The allegation is that Hillary has a pair of nuts? I am confused.
Obama was involved with a far-left organization called ACORN (the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now).
SoM playfully posted some acorns.
That's just so much Sophistry.
Stop flirting with me, you.
Then we get into your erroneous assumptions:
The sense of the "negative", why Clinton shouldn't be elected position (as opposed to the "positive", why Trump should be elected position) I get out of all of this is:
You make a partisan assumption that Trump's is a purely negative campaign, based on "fear" or xenophobia, either of immigrants or of foreign nations.
That's wrong.
Trump uses the phrase "LET'S MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN". That's not a phrase borne in fear or xenophobia, but in our inherent strength and historic greatness, that we can in a short time regain. His is a campaign scorning political correctness, returning to policy across the board grounded in common sense, in will of the people, and belief in the strength of individuals to do things better than would federal/authoritarian/Democrat/socialist central planning.
Against your insulting portrayal, that vision is inherently optimistic.
a. Obama is a dangerous Marxist-trained agitating deceitful demagogue;
b. Hillary is cut from the same clothe;
And what facts dispute that?
But Trump's campaign is not about voting for him ONLY in opposition to Obama and Hillary, but because he offers better trade policy, better immigration/border enforcement, reducing the debt that threatens to collapse the dollar (vs. Democraats who deny there is even a danger), rebuilding our military (same thing), and offers an administration that doesn't embrace anarchy and cop-killers.
c. Middle Eastern immigrants rape and kill and Clinton will accelerate that;
There is abundant evidence to back that up, with Islamic terror-bombings that have followed muslim immigration worldwide on almost a daily basis, in the U.S., in Europe, in Turkey, Africa, the Phillipines, even in Russia and China. Even occasionally in your native Australia. I posted one of a muslim gang-rape and the Australian girl facing her attackers in court a few years ago.
It is not unreasonable on the part of Trump and other nationalists to advocate a policy to control a high ratio of PROVEN dangerous muslim immigrants who slip in among the more peaceful muslims. And even among the peaceful ones (and I work with two on a daily basis) they have a barely concealed contempt for U.S. policy and culture, and daily graze on Al Jazeera, siding with pan-Arab islamism over their fellow Americans.
d. Mexicans do the same thing (not sure if you guys have bought into that assertion or not but I seem to recall it);
You conflate a lot here.
It is an absolute fact that 58.8%, or 7 million, of illegal immigrants to the U.S. are from Mexico (Tribune Newspapers, "White House is Lining Up Allies To Pass Overhaul before Mid-Terms", Peter Nicholas, Dec 30, 2009
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2009-...olls-show-obama ).
As I said prior, when you combine illegals statistically tracked from Central America (1.4 million, 11.76%), South America (775,000, 6.5%) and the Caribbeaan (500,000, 4.2%) Hispanic illegal immigration combines to be 81.25% of all illegal immigration.
Is it racist or xenophobic to be looking at Hispanics more, rather than Norwegians or Canadians? I think not.
As I said before (available in conservative media but rarely reported among the overwhelming pro-illegal/open-borders/pro-Hillary-Obama liberal media) the United States admits 1.1 million legal green-card immigrants per year.
And in addition to that, about 3 million illegals enter annually, about 1.5 million are deported, about 1.5 million a year stay and hide among us.
While statistically illegals commit crimes at a lower rate than U.S. citizens and legal immigrants, they still account for hundreds of thousands of crimes that they could not commit if they were not here, ranging from drug trafficking to murder, rape, burglary and shoplifting.
It is common sense that many enter illegally because they have criminal records in their native countries, and would not pass a screening for legal immigration.
I and many Americans would argue that their choosing to enter the country ALONE manifests their corruption and lack of respect for our laws, and that alone is a crime. The illegals I've met don't pay taxes and work under-the-table. And so myself and other Americans pay more in taxes, to compensate for what they don't pay but still use, for the police, fire, medical and other services they use at the taxpayers' expense.
