Trump supporters: How are you punishing the Establishment?

[The VOR]

For some like me, it is a vote against Hillary. I don't want WWIII.

It is news to libs that Cankles is a warmonger.

Sadly, they are completely uninformed or brainwashed.

Last time I checked, trump was the one not ruling out dropping a nuke on Europe.

 

[Two Thumbs]

For some like me, it is a vote against Hillary. I don't want WWIII.

It is news to libs that Cankles is a warmonger.

Sadly, they are completely uninformed or brainwashed.

Last time I checked, trump was the one not ruling out dropping a nuke on Europe.

how many people has trump let die?

how many people does each one know that was murdered?

 

[NightFox]

For some like me, it is a vote against Hillary. I don't want WWIII.

It is news to libs that Cankles is a warmonger.

Yep, she's basically Dick Cheney in a skirt, of course there's no evidence that Donald Trump wouldn't be just as bloodthirsty and interventionist, neither one of these buffoons is likely to do anything but accelerate the state of perpetual warfare that we currently find ourselves embroiled in.

"The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous. Hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance. This new version is the past and no different past can ever have existed. In principle the war effort is always planned to keep society on the brink of starvation. The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects and its object is not the victory over either Eurasia or East Asia, but to keep the very structure of society intact." -- George Orwell, 1984

 

[Snouter]

Last time I checked, trump was the one not ruling out dropping a nuke on Europe.

The ZOG "Allies" had no problem holocausting German civilians in Dresden during the big WWII. Now that ZOG has infected Europe with their middle east compatriots, who gives a ****?

 

[candycorn]

To get a little more specific here (okay, and to bump the thread, guilty), as I understand it the reason you're mad at the establishment is that you would elect people who say they're conservative, but then don't act as conservative as you want them to when they're in office. Okay, I do get that.

So it appears to be about frustration over elected Republican officials not being conservative enough.

So in response, you run a guy who would certainly be considered a RINO if it were not for his (insert adjective here, I'm out of them) behavior.

That's the disconnect that I'm asking about.

Well, I can see how you are a little confused.

Trump is the end result of 40 years of getting White Males to vote against their own economic interests by playing on their racial, sexual and religious fears.

Let me first start by saying I’m not disagreeing with you. I’m offering an alternative view:

I think you may be giving the horde of white males more credit for A) recognizing they’ve been duped and B) deciding that Donald Trump is the answer.

On one hand, groups of people are not that smart, not generally that responsive to non-specific stimuli (i.e., getting people to sign up for the military after 12/7/41 was easier than 12/6/41), and certainly not that motivated to join a political cause on the whole.

The alternative I’m offering is this:
Trump is a funny man who scratches an itch that a lot of people have to “stick it” to a social subset “above” them and cheer for the underdog. Though a well-known billionaire, he is seen as the underdog against the supposed establishment. And then, unlike many, presented with the opportunity, he didn’t strive for legitimacy or try to fit in…he actually drilled down into the subversive culture and tried to emulate them as best he could by giving out the phone number of his opponents, calling out a former POW, stating that a bothersome woman was on her period etc… Usually, those who take their seat in at the “grown up’s” table act like Julia Roberts in Pretty Woman and try to figure out which fork to use and blend in…he has put his elbows on the table and belches for effect.

When you state “Trump has reduced the GOP to it’s lowest common denominator.”, you’re 100% right.

Put that behavior together with a few jokes, cartoonish outlandish and un-keepable promises that he has already acknowledged were not promises but merely “suggestions” which is code for the fact that he never intended to keep them…. and it’s pretty easy to see why he got to where he was. Lies as a premise coming from an underdog and sprinkling in some jokes, make for great theater. If you were to watch a Will Farrell movie, you’d often see the same pattern…think “Old School”.

The problem is the Establishment has been trying to steer the ship away from the shoals of being a White Identity Party, Trump doubled and tripled down. And he did manage to tap into some genuine concerns about jobs and wages being driven down by undocumented workers and foreign competition.

Maybe. But the GOP has been the anti Affirmative Action party since forever, they have been the anti immigrant party (both legal and illegal) forever, and been lagging behind the Democrats in the courting of Hispanics, women, and blacks for 50+ years. He didn’t need to “tap into” anything.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Still working on trying to figure this out, and I may or may not ever get there. Here's one that just popped into my little brain:

For 2016, the Republican ticket is not going to be about conservatism vs. liberalism, it's going to be about anti-establishment vs. both The GOP Establishment AND liberalism. Okay. (But let me know if I'm wrong there)

The political system has been hijacked by the Corporate Crony Network. IT has become so deeply embedded into the Professional Political Class that a revolution in overturning this class is about the only solution. If we can end corporate money entering and corrupting our political system we might be able to save our dying nation.

This need to overthrow the CCN supercedes all ideological nonsense.

