2016 US Presidential Race - Mod Warning in OP

alastair

Amerika wrote: »

"DEWALT is a global manufacturer and distributor of power tools. We currently manufacture our tools in the U.S., Mexico, Brazil, China, Italy, the U.K. and the Czech Republic, among other locations, and our products are made with materials and components from all over the globe."

Per Dewalt website.

And the one I posted up is manufactured in the US.

alastair

oscarBravo wrote: »

Surprise, surprise: Donald Trump doesn't understand Civics 101.

Neither POTUS nor SCOTUS can abolish the second amendment. Someone should try to hold Trump's attention for the three minutes it would take to explain to him how the US Constitution gets amended.

It's okay, because Trump has added on those extra articles to the constitution, so it all balances out.

Billy86

KingBrian2 wrote: »

K-9 I've been called a liar multiple times by someone by the name of Billy on this forum where was the warning given to him during that whole time?:mad:

Brian, tell you what. I won't call you a liar here. I'll just quote some of your posts you are likely referring to, for a bit of context, and ask that you support them - with hard evidence and sources where required.



In reference to perhaps the biggest flip flopper in US presidential history, with zero history to go by, who has I believe the lowest 'truth' levels among fact checkers of anyone to ever run for US president.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Trump is the next Ronald Reagan.


At least with Trump you know what he stands for from the beginning.

This when trying to say Trump's 'ban all Muslims' comment was only talking about Jihadists.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

If Trump said no Nazis were let into America he would effectively be anti German.

This while discussing DONALD TRUMP'S statement on banning all Muslims. Note: I am not Donald Trump.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

See you are framing the conversation into emotive terms like all Muslims be banned.

This in response to Trump's statement that explicitly called for a "total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States". That is a 100% verbatim quote from Trump's official statement - not even an off the cuff comment.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

He is calling on those who believe in Jihad not to be allowed in so for all the other Muslims who don't believe in Jihad he says nothing about them.

This also about Trump's official statement that explicitly calls for banning all MUSLIMS.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Billy86 Donald Trump was talking about the Jihadists of the country that want Sharia law imposed across America and not the Muslims who have no ill will towards their fellow citizens. I will end it there.

This also in response to Trump's official statement that explicilty called for a "total and complete shutdown on all MUSLIMS"

KingBrian2 wrote: »

It says it right there in the text banning those that believe in Jihad. He is talking about those that believe in Jihad. You keep getting confused with Muslims.

And this again in response to Trump's explicit call for a "total and complete shutdown on all MUSLIMS"

KingBrian2 wrote: »

I am putting it to you that Trump is not anti Muslim he is anti Jihadist. You refuse to concede that his comments are directed at extreme Islam as opposed to Muslims themselves.

This again in reference to Trump's call for a "total and complete shutdown on all MUSLIMS"

KingBrian2 wrote: »

He is clearly talking about Muslims that believe in Jihad which is referenced in the text. All other Muslims are irrelevant.

This after it was repeatedly pointed out to you that the quotes from Trump about a "total and complete shutdown on all MUSLIMS" was taken verbatim from his official statement on his official website.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Donald Trump is not against all Muslims entering he explicitly stated the Jihadists are the problem and not be allowed enter. It was the media outlet that mentioned Muslims. They quoted him speaking about the Jihadists.

This after it was repeatedly pointed out to you that DonaldJTrump.com is not 'a news site' and is the official website of Donald J. Trump.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

You still have not answered the question I put to you are you okay with Jihadists entering America. You keep referencing the news site. You have not told us if you believe it is okay for Jihadists to enter the US.

Now, Brian, I don't want to accuse you of speaking out both sides of your mouth. So I'll just quote you instead.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Lets be clear on what he said “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on.” Now how that one sentence can be interpreted as sectarian is beyond me. It is how these comments are received by the public is what causes uproar.

Ok Brian, what happened you your line about it only being a ban on Jihadists? Are you saying two completely different, contradictory things, both of which are somehow true?

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Donald Trump has called on a halt of Muslims entering the country until America knows that future Muslims do not pose a threat to America's way of life.

Since you're claiming this is true, I await your official Democratic Party supporting documentation.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Under the Democratic platform all Muslims all 1 billion of them are allowed to arrive in America no vetting let them in. The same goes for Mexico.

Yeah, you really should link us to those official Democratic Party documents that show they will let all 1bn+ Muslims and 120mn Mexicans in without any vetting.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Islam is a billion people and according to the Democrats it is perfectly fine for all these Muslims to be allowed enter Europe & America regardless of their violent beliefs.

I also look forward to you explaining this...

