Jump to content

2016 American Presidential Thread


Recommended Posts

So the government doesn't allow guns at the convention? How ever will people defend themselves? I thought the second amendment was all about not being fucked over by the government? Wake up USA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that Trump and the republican leaders want people to have guns except when they are in the same place :chuckle:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a Republican and I'm not defending them, but they would say that they believe that people can have a gun in their house to defend themselves in case someone invades their home, but there is no reason to have a gun at a public event like the convention where there is tons of professional security guards and police who are armed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So many people want this fat, peabrained, hideous and delusional bigot to be president, it's amazingly pathetic.

If he loses in a landslide and goes bankrupt after becoming a national embarrassment, I'll go to sleep with a smile on my face every night for a good awhile.

Poor Ivanka.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So many people want this fat, peabrained, hideous and delusional bigot to be president, it's amazingly pathetic.

If he loses in a landslide and goes bankrupt after becoming a national embarrassment, I'll go to sleep with a smile on my face every night for a good awhile.

Poor Ivanka.

Lmfao!! Though you 'somehow' forgot to throw in ORANGE in the mix/your statement babe hehe. Welcum back! xx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a Republican and I'm not defending them, but they would say that they believe that people can have a gun in their house to defend themselves in case someone invades their home, but there is no reason to have a gun at a public event like the convention where there is tons of professional security guards and police who are armed.

What if a cop goes rogue and shoots every other cop in a surprise attack?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mauro

I'm not a Republican and I'm not defending them, but they would say that they believe that people can have a gun in their house to defend themselves in case someone invades their home, but there is no reason to have a gun at a public event like the convention where there is tons of professional security guards and police who are armed.

They would never say that. They want them allowed everywhere. Even in courthouses and federal buildings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a Republican and I'm not defending them, but they would say that they believe that people can have a gun in their house to defend themselves in case someone invades their home, but there is no reason to have a gun at a public event like the convention where there is tons of professional security guards and police who are armed.

They would never say that. They want them allowed everywhere. Even in courthouses and federal buildings.

I was about to say Mauro, exactly. So again, why not the convention? What are they afraid of? :1251:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So many people want this fat, peabrained, hideous and delusional bigot to be president, it's amazingly pathetic.

If he loses in a landslide and goes bankrupt after becoming a national embarrassment, I'll go to sleep with a smile on my face every night for a good awhile.

Poor Ivanka.

If it helps 70% of the country has a highly negative view of him according to a recent poll. He is more disliked then Bush at his worst.

I always said there is about anywhere from 27 to 33% of this country that is totally bat shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They would never say that. They want them allowed everywhere. Even in courthouses and federal buildings.

I guess, but there was a recently an Appeals Court case that said the Second Amendment only protects the right to have a gun in your home for personal protection, and that there is no constitutional right to have a concealed weapon in public places and states can restrict you from having a concealed weapon in public unless you have a valid reason to carry one which has to be more than just general self defense.

The extreme right crazies think that the Second Amendment protects your right to bear any type of guns, anywhere at any time, but courts have held time and time again that it allows certain restrictions on guns for public safety, and that the Second Amendment only prohibits an outright ban on guns. The big Supreme Court case finding a Second Amendment right to bear arms stemmed from when Washington, DC where I live attempted to ban all sales of handguns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also the Second Amendment applies only to the government restricting guns. So the Republican party or any private business/organization can prevent you from bringing guns onto their property or to their events and that has nothing to do with your rights under the Constitution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mauro

I guess, but there was a recently an Appeals Court case that said the Second Amendment only protects the right to have a gun in your home for personal protection, and that there is no constitutional right to have a concealed weapon in public places and states can restrict you from having a concealed weapon in public unless you have a valid reason to carry one which has to be more than just general self defense.

The extreme right crazies think that the Second Amendment protects your right to bear any type of guns, anywhere at any time, but courts have held time and time again that it allows certain restrictions on guns for public safety, and that the Second Amendment only prohibits an outright ban on guns. The big Supreme Court case finding a Second Amendment right to bear arms stemmed from when Washington, DC where I live attempted to ban all sales of handguns.

And they don't agree, just as they don't agree with the ruling on Roe v Wade. Don't try reasoning with these people.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And they don't agree, just as they don't agree with the ruling on Roe v Wade. Don't try reasoning with these people.

It's really easy to be casual and flippant about the abortion issue UNTIL you have children of your own. I'm not judging you because at one time I was the same. Once you see the different procedures described online you will never see the issue the same way again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mauro

It's really easy to be casual and flippant about the abortion issue UNTIL you have children of your own. I'm not judging you because at one time I was the same. Once you see the different procedures described online you will never see the issue the same way again.

Let's not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Rachelle of London

It's really easy to be casual and flippant about the abortion issue UNTIL you have children of your own. I'm not judging you because at one time I was the same. Once you see the different procedures described online you will never see the issue the same way again.

