dont be such a mongoloid

"Why Trump Will SMASH Hillary"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LibRNYJmZ-I

A video that's worth the watch that shows a logical look at why "Trump will smash Hillary" in the election. I think the video is pretty reliable and true.

Because Hillary has the media in her pocket and they want to protect her image. Shifting your attention towards the Russians while you just suppressed a potential presidential candidate is their form of damage control.

Trump arose (in brief) from the far right social conservatism that gave rise to the Tea Party. Trump himself played a hand in this by starting the whole birther movement funnily enough. The GOP base over the past 8 years has been consistently told that the GOP in DC isn't doing what needs to be done (RINOs and the rise of anti-establishment conservatives) and that the Democrats are criminals and working to make America worse. This lead to a large minority of the party hating the mainstream GOP and hating the Democrats, which is part of the reason people like Cruz or Rubio had some support. Cruz helped shut down the government and Rubio isn't too mainline in the GOP yet. Trump just happened to be the biggest and most boisterous of the GOP pick this cycle and he managed to get a strong plurality because most of the Tea Party types flocked to him while the rest of GOP spread their votes around in the early states. By the time the party had solidified around notTrump candidates, it was too late.

As far as winning the general is concerned Trump is nearly screwed. The current lay of the land makes it very hard for a GOP candidate to even contest a Democrat. The Dems start out with nearly 30 more EC votes than the Republicans when you look at previous voting maps and cut out the purple states. The country was already leaning towards the Dems in 08/12, but the way the population has shifted lately has made it even more difficult for the GOP to really win. The amount of minority voters who are eligible to vote makes up a bigger portion of voters than it did in either election. Whites are on the way out and blacks and hispanics are on the rise, and as a result the candidate who represents a part that continues to be regarded as anti-Black and anti-Latin America has a huge disadvantage. Considering that Trump is polarizing to begin with, he depends entirely on low minority turn out to really have a chance. Unfortunately, his incredibly strong rhetoric seems to be poised to cause a lot of voters to turn up just to prevent him from winning. Unless Trump can corner a demographic that isn't older white voters or conservative GenX/Y men, he's most likely going to lose. Even in his demographics, he faces opposition from Gary Johnson. In fact, you're looking at what could be the first election where places like Atlanta or Houston manage to turn their solid red state blue just from a high minority or low white voter turnout. If any of the conservative states like GA or TX get flipped, its almost guaranteed to be a loss for Trump. Considering Texas has been 48-52 for the past two elections and Georgia has been 45-55, it isn't too out of the realm for an outsider like Johnson to just spoil the entire thing for the GOP

so yeah Trump sucks I guess

I find it really hard to believe that Texas or Georgia could ever vote anything besides Republican. Do you have a source on this?

Not a hard source, just my own personal interpretations. Johnson is polling at ~8%. Trump and Hillary are both polling at ~40%. I'm going on the assumption that most Johnson voters are conservatives who don't like Trump. Even if he pulls just 2 or 3 % of the vote out from under the GOP in some of the stronger states, it'd be enough to secure a few more of the suburban districts for the Dems and possibly swing the state.

This is ignoring that even pulling a few thousand GOP voters in a place like Florida could quite literally tilt the election in the Dems favor.

Ah ok fair enough.

While Trump is a loose cannon and Hillary is a criminal I can understand why people vote for both of them. Some liberals have aligned views/policies with Clinton and some conservatives have aligned views/policies with Trump. Some conservatives just want Trump to do 1/3 of the things he says he will do and they will be happy. Same thing goes for Hillary.

Shows how broken the 2 party system is.

Heil trump

i just can't wait for the debates :D

Hillary Clinton is far from a perfect politician, but the fact that people put her and Donald Trump on even footing speaks volumes for how normalized we as a country have made Trump's (frankly) insane rhetoric.

This is a man that wants to build a multibillion dollar/ "50 foot" tall wall and somehow make Mexico pay for it despite immigration trends that show illegal immigration slowing down significantly. He wants to potentially leave NATO, has talked in the past about how "laziness is a trait in blacks", wants the military to commit war crimes, has proposed a Muslim database, wants to ignore the 14th amendment, has advocated for the closing of mosques, and has praised Kim Jong-un, Vladamir Putin, and fucking SADDAM HUSSEIN.

