It looks like you are using an ad blocker. That's okay. Who doesn't? But without advertising revenue, we can't keep making this site awesome. Click the link below for instructions on disabling adblock.
Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post.
Register to become a member today!
RosbifI never said Islam was a race, I just asked whether you preferred to be called a racist as you didn't like the term islamophobe. Reading comprehension can be tough though, don't stress it.
Haha, you have a funny idea about what a lie is, I guess that is a prerequisite in order to support trump though. So my personal experiences of living in places which have had high Muslim immigration, or are predominantly Muslim, and are not 'shitholes', are lies? What are your experiences of these ruined areas?
Man, these no go zones sound terrible, good thing Trump knows so much about these things and can educate us clueless europeans about it. When I was at my Muslim friends curry place the other night I didn't realise how much danger I was in! Clearly the relation between poverty and crime is unimportant here, it's definitely all about Islam. Obviously you'd be fine taking a stroll through the south side of Chicago at night.
Shit, it's my fault? Not the colonial legacy in North Africa or the civil war? Well now I feel really bad. Calling me brainless hurts too, especially coming from someone with your rich academic background. Lake Tahoe community college was it?
Best reply ever. Shit made me laugh especially the end.
Honestly I'm kind of sad it will be Hillary vs Trump. Neither is good but I guess I will vote Hillary only because I will not let a bigot become President.
Interesting article I read about Trump and supporters:
Not trying to offend anyone even Trump supporters. I don't understand why you support that racist fool but I'll agree to disagree and just personally hope that Trump won't be president
RosbifI never said Islam was a race, I just asked whether you preferred to be called a racist as you didn't like the term islamophobe. Reading comprehension can be tough though, don't stress it.
Haha, you have a funny idea about what a lie is, I guess that is a prerequisite in order to support trump though. So my personal experiences of living in places which have had high Muslim immigration, or are predominantly Muslim, and are not 'shitholes', are lies? What are your experiences of these ruined areas?
Man, these no go zones sound terrible, good thing Trump knows so much about these things and can educate us clueless europeans about it. When I was at my Muslim friends curry place the other night I didn't realise how much danger I was in! Clearly the relation between poverty and crime is unimportant here, it's definitely all about Islam. Obviously you'd be fine taking a stroll through the south side of Chicago at night.
Shit, it's my fault? Not the colonial legacy in North Africa or the civil war? Well now I feel really bad. Calling me brainless hurts too, especially coming from someone with your rich academic background. Lake Tahoe community college was it?
You're looking a bit "touch of gray" there, Peter Pan.
By calling me a "racist", a typical tactic of the regressive left, for criticizing Islam, you are in fact inferring that Islam is a "race" and those who criticize it are therefore "racists". It shouldn't be that complicated, even for the likes of you.
Furthermore, your cute personal anecdotes about your Muslim "friend" and living in Turkey carry about as much worth as you do, that is to say, none. Meanwhile, more Muslim no-go zones are springing up across Europe, with the stated goal of enforcing Sharia and submitting the populace to Allah, but of course this has nothing to do with Islam. Perhaps their welfare benefits just aren't generous enough?
Also, I would be willing to put a fair amount of money on wagering that you would be too frightened to wear a Star of David, or perhaps a Yarmulke in that wonderful Turkish town you lived in. Why not give it a try? You may want to be cautious, don't want to end up like those German tourists in Istanbul.
Moreover, your personal anecdotes are beyond pathetic. Tarifa was retaken by the Christian Reconquista in the 13th century, and the Muslims were later expelled from Spain or forced to convert (and later thrown out anyway). So the fact that you live in a Spanish city, that was Muslim over 700 years ago, is somehow proof that Muslim ghettos in Europe are not Sharia shitholes, is just laughable. I cannot even believe someone would be so stupid as to use that as a counter-argument. Maybe you've been eating too much Sharia curry with your Muslim "friend" (note: just because someone smiles when you provide them with business, does not necessarily make them your friend).
And since you are living in Spain, maybe you're familiar with the idea of the "fifth column". You should, you're part of it.
