Cleveland (Page 3)
-
No new posts
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller | Reply |
|
2016-07-21 10:18 AM in reply to: Hook'em |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by Hook'em Cruz "and to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. if you love our country and love your children as much as I know you do, stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution." Not only did Cruz not endorse Trump, the only candidate in the presidential race who fits the bill is Gary Johnson. I hear this charge a lot, but what aspect of the constitution is Trump not faithful to? Everybody likes to make him out to be the boogyman on conservative issues, but I just don't see it. Yes, he's fairly socially moderate, but Johnson is far more socially moderate. He's fiscally conservative (so is Gary). He supports our Military (so does Gary), he doesn't support international intervention (neither does Gary), he supports minority and womens rights (so does Gary), he supports the 2nd Amendment (Gary doesn't). I could go on and on, but the only thing Ted had over Trump was that he was more socially conservative where the Republican party has moved more socially moderate. Hence the socially moderate conservative candidate won the primary. To suggest that a Cruz supporter has a more "conservative" candidate in Johnson is kind of silly. If anything Johnson is further to the left than Trump, but more towards the center than Hillary. |
|
2016-07-21 10:19 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Hook'em Cruz "and to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. if you love our country and love your children as much as I know you do, stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution." Not only did Cruz not endorse Trump, the only candidate in the presidential race who fits the bill is Gary Johnson.
Will there be a Libertarian convention? The amount of free air time the DNC and GOP get from their conventions make it hard for a 3rd part to compete. They might have enough money to rent out a waffle house and have one. |
2016-07-21 10:42 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Deep in the Heart of Texas | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by tuwood Libertarian convention was held at the end of May in Orlando.Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Hook'em Cruz "and to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. if you love our country and love your children as much as I know you do, stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution." Not only did Cruz not endorse Trump, the only candidate in the presidential race who fits the bill is Gary Johnson.
Will there be a Libertarian convention? The amount of free air time the DNC and GOP get from their conventions make it hard for a 3rd part to compete. They might have enough money to rent out a waffle house and have one. |
2016-07-21 11:13 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Extreme Veteran 3025 Maryland | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Hook'em Cruz "and to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. if you love our country and love your children as much as I know you do, stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution." Not only did Cruz not endorse Trump, the only candidate in the presidential race who fits the bill is Gary Johnson. I hear this charge a lot, but what aspect of the constitution is Trump not faithful to? Everybody likes to make him out to be the boogyman on conservative issues, but I just don't see it. Yes, he's fairly socially moderate, but Johnson is far more socially moderate. He's fiscally conservative (so is Gary). He supports our Military (so does Gary), he doesn't support international intervention (neither does Gary), he supports minority and womens rights (so does Gary), he supports the 2nd Amendment (Gary doesn't). I could go on and on, but the only thing Ted had over Trump was that he was more socially conservative where the Republican party has moved more socially moderate. Hence the socially moderate conservative candidate won the primary. To suggest that a Cruz supporter has a more "conservative" candidate in Johnson is kind of silly. If anything Johnson is further to the left than Trump, but more towards the center than Hillary. umm. banning muslims? not constitutional. he said the goverment should have the power to close mosques. not constitutional. He wants to deport american born children of illegal immigrants. not constitutional. He said he would mandate the death penalty for anyone who kills a police officer. not constitutional. He said he loves waterboarding, and would absolutely authorize something beyond waterboarding. not constitutional and a war crime. he wants to open up libel laws so he can sue media corporations for money. not constitutional i'm tired but theres a start |
