[Valentine]

With the high energy of the main Trump thread, as well as other threads covering memes and gifs and short rebuttals it would also be useful to have a dedicated thread for winning long political debates, converting groups and moderate libs.

Dump whatever powerful arguments you've found across the forum/off site in here, but ideally edit the points to make them as concise as possible and add citations for credibility.

I'll start with a few cross posts:

(03-10-2016 03:40 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

1. Selling Trump / Defending Trump from attacks

1.1. General Trump brochure

Trump is the only candidate who is against USA's retarded wars, regime changes and color revolutions.

Trump: "The world would be a better place with Gadaffi and Saddam Hussein still in power"
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/25/politi...m-hussein/
Trump: "I would have a great cooperation with Putin, whom the USA has turned into a world leader through its abysmal leadership"
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/artic...29295.html
Trump: "I would fire the Bush administration for invading Iraq"
http://www.rense.com/general54/bushs.htm
Trump: "Saudi Arabia only exists because of USA and there is no reason why it should get so much from us"
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articl...f-the-u-s-
Trump: "Assad might be bad, but USA must stop 'nation-building' and must destroy ISIS, which is the consequence of our destabilizations of Syria and Iraq"
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/...n-building

He also features the following important details:

- opposition to illegal immigration, including fake "Syrian" "refugees"
- opposition to corporate free trade bills and other lobbying, including GMO
- opposition to war on drugs, wants to let states decide whether to legalize or not
- scepticism about the Federal Reserve; big banks are spending millions to defeat him - https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cc1T_PvUMAAEAVz.jpg

1.2. Countering appeals to Christianity and the Pope

If Trump is "not Christian" for building walls, then Pope Francis is also not a Christian, since he lives behind the giant Vatican wall himself:
http://thumbs.dreamstime.com/x/vatican-w...020107.jpg
Furthermore, even GOD HIMSELF is not a Christian, since his heavenly city has walls:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=KJV
"11 Having the glory of God: and her light was like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal;
12 And had a wall great and high, and had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:"

1.3. Countering "gish gallop" tactics

See, posts like this are EXACTLY why Trump is so popular. His opponents have nothing to offer except some buzzwords.

1.4. Countering "Trump is racist / KKK"

Trump has been endorsed by Charles Evers, Mississippi’s First Black Mayor and NAACP Field Secretary whose brother was assassinated by KKK.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/04/why-is...president/

1.5. Countering appeals to Obama

I was a huge fan of Obama when he was first elected, but sadly I have to admit Trump is right. Here are some of Obama's legacies:

- ISIS takeover of Libya
- ISIS takeover of Syria
- Rewarding megabanks for causing the financial crisis
- Supporting mass surveillance of innocent citizens
- Encouraging massive illegal immigration into USA (which disproportionately affects African Americans who get squeezed out of basic jobs and welfare and get massacred by Latino drug gangs)
- Stoking racial hatred and division in USA
- Forcing degeneracy and immorality onto States, removing their rights

Back in 2008, Obama was against pointless wars, against spying, against the banks, against illegal immigration and against gay marriage. He has trampled every single one of those promises. And that part - the shameless lying - is the worst of all.

1.6. Countering "Trump is a Republican" / "Trump is a Democrat" / "Trump only benefits X"

Donald Trump has sparked a powerful movement that includes people of all races, religions and political bents, and this is no time for petty squabbles. Both Republicans and Democrats will benefit from Making America Great Again.

The fact that both left-wing and right-wing media and establishment figures are united against Trump clearly shows that the left-right is only a circus made to divert the people's attention from things that actually matter.



Get on the Trump train or get out of the way.

1.7. Countering Godwin's law (appeals to Hitler)


https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736...e9b1bf.jpg

(or 1.3.)

1.8. Countering appeals to money / claims that Trump represents the influence of big money in politics

Donald Trump has spent the least per vote out of all candidates. His competitors outspend him on ads by a ratio of 100:1 and have spent half a billion dollars to fight him now. He has no super-PACs and runs the most cost-effective campaign in history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican...gn_finance





1.9. Countering "Trump is only in it for money and fame"

Unlike other candidates, Donald Trump has been a positive actor in the USA's vibrant culture and economy for decades, and has a rich history of kindness and helping others:

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/11/461306-t...y-persona/
(archive link in case it goes missing: http://archive.is/CseBi )



1.10. Countering "Trump appeals only to the uneducated

Trump is popular with people of all income and education levels because everyone can benefit from Making America Great Again. However, polls show that Trump is the most popular candidate exactly among the most educated:
http://s8.postimg.org/4x1cciadh/1454980619579.png



2. Destroying the competition

1. Ted Cruz

Ted Cruz is controlled opposition.

1) His "conservative" platform is fake. He didn't adopt any anti-war or anti-immigration stances until they had first been popularized by Trump (and partly Rand Paul).

2) The genuine parts of his "conservative" platform are the most useless ones: sucking up to evangelicals and Israel. Despite all his conservatism, he's never done anything serious against gay marriage, abortion and feminism. All talk, no action.

3) He is a pawn of the establishment who will bend to their wishes very easily. If he's really some uncontrollable fanatic, then why does he have a $50 million super-PAC? What idiot politician or banker would donate to someone who was really against them? Which brings us to...

4) He is directly funded by loans from Goldman Sachs and his wife works at Goldman Sachs herself. For all the shit we say about Marcobot or !Yeb, at least they don't have such direct ties to the worst and most destructive part of USA.

5) He's an uncharismatic person who relies on media support, snark and rehearsed speeches, similar to Obama. Put him under the same pressure as Trump is subjected to every day and he'll crumble.

6) His campaign is based on outright lies and fraud - not something "distasteful" or "questionable", but outright fraud like telling Ben Carson's voters that Carson dropped out, or making shameless claims about Trump that are 100% the opposite of reality

7) For all his mythical American patriotism, he has been a citizen of Canada until 2014, the very last moment when dropping that became profitable.