Or maybe not, I'm sure your Spanish is abysmal. It must be nice cavorting around the globe spending money you, in all likelihood, never earned (trust fund or inheritance?). Don't embarrass yourself any further by claiming that your ski instructor job pays for your flights, or your ability to live like a parasite.
But tell me this Peter Pan, what happens when the Pixie dust runs out?
CampeadorYou're looking a bit "touch of gray" there, Peter Pan.
By calling me a "racist", a typical tactic of the regressive left, for criticizing Islam, you are in fact inferring that Islam is a "race" and those who criticize it are therefore "racists". It shouldn't be that complicated, even for the likes of you.
Furthermore, your cute personal anecdotes about your Muslim "friend" and living in Turkey carry about as much worth as you do, that is to say, none. Meanwhile, more Muslim no-go zones are springing up across Europe, with the stated goal of enforcing Sharia and submitting the populace to Allah, but of course this has nothing to do with Islam. Perhaps their welfare benefits just aren't generous enough?
Also, I would be willing to put a fair amount of money on wagering that you would be too frightened to wear a Star of David, or perhaps a Yarmulke in that wonderful Turkish town you lived in. Why not give it a try? You may want to be cautious, don't want to end up like those German tourists in Istanbul.
Moreover, your personal anecdotes are beyond pathetic. Tarifa was retaken by the Christian Reconquista in the 13th century, and the Muslims were later expelled from Spain or forced to convert (and later thrown out anyway). So the fact that you live in a Spanish city, that was Muslim over 700 years ago, is somehow proof that Muslim ghettos in Europe are not Sharia shitholes, is just laughable. I cannot even believe someone would be so stupid as to use that as a counter-argument. Maybe you've been eating too much Sharia curry with your Muslim "friend" (note: just because someone smiles when you provide them with business, does not necessarily make them your friend).
And since you are living in Spain, maybe you're familiar with the idea of the "fifth column". You should, you're part of it.
Or maybe not, I'm sure your Spanish is abysmal. It must be nice cavorting around the globe spending money you, in all likelihood, never earned (trust fund or inheritance?). Don't embarrass yourself any further by claiming that your ski instructor job pays for your flights, or your ability to live like a parasite.
But tell me this Peter Pan, what happens when the Pixie dust runs out?
Nice internet stalking skills! You must be from anonymous or something, did my name being under every post help at all?
You're pretty average at guessing stuff about me though, the Muslim friend I mentioned and I went to school together from when we were 7. My Spanish is close to fluent and ski instructing more than pays for my flights. However, you were spot on about me having grey hair, got me! It is nice cavorting around the globe too, are you having a nice time hating Muslims on the internet (sorry, only thing I have seen you do)?
Anyway man, I think I will stop with this thread, never good to push far right lunatics too far. Good luck voting for Trump.
These jackals and hyenas in the media just cannot help themselves, where do they keep digging these people up from? It's like that "big" NYT expose about Trump's treatment of women that backfired completely on that pathetic excuse for a newspaper.
The first example is just clear as day of another boring media hit-piece:
"The family cabinetry business, finished its work in 1984 and submitted its final bill to the general contractor for the Trump Organization, the resort’s builder.
Edward’s son, Paul, who was the firm’s accountant, still remembers the amount of that bill more than 30 years later: $83,600."
Hmmmm so what's missing here? First, the deal was with a general contractor, rather than Trump. But sure let's say Trump is directly to blame. If there was a contract in place, it should have been one of the simplest cases ever for a court of law, they see it all the time.
And yet, they never collected. The second half of the story probably goes that the work was garbage, hence the company never sued or was ruled against in court, considering the company went completely out of business soon after. But this is just speculation based on the results.
If you had a shred of honesty, you'd preface your posts with "#Imwithher", do you get these articles from the Hillary campaign's mailing list?
CampeadorThese jackals and hyenas in the media just cannot help themselves, where do they keep digging these people up from? It's like that "big" NYT expose about Trump's treatment of women that backfired completely on that pathetic excuse for a newspaper.
The first example is just clear as day of another boring media hit-piece:
"The family cabinetry business, finished its work in 1984 and submitted its final bill to the general contractor for the Trump Organization, the resort’s builder.
