leading GOP presidential candidate
How does one classify a Muslim though according to Trump?
These days I'm not surprised by politicians who hold radical positions. I'm more dismayed by the popular support they get. People vote for scumbags like these.
Kinda surprised the president or media hasn't already called this man a bigot.
This is what happens when you let that "both sides" shit take hold.
http://time.com/4139975/trump-scheduled-rnc-fundraiser/To be fair, I believe it says "no presidential candidates" not just trump? :doge
RNC just dropped trump from their fundraiser...
nah he was gonna smooth it out with the establishment, but alashttp://time.com/4139975/trump-scheduled-rnc-fundraiser/To be fair, I believe it says "no presidential candidates" not just trump? :doge
RNC just dropped trump from their fundraiser...
"Well I think this whole notion that somehow we need to say no more Muslims and just ban a whole religion goes against everything we stand for and believe in. I mean religious freedom’s been a very important part of our, our history.”http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/12/07/verbatim-dick-cheney-criticizes-donald-trumps-muslim-policy/?smid=tw-nytpolitics&smtyp=cur
— Dick Cheney, the former vice president, speaking to the conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt and referring to a proposal by Donald J. Trump to bar Muslims from entering the country.
This is what happens when you let that "both sides" shit take hold.
Gross.
But what does that mean? If someone voices "a side" that has zero support, then .... ?They still get air time eye to eye with people that are to be taken seriously. That gives them more legitimacy than they actually have. I'm thinking of Alex Jones types, climate change deniers, anti-vaxxers, etc.
"We're losing a lot of people because of the internet," Trump said. "We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."
You know, it's kinda neat to see history repeating itself. Like I wonder if this "hijacked" feeling is what Germans felt when Hitler was running for power. :doge
Quote"We're losing a lot of people because of the internet," Trump said. "We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."
http://www.theverge.com/2015/12/7/9869308/donald-trump-close-up-the-internet-bill-gates#show-last-Point
Maybe in an era of three broadcast stations that concern has some kind of merit, but when Youtube personalities get more eyeballs than a typical news program and anyone can create a platform of their own, it seems like an antiquated idea. Pandora's box is open and there is only one way to close it.And challenging those people on their tripe would be bad for business, I know. It's all stupid, someone hold me. :tocry
Plus, mainstream news knows that acrimony gets the most attention. I've seen them trawl Twitter or YouTube comments just to get a "counter point" on even the most benign topic. It appears to be human nature.
Bill fucking Gates will fix it (not sure what it even is), because that's a name everyone knows. :picardQuote"We're losing a lot of people because of the internet," Trump said. "We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."
http://www.theverge.com/2015/12/7/9869308/donald-trump-close-up-the-internet-bill-gates#show-last-Point
Quote"We're losing a lot of people because of the internet," Trump said. "We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."
http://www.theverge.com/2015/12/7/9869308/donald-trump-close-up-the-internet-bill-gates#show-last-Point
The internet is a series of tubes. You just block the bad tubes.
Quote"We're losing a lot of people because of the internet," Trump said. "We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."
http://www.theverge.com/2015/12/7/9869308/donald-trump-close-up-the-internet-bill-gates#show-last-Point
The internet is a series of tubes. You just block the bad tubes.
Build a wall around the Internet, and we'll have a door, and the good ones, we'll let them back in.
This is what happens when you let that "both sides" shit take hold.
This is what happens when you let that "both sides" shit take hold.
Yeah, I remember in the run-up to the Gore/Bush election, everyone said, "There's no difference between which side you vote! They're all corrupt!"
Sure, maybe that's true, but can anyone say with any honesty that we would have gone back to Iraq if Gore had been in office? And that's eschewing discussion about the differences inherent between an environmentalist and an oil tycoon.
This explains why, during one inspection showdown in 1998, a Gallup poll found that nearly 70 percent of Americans wanted President Clinton to use airstrikes to target Hussein himself (instead of just his supposed weapons installations), and 60 percent wanted American ground forces to launch an invasion.
