Forum Members Who Are or Were Voting For Trump, Where Do You Stand Now and Why?

[Mycroft]

Hillary is leading in Ohio now, isn't she?


New Ohio poll puts Hillary Clinton ahead of Donald Trump by 9 points after news of Trump's vulgar talk | cleveland.com

last night they said it was statically even in the local ABC network

LOL!!

Pick a poll...any poll...it doesn't matter because they are all bogus.

Except for that last one that we'll see in November.

 

[TurtleDude]

LOL!!

Pick a poll...any poll...it doesn't matter because they are all bogus.

Except for that last one that we'll see in November.

I honestly have no idea what the real answer is. I know the father of a girl I coach was at the Trump rally along with my wife's uncle. They said it was packed to the gills and many of the people there were not much older than the girl I coach (16). SO I have no idea what is going on in Ohio.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

He was talking about outright bans, not gun control laws.

If a gun control law is an egregious enough violation of the Second Amendment, I don't see how it is much different from a complete ban.

Kind of like with the right to free speech. If a hypothetical law banned all political speech, I would see that as pretty much the same as a ban on all speech, even if non-political speech were still allowed by the law.

That said, I think it can be safely said that the Democrats do plan to ban all guns. They just plan to do it bit by bit. They say they only want certain limited measures. But there are some localities where the liberals have every gun law that they claim they want. Yet still whenever there is a big shooting incident those localities continue to pass even stricter laws yet.

An extremist judge?

Feel free to point out what makes Judge Shira Scheindlin, an extremist?

Why Judge Shira Scheindlin Is ‘Stop-and-Frisk’ Opponents’ Worst Enemy | Mediaite

 

[Toggle Almendro]

And yet even Heller allowed room for "reasonable" licensing requirements, bans for the mentally incompetent, bans on school grounds, etc etc. Do you have difficulty with the phrase "shall not be infringed", or do you not understand that Heller's decision was a blatant contradiction ?

I do not perceive any contradiction in Heller.

 

[Mathematician]

I voted YES.

My reasons:

1. I still feel he is the significantly lesser of two evils being offered as candidates for this election.

2. I fear the long-term results of Hillary appointments to the SCOTUS.

3. I am appalled at the way the power elites and the media they control have played every card in the propaganda warfare deck to cover up or downplay serious issues with Hillary's candidacy, to highlight character assassination as the rationale for who to vote for, and to arouse visceral emotions rather than encourage reasoned and considered thought. Manipulating many of us to vote for the one they clearly prefer.

4. I am concerned about other SJW type programs that may come to fruition in a Hillary Presidency that would destroy or reduce individual rights in exchange for social conformity.

I agree, with #2 probably being my biggest concern. I didn't vote in the poll because I haven't decided yet. Ideally, I'll find a friend/colleague who is a registered Democrat, we'll agree that both Trump and Hillary suck, and then we'll shake on both voting for Gary Johnson.

 

[Mycroft]

I honestly have no idea what the real answer is. I know the father of a girl I coach was at the Trump rally along with my wife's uncle. They said it was packed to the gills and many of the people there were not much older than the girl I coach (16). SO I have no idea what is going on in Ohio.

I agree. We don't actually have any idea.

But there are a lot of pollsters who are doing their damnedest to make people believe what THEY say is going on. Even to the point of cooking their numbers.

 

[TurtleDude]

I agree. We don't actually have any idea.

But there are a lot of pollsters who are doing their damnedest to make people believe what THEY say is going on. Even to the point of cooking their numbers.

Lots of the canklers and more than a few of the Trump loyalists are trying to convince themselves of their own choice

 

[Absentglare]

you are confused about several issues

1) someone losing their rights through due process of law is not an infringement on the right.

2) state regulations are not a federal infringement. The second amendment was not incorporated until two years later

3) you still haven't found any support for your collectivist argument

1) but apparently enforcement is an infringement, that's where you flip flop.

2) sure

3) yes i did, you simply rejected it with your no true scotsman fallacies and dishonest deflections.

you seem unable to understand the difference between the blanket restriction on federal action vs the clash between existing police powers at the state level that would later come into conflict once MacDonald incorporated the right to the states

You seem unable to understand that "reasonable" licensing requirements are arbitrary.

they are based on federal authority. you don't seem to get that fact. the Heller gun ban was pursuant to federal authority

You're not answering my questions. Your dishonest responses are tiresome.

Is a city council a federal authority ?

Is a city's law federal law ?

Recall Cruikshank's language, the second amendment "has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government," is a city council "national government" ?

 

[TurtleDude]

1) but apparently enforcement is an infringement, that's where you flip flop.

