the people have no choice but to exercise the original rights of self defense – to fight the government.” – Alexander Hamilton

“We need a revolution every 200 years, because all governments become stale and corrupt after 200 years.” – Ben Franklin

Our country, our 'backyard,' still invites us to participate in democracy in a loud and active sense

Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today. As founded though, you are correct.

Too many people say the sky is falling. Too many people are believing it. Remember who you are, who we are. We are a good people and we have a form of government that can bend to our will. It is there already, in our own backyard. Don't give up looking for it.

I have not and will not. I, however, realize that the "critical mass" necessary to exact the changes needed, is a long way off. So far off, I fear, I will not live to see it come to fruition, my last great hope is to instill the values and beliefs necessary in my children to continue the fight. Hoping that, one day, they may see this change come to pass.

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.
No sense in that; you would laugh, call them RINO's or worse, I'm sure. Since neither of us know any of these people personally (at least I don't), it's all intuitive/instinctive judgment, anyway, and seeing how they vote (or don't).
No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.
Do you live there, are you part of it? Otherwise, what do you see that shows you they are all corrupt? That they are besieged by lobbyists? That Washington and the two major parties are heavily influenced by Big Money? Those are problems, I agree (unless you are Big Money, Big Oil, Big Pharma...). But the bottom line is, if politicians don't do what we want them to, they get the heave-ho. Having a craving for personal power, as 320 points out, is certainly part of the recipe, but does that necessarily rule them out as good leaders? I don't believe it does. Power is part of being a leader.
Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today.
Okay. I will go as far as saying that we need a good house cleaning, starting with the RNC/DNC and strict campaign finance regulation. But like you said, the "critical mass" for that is a long way off. I think it's gotten a good start this year, though, don't you?

Old Lady, the truth is every one of the 70 are people who were in the power circle when Bush the little was President and they know they will have more power under Clinton than they would have under Trump.

They don't care about your , or me, or this country. They care about their power.

What 70 people are you referring to? The latest "I won't vote for him" letter? We all find what we look for, F&B, and you can call me naive, blind, or (my favorite) a pathological altruist, but I don't believe you.

I don't think you're ANY of those things. A loon when it comes to gun control, but none of the things you listed.

And yes, I'm referring to every Republican politician who has came out against Trump. They are afraid of losing their own power.

 

[oldsoul]

Trump is a national security disaster waiting to happen

Oh, right, because Hillary isn't right? There is no way she would ever fail to properly safeguard our national security...again.

They're not equivalent. It's nuts to call them equivalent.

It's somehow nuts to say the two positions are hypocritical? Huh? What world do you live in? Really, when did "do as I say, not as I do." become not a hypocritical stance?

The candidates aren't comparable. Almost everyone with a working frontal cortex believes so. Trump is a diplomatic disaster.

What is this "again" crap? Oh right, it was Hillary's job to make sure Benghazi, Libya was a safe town following a civil war.

How many embassies attacked on Bush's watch? Yeah.

The candidates are not comparable? What? Someone, quick tell the Federal Elections Commission. What an absurd assertion.

The "again" I refer to was her personal server while serving as the SOS. But, since you brought it up, yea, Benghazi too. A fact that is grossly under-reported is that nearly all, if not all, "western" nations had pulled out of Benghazi because it was unsafe. So, why didn't we? Also, extra security was requested well before the attack, and denied (whether overtly, or simply by not making a decision). Then there was the repeated calls for assistance that went unanswered, despite the fact that there were assets in place that could have assisted. So, yea Benghazi too.

How many embassies under Bush's watch? Irrelevant, Bush is not running for President as he has already served the maximum of two terms. Since you brought up Bush though, how many ambassadors where assassinated under his watch?

SoS never denied the security request. Congress denied the funding. Get your facts straight FOR ONCE.

She never put our nat'l security at risk with her emails. Come on.

Ambassador Stevens knew the risks and went into Benghazi ready to die if he had to. Tragically, that's what happened. It had nothing to do with Hillary.

Fact: The security request went unfulfilled.
Fact: The SoS is charged with the security of our embassies.
Fact: We simply do not know if she put our security at risk.
Fact: The assassination of an American Ambassador on foreign soil is nearly always considered an act of war.
Fact: Hillary lied when she said the attack was in response to a video. She, in fact, knew (or should have) at the time it was far too coordinated to be spontaneous.
I have my facts straight. You seem to be drunk on Hillary's Kool-aid though, so I wouldn't expect you to realize that.

 

[OldLady]

Either I typed that wrong or something happened to the quote. I think I said I don't agree that most if not all have only personal interests in mind. The theory that NO ONE in Washington is fit for the task is a simplistic and inaccurate statement.

Politicians are quite aware that they need to please their constituency but their real "end game" is to push for policies and laws that they believe will improve life for everyone they represent. This is the truth of it. They aren't all monsters.