. . .It should be noted that when he announced his opposition to Bush’s war push in the fall of ’02, Gore endorsed the basic goal of removing Hussein and securing his (supposed) WMD stockpiles. What he objected to was more the go-it-alone nature of Bush’s approach.
Quote"We're losing a lot of people because of the internet," Trump said. "We have to see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that internet up in some ways. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people."
http://www.theverge.com/2015/12/7/9869308/donald-trump-close-up-the-internet-bill-gates#show-last-Point
This is an interesting piece:
http://www.salon.com/2011/08/30/gore_president_iraq/QuoteThis explains why, during one inspection showdown in 1998, a Gallup poll found that nearly 70 percent of Americans wanted President Clinton to use airstrikes to target Hussein himself (instead of just his supposed weapons installations), and 60 percent wanted American ground forces to launch an invasion.
Damn, Americans are terrible.Quote. . .It should be noted that when he announced his opposition to Bush’s war push in the fall of ’02, Gore endorsed the basic goal of removing Hussein and securing his (supposed) WMD stockpiles. What he objected to was more the go-it-alone nature of Bush’s approach.
Fuck, this shitty world we live in was inevitable and our choices really are Turd Sandwich vs. a Giant Douche. 2008 was a once in a lifetime anomaly.
:goty2
That's exactly what the piece said. The point is that it's easy to look back from 2015 and see the huge divide between the left and right presently, but in 2000 the divide wasn't so great and Saddam Hussein was the most prominent cultural bogeyman. At that moment in time Pax Americana was at its peak and after 9/11 the US had a unique opportunity to reshape the world in its image with (some) justification.
Obviously that gamble was a huge failure that has spiraled completely out of control in ways no one could imagine, but it's only easy to see now with the benefit of hindsight.
He defended the idea on Tuesday, comparing it to policies implemented by President Franklin Roosevelt during World War Two against Japanese, German and Italian people in the US.
This is what happens when you let that "both sides" shit take hold.
Yeah, I remember in the run-up to the Gore/Bush election, everyone said, "There's no difference between which side you vote! They're all corrupt!"
Sure, maybe that's true, but can anyone say with any honesty that we would have gone back to Iraq if Gore had been in office? And that's eschewing discussion about the differences inherent between an environmentalist and an oil tycoon.
We are utilizing a new method of warfare. Something tells me Trumph is helping us more than he even thinksRead this as Triumph.
Lord knows he won't sniff a presidency but it's kinda nice to make the world pay attention again for a second. If he has done anything he has made the world realize that we matter, again.
Not a fan of the dude but I'll take the rep his name is bringing us across the water
And trust me, it is.
Just some real talk here. Fuck party lines.
)Obama is right, we got this. And I'm a conservative saying that.
I don't think anyone's brought it up in the thread, but before Trump spouted off, Rand Paul had already called for basically the same thing, only targeting immigrants from the Middle East rather than Muslims.
Presumably "Middle East" is excluding Israel in this case, so...
Sorry for hijacking your thread Stoney Mason, it's just interesting seeing this stuff now with the benefit of hindsight and how our narratives evolve.I'll bail you out by hijacking it worse:
You know, it's kinda neat to see history repeating itself. Like I wonder if this "hijacked" feeling is what Germans felt when Hitler was running for power. :dogeHere's the problem though, Hitler sent Germans all over the place to invite new immigrants into Germany and its sphere.