2016-07-21 11:25 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Hook'em Cruz "and to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. if you love our country and love your children as much as I know you do, stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution." Not only did Cruz not endorse Trump, the only candidate in the presidential race who fits the bill is Gary Johnson. I hear this charge a lot, but what aspect of the constitution is Trump not faithful to? Everybody likes to make him out to be the boogyman on conservative issues, but I just don't see it. Yes, he's fairly socially moderate, but Johnson is far more socially moderate. He's fiscally conservative (so is Gary). He supports our Military (so does Gary), he doesn't support international intervention (neither does Gary), he supports minority and womens rights (so does Gary), he supports the 2nd Amendment (Gary doesn't). I could go on and on, but the only thing Ted had over Trump was that he was more socially conservative where the Republican party has moved more socially moderate. Hence the socially moderate conservative candidate won the primary. To suggest that a Cruz supporter has a more "conservative" candidate in Johnson is kind of silly. If anything Johnson is further to the left than Trump, but more towards the center than Hillary. umm. banning muslims? not constitutional. he said the goverment should have the power to close mosques. not constitutional. Yes it is and it's been done before He wants to deport american born children of illegal immigrants. not constitutional. He wants to end the practice of birthright citizenship (which isn't constitutional anyways), which would close the anchor baby loophole and prevent them from becoming citizens and eligible for deportation which is totally fine and very constitutional. He said he would mandate the death penalty for anyone who kills a police officer. not constitutional. He said he loves waterboarding, and would absolutely authorize something beyond waterboarding. not constitutional and a war crime. Death penalty is constitutional and gets used all the time ( I don't support it btw) and interrogation techniques such as waterboarding doesn't apply to the constitution. Torture is unconstitutional for american citizens on US soil, but not foreigners overseas because they have no constitutional protections. We can certainly argue if it's good or bad, but it's not a constitutional issue. he wants to open up libel laws so he can sue media corporations for money. not constitutional What article of the constitution protects Libel? Are you suggesting that you want media corporations to be able to lie without recourse? Also, it's already permissible to sue the media for libel in most states so it's not inconsistent to have a federal standard. i'm tired but theres a start |
2016-07-21 11:35 AM in reply to: dmiller5 |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Hook'em Cruz "and to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. if you love our country and love your children as much as I know you do, stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution." Not only did Cruz not endorse Trump, the only candidate in the presidential race who fits the bill is Gary Johnson. I hear this charge a lot, but what aspect of the constitution is Trump not faithful to? Everybody likes to make him out to be the boogyman on conservative issues, but I just don't see it. Yes, he's fairly socially moderate, but Johnson is far more socially moderate. He's fiscally conservative (so is Gary). He supports our Military (so does Gary), he doesn't support international intervention (neither does Gary), he supports minority and womens rights (so does Gary), he supports the 2nd Amendment (Gary doesn't). I could go on and on, but the only thing Ted had over Trump was that he was more socially conservative where the Republican party has moved more socially moderate. Hence the socially moderate conservative candidate won the primary. To suggest that a Cruz supporter has a more "conservative" candidate in Johnson is kind of silly. If anything Johnson is further to the left than Trump, but more towards the center than Hillary. umm. banning muslims? not constitutional. he said the goverment should have the power to close mosques. not constitutional. He wants to deport american born children of illegal immigrants. not constitutional. He said he would mandate the death penalty for anyone who kills a police officer. not constitutional. He said he loves waterboarding, and would absolutely authorize something beyond waterboarding. not constitutional and a war crime. he wants to open up libel laws so he can sue media corporations for money. not constitutional i'm tired but theres a start
OK, take them one at a time. First off the US constitution protects the rights of US citizens. Trump made his comments about banning Muslims shortly after Obama said we'd be taking xx thousands of Syrian refugees right after a Syrian refugee attack in Belgium. From the WSJ:
Other scholars who spoke to Law Blog were more hesitant to pronounce the Muslim immigration ban unconstitutional, at least as it applied to non-U.S. citizens. (Denying entry to American citizens, they said, would definitely not hold up in court.)