KingBrian2 wrote: »

I have been consistent throughout.Trump has been opposed to Jihadism in America, Jihadism is the same as Islamism. Islamism is the rejection of American values and to be one is to repudiate the Republic. Trump's bellicose is directly at those extremists. People like you are grouping all the Muslims together and shouting Islamophobe, Islamophobe to your hearts content.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Yes I do stand by stating that remark because America does have a major problem with Muslims

...






I look forward to your supporting reputable source for this, too.

KingBrian2 wrote: »

He has staked his reputation on opposing intervention in Libya

I don't think that I ever did get to ask you to supply a reputable link to this? It's a pretty bold statement...

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Trump statements are designed to reclaim the Republic from the march of Wahhabism which has infected the public school system in America.

This one is just a fantastic inaccuracy I must have missed - "Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law." Source: Letter of Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814.


1791 First Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

America is not and has never been a sectarian country.

Christy42

Amerika wrote: »

Demand should drive development, not taxpayer dollars funneled into risky private entities. The free market system will create innovation, if it is there, and if it is cost effective.

Did you know it takes from $1.4 billion to $2.6 billion to bring a drug to market here?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/19/upshot/calculating-the-real-costs-of-developing-a-new-drug.html?_r=0

Research and trials are expensive. The only way to reduce these costs are to reduce standards. Tablets can do a lot of damage to people if not properly tested.

The free market will only make it harder for consumers to figure out which drugs are indeed safe to take as they won't have enough information. Regulation ia needed. Homeopathy shows us that there is a large demand for cheap ailments to problems and that people are happy to buy these objects if enough promises are made about them. Even if these promises can't be backed up scientifically. Homeopathy is at least just sugar and water but what if shady companies started selling drugs with dangerous ingredients with all the scientific backing of homeopathy?

RobertKK

Remember when Hillary Clinton said Obama could end up assassinated?

https://twitter.com/cronikeys/status/763188489659703296

People were talking about Trump earlier. Hillary in 2008 said Obama could end up like Robert Kennedy.

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

Of course our media would go in that direction. Is there any doubt? You need something for the Daily Two Minutes Of (Trump) Hate, after all. Donald Trump said Hillary Clinton wanted to essentially abolish the Second Amendment if she gets to pick her SOCTUS judges. Fact... NRA and Second Amendment folks are some of the most law-abiding people in America. Trump was just talking about the lobbying power of the NRA and 2A supporters to stop a very anti-Second Amendment agenda. But that simple explanation doesn’t fit into the media’s 'Full Palin' assault on Trump.

Hillary Clinton couldn't abolish the 2nd amendment if she wanted to. So it doesn't really matter if Trump said she wanted to. This is all a nonsense. Trump blew a dog whistle and you know it.

Black Swan

CNN Money: Donald Trump named his Team of Economic Advisors: 13 white males (no women and no racial or ethnic minorities), and all these advisors "outsiders" having no policy experience; rather hedge fund managers that profited during the Great Recession (while most Americans suffered from the equity losses), billionaires, and donors to the Trump campaign. "Trump on Thursday struggled to name any women he'd consider appointing to his Cabinet, other than his daughter, Ivanka Trump."

This should send a clear message to women, racial, and ethic minority voters about Donald Trump, where Trump claims he could not find one economic advisor (other than 13 white males) he thought qualified out of a country of approximately 318 million people.

Amerika

Wow... Breaking news.... Julian Assange is suggesting that Seth Rich, the DNC staffer who was mysteriously murdered, was the Wikileaks source for the leaked DNC emails.

http://drudgegae.iavian.net/r?hop=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thegatewaypundit.com%2F2016%2F08%2Fwow-breaking-video-julian-assange-suggests-seth-rich-wikileaks-dnc-source-shot-dead-dc%2F

Amerika

Black Swan wrote: »

CNN Money: Donald Trump named his Team of Economic Advisors: 13 white males (no women and no racial or ethnic minorities), and all these advisors "outsiders" having no policy experience; rather hedge fund managers that profited during the Great Recession (while most Americans suffered from the equity losses), billionaires, and donors to the Trump campaign. "Trump on Thursday struggled to name any women he'd consider appointing to his Cabinet, other than his daughter, Ivanka Trump."

This should send a clear message to women, racial, and ethic minority voters about Donald Trump, where Trump claims he could not find one economic advisor (other than 13 white males) he thought qualified out of a country of approximately 318 million people.

Or send a clear message that when it comes to the economy he's picking the best qualified team and won't succumb to PC nonsense.

Amerika

Amerika wrote: »

Or send a clear message that when it comes to the economy he's picking the best qualified team and won't succumb to PC nonsense.