8) Despite all his the "loathing" he supposedly inspires, he is heavily supported by the media and establishment figures. When have you seen Megyn Kelly give him a tough question? Is he compared to Hitler every day, despite espousing many of the same views as Trump?

Cruz is no better than Rubio or !Yeb. Trump or bust.

(03-24-2016 07:16 PM)Valentine Wrote:  

To my American brothers: I invite you to vote Trump in the GE and encourage everyone you can about it.

Realistically the general will be Trump vs Hillary, so let's look at reasons
Why you should vote for Trump:

+ *You'll take home more money*
1) He's a proven job creator.

2) His policies on immigration ensure that US citizens will be favoured instead of Big Biz constantly importing cheap foreign labour. [see more on his immigration policies below]

3) His policies on tax reform means individuals will pay less tax http://bit.ly/1LXw4cM whilst taxes increase on foreign goods to make up for the deficit (and more)

+ *Because the Establishment hate Trump*
1) They can't control him because he self-funds his Presidential campaign. Every other candidate takes "donations" from people who agree favours beforehand or later cash in favours from them. Unlike every other President who was merely a puppet, he would govern on his own terms.

2) He wants to open up the media to libel lawsuits. Right now if the media writes bullshit about you, you can't successfully sue them. He wants to take away their power, which they don't want.

3) He's pro-Second Amendment. Other politicians want to disarm you so that they can create totalitarian government with no consequence.

4) He wants Israel to repay financial aid. The US has spent over $100 BILLION in military aid to Israel, which only occurs because of the power that Jews have over the US (see http://thezog.info/list-summaries). They control every facet of the US, thus to stop Trump they've created a huge media smear campaign.

+ *He wants to audit the Federal Reserve*
This should be reason enough to vote for him.

This is a fantastic summary of the central banking Ponzi scheme https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrwbgdtbdXE

Summary: The Fed is a *privately-owned* central bank which the US Gov borrows money *at interest*. This means it's system of perpetual debt (and the US now has 5000x more debt than before the Fed was brought into existence). Here's a video illustration of how this system works https://youtu.be/iP9H5fADC0E

More overviews in these videos https://youtu.be/HRduwYgrU7A https://youtu.be/iFDe5kUUyT0 https://youtu.be/5IJeemTQ7Vk

+ *Wants to repeal the scam which is ObamaCare*
http://bit.ly/1RkgQoO TL;DR: Young healthy men are paying the bills for women and the elderly who cost more than they contribute

+ *Wants immigration reform*
1) Against *illegal* immigration
It's illegal but isn't enforced. So he proposes a few measures:

- Nationwide e-verify - to ensure every worker is legally eligible for work
- Increased budget for ICE agency responsible for immigration
- Deportation of all illegal immigrants *who have committed additional crimes*
- Building a wall in the South paid for by Mexico (where much of the illegal immigration occurs)

2) Helping US citizens first
- Wants to create laws which make sure that companies hire domestic citizens as a priority over foreign workers
- Refugee program for American children first - e.g. orphans who live in unsafe areas and improving high crime neighbourhoods
- Ending welfare abuse - ensuring immigrants can pay for their own housing, healthcare etc before coming to the US

3) He's against Muslim immigration *temporarily*
Polls have indicated that 25% of Muslims in the US believed violence against America was justified. There are regular terrorist attacks and people becoming radicalised.

You can pick only one of two solutions to further prevent terrorism:
Increase domestic surveillance (above it's already draconian levels) on *everyone*
OR
Temporarily stop immigration for *only the group* that is primarily responsible for the terrorism.

The crude but apt metaphor applies:
If I had a bowl that was filled with 10,000 M&M’s, but I told you that 10 of them were deadly poison, would you eat a handful?

And more reasons why you shouldn't vote for Hillary:
- *She's a career criminal*
She constantly abuses her power to enrich the Clinton Foundation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kypl1MYuKDY

- *The 'emailgate' scandal*
She used her own private mail server to hide many, many abuses of power.

For example:
- To hide her deals with foreign governments who then donate to the Clinton Foundation http://bit.ly/21Gi2Ew
- Sharing Top Secret information with unauthorised people, now she's even on the NSA's bad side http://bit.ly/1LwRrI1

TL;DR: Vote Trump. Get everyone you know to do it too. It's insane to do otherwise.

[Liberty Sea]

[Lothario]

I have a word document going where I am cutting and pasting, I found this gem 10-20 pages ago on the main thread but can not dig up who posted. Whoever posted it credit to you brother.

Quote:

Why you should vote for Trump:

+ *You'll take home more money*
1) He's a proven job creator.

2) His policies on immigration ensure that US citizens will be favoured instead of Big Biz constantly importing cheap foreign labour. [see more on his immigration policies below]

3) His policies on tax reform means individuals will pay less tax http://bit.ly/1LXw4cM whilst taxes increase on foreign goods to make up for the deficit (and more)

+ *Because the Establishment hate Trump*
1) They can't control him because he self-funds his Presidential campaign. Every other candidate takes "donations" from people who agree favours beforehand or later cash in favours from them. Unlike every other President who was merely a puppet, he would govern on his own terms.

2) He wants to open up the media to libel lawsuits. Right now if the media writes bullshit about you, you can't successfully sue them. He wants to take away their power, which they don't want.

3) He's pro-Second Amendment. Other politicians want to disarm you so that they can create totalitarian government with no consequence.

4) He wants Israel to repay financial aid. The US has spent over $100 BILLION in military aid to Israel, which only occurs because of the power that Jews have over the US (see http://thezog.info/list-summaries). They control every facet of the US, thus to stop Trump they've created a huge media smear campaign.

+ *He wants to audit the Federal Reserve*
This should be reason enough to vote for him.

