Good for Trump

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by n david

Tweet from the Secret Service:

"""The Secret Service is aware of the comments made earlier this afternoon."""

smh

Clinton's rally attended by a pro-Taliban, father of a gay bashing mass murderer and emails showing Huma Abedin had access and used Hillary's email which contained classified material.

And Trump blows it. Again.

Again, how did he blow it? This needed to be said.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Again, how did he blow it? This needed to be said.

No. You don't insinuate your opponent should be assassinated. That may happen in Russia with Putin, or back when Valenzuela had Chavez. Not in the USA.

[n david]

"""At Trump HQ, a lonely intern gazes sadly at the"DAYS WITHOUT ACCIDENT" sign, erases the 1, and writes in a 0."""

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by n david

No. You don't insinuate your opponent should be assassinated. That may happen in Russia with Putin, or back when Valenzuela had Chavez. Not in the USA.

That was not what was being insinuated. Don't repeat the liberal spin. What was being advocated was the possibility of revolution by those who love the 2nd Amendment.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by n david

Let me add, the same media giving Hillary a pass for having a Taliban-supporting, father of a gay bashing mass murderer sit no more than 20 feet from her, the same media will likely skewer Trump for those 8 words.

The majority of Americans don't care what the democrat media says (they have been dwindling in importance, influence, 'ratings', etc for years).

What Trump is saying is basically what an awful lot of Trump supporters believe: this is the last chance for a peaceful change in the current corrupt state of affairs. And that's why Trump is so dangerous to the PTBs: not because of he himself, but because of the millions of angry, and generally armed, populace behind him. I'm telling you, the peasants are marching to the Bastille pitchforks and torches in hand.

As for Trump trying to throw the election, that actually makes no sense, except in one very limited scenario, which you reject as being too tightly wrapped in tinfoil.

If Trump is a demonrat operative, trying to give Hillary the golden throne, he would have gone down in flames long ago. Then, Jeb or Cruz or Rubio or any of the other GOPe clowns would have won the nomination, and their loss to Hillary would be as predictable as Dukakis' loss.

Either that, or he would have lost the nomination, ran third party/independent, and generally went with the Ross Perot strategy of giving a Clinton the victory.

Nobody else on the field generated anywhere near the support and popularity Trump and still does. Everyone else would have been crushed by Hillary. Most of them would have lost to Sanders, even.

So, the only plausible way to say Trump is throwing it for Hillary involves a scheme way bigger than just losing to Hillary so she would win. The Trump dynamic has to be taken into account. Why would the demonrats cook up a scheme to generate the most popular candidate in decades, then have him lose on purpose? The target of such a scheme would not be Trump and Hillary, but the American people. Get the nation riled up then pull the rug out from under them? Sounds like a recipe for revolution.

Personally, I think they will keep promoting the lie that the 'race is close' so they can Diebold her into the WH. Maybe Trump is doing what he is doing to keep his support levels 'rationalistically lower', to provide a rationalisation for why they are 'neck and neck' instead of him stomping her campaign into oblivion - which is actually what he has been doing.

Who knows?

I do know this, with the E-Vote counters on the scene, NOTHING CAN BE TRUSTED.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Originalist

That was not what was being insinuated. Don't repeat the liberal spin. What was being advocated was the possibility of revolution by those who love the 2nd Amendment.

I'm not repeating liberal spin. You're repeating Trump excuses.

Your explanation is implausible, and this is why: 1) Trump was speaking specifically about Hillary, not about the government in general; 2) he said there was nothing anyone could do about it -- EXCEPT for 2A people.

He couldn't have been speaking of voting, because everyone can vote. There's only one thing 2A people have and can do which others cannot.

Sorry, whether you call it a revolution or assassination, the insinuation is the same.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by n david

I'm not repeating liberal spin. You're repeating Trump excuses.

Your explanation is implausible, and this is why: 1) Trump was speaking specifically about Hillary, not about the government in general; 2) he said there was nothing anyone could do about it -- EXCEPT for 2A people.

He couldn't have been speaking of voting, because everyone can vote. There's only one thing 2A people have and can do which others cannot.

Sorry, whether you call it a revolution or assassination, the insinuation is the same.

Oh for cryin' out loud! You are becoming the arrogant thing you constantly slam on here. You simply cannot admit an error on a thing you say. It's incredible. Revolution is not the same as condoning assassination.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Oh for cryin' out loud! You are becoming the arrogant thing you constantly slam on here. You simply cannot admit an error on a thing you say. It's incredible. Revolution is not the same as condoning assassination.

Okay. Please tell me what you mean by: "What was being advocated was the possibility of revolution by those who love the 2nd Amendment."

What are you meaning by revolution?

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by n david

Okay. Please tell me what you mean by: "What was being advocated was the possibility of revolution by those who love the 2nd Amendment."

What are you meaning by revolution?

Refusual to comply and daring Hillary to come get the guns.

But if you want to talk assassination, I guess you've heard the Wiki-leaks thing tonight. Incredible. We have an assassin as Democrat nominee.

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by n david

Tweet from the Secret Service:

"""The Secret Service is aware of the comments made earlier this afternoon."""

smh

Clinton's rally attended by a pro-Taliban, father of a gay bashing mass murderer and emails showing Huma Abedin had access and used Hillary's email which contained classified material.

And Trump blows it. Again.

If you think that the media would be going ape over Clinton's glaring issues if Trump would say everything just right, then you're more delusional than I thought. Just look back at 2012 or 2008---Romney was the guy who took jobs from people; the wealthy Republican who was evil; the "47% of America" statement---Sarah Palin was an airhead doofus who didn't read the New York Times; she could see Russia from her backyard; her daughter smoked pot---all the while Obama had associations with known domestic terrorists; went to church where Black Liberation Theology was espoused; was mentored by a man who was a member of the American Communist Party; etc

Journalism is dead for the most part. Cruz would be suffering with negative coverage if he were the nominee---Rubio, Kasich, Carson---they all would be crucified for every faux pas and would be investigated and vetted far beyond anything they would do to Hillary.