I could back this statement if the bolded bit made any sense whatsoever considering that they have zero experience.

Igotadose

Amerika wrote: »

Or send a clear message that when it comes to the economy he's picking the best qualified team and won't succumb to PC nonsense.

Then where's his guy Larry Kudlow, co-author of his tax plan, who regularly shills for him on CNBC?

These guys paid Trump for the gig. It's how he rolls.

LostinKildare

Black Swan wrote: »

CNN Money: Donald Trump named his Team of Economic Advisors: 13 white males (no women and no racial or ethnic minorities), and all these advisors "outsiders" having no policy experience; rather hedge fund managers that profited during the Great Recession (while most Americans suffered from the equity losses), billionaires, and donors to the Trump campaign. "Trump on Thursday struggled to name any women he'd consider appointing to his Cabinet, other than his daughter, Ivanka Trump."

This should send a clear message to women, racial, and ethic minority voters about Donald Trump, where Trump claims he could not find one economic advisor (other than 13 white males) he thought qualified out of a country of approximately 318 million people.

Those of us in Ireland may be interested to note that among the hedge-fund distressed-asset jackals in this group of "advisors" is Steve Feinberg, CEO of Cerberus Capital, the buyer in the Project Eagle NAMA property deal in Northern Ireland, now under criminal investigation by the FBI and authorities in NI.

Christy42

RobertKK wrote: »

Remember when Hillary Clinton said Obama could end up assassinated?

https://twitter.com/cronikeys/status/763188489659703296

People were talking about Trump earlier. Hillary in 2008 said Obama could end up like Robert Kennedy.

I disagree terribly with what Clinton said there. However all she said was that it was a possibility. It isn't as bad as Trump suggesting assassination as a method of protecting the 2nd.

Black Swan

Amerika wrote: »

Or send a clear message that when it comes to the economy he's picking the best qualified team and won't succumb to PC nonsense.

Donald Trump considers the qualifications of women today as "PC nonsense?" Not one qualified woman out of 126 million in America? Not one? This is a message that needs to get out to all American women voters for 8 November 2016, who would be absolute fools to vote for him.

Women voters are a sizable demographic. According to the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University: "Four years ago, about 10 million more women voted than men." Donald Trump has been polling low with women voters, and this message would drop him even further.

ancapailldorcha

I thought a key part of Trump's narrative was to take America back from elites and Wall Street and now he's set up a group of hedge fund managers to advise him? Is he going to do something similar with disaffected, poor Americans?

Akrasia

Maybe Trump will offer to pay the legal fees of anyone who assasinates Clinton, or does he only do that for people who violently assault protesters...

Akrasia

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I thought a key part of Trump's narrative was to take America back from elites and Wall Street and now he's set up a group of hedge fund managers to advise him? Is he going to do something similar with disaffected, poor Americans?

His tax plan is essentially a 15% cut in the top rate of tax, and the elimination of inheritance taxes.

He doesn't give a damn about the working poor or unemployed Americans.

Inheritance taxes are utterly irrelevant to most people because they don't have any assets worth taxing, and the threshold is almost 6 million dollars before the first cent of tax is paid, but they are absolutely hated by the wealthy.

By calling it a 'Death tax' and selling it as the government robbing people's graves, Trump is trying to get uninformed and ignorant voters to support his policy that actively discriminates against them and will contribute to intergenerational consolidation of wealth and a further impoverishment of the poor and middle classes.

Amerika

Brian? wrote: »

Hillary Clinton couldn't abolish the 2nd amendment if she wanted to. So it doesn't really matter if Trump said she wanted to. This is all a nonsense. Trump blew a dog whistle and you know it.

Correct, Hillary Clinton couldn't abolish 2A... without help. But she could make it near impossible for people to use their firearms by making ammunition so expensive, through executive orders, that average people wouldn't be able to afford it.

And here's what I do know..... that I can accurately forecast the game plan of our biased media in this election cycle.

Amerika wrote: »

I don’t watch Fox News either (edit... although I did watch them on a regular basis years ago). I would much rather watch left leaning media in order to view, first-hand, their biases... which is mostly everyone other than Fox News. I listen to NPR on the radio, and read news from very many sources, both left and right.