This is a fantastic summary of the central banking Ponzi scheme https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrwbgdtbdXE

Summary: The Fed is a *privately-owned* central bank which the US Gov borrows money *at interest*. This means it's system of perpetual debt (and the US now has 5000x more debt than before the Fed was brought into existence). Here's a video illustration of how this system works https://youtu.be/iP9H5fADC0E

More overviews in these videos https://youtu.be/HRduwYgrU7A https://youtu.be/iFDe5kUUyT0 https://youtu.be/5IJeemTQ7Vk

+ *Wants to repeal the scam which is ObamaCare*
http://bit.ly/1RkgQoO TL;DR: Young healthy men are paying the bills for women and the elderly who cost more than they contribute

+ *Wants immigration reform*
1) Against *illegal* immigration
It's illegal but isn't enforced. So he proposes a few measures:

- Nationwide e-verify - to ensure every worker is legally eligible for work
- Increased budget for ICE agency responsible for immigration
- Deportation of all illegal immigrants *who have committed additional crimes*
- Building a wall in the South paid for by Mexico (where much of the illegal immigration occurs)

2) Helping US citizens first
- Wants to create laws which make sure that companies hire domestic citizens as a priority over foreign workers
- Refugee program for American children first - e.g. orphans who live in unsafe areas and improving high crime neighbourhoods
- Ending welfare abuse - ensuring immigrants can pay for their own housing, healthcare etc before coming to the US

3) He's against Muslim immigration *temporarily*
Polls have indicated that 25% of Muslims in the US believed violence against America was justified. There are regular terrorist attacks and people becoming radicalised.

You can pick only one of two solutions to further prevent terrorism:
Increase domestic surveillance (above it's already draconian levels) on *everyone*
OR
Temporarily stop immigration for *only the group* that is primarily responsible for the terrorism.

The crude but apt metaphor applies:
If I had a bowl that was filled with 10,000 M&M’s, but I told you that 10 of them were deadly poison, would you eat a handful?

And more reasons why you shouldn't vote for Hillary:
- *She's a career criminal*
She constantly abuses her power to enrich the Clinton Foundation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kypl1MYuKDY

- *The 'emailgate' scandal*
She used her own private mail server to hide many, many abuses of power.

For example:
- To hide her deals with foreign governments who then donate to the Clinton Foundation http://bit.ly/21Gi2Ew
- Sharing Top Secret information with unauthorised people, now she's even on the NSA's bad side http://bit.ly/1LwRrI1

[Lothario]

Much simpler, 10 points that should be on the tip of tongue, ready to be fired in a nanosecond reaction time. Once again credit to a forum brother I can not remember who.

Quote:

Trump Vs Hillary

1. Globalism vs nationalism
2. Militant feminism vs masculinity
3. More job losses vs job creation
4. Establishment vs anti-establishment
5. Nepotism/cronyism vs meritocracy
6. Political correctness vs political incorrectness
7. Illegal invasion and subversion of host culture vs preserving the host culture
8. Stupid high taxes for earners vs low taxes for earners
9. Stupid ass wars vs avoiding stupid wars
10. Incentivizing losers vs incentivizing winners

[Shrodax]

My favorite resource thus far has been "The STUMP Cheat Sheet" on Reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comm...eat_sheet/

It's not worth copying and pasting the thread here, since it's continuously being updated as new issues appear in the media.

[Wutang]

Addressing "Trump sucks as a businessman because he's had some of his ventures go bankrupt"

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/14160524510...nald-trump

Quote:

Trump had a number of bankruptcies and failed businesses. By way of context, I have over thirty business failures on my record. Far more if you count Dilbert licensees. A typical startup has about a 10% chance of making it. Trump is entrepreneurial by nature, so you should expect a high number of failures. The number of failures don’t tell you anything.

To judge Trump’s business skill, look for how he managed his personal risk. And apparently he did that well. The bankruptcies protected his personal assets, and his license deals probably pay him a guaranteed advance no matter how well the licensee does. In other words, he made good deals that gave him a big upside but not much downside.

You might have seen estimates from experts saying Trump would be richer if he had simply put his inheritance millions into a stock index fund. But I believe those calculations ignore what he spends, gives to ex-wives, etc. I wouldn’t trust them.

[Valentine]

Hillary being made President will result in the end of the US

(03-19-2016 02:53 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Quote:

Do not think of a HAG victory, should it happen, as a tragedy. It would not be a tragedy; it would be, merely, the resumption of regular programming, it would be what we could have always reasonably expected to happen. It would mean that certain social trends will have quite a while longer to go before they exhaust themselves and are reversed or altered in the face of FACTS. No, it will not mean "civil war", "societal collapse", or any of those things.

This is completely out of touch. A Hillary win, a woman who is a criminal herself, is going to give citizenship to millions of people who broke the law, and import millions of rapefugees who also will break the law.

What incentive, with such flagrant disrespect of the law, on top of a collapsing economy, will there be to follow the law for millions upon millions of American citizens? None. And Hillary will pull the Merkel by intruding upon our liberties to hunt down "White supremacism," and cops will be ordered to terrorize normal citizens which only intensifies more unrest. Eventually cops will be murdered for carrying out Hillary's insane orders, and then the cops will revolt and stop following orders as well. Normal citizens will start robbing banks, military compounds for guns, killing federal workers, and it will occur all over the USA.

It will be de facto anarchy and civil war, because you cannot run a government that does not respect law and order. It will be rule by fiat and force, something that cannot sustain itself against a revolting population. Moreover, a Hillary win will not carry any legitimacy because most revolters will believe that illegal immigrants were given a vote.

A Hillary win is the beginning of the end of America, guaranteed.

(03-24-2016 03:59 AM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

I see Trump as the last chance at a civil ending to the cancer that is liberalism.

If Hillary wins, these things will happen...

#1) They will do all they can to come after our guns. Stack the Supreme Court with liberals and eventually they will come after our guns like they already have done in Aussie.

#2) The increased push against masculinity. Men and all they do will continue to be marginalized, stolen, and considered worthless until shit hits the fan, then the men will be forced to go fix everything and get nothing in return. More women running things into the ground, getting the big paychecks, and then once it breaks the men must come fix it and get all the blame and none of the reward.

#3) A push for hate speech laws, and places like this forum will either be heavily monitored or completely shut down.