Edward’s son, Paul, who was the firm’s accountant, still remembers the amount of that bill more than 30 years later: $83,600."
Hmmmm so what's missing here? First, the deal was with a general contractor, rather than Trump. But sure let's say Trump is directly to blame. If there was a contract in place, it should have been one of the simplest cases ever for a court of law, they see it all the time.
And yet, they never collected. The second half of the story probably goes that the work was garbage, hence the company never sued or was ruled against in court, considering the company went completely out of business soon after. But this is just speculation based on the results.
If you had a shred of honesty, you'd preface your posts with "#Imwithher", do you get these articles from the Hillary campaign's mailing list?
Aww, someone is upset that Trump is a dishonest man! Let me guess, you are OK with his idea to curb free speech of the press?
“Trump pledged if elected president to "open up our libel laws so when [newspapers] write purposely negative stories … we can sue them and make lots of money”"
Someone is thin-skinned. So far these journalists have found evidence to back up ALL their claims meaning it is not libel. And, FYI, libel standards are different for celebrities given that they are in the public eye.
And yes, especially given the following:
Trump is in charge of the finances for his entire operation given that he runs it, therefore he has the final say. Especially when it amounts to $69.5 million:
"In casino commission records of an audit, it was revealed that Trump’s companies owed a total of $69.5 million to 253 subcontractors on the Taj Mahal project. Some already had sued Trump, the state audit said; others were negotiating with Trump to try to recover what they could. The companies and their hundreds of workers had installed walls, chandeliers, plumbing, lighting and even the casino’s trademark minarets."
You evidently know nothing about business law. It has been a few years since I took the business law course, but it was one of the simpler parts of the class. JD probably remembers the exact judicial terms, but in layman terms, when a contractor accepts payment from a contractee after a dispute has been opened , the contract is considered complete.
You expect small businesses to engage in legal battles with a supposed billionaire? Ha. There is a reason 100-150 of them banded together to get what they needed, it was the only way they could afford it. His lawyer even agreed: "But the attorney advised him that the Trumps would drag the case out in court and legal fees would exceed what they’d recover"
Keep making excuses.
And no, I am not a Hillary fan either. If someone was defending her, I would call them out on her hypocrisy as well.
.MASSHOLE.And no, I am not a Hillary fan either. If someone was defending her, I would call them out on her hypocrisy as well.
If you're trying to play the whole non-partisan role, you're not doing a very good job of it, I've yet to see you post anything on Hillary (quite the treasure trove). Bernie doesn't count, he never had a chance.
If you're not supporting anyone, who should give a damn what you think?
At the end of the day, this is just another worthless media hit-piece that won't affect him in the slightest. He's won the vast majority of the cases against him, and you don't become a billionaire in his line of work without a few lawsuits along the way.
CampeadorIf you're trying to play the whole non-partisan role, you're not doing a very good job of it, I've yet to see you post anything on Hillary (quite the treasure trove). Bernie doesn't count, he never had a chance.
If you're not supporting anyone, who should give a damn what you think?
At the end of the day, this is just another worthless media hit-piece that won't affect him in the slightest. He's won the vast majority of the cases against him, and you don't become a billionaire in his line of work without a few lawsuits along the way.
Bernie never had a chance? Bernie got 12 million total votes. Trump got 13 million total votes. Just let that sink in. Bernie got more votes than the rest of the republican field put together... But sure he never had a chance?
S.J.WBernie never had a chance? Bernie got 12 million total votes. Trump got 13 million total votes. Just let that sink in. Bernie got more votes than the rest of the republican field put together... But sure he never had a chance?
CampeadorIf you're trying to play the whole non-partisan role, you're not doing a very good job of it, I've yet to see you post anything on Hillary (quite the treasure trove). Bernie doesn't count, he never had a chance.
If you're not supporting anyone, who should give a damn what you think?
At the end of the day, this is just another worthless media hit-piece that won't affect him in the slightest. He's won the vast majority of the cases against him, and you don't become a billionaire in his line of work without a few lawsuits along the way.
That would make sense seeing as there is no Hillary thread and I have yet to see anyone post anything positive about her. I called her out a month or so ago for having a BS plan for the Federal Reserve as well FYI. But your selective memory may have prevented you from remembering that.