Constitutional challenges to immigration restrictions “face unusually tough hurdles,” Stephen H. Legomsky, of Washington University School of Law, who was chief counsel at the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services agency under President Barack Obama from 2011 to 2013. Most recently the professor served briefly as senior counselor to the Secretary of Homeland Security on immigration issues. The hurdle he referred to is in the form of the so-called plenary power doctrine, a legal concept articulated by the Supreme Court giving Congress tremendous power over immigration laws. It was first laid down by the Supreme Court in the late 1880s when justices upheld the Chinese Exclusion Act, a federal law that suspended immigration of Chinese laborers. Repealed during World War II, it was the first major immigration restriction enacted into law and the first exclusion based on ethnicity. The plenary power doctrine “states that the courts should show exceptional deference to Congress when it legislates in the field of immigration,” Mr. Legomsky told Law Blog. “Whether modern courts would uphold a racial or religious immigration restriction is difficult to predict.” The high court has reaffirmed the doctrine in a 1972 ruling denying entry to a self-described “revolutionary Marxist” from Belgium who sought a temporary visa.
Now I'm no lawyer but I don't think one can make the blanket statement that what he was proposing was unconstitutional.
But let's back up.....and understand Trump and the Art of the Deal. So you start off saying, "Ban all Muslims". Then you back down to non-American Muslims.....and if you have to you settle on banning Muslims that have not been properly vetted.
Bernie sanders said he is going to make college tuition free! But he has no more constitutional authority to make college free than Trump does to make immigration laws. Actually Trump, if he follows Obama's lead, can decide which immigration laws he will uphold and which ones he will ignore. Anyway, it was a shocking statement to make a point and it worked. It brought attention to the fact that we are NOT adequately vetting Muslim immigrants and in all likelihood are admitting hundreds of jihadists.
|
|
2016-07-21 11:43 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by dmiller5 Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Hook'em Cruz "and to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. if you love our country and love your children as much as I know you do, stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution." Not only did Cruz not endorse Trump, the only candidate in the presidential race who fits the bill is Gary Johnson. I hear this charge a lot, but what aspect of the constitution is Trump not faithful to? Everybody likes to make him out to be the boogyman on conservative issues, but I just don't see it. Yes, he's fairly socially moderate, but Johnson is far more socially moderate. He's fiscally conservative (so is Gary). He supports our Military (so does Gary), he doesn't support international intervention (neither does Gary), he supports minority and womens rights (so does Gary), he supports the 2nd Amendment (Gary doesn't). I could go on and on, but the only thing Ted had over Trump was that he was more socially conservative where the Republican party has moved more socially moderate. Hence the socially moderate conservative candidate won the primary. To suggest that a Cruz supporter has a more "conservative" candidate in Johnson is kind of silly. If anything Johnson is further to the left than Trump, but more towards the center than Hillary. umm. banning muslims? not constitutional. he said the goverment should have the power to close mosques. not constitutional. He wants to deport american born children of illegal immigrants. not constitutional. He said he would mandate the death penalty for anyone who kills a police officer. not constitutional. He said he loves waterboarding, and would absolutely authorize something beyond waterboarding. not constitutional and a war crime. he wants to open up libel laws so he can sue media corporations for money. not constitutional i'm tired but theres a start
Bernie sanders said he is going to make college tuition free! But he has no more constitutional authority to make college free than Trump does to make immigration laws. Actually Trump, if he follows Obama's lead, can decide which immigration laws he will uphold and which ones he will ignore.
Isn't it ironic that Trump doesn't have to get any new laws to ban immigration? He just has to enforce the ones that are on the book to force people to go the legal route like they're supposed to be doing in the first place. lol |
2016-07-21 11:53 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Cleveland "He said he would mandate the death penalty for anyone who kills a police officer. not constitutional. He said he loves waterboarding, and would absolutely authorize something beyond waterboarding. not constitutional and a war crime."
Please cite the in the US constitution that prohibits waterboarding. Let me help you out a little Article 6, Clause 2 states that the US will adhere to legal treaties....so people point the Geneva convention that bans torture. But a teams of lawyers under the Bush administration concluded waterboarding was NOT torture. At any rate, it is a matter that needs to be left to the courts to decide it is torture. Even if it is, there is still an argument to be made that the Geneva convention does NOT apply to terrorist who are not soldiers of any country's army. I don't think he can legally 'mandate' that killing a police officer is a capitol offense but he could certainly push legislation through congress making it a federal capitol offense to kill a police officer. So maybe his statement is like saying I'm going to cut taxes on the middle class and raise taxes for the top 1%. No you aren't. Congress has the authority not he executive e branch.
