For all Trump Supporters

[esmith]

I meant what he said in this specific video.

area I was not sure about was the part about blocking the internet access. I'm sure he has looked into it, but I haven't therefore I pass.

 

[Notanumber]

area I was not sure about was the part about blocking the internet access. I'm sure he has looked into it, but I haven't therefore I pass.

The more I see of him the more I like him. He talks a lot of sense.

I hadn’t heard about the internet blocking idea before, but it seems that Donald Trump has. If it is possible, it would be a very good idea.

This video proves that he knows what he is talking about and knows how to talk about it.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Now your are paraphrasing Rush Limbaugh (which is probably flattering to Rush) while insulting over half of the population of this country.

Excuse you? Half of 324,013,797 is substantially more than the 62,985,105 people who voted for Trump.

 

[esmith]

The more I see of him the more I like him. He talks a lot of sense.

I hadn’t heard about the internet blocking idea before, but it seems that Donald Trump has. If it is possible, it would be a very good idea.

This video proves that he knows what he is talking about and knows how to talk about it.

He was on Tucker Carlson a couple of nights ago. If you have ever watch Carlson's show you know that he listens, asks good questions that put guest on the spot, and is honest. Milo sounded like a level headed person and did answered all of Tucker's questions without trying to dodge them as many do. I do not have any issue with him, but haven't really been exposed to him that much. Guess he has a book out that might be interesting.

 

[BSM1]

Excuse you? Half of 324,013,797 is substantially more than the 62,985,105 people who voted for Trump.

Hair-splitting. I get your point but it doesn't change who's name is on the mail box at 1600 PA Ave., Washington, DC. Deal with it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Hair-splitting. I get your point but it doesn't change who's name is on the mail box at 1600 PA Ave., Washington, DC. Deal with it.

It's also worth pointing out that voters didn't want Hilllary.
With about half of those eligible staying home, & only almost
half of voters preferring her, she's just last week's haggis.

 

[BSM1]

It's also worth pointing out that voters didn't want Hilllary.
With about half of those eligible staying home, & only almost
half of voters preferring her, she's just last week's haggis.

ummm....leftover haggis...

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Hair-splitting. I get your point but it doesn't change who's name is on the mail box at 1600 PA Ave., Washington, DC. Deal with it.

Honest use of words, actually. You can't lump people who didn't (or couldn't) vote in as having voted for the guy who won. That's fundamentally dishonest. It's as dishonest as Theresa May saying she has 65 million people supporting her as she goes into the Brexit negotiations. She's lumping together the people who voted Leave, the people who voted Remain and those that didn't or, more likely, couldn't vote at all.

 

[BSM1]

Honest use of words, actually. You can't lump people who didn't (or couldn't) vote in as having voted for the guy who won. That's fundamentally dishonest. It's as dishonest as Theresa May saying she has 65 million people supporting her as she goes into the Brexit negotiations. She's lumping together the people who voted Leave, the people who voted Remain and those that didn't or, more likely, couldn't vote at all.

I can see that the next four years will not be boring for you.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

It remains to be seen what he'll do in office.

You really have to wait and see?

You mean to tell me after all your careful vetting of him against Clinton you don't see him worse with the cronyism. I mean pretty much the majority of his top cabinet picks are Goldman Sachs millionaires/billionaires, his secretary of state is an Exxon Mobile millionaire, his pick for department of education is a multimillionaire. His executive orders and the bills coming out of the republican lead congress are engineered to further put money in the pockets of the rich at the financial expense of the people. I mean I realized some of his motives long ago when he began campaigning. But unlike him who signs the executive orders I've actually read many of them as well as some of the bills congress has in store for us...and they have a stink of cronyism on them.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

It's also worth pointing out that voters didn't want Hilllary.
With about half of those eligible staying home, & only almost
half of voters preferring her, she's just last week's haggis.

But you can't count a negative here in regards to the election. Those who stayed home don't count nor are they really all that important to the discussion because we can't know who they would have voted for. It's safe to say that if they didn't want Hillary they sure as heck didn't want Trump....

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Enough did to put him in the WH.

Well most didn't agree with him..but the EC sure did.

 

[Akivah]

You really have to wait and see?

You mean to tell me after all your careful vetting of him against Clinton you don't see him worse with the cronyism. I mean pretty much the majority of his top cabinet picks are Goldman Sachs millionaires/billionaires, his secretary of state is an Exxon Mobile millionaire, his pick for department of education is a multimillionaire.

Are you saying rich people can't be good cabinet members? In your opinion, what's the maximum wealth someone can have to be a good cabinet official?

 

[BSM1]

You really have to wait and see?

You mean to tell me after all your careful vetting of him against Clinton you don't see him worse with the cronyism. I mean pretty much the majority of his top cabinet picks are Goldman Sachs millionaires/billionaires, his secretary of state is an Exxon Mobile millionaire, his pick for department of education is a multimillionaire. His executive orders and the bills coming out of the republican lead congress are engineered to further put money in the pockets of the rich at the financial expense of the people. I mean I realized some of his motives long ago when he began campaigning. But unlike him who signs the executive orders I've actually read many of them as well as some of the bills congress has in store for us...and they have a stink of cronyism on them.

Why would you have such animosity toward successful people?

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Are you saying rich people can't be good cabinet members? In your opinion, what's the maximum wealth someone can have to be a good cabinet official?

I'm saying some have a habit of looking out for their own. I've seen no indication from this current administration through executive orders or bills making their way through congress of having any positive affect for the people. And I don't see that draining of the swamp he reluctantly endorsed and ran on as happening. With the current picks it's been the opposite.

 

[BSM1]

Well most didn't agree with him..but the EC sure did.

You understand that the EC reflects the will of the people of the states they represent. If there were such a glaring flaw to a candidate that would make him/her a danger than, of course, the EC could chose not to put that person in office. No matter what your personal beliefs, evidently Trump didn't meet the criteria of anti-christ.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Why would you have such animosity toward successful people?

What animosity?

Is he not filling the swamp with the status quo..

 

[BSM1]

I'm saying some have a habit of looking out for their own. I've seen no indication from this current administration through executive orders or bills making their way through congress of having any positive affect for the people. And I don't see that draining of the swamp he reluctantly endorsed and ran on as happening. With the current picks it's been the opposite.

And what president doesn't. It's one of the perks of the position.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

You understand that the EC reflects the will of the people of the states they represent. If there were such a glaring flaw to a candidate that would make him/her a danger than, of course, the EC could chose not to put that person in office. No matter what your personal beliefs, evidently Trump didn't meet the criteria of anti-christ.

No they don't. Most of the EC have nothing to do with the will of the people. At what point did the people express and interest for Bannon to be on the NSC.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

And what president doesn't. It's one of the perks of the position.

Not talking solely about the president. Although I think he might be on board with his cronies as to what they want to see implemented.