I will be supporting down ballot candidates, you know, the ones who can potentially help with the Congesssional gridlock we currently have.
You continue with your mental gymnastics to convince yourself he is the right man for the job. So far all these hit pieces have shown me is that there is one thing, and only one thing, that Trump cares about and that is himself.
.MASSHOLE.That would make sense seeing as there is no Hillary thread and I have yet to see anyone post anything positive about her. I called her out a month or so ago for having a BS plan for the Federal Reserve as well FYI. But your selective memory may have prevented you from remembering that.
I will be supporting down ballot candidates, you know, the ones who can potentially help with the Congesssional gridlock we currently have.
You continue with your mental gymnastics to convince yourself he is the right man for the job. So far all these hit pieces have shown me is that there is one thing, and only one thing, that Trump cares about and that is himself.
Of all the myriad things you could post on Hillary, all you could find was some milquetoast article on her Fed plan? No wonder I never noticed.
And, which down ballot candidates? Ending supposed "gridlock" would mean voting for candidates that align with the politics of who you think the next president will be. Based on your subtle support for Hillary, I'm guessing you'll vote straight ticket a certain way, if ending "gridlock" is your goal. But I'm sure you'll give some response about how you'll investigate each candidate in-depth, give me a break.
"One thing that Trump cares about and that is himself", which makes him different from the politicians in Washington in what way, exactly?
Seems like Democrats think walls work to keep out Sanders supporters.
"Security at the Sports Complex during the Democratic National Convention next month will include “no-scale fencing” to enclose the Wells Fargo Center and Xfinity Live!, the Secret Service special agent in charge said in an interview Thursday."
CampeadorOf all the myriad things you could post on Hillary, all you could find was some milquetoast article on her Fed plan? No wonder I never noticed.
And, which down ballot candidates? Ending supposed "gridlock" would mean voting for candidates that align with the politics of who you think the next president will be. Based on your subtle support for Hillary, I'm guessing you'll vote straight ticket a certain way, if ending "gridlock" is your goal. But I'm sure you'll give some response about how you'll investigate each candidate in-depth, give me a break.
"One thing that Trump cares about and that is himself", which makes him different from the politicians in Washington in what way, exactly?
No, it was the only thing someone else brought up...But you're stuck in your fantasy world so I wouldn't expect you to know that.
I honestly haven't done the research yet. I have until November to figure it out.
It certainly won't be Warren, assuming she doesn't get nominated as VP.
I am glad you caught onto my point. People champion him as the conservative candidate who is anti-establishment like Sanders, while in reality he is a demagogue who is entirely self-serving.
Charlie_KellyLol, thats a cute oxymoron you conservative troglodytes love to bring up. Helps cement the idea of how utterly brainless the majority of you are.
Oh the irony...
At least that guy has a trust fund, your broke dad couldn't pull one off for you.
And how exactly is regressive left an oxymoron? Anyone who favors Sharia Islam over freedom of speech is, by definition, a regressive.
.MASSHOLE.It certainly won't be Warren, assuming she doesn't get nominated as VP.
I am glad you caught onto my point. People champion him as the conservative candidate who is anti-establishment like Sanders, while in reality he is a demagogue who is entirely self-serving.
So, if you're trying to end Congressional gridlock and voting against Democrats, is it fair by process of deduction to assume that you believe Trump will win (or should win). Otherwise your earlier statement about gridlock doesn't make any sense.
Welcome on board.
I'll take my chances with someone who isn't bought and paid for by special interests. Will he need donor money? Sure, but I expect the RNC to deal with that. And frankly, out of anyone, I see Trump as the best person to tell special interests to go to hell.
I'm less nervous about Trump supposedly serving himself (his ego as is claimed), than Clinton serving all her corrupt corporate friends, and her friends in foreign governments like Saudi Arabia. The reason you give for not supporting Trump is precisely the reason you should. Unless you're naive enough to think politicians serve "the people".
CampeadorSo, if you're trying to end Congressional gridlock and voting against Democrats, is it fair by process of deduction to assume that you believe Trump will win (or should win). Otherwise your earlier statement about gridlock doesn't make any sense.