As the former President of MIT has said:QuoteHe argued that the “indiscriminate hospitality” to more whose homes would be “filled by others as miserable as themselves” would not make up for any “permanent injury done to our republic,” and that with the success of the American “experiment” more would be done for the [home nations] than “allowing its city slums and its vast stagnant reservoirs of degraded peasantry to be drained off upon our soil.”And Representative Johnson warns:Quotein a few years down the road without further restriction the currently despairing immigrants “will be pounding heavily at the very pillars of our government, where those who have come ahead of them a few years back with their socialism, their communism, their [revolutions], have merely gnawing like rats at our foundations.”Representative Box of Texas has outlined our future:Quoteif America destroyed the “work of our fathers” and became “another Europe or Asia” leaving a world that would “grow visibly darker, even to the people of foreign lands, and all that is worth living for will have been lost to us, whether we came recently or our fathers came long ago.”Senator Heflin pointed out that in past wars we went:Quote“across the seas to defeat a foreign foe and prevent a foreign army from invading America” the current immigration laws were allowing “the enemy through loopholes … to come right into the American household.” Heflin asserted that if American troops had “fought to keep the enemy out, surely we can vote for a law that will keep out the dangerous and deadly enemies of the countryRepublican Congressman Cable of Ohio:Quotecalled for the two parties to “unite in forming an ‘American bloc’ and that neither yield to the foreign influence,” declaring that “partisan politics have no place in this patriotic question.”He also noted that in certain cities, illegal immigrants were being favored by local policy:Quoteeighty percent of the city’s population was “foreign-stock” and that the vote displayed “the effect of the foreign born in the United States in attempting to dictate to Congress what laws should [be made].”Representative Box was on point when he argued this isn't discrimination, instead that:Quote“America has the gift of citizenship, home and opportunity to bestow as she chooses upon the worthy alien people who she many select, no Government and no group … has the right to question the exercise of America’s discretion in making such a choice.”He also pointed out of that many of these illegal immigrant groups are basically making the equivalent of a threat that:Quote“we already have admitted among us large, dangerous elements, and that we must admit more of them to keep them in a good and orderly humor.”While Republican Bill Vaile has knocked down all the hooey about how important immigrants are to America:Quote“it seems rather illogical … to claim that those who have been for the shortest time in the process of assimilation and in the work of the Republic should have even greater or even equal consideration because of this very newness.” And that it was “a fact, not merely an argument, that this country was created, kept united and developed … almost entirely by people who came here from the countries of Northern and Western Europe.”
But it's Democrat Stengle of New York who might best sum up the importance of borders, language, culture:Quote“many of the inhabitants of these cities appear to be tied up to foreign countries by their sympathies, customs, interests, and aspirations, and apparently but little interested in the future welfare of their adopted country.”
it severely restricted the immigration of Africans and outright banned the immigration of Arabs and Asians
Afghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Morocco, Nigeria, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Tunisia,Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Yemen, and the Palestinian Territories.
This will kill Trump's campaign no doubt about it.https://twitter.com/philipaklein/status/673995262767927297
Philip KleinVerified account
@philipaklein
. @realDonaldTrump will get days of coverage in which GOP rivals, Obama, Clinton, media, will all sound same. This is bad for him how?
This will kill Trump's campaign no doubt about it.
He forgot India. (#3 in Muslims.)QuoteAfghanistan, Algeria, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Egypt, Eritrea, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Libya, Mali, Morocco, Nigeria, North Korea, Oman, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Tunisia,Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Yemen, and the Palestinian Territories.
Rand's amendment was rejected last week but Cruz voted for it. I don't think they all hate Muslims but it's pretty obvious they are all willing to throw them under the bus to win (save maybe Jeb.)
(Oh and he did a bit about how Trump totally wants to fuck his daughter which was pretty :holeup )I knew this years ago from watching the inferior The Apprentice. He sorta feels the same way about Donald Jr.
Rand's amendment was rejected last week but Cruz voted for it. I don't think they all hate Muslims but it's pretty obvious they are all willing to throw them under the bus to win (save maybe Jeb.)
The recent terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino have redefined this race as one about foreign policy. Half (50%) of Republican Primary voters cite foreign policy or national security, including terrorism, as the most important in deciding to vote in the presidential primary. This represents a 29 percentage popint increase since September. Eighteen percent (18%) of likely Republican Primary voters cite jobs or the economy, 12% cite immigration, 4% cite the budget or national debt, 4% cite health care, 1% cite social issues, 1% cite taxes and 1% cite education.