Could a Trump supporter explain how running an authoritarian non-conservative is punishing the GOP Establishment? What is the end goal here? Do you want to end up with a conservative GOP? If so, how do you get there from here?
.

1. Prove that Trump is an authoritarian. I say he is not.

2. Overthrowing the Corporate Crony Network is the goal here. It has gone way beyond idiotology.

3. Ban corporate contribution by Constitutional amendment if necessary. Ban for profit corporate lobbyists inside the Beltway. Start ridding our political system of corrupt politicians. Start imprisoning the worst of them as a warning to future generations and execute any that have been selling secrets to our nations enemies like Hillary and Bill Clinton have.

 

[Boss]

To get a little more specific here (okay, and to bump the thread, guilty), as I understand it the reason you're mad at the establishment is that you would elect people who say they're conservative, but then don't act as conservative as you want them to when they're in office. Okay, I do get that.

So it appears to be about frustration over elected Republican officials not being conservative enough.

So in response, you run a guy who would certainly be considered a RINO if it were not for his (insert adjective here, I'm out of them) behavior.

That's the disconnect that I'm asking about.
.

Here is what I believe you are missing...

MOST Conservatives are not core Trump supporters. The bulk of the people supporting Trump, as crazy as it sounds, are the very people who insisted the GOP nominate Mitt Romney and John McCain. While we can look back in retrospect and say Romney and McCain were "establishment" picks, they both enjoyed broad support from someone or they couldn't have won the nomination and defeated the conservative. Now... how many voters do you know of who are out there proudly proclaiming their "establishment" support? I'm betting, not very many... right?

So the people who have backed the establishment in the past couple of elections are now opposed to the establishment but they were always opposed to the conservative. The same people who were duped by the establishment are now enamored with the populist.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The ZOG "Allies" had no problem holocausting German civilians in Dresden during the big WWII. Now that ZOG has infected Europe with their middle east compatriots, who gives a ****?

Now ZOG control ISIS terrorists who have infiltrated the Muslim refugees and are doing their bidding trashing Europe?

Are you ******* insane?

NEver mind, you are obviously insane or just another liberal sock pupet.

 

[Freewill]

Still working on trying to figure this out, and I may or may not ever get there. Here's one that just popped into my little brain:

For 2016, the Republican ticket is not going to be about conservatism vs. liberalism, it's going to be about anti-establishment vs. both The GOP Establishment AND liberalism. Okay. (But let me know if I'm wrong there)

Could a Trump supporter explain how running an authoritarian non-conservative is punishing the GOP Establishment? What is the end goal here? Do you want to end up with a conservative GOP? If so, how do you get there from here?
.

Denying a child candy is punishment. Denying the establishment's pick for president is the same thing. You, I get the feeling from your posts, are OK with supporting the establishment's PC correct candidates. A lot of people are fed up with what the parties are feeding us.

Vote for Mrs. Tuzla but don't try and disparage the rest of us for being jaded with the establishment.

 

[JimBowie1958]

MOST Conservatives are not core Trump supporters. The bulk of the people supporting Trump, as crazy as it sounds, are the very people who insisted the GOP nominate Mitt Romney and John McCain. While we can look back in retrospect and say Romney and McCain were "establishment" picks, they both enjoyed broad support from someone or they couldn't have won the nomination and defeated the conservative. Now... how many voters do you know of who are out there proudly proclaiming their "establishment" support? I'm betting, not very many... right?

So the people who have backed the establishment in the past couple of elections are now opposed to the establishment but they were always opposed to the conservative. The same people who were duped by the establishment are now enamored with the populist.

You are as nuts as the ZOG controls ISIS guy.

Romney and McCains supporters have fought against Trump tooth and nail through this nomination process and many of them STILL oppose him. Bill Kristol the moron has been desperately trying to recruit a third partry conservative challenger to Trump - no success so far. Romney has been doing everything he can to help Kristol.

Do you have any clue of what the hell you are talking about or are you just another Glen Beck nutbag drone?

 

[JimBowie1958]

To get a little more specific here (okay, and to bump the thread, guilty), as I understand it the reason you're mad at the establishment is that you would elect people who say they're conservative, but then don't act as conservative as you want them to when they're in office. Okay, I do get that.

So it appears to be about frustration over elected Republican officials not being conservative enough.

So in response, you run a guy who would certainly be considered a RINO if it were not for his (insert adjective here, I'm out of them) behavior.

That's the disconnect that I'm asking about.

Well, I can see how you are a little confused.

Trump is the end result of 40 years of getting White Males to vote against their own economic interests by playing on their racial, sexual and religious fears.

Let me first start by saying I’m not disagreeing with you. I’m offering an alternative view:

I think you may be giving the horde of white males more credit for A) recognizing they’ve been duped and B) deciding that Donald Trump is the answer.