Welcome on board.
I'll take my chances with someone who isn't bought and paid for by special interests. Will he need donor money? Sure, but I expect the RNC to deal with that. And frankly, out of anyone, I see Trump as the best person to tell special interests to go to hell.
I'm less nervous about Trump supposedly serving himself (his ego as is claimed), than Clinton serving all her corrupt corporate friends, and her friends in foreign governments like Saudi Arabia. The reason you give for not supporting Trump is precisely the reason you should. Unless you're naive enough to think politicians serve "the people".
I am voting against Warren because I do not agree with her ideas and how she acts as a politician.. I believe that she, like Sanders, is too stubborn on certain issues and unwilling to compromise. Therefore, she will not have my vote. Will it make a difference? No, she will be elected anyway as she is a rising star in the Democratic party.
No, I do not think Trump will or should win.
I do not think he will "serve the people". He will serve himself and his friends, just like you believe Clinton will do. If he was a "man of the people" he would not have all these controversies surrounding how he treats both subordinates and contractors. He has shown his lack of respect or tact when dealing with people numerous times. Not only are his policies crap, but his personality paints him as a man I do not want leading the country. He is incapable of admitting he made a mistake, and incapable of admitting he is wrong. That is dangerous.
Charlie_KellyLol, thats a cute oxymoron you conservative troglodytes love to bring up. Helps cement the idea of how utterly brainless the majority of you are.
The "regressive left" I believe was actually coined by people on the left or it was at least made popular by people on the left who were outraged by certain left-leaning people who are not living/acting in accordance with liberal principles. It does not mean that the entire left is regressive but that there is a certain segment of the left that is being regressive.
Anyone, for example, who wants to suppress freedom of speech (disrupting a speech or preventing a speech from happening etc.) is considered a part of the regressive left. This is seen on university campuses all of the time. Or, for example, when a person will criticize another for not using the right pronoun when speaking but that same person will not criticize Muslims for their overtly sexist treatment of women. These are characteristics of the regressive left.
onenerdykidThe "regressive left" I believe was actually coined by people on the left or it was at least made popular by people on the left who were outraged by certain left-leaning people who are not living/acting in accordance with liberal principles. It does not mean that the entire left is regressive but that there is a certain segment of the left that is being regressive.
Anyone, for example, who wants to suppress freedom of speech (disrupting a speech or preventing a speech from happening etc.) is considered a part of the regressive left. This is seen on university campuses all of the time. Or, for example, when a person will criticize another for not using the right pronoun when speaking but that same person will not criticize Muslims for their overtly sexist treatment of women. These are characteristics of the regressive left.
I guess I wrote that in terms of how I interpret it. He phrases it in such a way that it seems he is speaking of the entire left, when the vast majority of the left does not fall within those ideals. But solid post regardless.
These failing left-wing propaganda rags just keep desperately trying to drop "bombshells", seems like only far left diehards and politically ambiguous oddities like yourself subscribe. I wonder what kind of bonus there is for writing the first story that sticks?
You do realize who the owners are of the NYT and WaPo? Perhaps worth sharing.
Oh, by the way, Trump was proven correct yet again yesterday, in case you missed it.
CampeadorThese failing left-wing propaganda rags just keep desperately trying to drop "bombshells", seems like only far left diehards and politically ambiguous oddities like yourself subscribe.
Right!!? Just imagine if the American people as a whole learned about all the shady shit he has done haha.
californiagrownRight!!? Just imagine if the American people as a whole learned about all the shady shit he has done haha.
Right, because left-wing propaganda is very informational. And Islam has nothing to do with terrorism. The NYT exposed themselves and lost all credibility with that pathetic "bombshell" article on Trump's treatment on women. I guess they never banked on their sources setting the record straight afterwards.
Relative to Hillary, his "shady shit" seems rather minor. Do you think she'll be returning the $25 million she received from Saudi Arabia in return for streamlined weapons contracts? When do you think these bastions of journalistic integrity like the NYT and WaPo will be delving into that?
It's amusing how Hillary wants to import hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of Syrian migrants (more often than not Sharia adherents), yet these propaganda rags think people care about Trump's business dealings in the 1980s. You can almost smell the desperation.