#4) If they can get our guns and our freedom of speech, then it is Europe part two. Flood the country with 3rd world immigrants and refugees to vote away what little freedoms we have left and drive our standard of life into the toilet. Then let the coming economic crash hit full force. And there is nothing we peasants can do about it but get shit on.

I don't know if Trump can fix or save the USA, but I do know what happens if we get Hillary and/or Bernie.

Quote:

Michael Sebastien wrote:

More Feminism
Hillary’s only real qualification for the presidency is that she has a vagina and she slept with Bill Clinton at least once several years ago. Her eight years in the Senate are not marked by any notable achievements, and the defining feature of her tenure as Secretary of State was the terrorist attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, which left four Americans dead.

For this reason, Hillary has laid great emphasis on the fact that she is a woman. In an interview with Time magazine she pretty much said that women are better at governing than men:

I think that there are certain issues that we are more attuned to one of the things that I did in the State Department is increase resources to cases involving child abductions, trying to do more to promote international adoptions where appropriate. I just think there are some areas where our own life experiences really prepare us to be more receptive. I do think there is something in the governing or organizing approach. I just think women in general are better listeners, are more collegial, more open to new ideas and how to make things work in a way that looks for win-win outcomes. That has been my experience.

Because women comprise one of Hillary’s two large voting blocs, you can bet that she will push feminism and grrrl power at every turn.

Racial Divisiveness

Blacks comprise the second large voting bloc for Hillary. If you’ve watched the Democratic primaries, blacks are responsible for the fact that Hillary is beating Bernie Sanders. Bernie plays well in states with mostly white populations, but in states that have a large black population, Hillary always wins. That is because blacks vote for Hillary in even larger margins than they voted for Barack Obama.

To keep the black vote in line, Hillary will follow in Obama’s footsteps and continue to fan the fire of racial animus. If Hillary is elected, expect to see many more cities burning down due to race riots. All the while, Hillary will use racial tensions as a wedge to encroach on the police power which is supposed to be reserved to the states.

Race relations in the US are a powder keg that is set to explode. Hillary is more than willing to light the match if it assures her a second term.

[Samseau]

Remember, the point in arguing for Trump is maximum visibility. You probably won't convince the dude you're arguing with, but they aren't the goal. It's the people watching you argue who are the real prize. Be loud and confident. You've got nothing to lose (providing you aren't using your real name or arguing at your workplace).

[SirTimothy]

The biggest argument for Trump is that he is the most serious about securing the border. He was the first to propose building a wall, and can definitely do it.

Why does this matter more than anything else to the average American, even if they don't know it? WAGES.

You see, labor is a product that is subject to the same laws of supply and demand as any other product; when supply drastically increases, but demand stays about the same, what happens? The price drops. Immigrants who come into the U.S. for work typically don't create jobs, they take jobs, because if they could create jobs, they wouldn't be looking for one. I don't blame anyone for looking for work, but that's what happens. So when you import tens of millions of foreign workers who will take jobs for less than minimum wage, but not create any jobs themselves, what happens? Wages go way down.

On the other hand, those additional people will still need a place to live, but there is only a finite amount of space in a country, and most housing will be near cities. Sure, you can build more houses and apartments, but that costs money, and still needs land to build on. So demand for housing increases, supply stays the same or only increases somewhat, so the cost of housing goes up.

So the price of labor goes down, and the cost of living goes up, and the middle class just gets crushed. Ask the next Trump-hater you see if paying higher rent off of a smaller paycheck is worth "feeling the Bern" over.

[The Black Knight]

(03-25-2016 12:25 PM)Lothario Wrote:  

Much simpler, 10 points that should be on the tip of tongue, ready to be fired in a nanosecond reaction time. Once again credit to a forum brother I can not remember who.

Quote:

Trump Vs Hillary

1. Globalism vs nationalism
2. Militant feminism vs masculinity
3. More job losses vs job creation
4. Establishment vs anti-establishment
5. Nepotism/cronyism vs meritocracy
6. Political correctness vs political incorrectness
7. Illegal invasion and subversion of host culture vs preserving the host culture
8. Stupid high taxes for earners vs low taxes for earners
9. Stupid ass wars vs avoiding stupid wars
10. Incentivizing losers vs incentivizing winners

That would be me bro.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

(03-25-2016 07:03 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Remember, the point in arguing for Trump is maximum visibility. You probably won't convince the dude you're arguing with, but they aren't the goal. It's the people watching you argue who are the real prize. Be loud and confident. You've got nothing to lose (providing you aren't using your real name or arguing at your workplace).

Recommend absolutely everyone to watch this (and the whole movie 'Thank you for Smoking'):

[Liberty Sea]

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Adding

1.11. Countering "Media is working for Trump" and "Media gives Trump so much exposure"

These are the rationalizations of a sore loser. The media all over the world is engaged in a massive propaganda effort against Donald Trump. The fact that Trump somehow manages to turn the 24/7 overwhelmingly negative and dishonest coverage into a plus for him is just a testament to his charisma, not "the media helping him".

Here's a good example: Trump has been non-stop slammed for months over Megyn Kelly, to the point that almost every other journalist mentions it while interviewing him so to make him appear misogynistic or petty. And how does he react? He turns it around:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9xokE0fRok

Contrast this with Ted Cruz, who has zero ability for a masterful reframe and attracts many sore losers who delude themselves into thinking "the media is pro-Trump". No, the media isn't being pro Trump - it's just you being anti-reality.

[dispenser]

From the Trump thread:

(03-30-2016 09:36 AM)Mr. D Wrote:  

Nice take on the anti-Trump narrative.

The narrator is patient, logical, and concise, with a touch of humour. Ideal for persuading fence-sitters.

[Wutang]

Reposted from Trump thread, links you can send to people when they bring up how Trump is going to start invading other countries

thread-48360...pid1289360

One of the biggest reasons for my support of Trump are his stances on foreign policy. He isn't gobbling Israel's nuts to the extent that other American politicians are , he's against the head in the sky idealistic holy missions to spread the secular gospel of democracy and liberal values to places populated by people who are not capable of maintaining the institutions needed for these values to flourish, and he's calling for a drastic reduction of American involvement in foreign misadventures abroad in general. These sort of policies have been given labels such as nativist, nationalistic, and anti-neocon but turns out there is an actual technical term for it: realism.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/01/08/what...h-clinton/

Quote:

All of which raises the following counterfactual: Would the United States and the world be better off today if the last three presidents had followed the dictates of realism, instead of letting liberals and neocons run the show? The answer is yes.