X |
2016-07-21 11:56 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Cleveland "he wants to open up libel laws so he can sue media corporations for money. not constitutional"
Pretty sure this is already legal as well as constitutional. X |
2016-07-21 2:27 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Veteran 1019 St. Louis | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by Hook'em Cruz "and to those listening, please, don’t stay home in November. if you love our country and love your children as much as I know you do, stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket who you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution." Not only did Cruz not endorse Trump, the only candidate in the presidential race who fits the bill is Gary Johnson. I hear this charge a lot, but what aspect of the constitution is Trump not faithful to? Everybody likes to make him out to be the boogyman on conservative issues, but I just don't see it. Yes, he's fairly socially moderate, but Johnson is far more socially moderate. People question his conservative values because he's been so contradictory over the years. He used to be pro-choice, now he's pro-life. He supported legalizing drugs, now he doesn't. He supported universal healthcare, now he doesn't. He once said Hillary would be a great president. And since he has no actual record to compare to, just random quotes from interviews, debatges, and his books, it's hard to say if he's really changed his mind on all these issues (which is absolutely possible) or if he's just saying what conservatives want to hear. Plus, his current stance on gay marriage is that it's a reality and it's time to move on. He's definitely not in line with the RNC's platform on that one. He's fiscally conservative (so is Gary). He supports our Military (so does Gary), Not sure what you mean by this. They both say they support the military, but so does Hillary. He certainly wants to spend more on the military, Johnson wants to spend less. I totally support Trump's proposed VA reforms. But he said in the debates he would force our troops to target the families of terrorists. I personally don't think that forcing our military to commit war crimes is very supportive. he doesn't support international intervention (neither does Gary), Trump absolutely supports international intervention. He wants to bolster the military presence off the coast of China. He has said he would put boots on the ground in the fight against ISIS, bomb Iraqi oil fields, and use any and all means to stop Iran's nuclear program. He said Obama created the Syrian mess by not sending our troops in to get Assad. He once said that as president, he would tell North Korea to "either get out of the nuclear arms race or expect a rebuke similar to the one Ronald Reagan delivered to Ghadhafi" and "Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?" Trump wants countries that house our military bases to start paying us, Johnson wants to shut the overseas bases down and bring our troops home to defend our borders. he supports minority and womens rights (so does Gary), he supports the 2nd Amendment (Gary doesn't). Why did you say Johnson doesn't support the 2nd amendment? Not arguing, I seriously am asking. I can only find two quotes from him on gun control. (1) "I don't believe there should be any restrictions when it comes to firearms. None." (2) "If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns." Along with that, he's a supporter of both the constitution as it's written and individual liberties, so that sort of implies that he supports the right to bear arms. Trump, on the other hand, is currently a supporter of the 2nd amendment. But in one of his books he was a supporter of the assault weapon ban, waiting periods, and background checks. I could go on and on, but the only thing Ted had over Trump was that he was more socially conservative where the Republican party has moved more socially moderate. Hence the socially moderate conservative candidate won the primary. One last opinion, while Republican voters selected a more socially moderate candidate, the RNC itself has doubled down on their socially conservative policy with the platform they just approved. This despite the fact that in 2013, the RNC completed their assessment of why Romney lost and recommended for 2016 "When it comes to social issues, the Party must in fact and deed be inclusive and welcoming. If we are not, we will limit our ability to attract young people and others, including many women, who agree with us on some but not all issues." Too bad they didn't listen to themselves or their voters. To suggest that a Cruz supporter has a more "conservative" candidate in Johnson is kind of silly. If anything Johnson is further to the left than Trump, but more towards the center than Hillary. |
2016-07-21 7:04 PM in reply to: Bob Loblaw |
Elite 4547 | Subject: RE: Cleveland Has there ever been a convention as angry as this 2016 RNC? Not in my memory. Talk about vitriol. |
|