CampeadorThese failing left-wing propaganda rags just keep desperately trying to drop "bombshells", seems like only far left diehards and politically ambiguous oddities like yourself subscribe. I wonder what kind of bonus there is for writing the first story that sticks?
You do realize who the owners are of the NYT and WaPo? Perhaps worth sharing.
Oh, by the way, Trump was proven correct yet again yesterday, in case you missed it.
Should I just post Fox and Brietbart pieces? Where should I get my news? What lives up to the Campeador standards? I me
Correct? The terrorist was an American citizen, born relatively close to Trump himself, and was a known homophobe, wife-beater, and actually passed two FBI background tests.
And for one, I think it is utterly repulsive Trump could not even wait 48 hours before trumpeting about how he was "right".
Islam is not an issue, Islamism is.
But I bet you will call me an Islam apologist for saying that.
.MASSHOLE.Should I just post Fox and Brietbart pieces? Where should I get my news? What lives up to the Campeador standards? I me
Correct? The terrorist was an American citizen, born relatively close to Trump himself, and was a known homophobe, wife-beater, and actually passed two FBI background tests.
And for one, I think it is utterly repulsive Trump could not even wait 48 hours before trumpeting about how he was "right".
Islam is not an issue, Islamism is.
But I bet you will call me an Islam apologist for saying that.
Yes, a citizen born to Sharia Afghan parents, who should never have been let in. It just further proves the point that Muslims don't integrate (in fact they are commanded not to by the Koran, the Sunna, and the Hadiths).
Trump is warning of a clear and present danger, a danger that Islamic sympathizers like Obama actively refuse to acknowledge. He should continue to seize on this danger before the left has the chance to bring out the same typical bullshit that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism (typically through their favorite Islamic "civil rights" organization, the Muslim Brotherhood's very own CAIR). Islamism is directly tied to Islam, in fact, Islamists more closely follow Islam than non-Islamists.
How can you combat Islamism without combating the main tenets of Islam?
CampeadorYes, a citizen born to Sharia Afghan parents, who should never have been let in. It just further proves the point that Muslims don't integrate (in fact they are commanded not to by the Koran, the Sunna, and the Hadiths).
Trump is warning of a clear and present danger, a danger that Islamic sympathizers like Obama actively refuse to acknowledge. He should continue to seize on this danger before the left has the chance to bring out the same typical bullshit that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism (typically through their favorite Islamic "civil rights" organization, the Muslim Brotherhood's very own CAIR). Islamism is directly tied to Islam, in fact, Islamists more closely follow Islam than non-Islamists.
How can you combat Islamism without combating the main tenets of Islam?
Sharia? Where did you read they were Sharia? If I recall correctly his father came out denouncing his son and his actions, indicating his parents are not, in fact, Sharia believers. But keep perpetuating the cycle of misinformation. You are about as credible as those "liberal rags" WaPo and NYT you decry...
Well, I am glad you stated the obvious relationship between Islam and Islamists.
How? By combating the regressive sides of it. People are allowed to be against homosexuality, it is a right they have due to the 1st Amendment (something Trump often seems to neglect). They are not allowed to kill because of it. There needs to be a "liberal" figure for Islam, someone who can appeal to the masses, someone to bring about a period of "enlightenment"
CampeadorQuite the opposite, you fat piece of shit, you're the fucking terrible person. You and everyone else that makes apologies for Islamic ideology.
Furthermore, out of both of us, I think you'd be the only one with enough weight to achieve the desired effect from your flagpole.
It must get old having these teenagers on NS calling you a lard ass all day, I have no idea how you do it.
Wow, you really just immediately attacked me instead of critically thinking, great work.
Saying that trump is correct to ban muslims (almost 3 million people in the USA, im sure you know this) because of this terrorist attack on a gay club is outrageous. There are 10 other things that need to be changed, not eliminating a religion from our country.
Do we really need to bring hitler into this discussion, because that's all i think of when I hear of a future leader wanting to ban a religion from their country.