2) sure

3) yes i did, you simply rejected it with your no true scotsman fallacies and dishonest deflections.



You seem unable to understand that "reasonable" licensing requirements are arbitrary.



You're not answering my questions. Your dishonest responses are tiresome.

Is a city council a federal authority ?

Is a city's law federal law ?

Recall Cruikshank's language, the second amendment "has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government," is a city council "national government" ?

Cruikshank was accurate but you need to understand that the laws passed by DC council are federal in nature. They aren't a state entity. I cannot help it if you don't understand that fact.

And Cruikshank was true until the second amendment was incorporated. BTW Cruikshank supports the individual rights interpretation as does every other supreme court case

federal regulation based on the commerce clause-do you really want to argue that is honest?

 

[Absentglare]

Cruikshank was accurate but you need to understand that the laws passed by DC council are federal in nature. They aren't a state entity. I cannot help it if you don't understand that fact.

And Cruikshank was true until the second amendment was incorporated. BTW Cruikshank supports the individual rights interpretation as does every other supreme court case

federal regulation based on the commerce clause-do you really want to argue that is honest?

It's obvious that they aren't a state entity. Guantanamo Bay is not a state entity. Puerto Rico is not a state entity. Guam is not a state entity. Are you arguing that none of those places can pass gun control without violating the second amendment ? That would be ridiculous.

Look at the nature of your justification, it has more holes than swiss cheese.

 

[TurtleDude]

It's obvious that they aren't a state entity. Guantanamo Bay is not a state entity. Puerto Rico is not a state entity. Guam is not a state entity. Are you arguing that none of those places can pass gun control without violating the second amendment ? That would be ridiculous.

Look at the nature of your justification, it has more holes than swiss cheese.

you keep blathering this nonsense. If the DC law was a "state law" why would the plaintiffs in MacDonald V Chicago to bring a suit-why didn't the 7th Circuit take notice of Heller?

answer that

 

[radioman]

LOL!!

Pick a poll...any poll...it doesn't matter because they are all bogus.

Okay, I've noticed you making this claim a couple times today.
What do you think the pollsters' motivations for providing inaccurate info. would be?

Except for that last one that we'll see in November.

We definitely agree on this.

 

[Black Dog]

If a gun control law is an egregious enough violation of the Second Amendment, I don't see how it is much different from a complete ban.

Kind of like with the right to free speech. If a hypothetical law banned all political speech, I would see that as pretty much the same as a ban on all speech, even if non-political speech were still allowed by the law.

That said, I think it can be safely said that the Democrats do plan to ban all guns. They just plan to do it bit by bit. They say they only want certain limited measures. But there are some localities where the liberals have every gun law that they claim they want. Yet still whenever there is a big shooting incident those localities continue to pass even stricter laws yet.

Pure hyperbole and nothing more. Will not bother with the rest.

Why Judge Shira Scheindlin Is ‘Stop-and-Frisk’ Opponents’ Worst Enemy | Mediaite

Oh no! An opinion piece by some obvious political hack on the internet! I think this sums it up well...

Mr. Rothman cites only 2 of the judge's decisions over the course of 16 years that were overturned by a higher court in an attempt to suggest she is unfit or somehow drunk on her own judicial authority. he acknowledges that one of these reversals - the Awadallah case - resulted in a jury ultimately agreeing and reinforcing the initial ruling. The fact that it took a jury 6 hours to figure that out is not evidence that the judge was somehow unfit or presumptuous.

Mr. Rothman asserts that the judge injects her own personal political beliefs into her decisions but does not actually establish that as a fact. It is pure argumentation for Mr. Rothman profess to know the judge's private political beliefs.

 

[Port & Starboard]

Was gonna vote for Trump at first, but the moment he said he supported stop and frisk, that ended. Stop and frisk is nothing more than a polite way of saying we are going to remove the 4th amendment rights from minorities so white people can feel safe.

He is a bigot and misogynist. He is not qualified nor does filth like him deserve to be president.

White people were never stopped and frisked?

 

[Mycroft]

Okay, I've noticed you making this claim a couple times today.
What do you think the pollsters' motivations for providing inaccurate info. would be?


We definitely agree on this.

Their aim is to manipulate the voters because they do not want Trump to win.

 

[Black Dog]

White people were never stopped and frisked?

They sure were, 11% to 13% of the time.

 

[Toggle Almendro]

Pure hyperbole and nothing more. Will not bother with the rest.

Pointing out that "an extremely egregious violation of a right" has little practical difference from "the total violation of the right" is not hyperbole.

Pointing out that the Democrats' own behavior shows that they intend to keep on pushing until they get a total gun ban is not hyperbole.