Very true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very true.

I saw an interview with this woman Gianna Jessen who survived an saline abortion and she said something that really struck me:

If abortion is merely about women's rights, than what were mine?

I'm not trying to hijack the pres thread. Just some food for thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mauro
BOMBSHELL: Trump’s Presidential Campaign Is Nearly BROKE, It’s Going To Be A Bloodbath


Donald Trump’s Latest Campaign Finance Report Makes Dumpster Fires Look Good

Trump’s campaign only has $1.3 million cash on hand. Sad!


5768a5871500002f001ba75d.jpeg


WASHINGTON — Presumptive Republican Party presidential nominee Donald Trump entered June with just $1.3 million cash on hand in his campaign account, according to a campaign finance report filed on Monday. The tiny sum is the result of Trump’s poor first month of fundraising from donors that netted just $3.1 million.


The total is unbelievably paltry for a major party nominee, and places him further behind his opponent in terms of funds and campaign infrastructure than any other modern presidential candidate. In 2012, the collected efforts of the candidates, parties and super PACs of both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney spent more than $1 billion each.


Clinton, by comparison, raised $26.4 million for her campaign in the same time period as Trump’s $3.1 million. In May 2012, when Romney was the presumptive Republican nominee, he raised $23.4 million.


When party committees and supportive super PACs are factored in, the disparity between Clinton and Trump becomes astronomical.


Aside from the $26.4 million raised for Clinton’s campaign, Priorities USA Action (the super PAC endorsed by her campaign) pulled in an additional $12.4 million. The Democratic National Committee also raised $12.3 million. In total, these three committees comprising Team Clinton entered June with $103.4 million cash on hand.


Team Trump — his campaign, the Republican National Committee and the super PAC Great America — had a combined $21.7 million cash on hand. That is five times less than what Team Clinton has available to spend.



Team Clinton and Team Trump Cash on Hand (May 31, 2016)




5768a63515000030001ba760.png


The astonishing gap in funding has produced massive disparities in both television advertising and staff on the ground.


Priorities USA Action just launched a $20 million ad buy across swing states and has already spent $10.5 million attacking Trump and another $5 million boosting Clinton on air. The Clinton campaign just reserved television air time across eight states.


The Clinton campaign boasts a massive staff of 685 people, while the Trump campaign’s payroll sits at 69. Both numbers are down from April, but the presumptive Democratic nominee also has already begun to farm out her campaign staff to the DNC and state parties to begin to organize in key swing states and beyond. She has further promised to place staff in all 50 states to help get out the vote for her campaign and down-ballot Democrats.


Trump effectively became the party nominee on May 4 after defeating Texas Sen. Ted Cruz in the Indiana primary. He quickly stated that he would cease self-funding his campaign and start raising money for both his own committee and the Republican Party.


“I’m not looking for myself, I’m looking out for the party, so the party can compete in Senate races and House races. I want to raise money for the party,” he said on Fox at the time.


And he did raise $3 million through a joint fundraising committee called Trump Victory, formed in the waning weeks of May, for the Republican National Committee. That is about a quarter of the $13 million the RNC raised last month. The problem, though, is that Trump’s fundraising totals are both little and late, especially compared to both Clinton’s current total and the 2012 total of Romney, who became his party’s leader nine days earlier in the election year than Trump did.


The majority of Trump’s available cash is housed at the RNC, but the central party committee may have expected much more. In 2012, with the help Romney’s formidable network of wealthy donors, the RNC raised $34 million in May — $21 million more than this year. Romney, meanwhile, raised $23.4 million in May 2012, his best fundraising month of the cycle and $20 million more than Trump.


Overall, the RNC has raised $163 million through May, or $6 million less than in 2012 at the same point. But the RNC’s fundraising strength is centered on the large contributions it has received in special accounts that cannot be used to pay for election expenses. The committee has pulled in $33.4 million for its convention, building and recount accounts from donors who can give up to $100,200 to each one. That leaves just $129 million in their main campaign account to help Republican get elected this fall — far less than they had in 2012 at this juncture.


The DNC trails the RNC, with $108 million raised overall and $100 million raised when not including the convention, building and recount accounts.


This will not help make up the astronomical gap between Clinton’s $42 million cash on hand and Trump’s $1.2 million cash on hand. Candidates pay the lowest unit price for advertising, while parties and outside groups pay the expensive going rate. This means that candidate money goes much, much further — as Romney, who leaned too hard on super PACs in 2012, learned the hard way.


Trump has increased his fundraising schedule, and has already made stops in Texas, New York, Arizona, Georgia and Virginia in June. It is increasingly likely, however, that political scientists will finally get to see a real-world test of whether having a fully funded and fully functioning campaign really matters for its results.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some British bloke tried to assinate Trump over the weekend.

Will he ban British people from entering the US now? :ohno:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...