This week Trump is giving economic speeches. Let’s see if the media reports more on the content of his speeches or the one off-kilter statement he makes. And if they do report on his economics, will they be tearing everything down piece by piece? Hillary Clinton's position on the economy is heavily using her jobs record in New York while she was a Senator as her ability to create jobs. Will the press be reporting that she was unable to pass any substantial legislation to the benefit the upstate NY economy, or that the primary people who benefited from her efforts were people who donated to her campaigns and the Clinton Foundation? I think we know the media will concentrate on any off color statement Trump makes, use every available means to discredit Trump’s plans to create jobs, and completely ignore Hillary’s inability to do what she touts as her strength as opposed to Trumps.
- - - - -
Personally, I think the media is sorry they gave Trump so much air-time in the beginning, and as a result helped enable his rise to political power. I think they have remorse for their role early on and are now overcompensating by doing everything they can to take him down at every possible step. At this point I don't believe the media is capable of reporting on Trump in a fair manner.

Suryavarman

RobertKK wrote: »

It belonged in the conspiracy forum, I would have been told where to go if I used as a reply, do you have any evidence all those deaths of people who are becoming a problem for the Clintons are not being killed off by Clinton associates?
I would not even use that as an argument.

As for your last paragraph, why have the Clinton's not come out and denied rumours they are involved in the death of people?


You should have received the same warning I received about conspiracy, though I had not said the Clinton's had been involved in their deaths, just they were a posing a problem for them, instead you got thanked by the person who warned me for what is conspiracy.

You have no evidence for what you posted.

Somebody posted evidence contradicting your claim many days ago.

Well I dunno, I've heard a lot of smart people say, and I mean really smart people, amazing people, I'm a smart person, one of the smartest people ever, huge brain, these people, they've been saying that maybe Trump has been funding NAMBLA. I'm dunno if that's true, look at Jeffrey Epstein, terrible guy, terrible guy, he's a sex offender, I used to work with a sex offender, I think he supports Trump, and Trump is best friends with that Jeffrey Epstein guy? I want to find out, what is the problem? These tax returns, why won't he release them? I just want, I know lots of people that release their tax returns, very rich people, huge incomes, I just want to get to the bottom of the problem. I've had so many people thanking me. It sounds crazy but people are saying Suryavarman has a point. There have been so many people saying we have a tremendous problem. We have to find out what is going on here. Why won't he release the tax returns? I dunno folks, I dunno. I'm so rich.

ancapailldorcha

Akrasia wrote: »

He doesn't give a damn about the working poor or unemployed Americans.

I'm aware of this. I was just thinking that such a move would give the game away and at least damage his support among those who are disaffected.

BoatMad

This thread just shows up how useless Democracy is in a 24/7 fact-less news envirobment lead by social media and trill seeking " red top " Tv " news".

Trump has gained a degree of support , simply because he is saying things a certain group want to hear. It matters not what the facts are or where the truth lies.

Belief is now the new " truth" as witnessed by Gringrich disputing the facts relating to the decline of violent crime and saying his " belief " is superior to a fact.

Here is the kernal of Trumps popularity , take a man with an almost sociopathic lack of empathy and using 24/ 7 media, produce sound bite after sound bite speaking to certain groups in society that are angry. There's no logic in what he says , must of what he claims are partial truths at best and outright lies at worst. Yet his support groupings simply accept the lies as truths because " belief is the new truth " .

This electorate that supports Trump is being played like a fiddle by him. He's using it as a reality TV stage to gain support for him and his absurd policies , most of which are practically Un-implementable and most would severely hurt the very groups he claims to support

The absurd notion that a supposed billionaire , capitalist is going to improve or support the lot of the squeezed ( white ) middle and lower classes is just bizzare in the extreme. Rather like a belief that Brexit and the " leave " Tory party cares about the dispossessed of Wales the the Nortb east of England.

The sad thing is that this group in the electorate is receiving its information from Twitter , 24/7 media soundbites and print media with a " dumb down" agenda. Nothing is fact checked and the consumers of these " factoids " are unwilling or unable to check the facts themselves

Hence just like the Brexit vote and Trumps progress we are seeing the explotation of such media by Trump ( and Farage ) in that they report as if it were fact , pronouncements from these people. political " belief " has now replace " political support "

Brian?

Amerika wrote: »

Correct, Hillary Clinton couldn't abolish 2A... without help. But she could make it near impossible for people to use their firearms by making ammunition so expensive, through executive orders, that average people wouldn't be able to afford it.

And here's what I do know..... that I can accurately forecast the game plan of our biased media in this election cycle.

Do you not feel silly making these predictions? In 2012 you predicted the Dow would plummet and the smart money would flee Wall Street. It did the exact opposite. I also remember you recommending putting my investments in gold etc. . I would have lost a fortune.

You predicted Obama was coming after your guns with executive orders as well. He has done nothing of the sort.

BoatMad

Brian? wrote: »

Do you not feel silly making these predictions? In 2012 you predicted the Dow would plummet and the smart money would flee Wall Street. It did the exact opposite. I also remember you recommending putting my investments in gold etc. . I would have lost a fortune.