.MASSHOLE.Sharia? Where did you read they were Sharia? If I recall correctly his father came out denouncing his son and his actions, indicating his parents are not, in fact, Sharia believers. But keep perpetuating the cycle of misinformation. You are about as credible as those "liberal rags" WaPo and NYT you decry...
Christ almighty, the father was an avowed Taliban supporter.
But I suppose it's unfair to assume that those who ideologically support the Taliban also espouse Sharia, that would be a stretch.
Ah yes, I KNEW you would go there. Now you find yourself in a logical fallacy.
If he were a Taliban supporter and Sharia follower, he would have supported his sons actions and not spoken out against them, yet he did.
So, is he a Taliban supporter and Sharia follower, or is a "moderate" who supported a regime that saved his country from USSR occupation and fought for a nationalistic cause against the Pakistanis?
You're a Trump supporter, you should be all for nationalistic causes.
Also, it seems to me like there is a mental health issue with the father, given his interesting videos yet moderate rhetoric of recent days.
I mean the second you decided to call me fat, you lost any sort of credibility IMO If you seriously can't write out a statement without calling me fat, you're not worth listening to.
.MASSHOLE.Ah yes, I KNEW you would go there. Now you find yourself in a logical fallacy.
If he were a Taliban supporter and Sharia follower, he would have supported his sons actions and not spoken out against them, yet he did.
So, is he a Taliban supporter and Sharia follower, or is a "moderate" who supported a regime that saved his country from USSR occupation and fought for a nationalistic cause against the Pakistanis?
You're a Trump supporter, you should be all for nationalistic causes.
Also, it seems to me like there is a mental health issue with the father, given his interesting videos yet moderate rhetoric of recent days.
eheathI mean the second you decided to call me fat, you lost any sort of credibility IMO If you seriously can't write out a statement without calling me fat, you're not worth listening to.
I know your excessive weight is a touchy subject for you, but if you're going to throw insults you should expect a few in return.
Now, if you actually want to discuss why I am wrong about Islam, go right ahead.
CampeadorYou're clueless, your two minute skim of an article won't convince me otherwise.
And you've obviously never heard of Taquiyya.
How do you describe "moderate" rhetoric?
I actually posted a follow-on to your piece, but I guess that discredits your piece too...
Again, as I have asked many times, where should I get my news?
I have actually. Interesting point, but seeing as his parents have lived peacefully in this country for decades, I, and any other rational person, are inclined to think you are searching for any excuse for your disgusting views.
Moderate rhetoric for Islam would be akin to something like moderate Judaism or Christianity. The Old Testament was a very violent and backwards book, yet very few, if any, Christians or Jews follow those aspects of it.
.MASSHOLE.I actually posted a follow-on to your piece, but I guess that discredits your piece too...
Again, as I have asked many times, where should I get my news?
I have actually. Interesting point, but seeing as his parents have lived peacefully in this country for decades, I, and any other rational person, are inclined to think you are searching for any excuse for your disgusting views.
Moderate rhetoric for Islam would be akin to something like moderate Judaism or Christianity. The Old Testament was a very violent and backwards book, yet very few, if any, Christians or Jews follow those aspects of it.
You can look up the father's past from any number of sources, it's not an opinion piece like the garbage you dig up. Not exactly discreditable.
Here's some "moderate" Islam for you, being preached by an imam at a mosque in Orlando no less.
Honestly I'd be very impressed if you go through this video.
It has tons of good info about reforming Islam and such
It is true that overall Islam has a terrible history especially involving violence. The caliphs after Muhammad for example all lasted short times and were murdered by their brothers or friends. Furthermore anything before 1965 ish regarding Muslims and the Ottoman empire is incredibly Islamic and has violent tendencies. Muslims are rather intolerant of other religions etc and yes I get that and it sucks not gonna lie.
Now though regarding actually denying people and open thought that is where I disagree. If they show open aggression and try to destroy us as a nation (for example if Iran or Saudi or any Islamic Nation actually declared war) then yes we should fight and destroy their asses. But as long as that doesn't happen and it is more fringe groups through terrorism and such then fight those groups not the religion.
We as a secular society stand for open thought and diplomacy. We should try to be accepting of others not discriminating on people. What was our country founded on after all. The very first pilgrims were people that were kicked out because of persecution from England. We should not persecute a people.