He thinks global warming is a Chinese conspiracy, names himself as his primary foreign policy consultant, says that Cruz's dad was involved in the JFK assassination, insinuates that the Clintons murdered Vince Foster, said that Obama wasn't born in America/ was a Muslim, and said Mexico was "bringing their rapists".

There are some people who think that Trump is still playing some kind of 3D chess that no one else is capable of understanding, but I would assert that Trump is a shitty, bitter old man that started rich and has been surrounded by yes-men his entire life. The phrase "temperamentally unfit" has been thrown around a bunch, but I think it is a really good descriptor for him.

I'm a pretty moderate guy. Both sides have good ideas, and both sides have bad ideas. I've never had an election (local, state, or national) where I had an "us vs them" mentality when voting. Call me overly optimistic, but I have always assumed that the "other side" is in it for the right reasons and just has different political opinions than me. I sadly cannot do that this election cycle. Trump is legitimately a bad person that would hurt the middle/ working class, damage our international relationships, and embarrass us continually for the duration of his term. Imagine the Brexit shitfest but for four straight years.

That's what we're up against, and if you think that these things happening over the past year aren't worse than what Hillary has done over her decades in politics (some of which is admittedly not fantastic), I don't even know how to respond.

/rant

This election has a surprising amount of similarity to the south park episode where they have to vote between a giant douche and a turd sandwich.

https://cdn.meme.am/instances/63532089.jpg

So what? You say that like it's a bad thing, NATO expansionism and agression is the reason for the new cold war. NATOs persistent expansion into Eastern Europe is the exact reason for the current tensions with Russia, it's why they invaded Crimea and are stoking the civil war in Ukraine. They don't want NATO anti-missile defences and nuclear weapons on their borders disrupting the balance of power that kept Europe safe for decades.

Hillary and Obama are the globalists not Trump (if Trump is to be believed he would be a protectionist which would benefit the working class). NAFTA / TPP etc are what has destroyed the American working/middle class as low and semi skilled labour has been outsourced to developing countries in the names of bigger profits for the large corporations. They're trying to do it again in Europe with the TTIP but the French and Spanish are kicking up a fuss as they realise what it will do to their working class.

dude its totally fair to be more upset when your own people die than foreign people

He speaks for all the dumbass racist white people, which is a lot. But, Hillary isn't that much better. She seems like she actually wants to do shit while she's in office, which is bad. But, if Trump does win, which he'll probably will he seems like he's gonna be a hands offs president, which is best case scenario.

I'd suggest you watch the video that I (and someone else) posted if you really still believe that everything Trump has said/done is really just some asshole going on a whim. Just about everything he's done is part of his plan to gain support of what we might call the "easily persuaded" voting block of the American public, and this is very clear if you've been paying attention to how he's been changing over his campaign. All of the things he said which you listed were just to gather media attention; the way he presented himself at the RNC shows how he is moving from a far right nutjob to a moderate right-winged family man.

Part 1: Anti-Missile and nuclear weapons on the border are 99% of why Europe has been so stable for the past 70 years. Trying to blame outside pressure for Russian expansionism seems a bit silly.

Part 2: Globalism isn't inherently bad. The jobs that have left the US aren't coming back: first world manufacturing is dead and will stay dead forever no matter how many tariffs you put up. The only reason we still use people in the third world is because its cheaper than robots. Robots are at the point where they're cheaper than Chinese manufacturing in some markets even, as seen by Adidas relocating to Germany for their manufacturing. Being anti-Globalism isn't a long term game for anyone who wants their country to matter in 30 years. Unless you get the ball rolling now on converting your economy to a service economy you're basically guaranteed to face a massive depression when every corporation finally has the resources to switch to automated manufacturing. Working class labor is basically worthless at this point. The only way that untrained individuals can really afford to keep working in the future is in jobs that can't be replaced by robots. The deep irony here is that the less training you need for your job, the easier it is to replace with a robot. When automated drivers and stock clerks become a thing, a million people will lose their job overnight when Walmart switches to them full time.