2016-07-21 7:09 PM in reply to: ChineseDemocracy |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Cleveland Jerry Falwell junior. Wise man to Chelsea. The 3 biggest threats to America: 1. Osama |
2016-07-21 7:59 PM in reply to: Bob Loblaw |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Cleveland My bad on Gary and the 2nd Amendment Bob. I did a quick google on it because I didn't know and clicked on "one of those" sites that was wrong. Should have dug in a little deeper. |
2016-07-21 8:00 PM in reply to: ChineseDemocracy |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy Has there ever been a convention as angry as this 2016 RNC? Not in my memory. Talk about vitriol. ...but it seems to be working for them so far. Pretty sure the DNC will top them soon. hehe |
2016-07-21 10:38 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Cleveland Awesome speech tonight. |
2016-07-21 11:00 PM in reply to: Rogillio |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by Rogillio Agree.It might seem weird, but my favorite moment was when everyone gave the lgbtq community a standing ovation.Awesome speech tonight. |
|
2016-07-22 9:06 AM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 15655 | Subject: RE: Cleveland I liked some of what he had to say well enough......but my god, look up redundancy in the dictionary and the text of that speech will probably be there. He took 75 minutes to say what could have been said in half the time if he wouldn't have gone back and forth over the same issues so much. It got hard to watch after awhile.....I already heard it!!! And his daughter obviously inherited the same trait. Edited by Left Brain 2016-07-22 9:07 AM |
2016-07-22 10:10 AM in reply to: Left Brain |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by Left Brain I liked some of what he had to say well enough......but my god, look up redundancy in the dictionary and the text of that speech will probably be there. He took 75 minutes to say what could have been said in half the time if he wouldn't have gone back and forth over the same issues so much. It got hard to watch after awhile.....I already heard it!!! And his daughter obviously inherited the same trait.
Agree, a bit long winded. But when you have all the networks covering you......it behooves you to go a little long so you pick up some viewers who tuned in to watch their 10 pm show and found that Trump was still talking.....so you might as well listen cause your show is being delayed.
I think is was his best speech and I think he needs to stick to the teleprompter when speechifying.
Looking forward to the debates. Trump can cite a few of the Clinton Foundation 'coincidences'.....well, unless the FBI exonerates her in that investigation before hand. Not sure if that was part of the plea bargain Bill and Lynch negotiated or not?
|
2016-07-22 10:26 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Veteran 1019 St. Louis | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Left Brain I liked some of what he had to say well enough......but my god, look up redundancy in the dictionary and the text of that speech will probably be there. He took 75 minutes to say what could have been said in half the time if he wouldn't have gone back and forth over the same issues so much. It got hard to watch after awhile.....I already heard it!!! And his daughter obviously inherited the same trait.
Agree, a bit long winded. But when you have all the networks covering you......it behooves you to go a little long so you pick up some viewers who tuned in to watch their 10 pm show and found that Trump was still talking.....so you might as well listen cause your show is being delayed.
I think is was his best speech and I think he needs to stick to the teleprompter when speechifying.
Looking forward to the debates. Trump can cite a few of the Clinton Foundation 'coincidences'.....well, unless the FBI exonerates her in that investigation before hand. Not sure if that was part of the plea bargain Bill and Lynch negotiated or not?
Sorry, I just can't help myself. I have to post this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdRKT0231Co |
2016-07-22 10:38 AM in reply to: Bob Loblaw |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by Bob Loblaw Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Left Brain I liked some of what he had to say well enough......but my god, look up redundancy in the dictionary and the text of that speech will probably be there. He took 75 minutes to say what could have been said in half the time if he wouldn't have gone back and forth over the same issues so much. It got hard to watch after awhile.....I already heard it!!! And his daughter obviously inherited the same trait.
Agree, a bit long winded. But when you have all the networks covering you......it behooves you to go a little long so you pick up some viewers who tuned in to watch their 10 pm show and found that Trump was still talking.....so you might as well listen cause your show is being delayed.
I think is was his best speech and I think he needs to stick to the teleprompter when speechifying.
