he's digging a hole with this extreme vetting and foreign policy stance i honestly think its over. All HRC needs to do is get him to admit once per debate that he wants to bomb terrorists' children and its over.

I saw the movie unthinkable last night, and I think It's not such a bad idea now

I'm wondering if there are enough undocumented nukes in Putin's back pocket for him to slip one inside of the US, blame it on ISIS, and get Trump elected. I mean what are a few 100k lives to Putin compared to Trump in office.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Aug 15 2016 04:19pm

I actually think he's said something to that effect before, his "you have to take out their families" remark.

Part of the reason speeches like these won't work for Trump is that he supported literally everything he's now trying to criticize. He supported Iraq, as much as he wants to pretend otherwise. He supported intervention in Libya. You have no credibility when you say a position or an action is "a disaster" that you yourself are on record supporting. He invented a policy position on Syria that Obama/Clinton didn't actually have, told demonstrable lies about the Iran nuclear deal, and just sloppily revived talking points from the 2012 campaign that were easily debunked all the way back then like "apology tour" and "leading from behind."

The other part is that so much of his candidacy is based on a lie. We already vet immigrants and refugees, but he's spent all this time lying about that and saying "we have no idea" who they are, so now he has to give a big speech telling everyone we're going to interview the refugees friends and family, and investigate their Twitter and Facebook, to make absolutely sure they're not going to go on a shooting spree.

I think you're missing the bit where getting caught fabricating bs doesn't mean much in American politics - or so it seems from what I can gather through bill Maher and Trevor noah about the lack of consequences for lying

This post was edited by duffman316 on Aug 15 2016 04:29pm

The good news is we won't have to hear Larry Wilmore drone on about anymore though!

to be fair he said that VERY early in the primary debates, before he'd ever even met with a foreign policy adviser. Does that mean it ok? nah. does it mean i'd let it pass if he shelved the idea and never came back to it once he got the nod and then moved on to more moderate positions on the advice of foreign policy experts, sure. What i find shocking is him doubling down on this in general, it just seems like a dumb way to fragment votes. I think a large number of people know that bombing raids create a new generation of enemies.

As to the vetting, its the same issue we have with police brutality. "we need to interview and train cops better in america", "ok what test would you do to see if a cop will shoot someone when scared and under durress." "a virtual reality simulator that we haven't invented yet." "ya that's what i thought."

its the same concept, the only perfect vetting process is a time machine. and ya to suggest people get in willy nilly isn't going to win over any votes that arent hardliners who have been marching with him since he announced.

if you watch those shows it explains what's wrong with you...an atheist and a racist...good combo

Trump 2016 baby not slowing down

This post was edited by stimpy6298 on Aug 15 2016 05:02pm

I think he said that in December, roughly 5-6 months after he jumped into the race. Trump is clueless but if he went that long without getting any sort of foreign policy advice then he's flying even more blind than I ever could have guessed, and that would scare me.

I think everyone really needs to understand one thing about Trump, regardless if they intend to vote for him or not: he doesn't mean any of this. These aren't fixed positions to him. If he actually found himself elected there's not a single position he wouldn't flop on because he already has. On most issues he's already flip-flop-flip-flop-flipped on and we have months to go. He has no ideology. He's essentially running on his personality and whatever loose collection of ideas he's sticking to at that given moment, and if you're dumb enough to vote for him then he wants you on his team. He doesn't even want to do the job as it is currently constructed, he just wants to have the title. Everybody should get that through their head: if they actually care about walls and banning teh Muslims or rolling back the Johnson amendment, he doesn't care about any of that.



I mean we entered into a "post-truth" age of politics a few years ago. Mitt Romney ran the most brazenly dishonest presidential campaign I've ever witnessed and Trump probably will beat him out. In a way it's hard to compare them because while both of them lie profusely, they lie very differently.

That said it can still mean a lot though. Obama not only won, he beat Romney badly all throughout the battlegrounds. I think you'd see the people who run campaigns similar to Trump and Romney losing a whole lot more campaigns than they already do if they couldn't count on gerrymandering bailing them out in the House.

i can't believe jay has the balls to call trump a flip flopper and liar.....wtf? Who the fuck are you voting for the pope?