Of course you dont disagree with JoeB as you are both antiwhite racists idiotlogues.

Asking you why people support Trump is like asking a Muslim why people like pork barbeque

 

[JimBowie1958]

They are more interested in punishing their own leaders than winning an election. They are more interested in tearing things down than building things up. So they nominated the guy most offensive to their leaders, a guy who is going to get smoked in the election. Then, they'll blame their leaders for not supporting him enough, even though he's clearly an unqualified buffoon.

Hope u don't mind but as it is 100% truthful....

Your post deserves to be repeated:

They are more interested in punishing their own leaders than winning an election. They are more interested in tearing things down than building things up. So they nominated the guy most offensive to their leaders, a guy who is going to get smoked in the election. Then, they'll blame their leaders for not supporting him enough, even though he's clearly an unqualified buffoon.

Heard a line tonight about the old baseball manager named Billy Martin that may apply to most conservatives here....

"He was happiest when he was miserable."

If some of these people didn't have a thing to ***** about I think they would lose their minds

Lol, you do not understand Trumps movement and you never will as is obvious from that lame insipid post.

You are doing the bidding of the Corporate Crony Network and you dont even realize it yet, lol

But the opposition of members of the moron association like yourself is a very encouraging sign for the rest of us.

 

[JimBowie1958]

there's a difference between being an authoritarian and a boss

The two are not the same at all, I agree. The Donald is both an authoritarian and a boss.

authoritarian

[uh-thawr-i-tair-ee-uh n, uh-thor-]

• Examples
• Word Origin

See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
adjective
1.
favoring complete obedience or subjection to authority as opposed toindividual freedom:
authoritarian principles; authoritarian attitudes.
2.
of or relating to a governmental or political system, principle, orpractice in which individual freedom is held as completely subordinateto the power or authority of the state, centered either in one person ora small group that is not constitutionally accountable to the people.
3.
exercising complete or almost complete control over the will of anotheror of others:
an authoritarian parent.
noun
4.
a person who favors or acts according to authoritarian principles.



that sounds more like obama and hillary.

trump hasn't held a political office, so there's no proof.

unless you can list some freedoms he wants to take.

Hillary supporters could not care less what crimes she has committed. They are into politics for the pay off of winning and that is all.

They are not patriots, they are not honest people looking for the best for our nation. IT is only about getting their best booty haul they can get from the government, end of story. And they will riot and assault people if they think their pay off is threatened.

They are parasites on Americas ass. Time to get the bug spray.

 

[Boss]

Romney and McCains supporters have fought against Trump tooth and nail through this nomination process and many of them STILL oppose him. Bill Kristol the moron has been desperately trying to recruit a third partry conservative challenger to Trump - no success so far. Romney has been doing everything he can to help Kristol.

Do you have any clue of what the hell you are talking about or are you just another Glen Beck nutbag drone?

Nonsense. Romney and McCain got millions and millions of votes. They soundly defeated the conservative and all other contenders in their respective races. Now where did all those voters go in 2016? To Jeb Bush and Chris Christie? Nope... no one got those votes this time, they all went to Trump.

The bulk of Trump's supporters are the same people who insisted we nominate Romney and McCain.

 

[Freewill]

there's a difference between being an authoritarian and a boss

The two are not the same at all, I agree. The Donald is both an authoritarian and a boss.

authoritarian

[uh-thawr-i-tair-ee-uh n, uh-thor-]

• Examples
• Word Origin

See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
adjective
1.
favoring complete obedience or subjection to authority as opposed toindividual freedom:
authoritarian principles; authoritarian attitudes.
2.
of or relating to a governmental or political system, principle, orpractice in which individual freedom is held as completely subordinateto the power or authority of the state, centered either in one person ora small group that is not constitutionally accountable to the people.
3.
exercising complete or almost complete control over the will of anotheror of others:
an authoritarian parent.
noun
4.
a person who favors or acts according to authoritarian principles.



that sounds more like obama and hillary.

trump hasn't held a political office, so there's no proof.

unless you can list some freedoms he wants to take.

Hillary supporters could not care less what crimes she has committed. They are into politics for the pay off of winning and that is all.

They are not patriots, they are not honest people looking for the best for our nation. IT is only about getting their best booty they can get fromt he government, end of story.

They are parasites on Americas ass. Time to get the bug spray.

The democrats are just doing what they do, following the establishment lead. They should change from jackasses to lemmings.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Romney and McCains supporters have fought against Trump tooth and nail through this nomination process and many of them STILL oppose him. Bill Kristol the moron has been desperately trying to recruit a third partry conservative challenger to Trump - no success so far. Romney has been doing everything he can to help Kristol.

Do you have any clue of what the hell you are talking about or are you just another Glen Beck nutbag drone?