Looking forward to the debates. Trump can cite a few of the Clinton Foundation 'coincidences'.....well, unless the FBI exonerates her in that investigation before hand. Not sure if that was part of the plea bargain Bill and Lynch negotiated or not?
Sorry, I just can't help myself. I have to post this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdRKT0231Co http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/teleprompter-gaffe-flub-oops-blunder-hillary-clinton-sigh |
2016-07-22 11:13 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Veteran 1019 St. Louis | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Bob Loblaw Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Left Brain I liked some of what he had to say well enough......but my god, look up redundancy in the dictionary and the text of that speech will probably be there. He took 75 minutes to say what could have been said in half the time if he wouldn't have gone back and forth over the same issues so much. It got hard to watch after awhile.....I already heard it!!! And his daughter obviously inherited the same trait.
Agree, a bit long winded. But when you have all the networks covering you......it behooves you to go a little long so you pick up some viewers who tuned in to watch their 10 pm show and found that Trump was still talking.....so you might as well listen cause your show is being delayed.
I think is was his best speech and I think he needs to stick to the teleprompter when speechifying.
Looking forward to the debates. Trump can cite a few of the Clinton Foundation 'coincidences'.....well, unless the FBI exonerates her in that investigation before hand. Not sure if that was part of the plea bargain Bill and Lynch negotiated or not?
Sorry, I just can't help myself. I have to post this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdRKT0231Co http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/teleprompter-gaffe-flub-oops-blunder-hillary-clinton-sigh Umm, ok? Don't know how that relates to the irony of Trump saying presidential candidates shouldn't be allowed to use teleprompters and then using one for his acceptance speech as the GOP's presidential candidate. But sure, that is hilarious, and Hillary is fake and insincere. There's a funny one of Obama stuttering when his goes out that you'll probably also enjoy. |
|
2016-07-22 11:25 AM in reply to: 0 |
Champion 10157 Alabama | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by Bob Loblaw Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Bob Loblaw Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Left Brain I liked some of what he had to say well enough......but my god, look up redundancy in the dictionary and the text of that speech will probably be there. He took 75 minutes to say what could have been said in half the time if he wouldn't have gone back and forth over the same issues so much. It got hard to watch after awhile.....I already heard it!!! And his daughter obviously inherited the same trait.
Agree, a bit long winded. But when you have all the networks covering you......it behooves you to go a little long so you pick up some viewers who tuned in to watch their 10 pm show and found that Trump was still talking.....so you might as well listen cause your show is being delayed.
I think is was his best speech and I think he needs to stick to the teleprompter when speechifying.
Looking forward to the debates. Trump can cite a few of the Clinton Foundation 'coincidences'.....well, unless the FBI exonerates her in that investigation before hand. Not sure if that was part of the plea bargain Bill and Lynch negotiated or not?
Sorry, I just can't help myself. I have to post this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdRKT0231Co http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/teleprompter-gaffe-flub-oops-blunder-hillary-clinton-sigh Umm, ok? Don't know how that relates to the irony of Trump saying presidential candidates shouldn't be allowed to use teleprompters and then using one for his acceptance speech as the GOP's presidential candidate. But sure, that is hilarious, and Hillary is fake and insincere. There's a funny one of Obama stuttering when his goes out that you'll probably also enjoy.
It relates only in that it was about using teleprompters. Yes, he needs to eat his words about using them.....but I think had he used one in the primaries he would not be the nominee. People liked his unscripted nature.
ETA - I do my best proofing after I hit 'submit'. Edited by Rogillio 2016-07-22 11:26 AM |
2016-07-22 11:31 AM in reply to: Rogillio |
Veteran 1019 St. Louis | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Bob Loblaw Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Bob Loblaw Originally posted by Rogillio Originally posted by Left Brain I liked some of what he had to say well enough......but my god, look up redundancy in the dictionary and the text of that speech will probably be there. He took 75 minutes to say what could have been said in half the time if he wouldn't have gone back and forth over the same issues so much. It got hard to watch after awhile.....I already heard it!!! And his daughter obviously inherited the same trait.