To remind you: Realism sees power as the centerpiece of political life and sees states as primarily concerned with ensuring their own security in a world where there’s no world government to protect them from others. Realists believe military power is essential to preserving a state’s independence and autonomy, but they recognize it is a crude instrument that often produces unintended consequences. Realists believe nationalism and other local identities are powerful and enduring; states are mostly selfish; altruism is rare; trust is hard to come by; and norms and institutions have a limited impact on what powerful states do. In short, realists have a generally pessimistic view of international affairs and are wary of efforts to remake the world according to some ideological blueprint, no matter how appealing it might be in the abstract.

There's a few writers out there who have identified Trump as being as being the closet thing we have in a GOP candidate to a candidate advocating for realist positions. Note these articles were written before Trump gave his recent foreign policy speech.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/20...e-revealed

Quote:

The practical application of that doctrine plays out in several ways. Trump’s narrow definition of “national interest” does not include things like democracy promotion, humanitarian intervention, the responsibility to protect people from atrocities or the advocacy of human rights abroad. Trump believes that economic engagement will lead to political opening in the long run. He doesn’t think the U.S. government should spend blood or treasure on trying to change other countries’ systems.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/postevery...ald-trump/

Quote:

If they’re being intellectually honest, they would. Trump’s team hits on the major realpolitik talking points with respect to American foreign policy in these sentiments: a reluctance to expend U.S. blood and treasure overseas, an assumption of other states as rational unitary actors maximizing their interest defined as power, a reluctance to export American values, and a deep disdain for neoconservative approaches to the world. We also know from Tom Wright that Trump evinces a strong relative gains view of great power politics, checking another realist box. And a lot of what Trump is saying resonates with American attitudes on this subject.

I've bookmarked the articles I've linked to in this post for future use the next time I see people talking nonsense about how Trump is going to invade Iran and plunge the world into World War 3. One of the biggest misconceptions I seen about Trump from haters is that he's GOP hawk looking to pick fights around the world when he's iterated over and over again, even long before he began his presidential run that he has little interest in the US playing international watchman.

[Delta]

Unlike most of the forum I'm not a Trump supporter, but I'd genuinely like to have a civil discussion about it. I agree with you guys that leftists are being way too hysterical, and the Hitler comparisons have absolutely no place. However, I do have serious objections to a Trump presidency that I haven't seen addressed in this thread.

I oppose Trump because:
-His Politifact record suggests that he's a pathological liar.
-He repeatedly flung childish insults throughout the debates (e.g. "you're ugly"), while going out of his way to avoid constructive policy discussion.
-Almost no serious economist is in favor of the protectionism he espouses.
-"Ban all Muslim immigrants" is an extreme and unfeasible proposition (how do you test if someone is Muslim?)
-Partially due to the things he's said, and I'll concede partially due to exaggerated media representation, we'd make enemies with the rest of the world electing Trump.
-No, Mexico is not going to pay for a wall, and I don't want to see him start a trade war trying to make it happen.

[dasher]

(04-30-2016 01:04 AM)Delta Wrote:  

Unlike most of the forum I'm not a Trump supporter, but I'd genuinely like to have a civil discussion about it. I agree with you guys that leftists are being way too hysterical, and the Hitler comparisons have absolutely no place. However, I do have serious objections to a Trump presidency that I haven't seen addressed in this thread.

I oppose Trump because:
-His Politifact record suggests that he's a pathological liar.
-He repeatedly flung childish insults throughout the debates (e.g. "you're ugly"), while going out of his way to avoid constructive policy discussion.
-Almost no serious economist is in favor of the protectionism he espouses.
-"Ban all Muslim immigrants" is an extreme and unfeasible proposition (how do you test if someone is Muslim?)
-Partially due to the things he's said, and I'll concede partially due to exaggerated media representation, we'd make enemies with the rest of the world electing Trump.
-No, Mexico is not going to pay for a wall, and I don't want to see him start a trade war trying to make it happen.

1. The parent company of politifact endorsed Clinton and generally treat Democrats with kid gloves while being obviously biased with any Republicans.
2. The format of the debates is not conductive to 'constructive policy discussion'. If you're playing to win the debates, the goal is to turn the other guys into unelectable losers.
3. Who cares? Those 'serious economists' are anti-US free trade, open borders traitors and are biased beyond belief.
4. No it isn't.
5. No we wouldn't.
6. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/pay-for-the-wall

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

(04-30-2016 01:04 AM)Delta Wrote:  

Unlike most of the forum I'm not a Trump supporter, but I'd genuinely like to have a civil discussion about it. I agree with you guys that leftists are being way too hysterical, and the Hitler comparisons have absolutely no place. However, I do have serious objections to a Trump presidency that I haven't seen addressed in this thread.

I oppose Trump because:

I respect your politeness, though I disagree with your arguments almost entirely.

Quote:

-His Politifact record suggests that he's a pathological liar.

First of all, Politifact is a shill website owned by the following chain: Tampa Bay Times -> Times Publishing Company -> Poynter Institute -> Ford Foundation.

Second of all, Politifact uses extremely biased methods to declare what is true or false. For example, if Donald Trump says the trade deficit with China is $500 bn/yr and it's really $482 bn/yr, they will judge it to be a "total lie". If Hillary Clinton says that the war in Syria is a war between Assad and moderate Syrian rebels, they will judge it to be completely true (even though these rebels constitute only a minority of combatants).

Trump's views have been amazingly consistent over time.

Quote:

-He repeatedly flung childish insults throughout the debates (e.g. "you're ugly"), while going out of his way to avoid constructive policy discussion.