Likewise, there is a terrible cost for Islamic immigrants when they resort to terror. It also turned out that the extended family in the U.S. of the Boston Marathon bombers, the Tsarnaev brothers, received welfare, food stamps, and free college tuition. Despite all they received from our nation, they still made war with us.
e. Clinton will embroil the US in a war in Central Asia with Russia;
Are you mocking that notion?
Clinton is comparable ideologically to the Neo-Cons of the W. Bush era. And to her husband Bill Clinton who similarly intervened in Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, Somalia and Rwanda. She is an interventionist.
She HERSELF was involved in trafficking arms to questionably reliable muslim rebels in Syria who are fighting Assad.
Clinton is a globalist, whereas Trump is relatively isolationist, not wanting to intervene in areas that are not vital U.S. interests.
f. Clinton will continue the stultifying effects of globalisation because of her ties to big business.
Again, you seem to say that as if mocking the concern of U.S. conservative opposition.
But there is abundant evidence to support that belief.
Hillary Clinton is an active member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and far more than that, she has demonstrated her ability to sell out the American people to foreign interests through donations to the Clinton Foundation, giving some of the worst players on the global stage access to federal official, in exchange for cash donations, and for "speaking fees" in the hundreds of thousands of dollars per appearance.
A modern Benedict Arnold, whose loyalty, whose GOVERNMENT, is on sale to the highest bidder.
Not sure where you all stand on China.
What is there to explain?
China has aggressively been expanding its military reach in the South China Sea, creating new islands and airbases to leverage out its neighbors.
Google up CHINA FIRST ISLAND CHAIN, SECOND ISLAND CHAIN, THIRD ISLAND CHAIN. A plan for widening circles of dominion over the Pacific.
The second planned island chain runs through the U.S. territory of Guam.
The third island chain runs through Hawaii!
China unrelentingly manipulates its currency to gain an unfair advantage over other nations.
China is constantly involved in pirating of copyright-protected U.S. properties.
China has committed cyberwarfare not only on the U.S. government and military, but on civilian infrastructure, and on virtually every major U.S. company.
As I posted prior, in search of leaks from Chinese officials, China cyper-hacked the New York Times, and hacked into its reporters' e-mail accounts to track down the Chinese sources they used.
I started a topic several years ago about a Chinese diplomatic defector who said the Chinese government views the U.S. as its primary enemy in the world.
Again, what in here is there to question or mock? These things are absolute fact.
What I have noticed is that, over the past 3-4 years, is how far Tea Party (anti-establishment) right you have all swung.
Back in the day, Wonder Boy was on the right wing of the mainstream Republican Party, G-Man was more mainstream again, and Pariah was out there in Libertarian Limbo Land, getting ready for post-Apocalypse survivalism. I'm kind of joking - in any event, you didn't really buy into mainstream politics.
Again, you make sweeping assumptions, against the facts.
If you really looked at those posts back from 2003-2008, you saw myself, G-man and Pariah sided with W. Bush on the Iraq War, Afghan War and broader fight against Islamic terrorism, but still opposed Bush on deficit spending, and his attempts to label Islam for the most part as a "religion of peace".
I opposed Bush on the Patriot Act, and said that it was not necessary, that only enforcement of our previously unenforced existing laws were necessary.
I opposed the massive uptick in social spending under Bush, on S-Chip, No Child Left Behind, and the Prescription Drug Plan.
For all the attempts of the Left to say it was "Bush's wars" that caused the debt to spike from $5.5 trillion to 10.5 trillion in his 8 years, 80% of that was social spending, BIPARTISAN spending, in full cooperation with Ted Kennedy and the Democrats. Democrats also voted for the Iraq war, then opportunistically turned on the Iraq war when support of it declined in the polls.
I don't wish to put words in the mouths of G-man and Pariah, but I'd say we're less mainstream Republicans now because we've felt less represented by the Republican party.
Particularly in the 2014 election, when the GOP campaigned to gain control of the Senate, along with the House they already held, to de-fund Obamacare.
