• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Trump in Tucson

Lutherf

Lutherf

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
53,699
Reaction score
59,224
Location
Tucson, AZ
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I didn't even know the guy was coming here (I'm kind of busy this time of year) but caught a little of what was going on in Phoenix. I also noticed that my go to place for lunch was dead and I figure a lot of folks were at the Civic Center for the rally.

Anyway, it seems like a ton of people showed up. There were entrances blocked, protesters hollering, Trump supporters hollering back and a few minutes into Trump's part of the event another protester got stomped.

Stuff Gets Ugly at Trump Tucson Rally

This is ridiculous. Trump is bringing out the angry idiots on both sides.
 
I bet that was staged!!
 
Orly? said:
I bet that was staged!!
Click to expand...

It could give that impression. A white protestor being beaten by a black Trump supporter? If you believe the hype, Trump has no supporters among members of American minority groups. :shrug:
 

It began with unforeseen craziness on the debate stage and now has spilled over to the rallies. Most likely this will continue with every rally. This is going to get old real fast.

My only question is how do all these people, the protestors and attendees , have all this time for this foolishness? I work Mon-Fri and my weekend is spent on house and various other projects. Am always amazed how much time people have to do nonproductive activities.
 

The protests are being coordinated by leftwing groups funded by Soros. This is nothing new for Soros. He was behind the protests in Ferguson., NYC and beyond.

The protests actually help Trump. It gives him wall to wall coverage on TV and makes him look like the candidate the left despises the most. But in reality Trump is the candidate the left are hoping wins the nomination because Clinton in all the polls beats Trump by 6-8 points head to head.

Soros wants Trump to be the nominee. He is backing Clinton already to the tune of 8 million.

Another thing that was revealed last week is Soros and a couple of his associates have donated $700,000 to Kasich's campaign. Why? Well Kasich proved why this week when he camped out in Utah campaigning in a state he doesn't have a prayer of winning. Cruz in the latest poll shows a 53% lead. If that holds he will take all 40 delegates. Kasich is playing saboteur hoping to take away enough votes from anti-Trump voters to keep that from happening. To further prove this, Kasich did not go to Arizona to campaign because Trump has a significant lead at the moment. Apparently Kasich is not interested in states he might have a chance to win like PA or RI, just states where Cruz is doing well.
 

It really is a fascinating dynamic we're seeing this cycle and has given those who want to look some great insight to the whole "king making" process. I keep asking myself if it's always been this way and and I just missed it or if all this is something new.
 
The racist candidate has BLACKS attacking Klansmen who protest at his rallies? (Klansman in the hood was the person behind, and with the guy that got #### up)

Truth proves media lies every day.



Angry "idiots" have been screaming for 30 years. Now we are being SEEN and HEARD!!!!!!!!!

Here is another 2000 for the 2 nd REVOLUTIONALRY ARMY
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/19/new-...s-see-costs-not-benefits-of-global-trade.html
 
Last edited:
This has been a very interesting campaign to say the least. It would almost be funny if were not for how serious the times we live and the poor state of our union. But I am of the belief if you really want to know what's going on, follow the money. And Kasich taking money from Soros and his associates (700,000 in total) is a real concern. But if you look at his reported donations for this past cycle, most of them are corporations with Soro's donation of 200,000 the six largest. It really starts to fall in place when you listen to his campaign speech that he vows to pass immigration reform in the first 100 days of his presidency which includes amnesty. This is the Chamber of Commerce wet dream come true so yeah the corporations are keeping him going so he will be poised if there is a brokered convention. Soros on the other hand, wants him in the race to be the spoiler for Cruz so Trump wins. This insures his gal Clinton will win the general.

Immigration (amnesty) isn't the only thing Kasich has moved to the left. Today he said the Republicans in Congress should be considering Obama's choice for the SC court. Hello? Well back in NH Kasich did say he should be running on the Democratic ticket. True story. My suggestion to Kasich is to read Federlist paper #69 written by Alexander Hamilton. There he will find that yes it is the duty of the president to chose an appointee to the SC, the Senate is to advise the president, and if the Senate in majority agree he shall be confirmed. But it also states if the Congress is divided on such an appointee, then it goes nowhere. Sure would be nice if the one candidate who has a true grasp on the Constitution prevails.

Oh and in your link of the protest it showed Trump's manager out in the crowds getting rough with one of the protesters as they were being rounded up to exit the rally. Trump's campaign manager's name is Corey Lewandowski. Do a search on him. He is the same guy that roughed up a reporter Michelle Fields in Florida. She was there doing her job asking questions. Guess Lewandowski didn't like the questions because he grabbed her arm and pulled her to the ground. (There is video showing him grabbing her arm) She posted on line the bruises from the encounter, there were witnesses and she has since filed charges against him. Now we see Lewandowski using similar tactics on a protester. Trump did one of his famous call ins on ABC with Stephanopoulos this morning. Every news outlet has time for a call in from Trump. When he was asked about his campaign manager going after a protester, Trump denied it. While he was denying it, ABC was playing video that showed it to be true. There have been several videos surface showing different angles of the encounter and Lewandowski (should we call him Lewd for short?) was roughing the guy up pretty good. Why would a campaign manager be out among the protesters rumbling with them? Why would a campaign manager be roughing up female reporters?
 
Last edited:

Both the politicians (both parties) and the voters seem to have forgotten that what really makes America great is the people. When the people are free to pursue their own interests, to decide for themselves which methods are "best" for that purpose and to reap the benefits of their pursuits we produce far more than any managed economy can ever hope to.