He has flung the childish insults at his opponents because they're accurate and effective, not to avoid anything. He spends much of his time talking about what measures he'll take and why. Also, who determines what statement constitutes policy and what doesn't? Politifact again? Trump has much more substance than presidents commonly celebrated for their supposedly amazing policies like Obama. Also, what is "policy" worth if its holder discards it as soon as he smells a pile of donor dollars?

Quote:

-Almost no serious economist is in favor of the protectionism he espouses.

Economics is a deeply infiltrated and corrupted field. Serious economists have given us the financial crisis, bank bailouts, long recession and unemployment. Serious economists espouse idiotic views such as "let in hundreds of millions of migrants because it will increase GDP". Serious economists should be judged on the merit of their individual arguments, not their think-tank credentials.

Quote:

-"Ban all Muslim immigrants" is an extreme and unfeasible proposition (how do you test if someone is Muslim?)

Banning all Muslim migrants has never been proposed and is an exaggeration. Banning all migrants from Muslim-majority countries that have proven themselves troublesome (i.e. Saudi Arabia, Pakistan) is not hard. Exceptions could be made for those from those countries who are willing to submit to a serious vetting process, of course.

Quote:

-Partially due to the things he's said, and I'll concede partially due to exaggerated media representation, we'd make enemies with the rest of the world electing Trump.

This is all the more reason to elect Trump. The world under the world-favorite Obama is a total mess. Russia which could be a decent ally is forced into defending itself from USA's lunacy. Saudi Arabia which has never done anything except funding terrorism is USA's best friend right now. If a Trump presidency means reversing that, sign me up.

Quote:

-No, Mexico is not going to pay for a wall, and I don't want to see him start a trade war trying to make it happen.

Savings from expulsion of illegal immigrants and end of the welfare they receive will easily pay for the wall within the first two years. A small tax on money transfers to Mexico would also easily pay for it. It can be done easily. USA spies on me anywhere in the world when I sign a FATCA disclosure form, so I refuse to believe that USA can't get its own things in order.

[Delta]

I don't doubt that Politifact has some subtle bias, probably more so in the statements they choose to verify rather than in the verification process itself. But in just a year or so of campaigning, Trump has racked up a mind-boggling 81 statements rated as "false" or "pants on fire." I do seriously doubt that Politifact could fabricate that many lies. Just a couple of examples off the top of my head: there definitely weren't thousands (or even hundreds or tens) of Muslims celebrating in the streets of Jersey City on 9/11, and definitely nowhere near 80% of white murder victims are killed by a black perpetrator.

And I know I only brought up the academic consensus on protectionism, but my own thought process also leads me to believe that international trade should be completely free (full disclosure- I'm libertarian). By definition, all economic activity that everyone does every day is trade. You choose to go to the store and buy food to instead of foraging through the wilderness? That's trade. It eliminated the job of finding food for you and your family. Cars made in Michigan are shipped across state lines to your local dealership? That's trade. It eliminated jobs from your state, which has no need to produce its own forms of transportation. Surely you have no problem with these examples, even though they do eliminate jobs.

But when goods are traded across COUNTRY lines, rather than state lines or household lines, that's somehow detrimental? Yes, international trade has killed manufacturing jobs in the US; which is perfectly fine, because that has freed people up to do more desirable jobs. The factory workers of the early 1900's are now the office drones of the early 2000's.

Just like with any innovation, there are some unfortunate victims of international trade. Milkmen were probably not pleased about the invention of the refrigerator, just like blue collar workers are not pleased about the proliferation of low-level jobs going where they're more desperately needed. But over the long run, innovations like these are so beneficial to the general populace that we can't suppress them just because they'll cause a few people to lose their current job. It's a classic case of concentrated harm vs. widespread, but harder to perceive benefit. Unless you want to reduce things like trading across state lines and technological automation, then it doesn't make sense to want to reduce international trade.

[pharao]

The real battle is between Donald Trump and Hitlery Klanton

And Hitlery is easy to identify as a compulsive liar:

[sixsix]

(04-30-2016 10:21 PM)Delta Wrote:  

I don't doubt that Politifact has some subtle bias, probably more so in the statements they choose to verify rather than in the verification process itself.

Just be honest here and look at this:


(Click for original size.)

This has nothing to do with a subtle bias: It is political propaganda.

When Ted Cruz said that the federal government is trying to force schools to let boys shower with girls, Politifact considered that false because "transgender girls are not boys." That's not fact checking at all, that's just judging political opponents according to the rules and definition of your own side.

Quote:

Just a couple of examples off the top of my head: there definitely weren't thousands (or even hundreds or tens) of Muslims celebrating in the streets of Jersey City on 9/11, and definitely nowhere near 80% of white murder victims are killed by a black perpetrator.

Yeah right. He is a liar because he brings attention to a huge and actively suppressed problem of Muslims with loyalty to their faith and hatred for the host culture and you want to argue numbers?

It is a fact (which was furiously denied) that there were in fact Muslims celebrating the biggest terror attack in the USA and they're supposed to be citizens. Just like we had Muslims dancing in the streets of Belgium after the recent bombings. And Trump is lying but the establishment politicians and the media that refuse to cover that are not?

And the interracial violence chart was indeed off. But are Clinton or Obama rated as liars for promoting the false narrative that black people are hunted down by cops? No, they are not.

Quote:

Just like with any innovation, there are some unfortunate victims of international trade. Milkmen were probably not pleased about the invention of the refrigerator, just like blue collar workers are not pleased about the proliferation of low-level jobs going where they're more desperately needed.

Yeah, but now the victim is our civilization and the future of our people. And the end result of this thinking is that you hand over everything to people that will abolish your libertarian utopia as soon as they can.

It is a good thing that we don't have to compete with slave labor and the only one benefiting from such trade are globalists that are playing you with theoretical sophistry about libertarian ideals they only laugh at and use as a tool until it's no longer convenient.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Wow, that Politifact compilation is stunning. Great job whomever made it. Make sure to spread it around!