But as soon as the newly elected legislature was seated in early 2015, against what they promised, they approved funding for Obamacare for another year!
Again, read the book OBAMANOMICS by Timothy Carney, which details how corporate lobby money infests and controls the majority of both parties. The Tea Party wing (that you seem to belittle and mock as crazy extremists) are the only ones trying to contain federal debt, shrink government, and make legislation and spending compliant to the will of the people.
(To make it plain, I broadly regard Obama as a wonderful President...
Good Lord, is your delusion showing!
No doubt a delusion fed by the Rothschild/globalist talking piece THE ECONOMIST, and other liberal/globalist Newspeak.
Minneapolis is burning right now. Ferguson Missouri. Baltimore, Maryland. New York City.
Terrorist attacks all over the United States. Most recently 4 hours north of me in Orlando, FL.
In the 8th year of Obama's presidency, he has spent almost 10 trillion in new debt (in addition to printing out of thin air another 3 trillion, more than quadrupling the 800 billion of U.S. currency in circulation when he took office.) And despite this monster ditch he has dug for the U.S., he has not exceeded 2% growth any year of his presidency.
We are at the lowest ratio of homeownership since I was born. Skyrocketing rates of food stamps usage, disability, record lows in worker participation (in other words, many are either reluctantly working part-time jobs, unemployed, or have given up looking for work).
Obama has brought this country to its knees, and will be remembered in the context of history as possibly its worst president, in terms of stoking both racial and economic-class division, his crippling of business growth, and hyperinflating our debt in a way that has positioned the dollar and our economy at the brink of collapse. And believe me, if and when it collapses, it will be felt in Europe, China and Australia as well.
except on foreign policy where I think he has been disinterested and happy to leave things to his Secretaries of State, and I think Russia and China have taken advantage of that and that Israel/Palestine has become worse without the United States as a voice of reason. As a citizen of a non-US Western democracy, that should be no surprise: we all tend to like Democrats because they're closer to our chunk of the political spectrum.)
Obama's foreign policy errors are not incompetence or mistakes. They are the ideological success of his barely closeted anti-colonialism, liberation theology, and cultural marxism.
Dinesh D'Souza: "Why Obama wants to destroy America"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAjGxvCc3qE
But it seems to me that you three have all veered hard right, and that is because of eight years of the Obama administration.
When you are already standing on the Left, Dave, anything to the right of you looks right-wingy.
I increasingly think less in terms of Left and Right (knowing that people on both sides wear false hats to advance their self-serving and/or globalist agenda) and think more in terms of nationalism, Constitutional freedoms, our historic identity as a nation, who will preserve that, and who will front it as a false flag.
So what does this mean if you're typical of GOP voters? There is a good chance - objectively by any measure, a very decent chance - that you'll have another eight years of a Democrat president. That would mean that since 1993, only eight years will have been under a Republican administration.
Or it could mean that enough Democrats have lost their jobs and suffered under Obama/Reid/Pelosi that they are willing to vote for Trump as well. Certainly the coal miners in traditionally Democrat West Virginia. A Reagan-Democrat style re-alignment, because many Democrats are both angry and afraid of the far-Left/globalist Democrat agenda, that costs them their jobs in offshoring, that favors risky Islamic immigration over the security of taxpaying citizens, that spikes tuition to the point they may not be able to send their kids to college, while giving free tuition to illegal immigrants. Democrats that treat illegal immigrants better than they treat U.S. veterans. Democrats that side with anarchists and cop-killers, and makes citizens even wonder if the police can still protect them.
The Left likes to condescendingly sell us the inevitability of what they oh-so-enlightenedly favor.
(And let's face it, with the benefit of hindsight: despite his nutty advisors and their internationalist interventionist instincts, Dubya was more centrally balanced than a ballerina. He helped big business and he didn't really cause much of a ruckus on the domestic front. He even set aside the world's largest environmental exclusion zone in his last days in office.)