The reason we can produce so much more is that, to a person, liberty provides the opportunity (through necessity) to learn how to overcome failure and that learning spurs greater and greater achievement. It encourages people to view education as an asset. It encourages people to be more entrepreneurial. It encourages people to be more independent while, at the same time, reinforcing the need to be an asset to society. It produces an abundance mentality instead of a scarcity mentality. It encourages risk. It encourages commitment. It encourages competition. These are the essential ingredients for Synergy and synergy is the measure of success.

It doesn't matter whether Trump or Clinton become president as long as the American people choose to remain free. The real danger we face isn't one candidate or another. It's complacency in failure.
 

How many people among us really want to remain free? They are willing to give up freedoms daily for a false sense of security. They are willing to allow religious liberties of others to be trampled in the name of PC. They are willing to allow states rights to be chiseled away in the name of the all and powerful Federal government overreach. Many are willing to allow the silencing of speech if they find it offending. Others are just fine with gun control violating the 2nd Amendment.

You see I do think it matters who will be the nominee. For they will have great influence on which way this country will go. Four more years of Obama policies will transform this country to something that looks nothing like what the founders intended. May the constitutionalist conservative prevail. God help us.
 
You take a fringe case and call it the Truth! It does NOT prove anything!


vesper said:
Today he said the Republicans in Congress should be considering Obama's choice for the SC court.
Click to expand...
Well I was under the understanding that it was a Congressman's JOB to consider the president-elect's choice for the SC court! On this very principle, i.e do your job because that's what you are PAID for, I think that the GOP's position is a complete disgrace!
Besides this Mitch Mc Connell, a chronic campaigner, is chasing rainbow here, and will end up with no other choice than being forced to swallow a much more progressive choice when Clinton gets in the White House!


You really don't get it!
Regulations are not pushed to hobble people's freedom, quite the contrary they are necessary to prevent bad guys to act on their greed or narcissistic tendencies, go on a rampage and ultimately limit people's freedom by reducing the bevy of choices they would have had otherwise!
Dude think speed limit!
 

The natural state of man liberty and when that liberty is sufficiently restrained that he finally feels the yoke on his neck man tends to revolt and reclaim his freedom.
 

I don't get it?

Your perception of liberty is beyond be. To your thinking the goldfish in a tank is free because he has no worry of being eaten by another fish and his food is hand delivered daily. My take is that the goldfish is not free because he is entirely at the mercy of his provider.
 

Well said, Lutherf! :thumbs:
 
vesper said:
Others are just fine with gun control violating the 2nd Amendment.
Click to expand...
I will never get the idea that a child whose life has been ripped off during a mass shouting is freer now that he lies six feet under! Shouldn't the freedom to live trump the 2nd amendment instead!? I just don't get it!
But in any case at some point you will have to think outside the box of the constitution and get your cues from the experience of other countries which are fairing far better on matters of guns as far as the preservation of life is concerned!
Because believe me there is nothing "special" (as in we, Americans, are special so we do things our own way, the special constitutional way) about dismissing these practically daily mass shootings as "things happen"! Quite the contrary, it's just dumb!
What should sober you though, is that while those guns make headlines mostly whenever mass shootings happen, what is neatly kept under the rug though are all the suicides their wide circulation are enabling! So that in the end the fight to protect the 2nd amendment is bound to be lost for lack of........ proponents!



Conjuring up a half-baked analogy that is so glaringly leaking from its wherever will not make you right: The only place where a goldfish could rightly feel as living in a tank would be North Korea!
From your small-minded perspective you have been brainwashed to believe that entitlements are wrong for the country, and you have come to accept it not because it's true but because it rubs your guts the right way! And yet....... there are truckloads of statistics out there that prove that a country is ultimately better off 'doling out' government benefits to those in need! and boatloads of other statistics demonstrate that government benefits contrary to the rightist-racist propaganda is absolutely no fatality at all!
Moreover have you already forgotten what happened in 2008 when an insufficiently regulated financial industry nearly tanked the US economy! You will have to go some distance to convince me how in a destroyed economy my freedom would have been enhanced!
For example, thank God the traffic is regulated, thank God there are speed limits on the highways, because whenever i drive my car I don't have to dread that i am taking a one-way ticket to the other world!
My freedom ends when that of the other begins! That's what freedom is all about! But sadly there are some bad guys out there who won't accept that! This is the very reason why we need regulations!
 
Last edited:

You seem to be a little bit excited about this stuff.

First off, I've never suggested that government shouldn't provide aid for the needy. My concern is merely that the more aid the government provides the more dependent people become on that aid and the less self sufficient they become. Let's take Social Security as an example. The original idea is that it would be insurance against abject poverty. It was to be a supplement to other retirement assets a person generated during their working life. Over the years the program has been expanded and now it's the primary retirement plan for a huge number of people. That isn't "helping the needy". It's shackling everyone to a government program. If Social Security accounts were actually held by individuals and transferable to their heirs THAT would be freedom but with a little government assist. Health care is the next "need" that government will take over. Already we're seeing the effects of Obamacare. Premiums are still increasing. People are already having to change doctors because their choice of doctor doesn't take the plans that are available. People are still going broke because the cheapest ("free") plans have huge deductibles and out of pocket caps. This past year my insurer cancelled the plan I've had for a decade because it was no longer ACA compliant and I was forced to purchase insurance through the federal exchange. That isn't making me "more free" in any way, shape or form.

You suggest that deregulation caused the Wall Street collapse. My take is that things could never have gotten so far out of control without government support of the financial industry. Lenders were making horrible decisions because they could (and in many cases were coerced into making those decisions). When Wall Street is tied at the hip to DC that's how we get "too big to fail" because political interests begin to trump sound economics. Let me ask, if a corporation can be "too big to fail" then why can't a government?

You seem to be under the impression that freedom is something that the government issues. My take is that freedom is something that government can only take away and we must restrain government lest they do exactly that.
 
Stick this here too.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.