Switching to a globalist economy now lets us get our teething out of the way early and allows us to actually get people prepared for the time when anyone without a college degree is literally worthless on the market

Trump may be trying to win over the far right, but he has to pivot now to have a chance at the general. Right now, he simply is too unlikable for minorities to want to vote for him. All the Right Wing evangelicals are already on his side, but he keeps pandering to them. Hell he actually seems to be pushing them away at this point as he moves further and further into whatever he's moving into. Insulting a dead soldier's family just isn't something that makes sense if you want to appeal to the American public, and if his goal is to sway moderates he needs to switch away from things that are so easy to point at and call him an asshole over

Ronald Regan 2.0

can we just agree that the Bernie supporters who switched over to Trump are probably bigger retards than the people who've supported Trump since the beginning?

I made it very clear I think the title is dumb too. The point tho is to give the other side and play devil's advocate. There are lots of examples with video proof of him being rational and calm. I posted it to give a different view than the one everyone sees on media/most of his campaign

Filter out the World Events forum and you won't have to see it

the sad fact is that a lot of people actually think like trump and say the things trump say, theyve just never had a voice in the us gov that ran for president until trump

a lot of people in the us are racist and bigoted and everything trump is, they just have a much much much louder voice

you realize this president gets to make what looks to be anywhere from 1 to 4 supreme court appointments right, we have 2 already over the average on retirement age and 1 who will go over it during this next term.

that's one of the most hands on things a president gets to do because it affects all of our rulings and laws (for anywhere from the next 10 to 40+ years) for like roe v wade, which trump has already said he'll get overturned the instant he can with his appointment(s).

so i guess if you want supreme court justices that slant towards those "dumbass racist white people" (and lets be honest, you might as well mean guys here if we're starting with roe v wade get overturned) then more power to you i guess.

but it's not really possible for anyone elected to be hands off this election due to the supreme court appointments tbh.

racist bigot ends segregation:

http://imgur.com/a/KzU3o

racist bigot v2

Many Jews in the Communist conspiracy. Chambers and Hiss were the only non-Jews. Many thought that Hiss was. He could have been a half. Every other one was a Jew—and it raised hell for us. But in this case, I hope to God he's not a Jew.
Nixon, Haldeman, and Ronald Ziegler, 2:42-3:33 P.M. Oval Office Conversation #524-7; cassette #775 (June 17, 1971)
The Jews are irreligious, atheistic, immoral bunch of bastards.

Nixon to Bob Haldeman (February 1, 1972) as quoted in Counterpunch (March 12, 2002)

But, Bob, generally speaking, you can't trust the bastards. They turn on you. Am I wrong or right?
Speaking about Jews "New Tapes Reveal Depth of Nixon's Anti-Semitism" in The Washington Post (October 9, 1999)

"racist bigot" Bill Clinton spars with BLM protestors: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/04/07/politics/bill-clinton-black-lives-matter-protesters/
Milo on Bill clinton and the black community:
“I think that what the black community still has to deal with, partly as a result of the Clintons, I mean Bill Clinton signed in a law that basically destroyed the black family. He put every black dad in the country in prison for smoking a blunt. It’s insane,” said Yiannopoulos.

I mean, I don’t know what your views on drugs are, I think the war on drugs has basically been a disaster, and it has hit black families really hard. Who’s responsible for that? Bill Clinton… Bill Clinton of course also put to death Ricky Ray Rector, the retarded guy who had a mental age of seven… when he had his last meal they said ‘what do you want for your last meal?’ and he said I want turkey dinner and some ice cream’. He said ‘I’ll take the turkey dinner now and I’ll have the ice cream after the execution’. This is the mental awareness of this guy, he should not have been killed. Bill Clinton said fry him, so he went to the chair, and of cause before the ’92 election when he wanted to appear tough, he signed this law that did more than anything else in American history to destroy the black family. Now, there are some valid grievances the black community have, they just don’t realise that most of them are levelled- most of them are Democratic things. There are some problems, and they deserve way better schools. They deserve way better, you know, public services. They deserve to be policed properly so that their communities can recover from endemic crime. What they don’t necessarily deserve is the right to throw their toys out the pram, behave like children, and indulge in this sort of victimhood and grievance culture that the left has tried to do with gays, tried to do with women, tried to do with blacks, because what they basically want to do is replace the absent father with the state. They want everyone to be dependent on the state and vote for Democrats because Democrats are going to give them freebies. This is so socially destructive and it is actually the most sociopathic and unkind thing you could possibly do. So, I don’t like Black Lives Matter as a solution, but I wouldn’t say that black people have it easy.

