Donald Trump's venue for Alabama rally moved to larger stadium.

PatsFan1283 · Aug 23, 2015

He wasn't speaking to the issue of the 14th amendment, he was speaking to Trump's overall surge based on a populist and nationalist message and how that is playing well because of the current political climate even though it isn't the answer to what ails us.

And yes, deporting 20 million people isn't feasible and mostly fear mongering rhetoric that would be impractical to truly implement.

RenoChazz · Aug 23, 2015

cut across shorty said:
Maybe you get it, but by what you wrote I can't be sure. You seem to be making a mostly separate point. The "absurd" statement I was responding to was the notion that there is/was a constitutional amendment that defined marriage as being between a man and a woman and that since that has been changed to some degree, working around the 14 amendment shouldn't be much of a challenge and that similar tactics can be administered.

The question then becomes "what is wrong with that statement/notion ???" The answer should be obvious to any knowledgeable person. In case it isn't, the answer is There's no such constitutional amendment defining marriage. It was a question for the courts to decide and it was determined that is not the definition.

To think working around the 14th amendment can done in a similar manner is frankly idiotic. There are specific rules for changing/removing/adding a constitutional amendment (any amendment) and it requires a very high standard that involves elected officials across the nation. The courts have no involvement. Most of the GOP candidates understand this. However, these candidates are slaves to the narratives that are fed to their clueless, easily duped, know-nothing, followers and they have to treat them like they're intelligent and play along so these followers don't ever realize how stupid they are. It becomes a major risk to tell the truth. They believe if they do that, they'll no longer be viable and they're probably right about that. Mostly because they'll get no monetary support from the party or the super rich. For an example, compare what Ted Cruz is saying now about changing the 14th amendment to what he's said in the past. It's the exact opposite.

Yeah I knew what you were getting at there that's what the plus one. The next paragraph was just adding a separate point in why he's so popular. There's more to it than dumb people. The same can be said about Sanders supporters and their cluelessness on economics.

scottcarter · Aug 23, 2015

MikeB said:
The background is hilarious

:toast:

PatsFan1283 · Aug 23, 2015

If I were trump I'd pay Warner Bros for the rights to the last scene of the Dark Knight rises and just digitally alter the head of Batman and put his own head on it.

<dl style="margin-top: 0.2em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; color: rgb(37, 37, 37); font-family: sans-serif; line-height: 22.3999996185303px;"><dd style="margin-left: 1.6em; margin-bottom: 0.1em; margin-right: 0px;">Commissioner James Gordon: Because he's the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So, we'll hunt him, because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent guardian. A watchful protector. A Dark Knight.</dd>
Then Trump 2016 comes on the screen
</dl>

GoSooners · Aug 23, 2015

Not one brown face to be seen. Just a bunch of dumb crackers

cutacrossshorty · Aug 23, 2015

RenoChazz said:
Yeah I knew what you were getting at there that's what the plus one. The next paragraph was just adding a separate point in why he's so popular. There's more to it than dumb people. The same can be said about Sanders supporters and their cluelessness on economics.

Are you saying that in a hypothetical matchup of say Trump supporters versus Sanders supporters, where both groups were given an exam on Economics and you were able to wager on which side scored better, you would wager against the Sanders supporters? Good luck with that.

RenoChazz · Aug 23, 2015

cut across shorty said:
Are you saying that in a hypothetical matchup of say Trump supporters versus Sanders supporters, where both groups were given an exam on Economics and you were able to wager on which side scored better, you would wager against the Sanders supporters? Good luck with that.

LOL Sander's is an economic illiterate, I would take Sander's supporters over Sanders. But this is tough though, because as you pointed out earlier, Trump supporters are the bottom of the intellectual food chain.

RenoChazz · Aug 23, 2015

Gary Johnson isn't in yet but he will be after the two parties settle. He believes in evolution, GMO science, Climate change (Science Bitches!), free markets, ending the failed war on drugs, gay marriage, pro choice, pro IMMIGRATION & open borders, nonintervention foreign policy, civil liberties, and believes that economic liberty and civil liberty are a package deal. Plus he has actual executive experience as Governor of New Mexico, where his ideals were put into action. He won with 2-1 democratic voters, and was the most popular and successful Governor in the nation, taking New Mexico from billion dollar deficit to 1 billion dollar surplus, on a border state, with the biggest jobs growth.