[Liberty Sea]

Saw this on Trump's facebook:

Quote:

REASONS TO VOTE FOR DONALD J. TRUMP
1. Donald J. Trump is the only candidate who can turn things around for America and should be taken seriously!!! He loves America and Americans of ALL races.

2. He is immune to special interest lobbying because he has accepted no donations or special interest money. No other candidate can make this claim.

3. He is an executive. The President of the United States is the Chief Executive Officer of our nation. We don’t need a policy expert or a legislator – we need someone who knows how to run an organization. Mr. Trump is the only candidate who has a proven record as a successful executive on a large scale.

4. He is honest. Mr. Trump is a man who tells the truth. He may not always say it in the most polished way, but our country has had enough suave liars. It is time for some straight forward honesty.

5. He is decisive. As President every decision he makes would be in the best interest of the country. We hear about his having business interests that filed for bankruptcy. In each case, he looked at the situation as it was, and then he cut his losses. We need someone who will look at government programs realistically and if they are failures; will end the wasteful Washington spending.

6. He is courageous. Mr. Trump has been viciously attacked by the Washington establishment and the media – and he has not budged one inch. In other words, he is willing to take charge and lead.

7. He listens. At Trump Presidential events, the audience gets to actually speak to him without being screened, and he responds without a teleprompter.

8. His success is unmatched in the business world by all the others -
He attended one of the best business schools/ to make 10 billion dollars.

9. Having an IQ of 157, his knowledge of contracts and negotiating is brilliant/ internationally/ unparalleled. No one builds an international business empire the size of Trump's without being able to win at the negotiating table.

10. He was popular in the Apprentice/ number 1# rated program 10 years running.

11. He wrote 10 best-selling books [ His book the Art of a deal [educational]

12. He owned and operated Miss Universe/ Miss America] beauty pageants.

13. He’s doing business worldwide therefore his experience is desirable/ knows cultures/international taxes/ pricing/ shipping/ unions/ regulations/ contracts/ business/ practices/ suppliers/ safety rules/ types of workers.

14. He’s into construction, media, manufacturing, travel and publishing.

15. He’s a job producer/ just for the records/ most of his CEO’s are women/ yes they make more than the men/ creditability counts.

16. He gives millions to charities.

17. He understands currencies/ money exchanges/ inflation, deflation worldwide wages.

18. His tax program 0-10-15-25 is simple.

19. His universal interstate medical/ insurance program is very realistic/ competition.

20. He has a good five point immigration program.

21. He’s pro military & Vet’s [improve VA hospital/care] Take ISIS oil fields to pay Vets.

22. He wants to seal off the boarder [build that wall] He’s built a 96 story building/ he thinks that’s harder than constructing a wall. He understands that a nation without borders, language and laws is not a nation.

23. He’s anti-Iran deal/ pro-Israel. He says it states we have to protect Iran if Israel attacks [Iran keeps saying they are going to wipe Israel and us off of the map].

24. His pro Christmas stance is anti [political correct].

25. He also realizes that our nation is being trashed worldwide and speaks up about it.

26. He recognizes the China money manipulation policy which is anti-USA.

27. He says that Japan’s tariff on US goods [one way deal making].

28. He wants to put a tariff on Mexican goods/ all traffic/ cut off aid.

29. Remember when Trump said; we protect Saudi Arabia therefore they must pay.

30. We fought and spend billions in Afghanistan to help those people and China is mining their minerals because the Obama administration is incompetent/ can’t win at negotiating/ stupid leaders.

31. He’s warning America of [Poisons vaccines] and the dangers.

32. He wants a high tech military/ a world class military/ hardware/ hacking/ security [too good to fail].

33. He realizes we have a Muslin problem in this nation.
34. He thinks Obama’s birth certificate is a fraud [check out his SS#, no draft card/ old pass port/ E-verification status, school records [remember his dad isn’t American therefore he isn’t qualified for the office he’s in].

35. He will work for a $1 per year salary, give the rest to charity and not accept the pension after presidency if elected.

36. Trump is going to organize the FASTEST government ever seen... No BS red tape.
37. He will use China's influence in North Korea to secure the peninsula of Korea and in the process increase commerce amongst China Sea nations...

SUMMARY
Like him or not, agree with him or not, it doesn’t matter. So far Trump is the only candidate who has shown that he “can up-set the apple-cart” and make things happen and he is exactly what America needs at this point in time!

Everybody should do their homework on the candidates.

We must not listen to the “political main stream media”. They are not going to tell you the truth! They have a way of twisting words for their own story and agenda! There is an important choice that each voter has to make. Either you cast your vote for another “puppet candidate” and business as usual in Washington or you support Donald J. Trump

MAKE AMERICA GREAT!!! AGAIN
Please "LIKE" if you agree

Edited from Jeannie Gibbs another patriotic American @ FB

Some of it are bad reasons (like the vaccine shit), but take what you think is legitimate.

[Liberty Sea]

The argument against NeverTrump from a conservative blogger: In essence, Trump might do good thing X that he promised, while we know for a fact that Hillary won't. NeverTrump voters don't trust Trump's words, but by arguing that there is a possibility, however small, that he will advance conservative interest while Hillary 100% won't, you can convince them not to sit home or vote for Clinton.

Quote:

A. Trump might appoint conservatives to the Supreme Court. But we KNOW that Hillary won't. This reason by itself ought to incline one to take a stand against the leftist candidate. I don't need to explain to my astute readers how important the composition of SCOTUS is. The composition of SCOTUS 'trumps' in long-term importance the identity of POTUS, if you will excuse the pun (and even if you won't.)... even one Hillary term will do irreparable damage to the country because of her Supreme Court nominations. Irreparable.

B. It is a very good bet that Trump will put a severe dent in the influx of illegal aliens across the southern border. But we KNOW that Hillary will do nothing to stem the illegal tide. If anything she'll encourage it because in her cynical eyes they are 'undocumented Democrats.' The strategy of the Left is to alter the demographics of the USA in such a way that conservatives are permanently rendered politically ineffective.