Bill Clinton endorsing former KKK leader http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/OB-JB075_11byrd_H_20100628074822.jpg

when you're an 18 y-old yankeedoodle that votes for the party of slave plantation owners with kkk members in their ranks cuz the MSM tell you the other candidate is a "racist bigot" and the only "evidence" is a quote taken out of context. or is being against people who skip the line and come in illegal, bypassing the majority that does it effort to be legally in order, makes you a racist now?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uXJ1mgkyF0
Hillary Clinton says US need to secure borders, and illegals should be deported. I think she's a racist bigot chaps.

Mutually Assured Destruction is what kept Europe and the world safe during the cold war. Since the fall of the Berlin wall NATO has been expanding eastwards in an attempt to nullify the threat of Russias nuclear arsenal. That's what has them upset, it's what they have been saying is upsetting them for the past decade or more. NATO is trying to engineer a situation in which a Russia would not be able to respond to a nuclear attack on it's country because there are NATO missile defence weapons completely surrounding them.

Upsetting the balance of power is exactly what has caused the current tensions with Russia. It's not in their interests to let Ukraine become a part of the EU and join NATO as it means NATO troops and missiles on their border hence why they are supporting the separatists and invaded Crimea (NATO rules prevent members with border disputes from joining the alliance). Just imagine the shit fit USA would throw if Canada or Mexico decided to host Russian nukes. Or the shit fit the USA did throw when Cuba tried to.

I like how you gave a serious and truthfull response to a quote that is so criminally retarded.

heres some more stuff for reading on the dynamic inbetween Russia and the EU after the collapse of the USSR: http://www.lse.ac.uk/IDEAS/publications/reports/pdf/SR018/DeBardeleben.pdf

both of these quotes have no evidence of actually having been said other than a quote from a book written over 30 years after they were supposedly said. On top of that, historians generally agree that both quotes are antithetical to lbj's political beliefs.

yes, nixon was a racist. he was also a republican, and appealed to racists in the election, a nation who still held onto some of the bigotry that nazis convinced the world of.

Bill Clinton was literally nowhere near close to the driving politician behind the war on drugs, which was primarily created by the campaigns of Nixon and Reagan, so 90% of the assumption of this fat ass block of text is just fundamentally incorrect. Clinton certainly made a mistake in allowing for the execution of Ricky Ray Rector, but simultaneously that is a failure of the criminal justice system and the laws written by congress at the time. It's completely ridiculous to place the entirety of the blame of that situation on the Clinton presidency. As far as Clinton endorsing Robert Byrd, a man who was never a "leader" of the KKK and who, during his long political career, completely owned up to his association with the Klan and repeatedly, profusely apologized about his membership saying "I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no place in America. I apologized a thousand times ... and I don't mind apologizing over and over again. I can't erase what happened." I dont necessarily see an issue with that.

The rest of this block of text reads like something directly out of a trump speech - it's largely incomprehensible gibberish with a vaguely racist and threatening undertone. Also stop quoting Milo Yiannopoulos as if he is a credible source or part of a credible institution,

You would do well to not attempt to infantilize those who you dont agree with, especially when you are the one taking quotes out of context and ignoring evidence.

Was this supposed to be an argument? You actually made zero points, dumb ass.

From 1940 to 1960 Johnson voted with the South 78% on civil rights issues. Before 1957, voted 100% against civil rights issues. He also voted against the C.R.A. of 1957 and 1960.