Perhaps you somehow overlooked the near-collapse of the U.S. economy, and the $750 billion TARP bailout, that John McCain suspended his 2008 presidential campaign to go back to Washington and vote on.
Perhaps you missed the collapse of AIG and Lehman Brothers, the mortgage crisis, and its resultant effect on the economies of Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece and Ireland. And the snowballing crisis of the Euro in 2010.
The Bush era, despite your rose-colored glasses, wasn't so rosy. It was a very scary time. And I think if not for the crisis in Europe that made the U.S. a relative investment safe haven, that might have been when the dollar would have collapsed, without an external greater crisis that brought an infusion of foreign investment into the U.S.
Dubya left office in 2009. Clinton wins and she is in office, most feasibly, until 2024. And that ignores her husband's administration, 1993-2001.
That's a long time in the cold.
And the funny thing is that, if the GOP loses, then instead of saying, well, we need to work on Hispanic or young voters and get them to understand the benefits of conservative politics (and there are many, many benefits - I am a conservative voter in my country), you'll be doing your best to deny Hispanics citizenship rights, curtail the rights of ex-cons to vote because they're black and likely to be Dem supporters and so on.
While there is a need to reach out to black, Hispanic and Asian voters by the GOP, as I stated above, the central problem is their alienation of the GOP's core voter-base, in not doing what they promised after the 2014 election (using their newly-elected power to repeal Obamacare).
And further alienating white GOP (and Reagan Democrat) voters, under the years of Bill Clinton, W. Bush, and now Obama, through the offshoring of jobs and bringing in low-wage immigrants to steal the jobs that are left.
You again conflate illegal immigration (that the GOP condemns) with LEGAL immigration (that the GOP embraces, and truly is an American strength). That is a dishonest argument.
There needs to be a positive narrative in the GOP. Jobs - get competitive with manufacturing in advanced technologies instead of the shit manufacturing that is now done in Vietnam and Cambodia because even the Chinese can't undercut them.
That's not lucid or clear enough to respond to.
Security - have a gun, if you must, but lock it up and don't let nutjobs have them so as to prevent your kids getting shot.
That's also assuming a lot.
I don't know anyone who DOESN'T keep their guns locked in a safe when not in use.
And regulation never prevented one criminal or terrorist from getting the guns they needed. The old saying
"If all guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have them." Law abiding people obey the gun laws, criminals don't.
Christian values - and to appeal to young voters, that means modern Christian values around forgiveness and tolerance. Recognise that lots of people pray to Jesus. Be inclusive about that.
But, right now... Fucked if I can see any positive narrative at present with the current freakshow.
Again, too unclear to respond to. But it again appears to be sweeping stereotypes of Christian beliefs, and Christian political groups in the U.S., that you don't truly understand, even as you condescend to them.
If the GOP keep focussing on securing the votes of that diminishing demographic, the old white dudes, the GOP will never be back in office.
That's the core, right there. Democrats, and other elites who pretend to be conservative Republicans, have worked together to demographically destroy the GOP since the 1964 immigration reform act.
It was calculated to destroy the party of nationalism, to open the U.S. up to globalist submission, eroding its financial independence (with crushing federal debt), and its nationalism and identity (with immigration, both massive legal, and massive illegal), and its border security (again, through illegal immigration). We are witnessing the endgame, the last nation insulated from globalism, and there is nowhere else to go.
Regarding your delusional point about reaching out to minority voters, that is impossible. A majority of minority voters will always overwhelmingly vote Democrat.
The best Republicans can do is shave off another 10 or 15% of minority voters in addition to their white voter base, as Republicans did to win in 2004. But you will never NEVER get a majority of blacks, Hispanics or asians to vote Republican.
As Rush Limbaugh said just after the 2012 election, "You just can't compete with Santa Claus." Minorities vote for free stuff, social spending and open borders to admit their extended family. The Democrats will always be able to offer more freebies, and lawless free passes for illegal immigrants, than the Republicans will ever concede.