...
When asked who could best manage government spending 42% chose Trump, 10% chose Bush, 9% chose Kasich and 8% were unsure.
A third of likely voters (33%) chose Trump as the best to handle ISIS, 11% chose Bush, 9% chose Christie and 15% were unsure.
Forty-five percent (45%) chose Trump as the best to handle illegal immigration, 14% chose Rubio, 11% chose Bush and 9% unsure.
Thirty-six percent (36%) chose Trump as the best to handle taxation, 10% chose Bush, 8% chose Kasich and 14% were unsure.
Candidate would do the best job handling:
The economy: Trump 52%, Carson 10%, Cruz 10%
Illegal Immigration: Trump 49%, Cruz 16%, Rubio 11%
Foreign Policy: Trump 30%, Cruz 21%, Rubio 13%
ISIS: Trump 41%, Cruz 18%, Bush/Rubio 9%
Has best chance of winning the general: Trump 42%, Cruz 17%, Carson/Rubio 11%
Most important issue
GOP: 29% economy, 27% terrorism, 13% foreign policy, 10% illegal immigration
DEM: 38% economy, 22% health care, 13% terrorism, 10% foreign policy
(Oh and he did a bit about how Trump totally wants to fuck his daughter which was pretty :holeup )
It's been a self-reinforcing cycle where things have swung into Trump's wheelhouse.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924these were passed during the height of the eugenics movement in America, you can see it reflected in some of the language:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1917
Sec. 9. That it shall be unlawful for any person, including any transportation company other than railway lines entering the United States from foreign contiguous territory, or the owner, master, agent, or consignee of any vessel to bring to the United States either from a foreign country or any insular possession of the United States any alien afflicted with idiocy, insanity, imbecility, feeble-mindedness, epilepsy, constitutional psychopathic inferiority, chronic alcoholism, tuberculosis in any form, or a loathsome or dangerous contagious disease, and if it shall appear to the satisfaction of the Secretary of Labor that any alien so brought to the United States was afflicted with any of the said diseases or disabilities at the time of foreign embarkation, and that the existence of such disease of disability might have been detected by means of a competent medical examination at such time, such person or transportation company, or the master, agent, owner, or consignee of any such vessel shall pay to the collector of customs of the customs district in which the port of arrival is located the sum of $1,000, and in addition a sum equal to that paid by such alien for his transportation from the initial point of departure, indicated in his ticket, to the port of arrival for each and every violation of the provisions of this section, such latter sum to be delivered by the collector of customs to the alien on whose account assessed. It shall also be unlawful for any such person to bring to any port of the United States any alien afflicted with any mental defect other than those above specifically named, or physical defect of a nature which may affect his ability to earn a living, as contemplated in section 3 of this Act, and if it shall appear to the satisfaction of the Secretary of Labor that any alien so brought to the United States was so afflicted at the time of foreign embarkation, and that the existence of such mental or physical defect might have been detected by means of a competent medical examination at such time, such person shall pay to the collector of customs of the customs district in which the port of arrival is located the sum of $250, and in addition a sum equal to that paid by such alien for his transportation from the initial point of departure, indicated in his ticket, to the port of arrival, for each and every violation of this provision such latter sum to be delivered by the collector of customs of the alien for whose account assessed.legislation nominally targeted at people with revolutionary ideology or a (perceived) inability to labor within a market capitalist economy enabled by racist pseudo-science. when you see it euphemized as 'designed to preserve American homogeneity', that's what that means.
these were passed during the height of the eugenics movement in America, you can see it reflected in some of the languageIt can't happen here.
legislation nominally targeted at people with revolutionary ideology or a (perceived) inability to labor within a market capitalist economy enabled by racist pseudo-science. when you see it euphemized as 'designed to preserve American homogeneity', that's what that means.