LBJ reversed his position on race 180%, likely because he was a consumate politico who realized he was going to need the black vote, rather than any sense of brotherhood or equality. In Congress, LBJ repeatedly voted against legislation to protect black Americans from lynching. As a Senate leader he did his best to cripple the C.R.A. of 1957 managing to reduce it to an act of mere symbolism by taking out the enforcement provisions before sending it to Eisenhower. Dem colleague Strom Thurmond staged the longest filibuster in history up to that point, speaking for 24 hours in a failed attempt to block the bill.

In 1960 another C.R.A. was introduced to try to correct the LBJ deficiencies of the 1957 act, and Senate Democrats again staged a record-setting filibuster. In both cases, LBJ petitioned the northeastern Kennedy liberals to credit him for having seen to the law’s passage while at the same time boasting to southern Democrats that he had cut the legs out from under the legislation.

Johnson later explained it: “These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days, and that’s a problem for us, since they’ve got something now they never had before: the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this — we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”

The opposition to civil rights was still somewhat prevalant in the Dem party at the time, excepting the northeastern liberal wing. They again filibustered the 64 C.R.A (for 57 days) and a (much) larger percentage of Republicans than Democrats in both houses of Congress voted for it. In the House, 80 percent of the Republicans and 63 percent of the Democrats voted in favor. In the Senate, 82 percent of the Republicans and 69 percent of the Democrats voted for it.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/lyndon-johnson-civil-rights-racism

A-are you blaming the nazis for racism in the south of the USA or just invoking Godwin's law?
Bringing up Nixon quotes is a response to this, and i took two presidents from both parties

It's true that the ' war on drugs" took off under Nixon,but bill himself admits he played his part

"Bill Clinton said Wednesday that the crime bill he signed into law as President in 1994 worsened the nation's criminal justice system by increasing prison sentences."

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/07/15/politics/bill-clinton-1994-crime-bill/

Democrat United States Senator Robert C. Byrd was a recruiter for the Klan while in his 20s and 30s, rising to the title of Kleagle and Exalted Cyclops of his local chapter. After leaving the group, Byrd spoke in favor of the Klan during his early political career. Though he claimed to have left the organization in 1943, Byrd wrote a letter in 1946 to the group's Imperial Wizard stating "The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia." Byrd defended the Klan in his 1958 U.S. Senate campaign when he was 41 years old.[1]

Despite being the only Senator to vote against both African American U.S. Supreme Court nominees (liberal Thurgood Marshall and conservative Clarence Thomas) and filibustering the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Byrd later said joining the Klan was his "greatest mistake. he did make up and rose to senate leader , but he was a kkk figure, and he became a prominent figure in politics, which is a rebutal to the quote of Jaeg i quoted earlier to disprove, the idea that before trump public or closeted racist figures had no place in US politics, something you must agree on.

yea i think milo is a dangerous faggot.

reread this part "What they don’t necessarily deserve is the right to throw their toys out the pram, behave like children, and indulge in this sort of victimhood and grievance culture that the left has tried to do with gays, tried to do with women, tried to do with blacks, because what they basically want to do is replace the absent father with the state."
nothing racist about it tbh.

but thats exactly the modus operandi i see and react against. I just like to point out the irony of it with some of my own. And unlike you, i actually provided links or sources in my previous posts. how come the onus is solely on me, when most people don't even bother?

I really enjoy the european trying to tell me the Democrats are the party of racism and conservative ideals because 150 years ago they supported slavery

Like if you're going to try and dismantle a political party, try attacking their actual current platform pls.

I like the american more that is more ignorant of his own country's history than an european. there were a 100 years inbetween slavery and desegregation.
Or did the march on Washington happen in 1865 according to you? And oh boy, believe me I'd be shitting on the republicans way harder if Jeb Bush got the nomination like it was almost set in stone last year. The bushes and the clintons are cut from the same cloth and i don't bear any love for either party, in fact, the whole run up to the nomination just reinforced the image the simpsons put in my mind as a kid on the republican party http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/simpsons/images/c/cf/Republican_party_headquarters.png/revision/latest?cb=20100730161648
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/simpsons/images/3/36/Republican_Party.jpg/revision/latest/scale-to-width-down/180?cb=20121022150655