At least he's not Hillary...

[AUChizad]

You have no clue what anyone thinks. You are so busy hating Trump you cannot even read.

Everyone voting for Trump has said they are voting against hitlary. And that if you are not voting GOP, then you are voting for hitlary. 

Fresh water is cheap in this country. Use it to wash some of that sand out...

OIC.

The GOP destroyed themselves. You can only lie to the people so much, and then they catch on.

Those like you have allowed the establishment to continue unabated for years, you helped create a Trump.

Because Cruz has been there, he is considered part of the establishment by many.

And I said the PERCEPTION is that Cruz is part of the establishment SINCE he does hold office.
So YES, If you support Cruz while poo-pooing Trump, you will be perceived as supporting the establishment.

Silly little man, they are seeing the voice of the people strike out against the establishment.

It seems the powers that be are very scared of the people. The republican party has had a long time to clean house. They did not. Now we have Trump. He is a creation of the GOP's failure. Bringing Romney out now is a bit pathetic. And embarrassing for the GOP leadership.

This is not counting your posts about how the meddlin' GOP done trite to steal the 'lection frm Trump!!! Or the tons of times you nodded your head and agreed with dozens of others in this thread taking the same anti-GOP stance.

[AUChizad]

Trump apparently wants to launch his own Al Jazeera for his Goebbels style propaganda.

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/donald-trump-tv-network

[CCTAU]

Yet you ignore the posts about now that Trump is the GOP candidate, it's time to get behind the GOP.

And none of those things made me anti GOP. U was just stating the establishment GOP guys were getting what they deserved.

You are still like a bitchy wife. I can't believe you wasted your time getting those posts. (Yet selectively)

[Snaggletiger]

I'm confused.

[dallaswareagle]

Trump apparently wants to launch his own Al Jazeera for his Goebbels style propaganda.

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/donald-trump-tv-network

Well, Hillary has:

CBS
NBC
CBS
CNN
MSNBC

[Token]

I'm confused.

Which is the exact point of the current state of politics.

[GH2001]

So, if I understand this conspiracy correctly, Trump was in the bag for Hillary the whole time and his intention was to get her elected. And Trump has put all of the money that he will get, since there aren't any big contributions left that will be made to his campaign, according to x information--into his own companies.

Now that he's the last man standing, I guess he's just still in it to try to siphon votes away from Sanders.

The man is a genius! I guess he just needs to hope that he doesn't by some ill-fated chance get elected. Then, his whole plan will be foiled.

Damn! Why couldn't I see this? I feel so duped.

You just failed miserably at satire.

[AUChizad]

You are still like a bitchy wife. I can't believe you wasted your time getting those posts. (Yet selectively)

(Flagrant lie about past positions in the thread)
(Quote posts proving you lied that are easily searchable)
"OMG I can't believe you wasted so much time to prove I'm a liar!!!"

That's my favorite line of argument.

I used to let this type of bullshit go for too long until I realized apparently most the board's memories are short enough to believe the revisionist history from certain people of either my past positions, or theirs.

Sad!

[CCTAU]

(Flagrant lie about past positions in the thread)
(Quote posts proving you lied that are easily searchable)
"OMG I can't believe you wasted so much time to prove I'm a liar!!!"

That's my favorite line of argument.

I used to let this type of bullshit go for too long until I realized apparently most the board's memories are short enough to believe the revisionist history from certain people of either my past positions, or theirs.

Sad!

Does your husband get annoyed at this action also?

[Kaos]

(Flagrant lie about past positions in the thread)
(Quote posts proving you lied that are easily searchable)
"OMG I can't believe you wasted so much time to prove I'm a liar!!!"

That's my favorite line of argument.

I used to let this type of bullshit go for too long until I realized apparently most the board's memories are short enough to believe the revisionist history from certain people of either my past positions, or theirs.

Sad!

You've got to stop calling people liars. 

The comment is, in itself, a lie.  And it's unseemly.  Stop it. 

You care, like, a billion times more about this "people are lying about me" than anybody on here.  Trust me, I know. I used to let shit like this get to me.  You've got to let it go.  Even if you "win" the discussion, guess what?  You don't actually win anything. There's no trophy or certificate.  Nobody is going to step back and say, "My GOD, what a marvelous point.  Chizad has unmasked CCTAU as a liar!  We must shun him, banish the liar from our midst!!" 

It's just not worth it.  Have the discussion, don't get worked up about it (win or lose), take your medicine when it's warranted (and there have been heaping doses delivered in this thread on occasion) and then go do something productive. 

"Neener, Neener, you LIED!" with an ass bucket of cut and pasted comments isn't it. 

[WiregrassTiger]

You just failed miserably at satire.

ok. Eat me.

[Saniflush]

ok. Eat me.

Once again, not satire.

[wesfau2]

You've got to stop calling people liars. 

Why?  If the accused is demonstrably misrepresenting facts, then why not call them out?

It's just not worth it.  Have the discussion, don't get worked up about it (win or lose), take your medicine when it's warranted (and there have been heaping doses delivered in this thread on occasion) and then go do something productive. 

I think (don't want to speak for him) that Chad is working from a basic set of debating "rules": cite your facts and acknowledge when you misstep.

The complete inability of most of his debate foils in this forum to adhere to these simple (and pretty universal) guidelines is the source of contention.

I don't think Chad declares the "win" when he points out past inconsistencies in a poster's positions, he's just trying to get the debate/discussion back on track and/or break through some pretty obvious cognitive dissonance.

[GH2001]

Going back to the Trump campaign finance topic, good read from the uber left leaning foxnews and howie kurtz. I think this is a "right down the middle" article. Not chicken little but not sugar coating it either:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/06/22/media-freakout-over-trumps-poor-fundraising-how-bad-is-problem.html

There is probably some cause for concern. Just not to the level of what the New York Times would want people to believe. Trump is behind the 8 ball here and a lot of that is the inexperience of him and his former campaign mgr. Again, it may be something Manafort will fix. But the next month will be critical for him.