Oh no! An opinion piece by some obvious political hack on the internet!

I'm not sure where else you would expect to find criticism of an extremist judge.

Mr. Rothman asserts that the judge injects her own personal political beliefs into her decisions but does not actually establish that as a fact.

All the silly references to Trayvon Martin would count.

At any rate, I saw her interviewed on TV (Tavis Smiley) a few days ago, and my own impression was that she was a leftist radical.

I see little chance that her ruling would ever be upheld in higher courts.

 

[Fishking]

Just grab 'em by the *****, amirite?

That doesn't work?

 

[Fishking]

Donald Trump has done nothing for anyone except Donald Trump. Hey, vote for whoever you want, but if you're doing it with some sense that he's a hero, you live in a fantasy world.

Are you a Trump supporter, or a past Trump supporter, per the OP?

 

[radioman]

Their aim is to manipulate the voters because they do not want Trump to win.

Sorry about this late response.
Are you saying that Trump supporters will think he's a lost cause and not bother to vote?
Couldn't Trump voters just as easily decide that if Trump is way behind, they and all Trump voters must vote to save the country.
Conversely, couldn't favorable polls lull Hillary supporters into a fall sense of security?
Clintonites might think she's got it in the bag and their vote isn't necessary.

 

[Mycroft]

Sorry about this late response.
Are you saying that Trump supporters will think he's a lost cause and not bother to vote?
Couldn't Trump voters just as easily decide that if Trump is way behind, they and all Trump voters must vote to save the country.

No. That's not what I'm saying. In fact, I'm talking about all voters.

Conversely, couldn't favorable polls lull Hillary supporters into a fall sense of security?
Clintonites might think she's got it in the bag and their vote isn't necessary.

I've read an article about this being a concern to Hillary and her campaign.

In any case, it seems you didn't understand my point. I'll try to clarify.

Tell me, who does the mainstream media reach, mostly? I think it is those who pretty much limit themselves to the "nightly news" kind of networks. ABC, CBS, NBC, their cable alter-egos and others like CNN. The people viewing those networks are not, for the most part, getting their news from other sources. So that mainstream media, by controlling what they report on...by slanting their reporting in favor of Hillary and against Trump...are manipulating a very large part of the voting public.

For example, I have friends who only watch the news on TV. They are almost totally unaware that WikiLeaks has been dumping Podesto's emails and when I tell them what is in those emails, they are flabbergasted. They simply had no idea that was going on and they had no idea about the things the emails say about Hillary and her campaign.

THEY are the people who the mainstream media is manipulating. They are the people I was talking about in my post.

 

[upsideguy]

I voted YES.

My reasons:

1. I still feel he is the significantly lesser of two evils being offered as candidates for this election.

2. I fear the long-term results of Hillary appointments to the SCOTUS.

3. I am appalled at the way the power elites and the media they control have played every card in the propaganda warfare deck to cover up or downplay serious issues with Hillary's candidacy, to highlight character assassination as the rationale for who to vote for, and to arouse visceral emotions rather than encourage reasoned and considered thought. Manipulating many of us to vote for the one they clearly prefer.

4. I am concerned about other SJW type programs that may come to fruition in a Hillary Presidency that would destroy or reduce individual rights in exchange for social conformity.

I always appreciate people that apply intelligence and thought to their answers. Though I do not agree with your conclusions, I do appreciate a post that is without emotion and stands on its own.

 

[Bodi]

I was seriously considering voting for Trump... but not anymore. At this point I will not vote at all.

 

[SailaWay]

No. That's not what I'm saying. In fact, I'm talking about all voters.



I've read an article about this being a concern to Hillary and her campaign.

In any case, it seems you didn't understand my point. I'll try to clarify.

Tell me, who does the mainstream media reach, mostly? I think it is those who pretty much limit themselves to the "nightly news" kind of networks. ABC, CBS, NBC, their cable alter-egos and others like CNN. The people viewing those networks are not, for the most part, getting their news from other sources. So that mainstream media, by controlling what they report on...by slanting their reporting in favor of Hillary and against Trump...are manipulating a very large part of the voting public.

For example, I have friends who only watch the news on TV. They are almost totally unaware that WikiLeaks has been dumping Podesto's emails and when I tell them what is in those emails, they are flabbergasted. They simply had no idea that was going on and they had no idea about the things the emails say about Hillary and her campaign.

THEY are the people who the mainstream media is manipulating. They are the people I was talking about in my post.

yep the media now proven as totally crooked

 

[Patrickt]

I haven't heard a Trumpkin or a Clintonista express a rational reason for voting for either one. I understand that liking his hair and appreciating her having a vagina are both reasons but neither are rational.