You predicted Obama was coming after your guns with executive orders as well. He has done nothing of the sort.

Remember , supporters of this stuff are " believers " they , like their religious cohorts , are not swayed by facts. Belief is the new fact.

RobertKK

Suryavarman wrote: »

Somebody posted evidence contradicting your claim many days ago.

Well I dunno, I've heard a lot of smart people say, and I mean really smart people, amazing people, I'm a smart person, one of the smartest people ever, huge brain, these people, they've been saying that maybe Trump has been funding NAMBLA. I'm dunno if that's true, look at Jeffrey Epstein, terrible guy, terrible guy, he's a sex offender, I used to work with a sex offender, I think he supports Trump, and Trump is best friends with that Jeffrey Epstein guy? I want to find out, what is the problem? These tax returns, why won't he release them? I just want, I know lots of people that release their tax returns, very rich people, huge incomes, I just want to get to the bottom of the problem. I've had so many people thanking me. It sounds crazy but people are saying Suryavarman has a point. There have been so many people saying we have a tremendous problem. We have to find out what is going on here. Why won't he release the tax returns? I dunno folks, I dunno. I'm so rich.

It is still conspiracy and you offered no evidence.
You would not be posting it if it related to the Clintons.

I am sure you don't want to talk about the lies from the Democrats who blamed Russia for the DNC email leaks, when it turned out to be Seth Rich, a DNC staffer who ended up murdered.

I am sure you want to stick to the conspiracy theories.

This is no conspiracy, the DNC probably knew it was an inside job but were too embarrassed to admit it. It took Julian Assange to say it was the murdered Seth Rich who was their source.

RobertKK

Brian? wrote: »

Do you not feel silly making these predictions? In 2012 you predicted the Dow would plummet and the smart money would flee Wall Street. It did the exact opposite. I also remember you recommending putting my investments in gold etc. . I would have lost a fortune.

You predicted Obama was coming after your guns with executive orders as well. He has done nothing of the sort.

The stock markets would have plummeted if not for the quantitative easing and record low interest rates.

Record low interest rates remain as the world economy is very very fragile.

Christy42

RobertKK wrote: »

It is still conspiracy and you offered no evidence.
You would not be posting it if it related to the Clintons.

I am sure you don't want to talk about the lies from the Democrats who blamed Russia for the DNC email leaks, when it turned out to be Seth Rich, a DNC staffer who ended up murdered.

I am sure you want to stick to the conspiracy theories.

This is no conspiracy, the DNC probably knew it was an inside job but were too embarrassed to admit it. It took Julian Assange to say it was the murdered Seth Rich who was their source.

Complains about a lack of credible sources and follows it up with a claim without credible sources.

You know Assange is hardly unbiased. Why would you take his word for it with 0 actual evidence?

RobertKK

Christy42 wrote: »

Complains about a lack of credible sources and follows it up with a claim without credible sources.

You know Assange is hardly unbiased. Why would you take his word for it with 0 actual evidence?

Wikileaks are offering $20,000 for information that leads to his murderer(s) being brought to justice as they say their source was murdered.

oscarBravo

Amerika wrote: »

Correct, Hillary Clinton couldn't abolish 2A... without help. But she could make it near impossible for people to use their firearms by making ammunition so expensive, through executive orders, that average people wouldn't be able to afford it.

How could she influence the price of ammunition? She couldn't impose taxes on it; as far as I know, all taxes have to come from the House of Representatives Ways and Means committee.

That aside, why would she want to do that? The idea that she doesn't want people to have guns is pure right-wing talking-head propaganda. All she wants is what the vast majority of Americans, including the vast majority of NRA members and GOP voters, wants: sensible restrictions on who can get their hands on guns.

The hysteria around the Second Amendment is positively farcical. It's like screaming "PROHIBITION!!" in response to the suggestion that maybe pre-schoolers shouldn't be allowed to buy heroin.

BoatMad

RobertKK wrote: »

The stock markets would have plummeted if not for the quantitative easing and record low interest rates.

Record low interest rates remain as the world economy is very very fragile.

Your comeback is to then justify your were right because things didn't work out the way you forsaw but would have if these things then didn't happen.

Wow

( I beleived the world would end last Wednesday , when I beleive it was to be hit by Jupiter , I was right , just that Jupiter didn't move its damm orbit )

Amerika

Christy42 wrote: »

Complains about a lack of credible sources and follows it up with a claim without credible sources.

You know Assange is hardly unbiased. Why would you take his word for it with 0 actual evidence?

Do you have any evidence where Assange has lied in the past about his sources?