[AUChizad]

Why?  If the accused is demonstrably misrepresenting facts, then why not call them out?

I think (don't want to speak for him) that Chad is working from a basic set of debating "rules": cite your facts and acknowledge when you misstep.

The complete inability of most of his debate foils in this forum to adhere to these simple (and pretty universal) guidelines is the source of contention.

I don't think Chad declares the "win" when he points out past inconsistencies in a poster's positions, he's just trying to get the debate/discussion back on track and/or break through some pretty obvious cognitive dissonance.

Thanks. I'd hate to have had to "waste time" to type that.

[War Eagle!!!]

Going back to the Trump campaign finance topic, good read from the uber left leaning foxnews and howie kurtz. I think this is a "right down the middle" article. Not chicken little but not sugar coating it either:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/06/22/media-freakout-over-trumps-poor-fundraising-how-bad-is-problem.html

There is probably some cause for concern. Just not to the level of what the New York Times would want people to believe. Trump is behind the 8 ball here and a lot of that is the inexperience of him and his former campaign mgr. Again, it may be something Manafort will fix. But the next month will be critical for him.

The problem is that the Clinton's are a machine. They know how to play the political game.

I feel that Trump could actually do well if someone would tell him to stick to his issues (Immigration, gun control, economy) and stop the petty bullshit that Clinton is going to trap him in. The Clinton machine is too good at the political game and will bury Trump if he continues what has happened the last month or so.

[AUChizad]

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/284281-trump-questions-clintons-religion

Trump questions Clinton’s religion
By Jonathan Easley

Donald Trump questioned Hillary Clinton’s commitment to her Christian faith on Tuesday, saying that little is known about her spiritual life even though she’s been in the public eye for decades.

Speaking to a group of top social conservative evangelical Christian leaders at a gathering in New York City, Trump said, “we don't know anything about Hillary in terms of religion.”

“Now, she's been in the public eye for years and years, and yet there's no — there's nothing out there,” Trump said. “There's like nothing out there. It's going to be an extension of Obama but it's going to be worse, because with Obama you had your guard up. With Hillary you don't, and it's going to be worse.”

The meeting was closed to the press but E.W. Webb, a faith leader on hand for the event, posted video of the remarks.

Clinton does not speak frequently about being a Methodist, but she has opened up about it on several occasions on the campaign trail this year.

Trump on Tuesday also said that while it’s important to pray for everyone, that those one hand shouldn’t be “politically correct” by praying for the nation’s leaders who are “selling the evangelicals down the tubes.”

“People were saying, some of the people were saying, 'Let's pray for our leaders,'” Trump said.

“I said, 'Well, you can pray for your leaders' — and I agree with that, pray for everyone — but what you really have to do is pray to get everybody out to vote for one specific person.

“And we can't be, again, politically correct and say we pray for all of our leaders, because all of your leaders are selling Christianity down the tubes, selling the evangelicals down the tubes,” Trump said. “And it's a very, very, very, very bad thing that's happening.”

Not sure what the hell those last four paragraphs were supposed to mean.

So I guess Hillary's a secret Moozlim now too? I bet CCTAU even has a photoshopped meme to prove it.

Let me google that for you:
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=hillary+clinton+methodist&tbm=vid

There are literally hundreds of thousands of hours of her speaking about her Methodist faith for you to choose from.

Meanwhile, here's what we know about Trump's religion, despite being in the public eye even longer than Hillary.
http://www.redstate.com/aglanon/2016/06/22/heres-donald-trump-said-jesus-playboy-mag-jerry-falwell-posed-front/
From 1990:

PB: How large a role does pure ego play in your deal making and enjoyment of publicity?
DT: Every successful person has a very large ego.
PB: Every successful person? Mother Teresa? Jesus Christ?
DT: Far greater egos than you will ever understand.

From 2016:

"I am not sure I have," Trump said when asked if he'd ever asked God for forgiveness. "I just go on and try to do a better job from there. I don't think so," he said. "I think if I do something wrong, I think, I just try and make it right. I don't bring God into that picture. I don't."

But I guess me expecting any degree of honesty out of Trump is just me saying "Neener, Neener, you LIED!"

 

[Kaos]

Why?  If the accused is demonstrably misrepresenting facts, then why not call them out?

I think (don't want to speak for him) that Chad is working from a basic set of debating "rules": cite your facts and acknowledge when you misstep.

The complete inability of most of his debate foils in this forum to adhere to these simple (and pretty universal) guidelines is the source of contention.

I don't think Chad declares the "win" when he points out past inconsistencies in a poster's positions, he's just trying to get the debate/discussion back on track and/or break through some pretty obvious cognitive dissonance.

So...... Neener, neener, neener then. 

Got it. 

If youclaim Chizad is dispassionately "debating" and maintaining the high standards of civil discourse you're either trolling yourself or in a delusional fuge state.

But carry on, wayward son.  There will be no peace when you are done.

[Kaos]

But I guess me expecting any degree of honesty out of Trump is just me saying "Neener, Neener, you LIED!"

^^^^
FINALLY gets it. 

[AUChizad]

So...... Neener, neener, neener then. 

Got it. 

If youclaim Chizad is dispassionately "debating" and maintaining the high standards of civil discourse you're either trolling yourself or in a delusional fuge state.

But carry on, wayward son.  There will be no peace when you are done.

So...you're acknowledging it is impossible to make your points honestly and lying is just to be expected in this discussion?

Got it.

And if you think I'm just hurling insults while you are "dispationately debating" you are a lying liar who lies. But I guess we established that.