Nonsense. Romney and McCain got millions and millions of votes. They soundly defeated the conservative and all other contenders in their respective races. Now where did all those voters go in 2016? To Jeb Bush and Chris Christie? Nope... no one got those votes this time, they all went to Trump.

The bulk of Trump's supporters are the same people who insisted we nominate Romney and McCain.

That is laughably false on the face of it. Obviously as the victor became clear in the last three Presidential primary contests, the party regulars lined up behind the guy that was obviously going to win, while the idiotlogue hold outs were desperately hoping for a change in the political winds that never came. But that happens in every contest. The key battles were prior to Indiana, and that still had plenty of Romneyite and Losertarian opposition to Trump.

Maybe you should go back to your coloring books and leave the serious discussion to the adults in the room, junior.

 

[gipper]

For some like me, it is a vote against Hillary. I don't want WWIII.

WWIII is just around the corner, should the Queen of Chaos win.

The Queen of Chaos and the Threat of World War III
"War creates chaos, and Hillary Clinton has been an eager advocate of every U.S. aggressive war in the last quarter of a century. These wars have devastated whole countries and caused an unmanageable refugee crisis. Chaos is all there is to show for Hillary’s vaunted “foreign policy experience”.

The President of the United States is not a purely symbolic position. It involves crucial decision-making powers. Hillary Clinton has demonstrated dangerously poor judgment in fateful questions of war and peace. That should disqualify her.

If you think U.S. policy couldn’t be more pro-Israel than it is now, just wait until you see Hillary in the White House. After Haim Saban pledged to spend “as much as necessary” to make her President, Hillary Clinton has pledged to invite Netanyahu to the While House in her first month as President,

Simple: whenever Obama hesitated, Hillary did not. She urged war in Libya, a no-fly zone in Syria, and from all she says, would have been urging stronger action against Russia when her former spokeswoman Victoria Nuland was leading the anti-Russian coup in Kiev. Her chuckling over the bestial murder of Gaddafi shows an absence of any human feeling for her adversaries. She dismisses them as subhuman...
The Queen of Chaos - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

The Queen of Chaos...but libs and Ds don't know the truth. If only they could read and comprehend...

 

[JimBowie1958]

The democrats are just doing what they do, following the establishment lead. They should change from jackasses to lemmings.

All they want is their Obamaphones, and that is all.

 

[Boss]

Romney and McCains supporters have fought against Trump tooth and nail through this nomination process and many of them STILL oppose him. Bill Kristol the moron has been desperately trying to recruit a third partry conservative challenger to Trump - no success so far. Romney has been doing everything he can to help Kristol.

Do you have any clue of what the hell you are talking about or are you just another Glen Beck nutbag drone?

Nonsense. Romney and McCain got millions and millions of votes. They soundly defeated the conservative and all other contenders in their respective races. Now where did all those voters go in 2016? To Jeb Bush and Chris Christie? Nope... no one got those votes this time, they all went to Trump.

The bulk of Trump's supporters are the same people who insisted we nominate Romney and McCain.

That is laughably false on the face of it. Obviously as the victor became clear in the last three Presidential primary contests, the party regulars lined up behind the guy that was obviously going to win, while the idiotlogue hold outs were desperately hoping for a change in the political winds that never came. But that happens in every contest. The key battles were prior to Indiana, and that still had plenty of Romneyite and Losertarian opposition to Trump.

Maybe you should go back to your coloring books and leave the serious discussion to the adults in the room, junior.

You're right, it happens every contest and it happened here as well. I didn't say Trump's supporters were the key supporters of Romney and McCain... they were the dupes who the key supporters convinced they had to vote for Romney or McCain to win. Somebody voted for those men or they couldn't have won the nomination... and we clearly can define them as "establishment" picks today, but see if you can find one proud establishment voter out there? So where did all those millions upon millions of people go?

Well... They're all wearing Trump buttons today. The same people who ran in horror away from the Conservative, did so again this time, they just picked a populist who ran as anti-establishment this time.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You're right, it happens every contest and it happened here as well. I didn't say Trump's supporters were the key supporters of Romney and McCain... they were the dupes who the key supporters convinced they had to vote for Romney or McCain to win. Somebody voted for those men or they couldn't have won the nomination... and we clearly can define them as "establishment" picks today, but see if you can find one proud establishment voter out there? So where did all those millions upon millions of people go?

Well... They're all wearing Trump buttons today. The same people who ran in horror away from the Conservative, did so again this time, they just picked a populist who ran as anti-establishment this time.

It is a little old thing called 'party loyalty'. When the decision has apparently been made you stand behind your parties nominee instead of undermining your party.

That is why I am not a member of a party as I cannot support just any nominee, as I did not support vulture capitalist Romney nor would I support the collaborator McCain.

However your posts make it sound like the kabal that got us those two losers as nominees were also behind the Trump nomination and that is simply not true.