Agree, a bit long winded. But when you have all the networks covering you......it behooves you to go a little long so you pick up some viewers who tuned in to watch their 10 pm show and found that Trump was still talking.....so you might as well listen cause your show is being delayed.
I think is was his best speech and I think he needs to stick to the teleprompter when speechifying.
Looking forward to the debates. Trump can cite a few of the Clinton Foundation 'coincidences'.....well, unless the FBI exonerates her in that investigation before hand. Not sure if that was part of the plea bargain Bill and Lynch negotiated or not?
Sorry, I just can't help myself. I have to post this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdRKT0231Co http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/teleprompter-gaffe-flub-oops-blunder-hillary-clinton-sigh Umm, ok? Don't know how that relates to the irony of Trump saying presidential candidates shouldn't be allowed to use teleprompters and then using one for his acceptance speech as the GOP's presidential candidate. But sure, that is hilarious, and Hillary is fake and insincere. There's a funny one of Obama stuttering when his goes out that you'll probably also enjoy.
It relates only in that it was about using teleprompters. Yes, he needs to eat his words about using them.....but I think had he used one in the primaries he would not be the nominee. People liked his unscripted nature.
ETA - I do my best proofing after I hit 'submit'. I think his unscripted speech days are over. He promised to be dull and presidential once nominated, and when he speaks off the cuff he's anything but. Hopefully, he'll go full-Donald for the debates. He's much more entertaining when he's unfiltered. |
2016-07-22 3:00 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Elite 4547 | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy Has there ever been a convention as angry as this 2016 RNC? Not in my memory. Talk about vitriol. ...but it seems to be working for them so far. Pretty sure the DNC will top them soon. hehe Tony, c'mon man, you really think you're going to see speakers telling bold-faced lies like, "Obama's a Muslim!?" Or, chanting, "Lock him up!," when referring to The Donald? Talk about Silly Season, I can't even have a nice convo. with my conservative in-laws. Faux News is quite powerful stuff. Apparently, Obama is a Muslim intent on destroying America. Hillary is not only a criminal and a pathological liar, she's killed dozens of her political enemies. I was watching with my pop-in-law the Nightly News the evening after Melania's speech...ya know, the speech she lifted an entire passage from Michelle Obama's 2008 speech? My ma-in-law comes into the room later after we mentioned Melania's words were the same as Michelle's, to which she replied, "That's just a lie. The Democrats always lie." ...okay? SMH. Trust me, I love law and order...but Trump's painting a picture that just doesn't match reality. Does anybody else read fact-checkers? https://www.yahoo.com/news/ap-fact-check-trump-resurfaces-debunked-c... |
2016-07-22 3:04 PM in reply to: ChineseDemocracy |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: Cleveland Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy Originally posted by tuwood Tony, c'mon man, you really think you're going to see speakers telling bold-faced lies like, "Obama's a Muslim!?" Or, chanting, "Lock him up!," when referring to The Donald? Talk about Silly Season, I can't even have a nice convo. with my conservative in-laws. Faux News is quite powerful stuff. Apparently, Obama is a Muslim intent on destroying America. Hillary is not only a criminal and a pathological liar, she's killed dozens of her political enemies. I was watching with my pop-in-law the Nightly News the evening after Melania's speech...ya know, the speech she lifted an entire passage from Michelle Obama's 2008 speech? My ma-in-law comes into the room later after we mentioned Melania's words were the same as Michelle's, to which she replied, "That's just a lie. The Democrats always lie." ...okay? SMH. Trust me, I love law and order...but Trump's painting a picture that just doesn't match reality. Does anybody else read fact-checkers? https://www.yahoo.com/news/ap-fact-check-trump-resurfaces-debunked-c... Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy Has there ever been a convention as angry as this 2016 RNC? Not in my memory. Talk about vitriol. ...but it seems to be working for them so far. Pretty sure the DNC will top them soon. hehe Have you been listening to Hillary lately? (I know it's really hard) lol Anyways, I was more referring to the Bernie supporters burning the place down because they are very angry at Hillary. |
|