You will have noticed by now how liberals routinely suppress the distinction between legal and illegal immigrants by speaking of immigrants or 'migrants' without qualification. Michael Dukakis -- remember him? -- recently went on about how Trump's ancestors came from Germany. Right, but they immigrated legally. So how is that relevant to the topic of illegal immigration? Here again we see another example of liberal mendacity. Dukakis, De Blasio, and the usual suspects misrepresent their opponents as wanting a stoppage of all immigration. They are lying.

C. A third thing Trump might very well do is stop the outrage of sanctuary cities. But we KNOW Hillary won't. By the way, what do sanctuary cities provide sanctuary from? The rule of law.

D. A fourth thing Trump can be expected to do is enforce civil order and free speech rights in the face of such disorderly elements as the members of Black Lives Matter. These liars and thugs have targeted the police and are actively working to undermine the rule of law. They disrupt speakers. One even disrupted a speech by Bernie Sanders! Hillary is in bed with them. She repeats all the leftist lies about Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, 'mass incarceration,' 'white privilege,' and so on. And what is most despicable is that she does it cynically for her own personal advantage.

...The single most important issue respecting the question of civil order is control of the nation's borders. Hillary will do nothing on this issue except lie about it. Trump may do something about it. See (B) above. This clinches the matter for me. My reader strains at a gnat while swallowing a camel when he brings up Trump's threatening remarks. Ask yourself: which is worse, Trump's words or the repeated and well-orchestrated leftist disruptions of conservative events? Words or actual physical violence?
...

E. A fifth thing Trump might do is defend religious liberties. We KNOW that Hillary won't. Never forget that the Left is anti-religion and has been since 1789. Part of the reason for this is that the Left is totalitarian: it can brook no competitors to State power. This is why it must destroy belief in God and in the family. The god of the leftist is the State, the apparatchiki of the latter being the State's 'priesthood.'

F. A sixth thing Trump might do is defend Second Amendment rights. We KNOW that Hillary won't. She is a mendacious 'stealth ideologue' who won't admit that she is for Aussie-style confiscation, but that is what the liberty-basher and Constitution-trasher is for. She realizes that guns in the hands of citizens are a check on her leftist totalitarianism.

G. And then came Brussells. A seventh thing Trump might do is take serious and 'meaningful' steps against Islamic terrorism. We KNOW that Hillary won't.

Add these reasons together and you have a strong cumulative-case argument for the preferrability of Trump over Hillary should it come to such a contest.

[DamienCasanova]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016...lfare-as-/

Half of immigrant-led households collect welfare as admission rules go unenforced

Immigrants are supposed to be beneficial to the U.S. — so much so that federal law requires them to prove they won’t end up on the public dole if they are legally admitted.

But it’s a stricture honored more in the breach than in compliance, according to statistics obtained by the Federation for American Immigration Reform, which found that of the millions of legal immigrants living in the U.S. and collecting welfare or other public benefits, only a single person was kicked out of the country over the last three years for becoming a public burden.

That seems to fly in the face of federal policies that, dating back to the very first broad immigration law in the 1880s, have demanded that immigrants prove they will be able to support themselves.

New immigrants can be denied if they can’t show their financial means, and those already in the country can be deported if they fail to live up to the bargain — but that hardly ever happens, according to FAIR’s data.

The group had asked the Executive Office for Immigration Review, which hears the cases, for data on five countries: Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, Cuba and Colombia. EOIR said it found just three cases brought between 2013 and 2015, all of them against Mexicans, and only one of those charges was sustained.

EOIR said it didn’t have data for all nationalities.

No enforcement means more impoverished immigrants willing to test their chances, said Ian Smith, the FAIR investigator who obtained the data.

“Like all removal grounds, they’re supposed to deter that behavior, and it’s there to make sure that [those] people come into this country are at least somewhat desirable,” he said. “It was supposed to be a filtration mechanism. It’s like anything. If you don’t enforce it, the deterrence element gets turned off.”

More than half of immigrant-led households use at least one welfare program, according to research by the Center for Immigration Studies. By comparison, 30 percent of households led by native-born U.S. citizens take welfare.

Immigrants from Mexico and Central America have the highest rate, with nearly three-quarters using at least one program. The Caribbean is second, with a 51 percent use rate.

The center said that’s not surprising given that welfare is inversely related to education, meaning the less educated someone is, the more likely he or she will be poor and will take welfare. Central American and Mexican immigrants are overwhelmingly less educated, according to the center’s findings.

But making charges stick against immigrants on the dole is exceedingly difficult, analysts say.

While the law doesn’t define “public charge,” court cases and guidance the Clinton administration issued in the late 1990s has restricted when agents can pursue cases.

According to those requirements, many welfare programs don’t even count against immigrants, and even when they do, states or federal agencies must have tried to get the immigrant to repay the money, a judge has to have sided with the government’s case, and the immigrant must have refused to comply in order for a public charge case to stick. The violation also must have occurred in the first several years after an immigrant was admitted.

“Collectively, the various sources addressing the meaning of public charge suggest that an alien’s receipt of public benefits, per se, is unlikely to result in the alien being deemed removable on public charge grounds,” the Congressional Research Service concluded in a report earlier this year.

Mr. Smith, the FAIR investigator who obtained the new data from the government, said it’s time to loosen the requirements.

“More programs, not just cash programs, should be made out of bounds for immigrants when it comes to public charge removability. America’s bountiful welfare system is a major magnet for unskilled foreigners to come here,” he said.

A top EOIR official told FAIR that the government’s rare use of public charge cases is likely due to the difficulty of making the charges stick. He said when federal officials decide someone needs to go, they go after some other breach that’s easier to prove.

The EOIR declined to comment to The Washington Times, saying the agency doesn’t interpret its data, nor will it discuss individual cases.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the agency responsible for bringing the cases in the first place, signaled that it’s focused on more serious cases such as risks to national security.

“ICE is committed to focusing on smart, effective immigration enforcement and makes custody determinations on a case-by-case basis, prioritizing serious criminal offenders and other individuals who pose a risk to national security or public safety,” said Jennifer Elzea, an ICE spokeswoman