I'm not saying not to be aware of the danger and respond accordingly if massive threats occur. We just can't deny a people entrance to our country simply because of their faith. Only deny entry because of their actions (such as if they actually tried to persecute people of other religions through stonings or beatings or even killings). Put those people in jail or prison that's where they should stay just like for other criminals that have killed or stolen. LASTLY TAKE THE PEOPLE IN PRISON ON MARIJUANA OUT OF PRISON. Y THE FUCK ARE YOU IN PRISON FOR HAVING DEALT A POUND OF MARIJUANA SHIT IS RETARDED
77% women
73% moderates
52% white men
53% blue collar whites
Those last two figures will need to swing if he is to have ANY chance of winning.
Then there is this. While it is still early, Trump is digging himself into a deeper and deeper hole with his outspoken claims.
EVERY poll is biased towards the particular left/right. Just the fact this is from the washington post should tell you how ridiculously anti Trump this poll is. I bet you there are plenty of polls out there where they are much closer...again different sources of data usually they don't poll enough people anyway to get a reliable r squared, etc value.
Trump definitely has some uphill to climb regarding his campaign but Hillary is one of the most corrupt politicians in US history and people recognize this. She is insanely untrustworth. I just cant comprehend why anyone would vote for her. She, as A PUBLIC SERVANT, has amassed a massive fortune. Who cares if trump is a billionare....at least he actually has a business that produces things, and hires people. Hillary has made $100M+ through bribes, corruption, extortion, "speeches",etc. This is FAR worse than the "evil" billionare who everyone hates (jealous of).
KravtZEVERY poll is biased towards the particular left/right. Just the fact this is from the washington post should tell you how ridiculously anti Trump this poll is. I bet you there are plenty of polls out there where they are much closer...again different sources of data usually they don't poll enough people anyway to get a reliable r squared, etc value.
Trump definitely has some uphill to climb regarding his campaign but Hillary is one of the most corrupt politicians in US history and people recognize this. She is insanely untrustworth. I just cant comprehend why anyone would vote for her. She, as A PUBLIC SERVANT, has amassed a massive fortune. Who cares if trump is a billionare....at least he actually has a business that produces things, and hires people. Hillary has made $100M+ through bribes, corruption, extortion, "speeches",etc. This is FAR worse than the "evil" billionare who everyone hates (jealous of).
It is combined with ABC ....and it is not a poll about voting preferences, just general favorability. While Hillary may be insanely untrustworthy and generally a piss-poor candidate, she is still seen as more favorable candidate than Trump which says a lot.
Regardless of the figures, Trump is falling in popularity across the board. His outspokenness, which was once his strength, is now turning against him. Perhaps there is now more focus on his words and actions than before due to the Presidential race basically being set, or perhaps people finally realize how crass he is after his statements towards the judge, Orlando, and Obama.
.MASSHOLE.It is combined with ABC ....and it is not a poll about voting preferences, just general favorability. While Hillary may be insanely untrustworthy and generally a piss-poor candidate, she is still seen as more favorable candidate than Trump which says a lot.
Regardless of the figures, Trump is falling in popularity across the board. His outspokenness, which was once his strength, is now turning against him. Perhaps there is now more focus on his words and actions than before due to the Presidential race basically being set, or perhaps people finally realize how crass he is after his statements towards the judge, Orlando, and Obama.
Once Trump locked up the nomination....everyone knew it would be a full on media assault against him since Hillary is the media's chosen president. Trump will have a good chance I really do.
I don't know anyone voting for Hillary besides my hipster cousin
KravtZOnce Trump locked up the nomination....everyone knew it would be a full on media assault against him since Hillary is the media's chosen president. Trump will have a good chance I really do.
I don't know anyone voting for Hillary besides my hipster cousin
Well, polling numbers, which are still early and have a lot of noise, are seeing an uptick for Clinton even after the Orlando events.
Still better than anecdotal evidence.
Trump has a chance, but he needs to stop shooting himself in the foot every time he gets in front of a camera. It should say a lot there that the majority of the GOP have done very little to stand behind him considering they see Clinton as the equivalent of Lucifer.