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.

I think you're beginning to believe some of the silliness being spewed by off-news sites and the tireless posters here.

No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.

A few quotes from our founders:

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” – Thomas Jefferson

“When a government betrays the people by amassing too much power and becoming tyrannical, the people have no choice but to exercise the original rights of self defense – to fight the government.” – Alexander Hamilton

“We need a revolution every 200 years, because all governments become stale and corrupt after 200 years.” – Ben Franklin

Our country, our 'backyard,' still invites us to participate in democracy in a loud and active sense

Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today. As founded though, you are correct.

Too many people say the sky is falling. Too many people are believing it. Remember who you are, who we are. We are a good people and we have a form of government that can bend to our will. It is there already, in our own backyard. Don't give up looking for it.

I have not and will not. I, however, realize that the "critical mass" necessary to exact the changes needed, is a long way off. So far off, I fear, I will not live to see it come to fruition, my last great hope is to instill the values and beliefs necessary in my children to continue the fight. Hoping that, one day, they may see this change come to pass.

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.
No sense in that; you would laugh, call them RINO's or worse, I'm sure. Since neither of us know any of these people personally (at least I don't), it's all intuitive/instinctive judgment, anyway, and seeing how they vote (or don't).
No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.
Do you live there, are you part of it? Otherwise, what do you see that shows you they are all corrupt? That they are besieged by lobbyists? That Washington and the two major parties are heavily influenced by Big Money? Those are problems, I agree (unless you are Big Money, Big Oil, Big Pharma...). But the bottom line is, if politicians don't do what we want them to, they get the heave-ho. Having a craving for personal power, as 320 points out, is certainly part of the recipe, but does that necessarily rule them out as good leaders? I don't believe it does. Power is part of being a leader.
Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today.
Okay. I will go as far as saying that we need a good house cleaning, starting with the RNC/DNC and strict campaign finance regulation. But like you said, the "critical mass" for that is a long way off. I think it's gotten a good start this year, though, don't you?

Old Lady, the truth is every one of the 70 are people who were in the power circle when Bush the little was President and they know they will have more power under Clinton than they would have under Trump.

They don't care about your , or me, or this country. They care about their power.

What 70 people are you referring to? The latest "I won't vote for him" letter? We all find what we look for, F&B, and you can call me naive, blind, or (my favorite) a pathological altruist, but I don't believe you.

I don't think you're ANY of those things. A loon when it comes to gun control, but none of the things you listed.

And yes, I'm referring to every Republican politician who has came out against Trump. They are afraid of losing their own power.

There's no possibility that at least some of them are actually concerned about our country and how it would fare under a man ill prepared for the job? No possibility at all they know what they are talking about or at least think they do?
Everyone in government fears losing their job when there is an election; it happens every four years, like clockwork.
You shouldn't dismiss their words just because of half-baked propaganda from the desperate Trump campaign. If you have valid reasons for not believing their arguments, that's another story.

 

[oldsoul]

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.

No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.

A few quotes from our founders:

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” – Thomas Jefferson

“When a government betrays the people by amassing too much power and becoming tyrannical, the people have no choice but to exercise the original rights of self defense – to fight the government.” – Alexander Hamilton

“We need a revolution every 200 years, because all governments become stale and corrupt after 200 years.” – Ben Franklin

Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today. As founded though, you are correct.

I have not and will not. I, however, realize that the "critical mass" necessary to exact the changes needed, is a long way off. So far off, I fear, I will not live to see it come to fruition, my last great hope is to instill the values and beliefs necessary in my children to continue the fight. Hoping that, one day, they may see this change come to pass.

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.
No sense in that; you would laugh, call them RINO's or worse, I'm sure. Since neither of us know any of these people personally (at least I don't), it's all intuitive/instinctive judgment, anyway, and seeing how they vote (or don't).
No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.
Do you live there, are you part of it? Otherwise, what do you see that shows you they are all corrupt? That they are besieged by lobbyists? That Washington and the two major parties are heavily influenced by Big Money? Those are problems, I agree (unless you are Big Money, Big Oil, Big Pharma...). But the bottom line is, if politicians don't do what we want them to, they get the heave-ho. Having a craving for personal power, as 320 points out, is certainly part of the recipe, but does that necessarily rule them out as good leaders? I don't believe it does. Power is part of being a leader.
Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today.
Okay. I will go as far as saying that we need a good house cleaning, starting with the RNC/DNC and strict campaign finance regulation. But like you said, the "critical mass" for that is a long way off. I think it's gotten a good start this year, though, don't you?

Old Lady, the truth is every one of the 70 are people who were in the power circle when Bush the little was President and they know they will have more power under Clinton than they would have under Trump.

They don't care about your , or me, or this country. They care about their power.