I think trump might go all the way if muslin fear and hate is as strong in the us as in the eu
Right wing anti immigrant and muslim parties have won everywhere here
It's the establishment and their politicians far out of step because they're drooling at the idea that some kind of amnesty will win the party the hispanic vote.
I mean, is Trump wanting to ban Islamic immigrants for a period a worse or better position than wrecking up the Middle East constantly like some "sane" candidates (Rubio, Christie, Graham, Jeb, etc.) advocate on the regular? I'm not sure if presented with the false choice I wouldn't prefer Trump's ban, especially if it could be sunsetted in the law. (And knowing the ban on American citizens returning would never hold up in court. Along with who knows how much else of it would get chopped up.)
You really gotta stop reading Mickey Kaus, man.I haven't in forever, his site became just a republishing of his twitter feed. :-\
As much as I disagree with Ron Paul on economic issues where is the Republican saying any of this. Certainly not his idiotic son.As disappointing as Rand has been, this is one area he hasn't been that bad on chasing votes he'll never get thankfully.
Banned from GAF, Banned from America.
I have no home.
Banned from GAF, Banned from America.
I have no home.
Want to become a gay ocean pirate with me?
Nevertheless, Chief Justice John Roberts seemed to question why diversity in the classroom was important to a university.
"What unique perspective does a minority student bring to a physics class?" he asked Gregory Garre, the attorney representing the University of Texas.
Alito argued the system was based on “terrible stereotyping" because it suggested minorities coming through the top 10 program weren't good enough.
“It's kind of the assumption that if the—if a student—if a black student or a Hispanic student is admitted as part of the top 10-percent plan, it has to be because that student didn't have to compete against very many whites and— and Asians,” he said.
“Grutter said that we did not expect these sort of programs to be around in 25 years, and that was 12 years ago,” Roberts said, referring to the 2003 Supreme Court decision that upheld affirmative action. “Are we going to hit the deadline? Is this going to be done on—in your view in 12 years?
In response, Garre pointed to the systemic issues that the affirmative action policy sought to address, like the racial test score gap. But Roberts insisted that the program needed to be temporary and asked Garre: "When do you think your program will be done?”
Justice Antonin Scalia argued that affirmative action programs were hurting black students by sending them to schools that were too advanced for them.
He pointed to those who "contend it does not benefit African-Americans to—to get them into the University of Texas where they do not do well, as opposed to having them go to a less-advanced school, a less—a slower-track school where they do well."
I don't Mandark, have you been down to the South recently? people will insert the craziest sounding shit into conversations like it's accepted knowledge. I have no doubt those numbers are fairly accurate.
TBH the unique perspective argument russles my jimmies too when it comes to science and maths. I think its pretty condescending too like minorities need something unique to be able to compete instead of being just being able to compete in the same as a white dude.Unique? Like sports?
TBH the unique perspective argument russles my jimmies too when it comes to science and maths. I think its pretty condescending too like minorities need something unique to be able to compete instead of being just being able to compete in the same as a white dude.:picard
I don't Mandark, have you been down to the South recently? people will insert the craziest sounding shit into conversations like it's accepted knowledge. I have no doubt those numbers are fairly accurate.
I live in the the South and am a Baby Boomer and can confirm this
TBH the unique perspective argument russles my jimmies too when it comes to science and maths. I think its pretty condescending too like minorities need something unique to be able to compete instead of being just being able to compete in the same as a white dude.:picard
Science isn't some pure pursuit with limitless resources. There's all kinds of priorities, politics, budgets etc. that go into it, and when you just have white dudes in the field :dogeTBH the unique perspective argument russles my jimmies too when it comes to science and maths. I think its pretty condescending too like minorities need something unique to be able to compete instead of being just being able to compete in the same as a white dude.:picard
Don't know why I got picarded for this. Its an argument used a lot to argue for more women in tech as well, like women are some how have better capacity to create user interfaces or some shit. I'm all for more minorities in class rooms and more women in tech, I just don't like this line of argument for it.