What 70 people are you referring to? The latest "I won't vote for him" letter? We all find what we look for, F&B, and you can call me naive, blind, or (my favorite) a pathological altruist, but I don't believe you.

I don't think you're ANY of those things. A loon when it comes to gun control, but none of the things you listed.

And yes, I'm referring to every Republican politician who has came out against Trump. They are afraid of losing their own power.

There's no possibility that at least some of them are actually concerned about our country and how it would fare under a man ill prepared for the job? No possibility at all they know what they are talking about or at least think they do?
Everyone in government fears losing their job when there is an election; it happens every four years, like clockwork.
You shouldn't dismiss their words just because of half-baked propaganda from the desperate Trump campaign. If you have valid reasons for not believing their arguments, that's another story.

I do have a valid reason for not believing them. History.
Don't get me wrong, Trump would be a disaster, just like Clinton. The reasons "the 70" are distancing themselves from him, that's what I don't believe.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.

No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.

A few quotes from our founders:

“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” – Thomas Jefferson

“When a government betrays the people by amassing too much power and becoming tyrannical, the people have no choice but to exercise the original rights of self defense – to fight the government.” – Alexander Hamilton

“We need a revolution every 200 years, because all governments become stale and corrupt after 200 years.” – Ben Franklin

Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today. As founded though, you are correct.

I have not and will not. I, however, realize that the "critical mass" necessary to exact the changes needed, is a long way off. So far off, I fear, I will not live to see it come to fruition, my last great hope is to instill the values and beliefs necessary in my children to continue the fight. Hoping that, one day, they may see this change come to pass.

Name one. Aside from, possibly, Ted Cruz, I can't.
No sense in that; you would laugh, call them RINO's or worse, I'm sure. Since neither of us know any of these people personally (at least I don't), it's all intuitive/instinctive judgment, anyway, and seeing how they vote (or don't).
No, what I am believing is what my "eyes" are telling me. Washington is corrupt.
Do you live there, are you part of it? Otherwise, what do you see that shows you they are all corrupt? That they are besieged by lobbyists? That Washington and the two major parties are heavily influenced by Big Money? Those are problems, I agree (unless you are Big Money, Big Oil, Big Pharma...). But the bottom line is, if politicians don't do what we want them to, they get the heave-ho. Having a craving for personal power, as 320 points out, is certainly part of the recipe, but does that necessarily rule them out as good leaders? I don't believe it does. Power is part of being a leader.
Not sure that is still true of those who mean to govern today.
Okay. I will go as far as saying that we need a good house cleaning, starting with the RNC/DNC and strict campaign finance regulation. But like you said, the "critical mass" for that is a long way off. I think it's gotten a good start this year, though, don't you?

Old Lady, the truth is every one of the 70 are people who were in the power circle when Bush the little was President and they know they will have more power under Clinton than they would have under Trump.

They don't care about your , or me, or this country. They care about their power.

What 70 people are you referring to? The latest "I won't vote for him" letter? We all find what we look for, F&B, and you can call me naive, blind, or (my favorite) a pathological altruist, but I don't believe you.

I don't think you're ANY of those things. A loon when it comes to gun control, but none of the things you listed.

And yes, I'm referring to every Republican politician who has came out against Trump. They are afraid of losing their own power.

There's no possibility that at least some of them are actually concerned about our country and how it would fare under a man ill prepared for the job? No possibility at all they know what they are talking about or at least think they do?
Everyone in government fears losing their job when there is an election; it happens every four years, like clockwork.
You shouldn't dismiss their words just because of half-baked propaganda from the desperate Trump campaign. If you have valid reasons for not believing their arguments, that's another story.

You believe their stated reason because it suits your argument Old Lady. That's a fact.

 

[OldLady]

We're chasing our tails here. Opinions can never be argued, can they?
Pollyanna signing out.

 

[mamooth]

Look at it the choice this way. Trump represents the "risk" of an unproven political leader who puts American priorities first. Hillary represents the "safety" of a proven failed leader who puts the priorities of her cronies and Clinton donors first. I'll take Trump any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you.

Look at the choice this way.

At the absolute worst, Clinton is a bad president.

At the absolute worst, Trump ends American democracy and starts a nuclear war.

If those differences doesn't concern you, then there's nothing more to say.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Look at it the choice this way. Trump represents the "risk" of an unproven political leader who puts American priorities first. Hillary represents the "safety" of a proven failed leader who puts the priorities of her cronies and Clinton donors first. I'll take Trump any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you.

Look at the choice this way.

At the absolute worst, Clinton is a bad president.

At the absolute worst, Trump ends American democracy and starts a nuclear war.

If those differences doesn't concern you, then there's nothing more to say.

what an absolute crock of shit LOL

 

[Disir]

I can't think of any reason to vote for Clinton, the Democrats, Trump or the Republicans. The only thing the Democrats have been able to put together is but, Trump.

Is your ignorance willful, or have you been dropped on your head too many times?

You're projecting.

 

[320 Years of History]

We're chasing our tails here. Opinions can never be argued, can they?

Pollyanna signing out.

??? Say what?

What is an opinion but a belief about something that cannot at that point in time be incontrovertibly established? What was Augustine's Summa Theologica other than an argument in support of his belief about the verity of God's existence? What are all the arguments in support of and against any debatable position one might take?

Of course one can argue for the qualitative merit, or lack thereof, of one's opinion. It's not a question of whether an opinion can be argued; it's a matter of how coherent, complete, rigorous and cogent one's argument be, and, of course, whether one even bothers to present an argument of any sort at all.

 

[OldLady]

We're chasing our tails here. Opinions can never be argued, can they?

Pollyanna signing out.

??? Say what?

What is an opinion but a belief about something that cannot at that point in time be incontrovertibly established? What was Augustine's Summa Theologica other than an argument in support of his belief about the verity of God's existence? What are all the arguments in support of and against any debatable position one might take?

Of course one can argue for the qualitative merit, or lack thereof, of one's opinion. It's not a question of whether an opinion can be argued; it's a matter of how coherent, complete, rigorous and cogent one's argument be, and, of course, whether one even bothers to present an argument of any sort at all.

Old Soul feels one way, I feel the other. We see what we look for in situations and in people. Good and ill can be found anywhere. The CDZ is apparently supposed to be where arguments are backed up by evidence. I don't know any of these Washington politicians personally, and probably Old Soul doesn't either, so "proving" they are all corrupt or that some of them aren't, is impossible for us.
By the way, I never argue about the verity of God's existence, either. It is at heart the exact same situation as the disagreement between OldSoul and myself, no matter how many words you throw at it.

 

[Fair&Balanced]

We're chasing our tails here. Opinions can never be argued, can they?

Pollyanna signing out.

??? Say what?

What is an opinion but a belief about something that cannot at that point in time be incontrovertibly established? What was Augustine's Summa Theologica other than an argument in support of his belief about the verity of God's existence? What are all the arguments in support of and against any debatable position one might take?

Of course one can argue for the qualitative merit, or lack thereof, of one's opinion. It's not a question of whether an opinion can be argued; it's a matter of how coherent, complete, rigorous and cogent one's argument be, and, of course, whether one even bothers to present an argument of any sort at all.

Old Soul feels one way, I feel the other. We see what we look for in situations and in people. Good and ill can be found anywhere. The CDZ is apparently supposed to be where arguments are backed up by evidence. I don't know any of these Washington politicians personally, and probably Old Soul doesn't either, so "proving" they are all corrupt or that some of them aren't, is impossible for us.
By the way, I never argue about the verity of God's existence, either. It is at heart the exact same situation as the disagreement between OldSoul and myself, no matter how many words you throw at it.

I doubt every politician that goes to Washington is corrupt, but I DO believe that every politician who goes to Washington becomes corrupt. Republican or Democrat, doesn't matter, what they all end up fighting for the most is keeping their damn jobs.

 

[OldLady]

We're chasing our tails here. Opinions can never be argued, can they?

Pollyanna signing out.

??? Say what?

What is an opinion but a belief about something that cannot at that point in time be incontrovertibly established? What was Augustine's Summa Theologica other than an argument in support of his belief about the verity of God's existence? What are all the arguments in support of and against any debatable position one might take?

Of course one can argue for the qualitative merit, or lack thereof, of one's opinion. It's not a question of whether an opinion can be argued; it's a matter of how coherent, complete, rigorous and cogent one's argument be, and, of course, whether one even bothers to present an argument of any sort at all.

Old Soul feels one way, I feel the other. We see what we look for in situations and in people. Good and ill can be found anywhere. The CDZ is apparently supposed to be where arguments are backed up by evidence. I don't know any of these Washington politicians personally, and probably Old Soul doesn't either, so "proving" they are all corrupt or that some of them aren't, is impossible for us.
By the way, I never argue about the verity of God's existence, either. It is at heart the exact same situation as the disagreement between OldSoul and myself, no matter how many words you throw at it.

I doubt every politician that goes to Washington is corrupt, but I DO believe that every politician who goes to Washington becomes corrupt. Republican or Democrat, doesn't matter, what they all end up fighting for the most is keeping their damn jobs.

Yes. To make a difference, you have to be in the game. If you aren't, you can't bring about changes that matter.
You know, I worked for the local county arm of the AMA many years ago in a state far, far away. They were so full of rationalizations and smutty, self-protective decisions that sometimes I went home feeling like I needed a shower. Except it wouldn't have gotten me clean. I know how it works. To deem it all "corrupt" because of those self serving incidents? No. Good work got done, as well.