PatsFan1283 · Aug 23, 2015

RenoChazz said:
Gary Johnson isn't in yet but he will be after the two parties settle. He believes in evolution, GMO science, Climate change (Science Bitches!), free markets, ending the failed war on drugs, gay marriage, pro choice, pro IMMIGRATION & open borders, nonintervention foreign policy, civil liberties, and believes that economic liberty and civil liberty are a package deal. Plus he has actual executive experience as Governor of New Mexico, where his ideals were put into action. He won with 2-1 democratic voters, and was the most popular and successful Governor in the nation, taking New Mexico from billion dollar deficit to 1 billion dollar surplus, on a border state, with the biggest jobs growth.

I like G Johnson but he has no chance. Considering how many Americans agree with the fiscal conservative/socially liberal message, it is pretty funny a candidate hasn't been able to capture that momentum and make a legitimate run with it. We can blame party politics for that.

While we're throwing out candidates who we think are electable and can bring us back to prosperity....

RenoChazz · Aug 23, 2015

PatsFan1283 said:
I like G Johnson but he has no chance. Considering how many Americans agree with the fiscal conservative/socially liberal message, it is pretty funny a candidate hasn't been able to capture that momentum and make a legitimate run with it. We can blame party politics for that.

While we're throwing out candidates who we think are electable and can bring us back to prosperity....

I like Marco Rubio on a lot of things, and he's the GOP's best shot, but if it's not him, I really like Johnson's fiscal conservative and socially liberal approach to grow with the hispanics. If it's Trump and Sanders, Johnson has a shot at getting the hispanic vote. If he can get some money behind him and get into the debates forget about it. He's like a smarter version of the Paul's without the baggage.

PatsFan1283 · Aug 23, 2015

Why didn't Johnson just run in the republican field? His message would be so unique that he could standout and get his name out there in the mainstream. Then once he flames out just pivot to 3rd party. Seems like he does a poor job of growing the libertarian brand.

RenoChazz · Aug 23, 2015

PatsFan1283 said:
Why didn't Johnson just run in the republican field? His message would be so unique that he could standout and get his name out there in the mainstream. Then once he flames out just pivot to 3rd party. Seems like he does a poor job of growing the libertarian brand.

The republican party fucked him. They omitted his name from the polls, so he had no chance of even being in the debates. This might be his year though. He needs money though. If some of these guys like Tesla, ******, Whole foods, Koch brothers, would donate to the cause he might get in.

cutacrossshorty · Aug 23, 2015

RenoChazz said:
But this is tough though, because as you pointed out earlier, Trump supporters are the bottom of the intellectual food chain.

First of all, glad you recognized the humor. However, I don't think I ever specifically isolated Trump supporters for lack of intelligence. My criticism was of basically anyone who abandons critical thinking and readily accepts fairly obvious falsehoods and misinformation that the well funded think tanks and media outlets feed them. These think tanks and media outlets are owned and operated by the power brokers and most any GOP candidate can't afford to go against them. They have to embrace the falsehood of the day or they are finished in that party. Trump has been a bit of an exception with some of the things he's said (like calling the others puppets and how easily they can be bought and citing important things that Planned Parenthood does, etc.). The power brokers would really like to destroy him and get him out of the way and he knows that, but as I wrote in another thread (which probably went largely unnoticed), his weapon against them was not ruling out a 3rd party run. He's since confirmed that by saying "treat me fairly and I won't run 3rd party". Which roughly translates to "Don't fuck with me or I'll make you pay".

PatsFan1283 · Aug 23, 2015

RenoChazz said:
The republican party fucked him. They omitted his name from the polls, so he had no chance of even being in the debates. This might be his year though. He needs money though. If some of these guys like Tesla, ******, Whole foods, Koch brothers, would donate to the cause he might get in.

I admire the optimism but it likely won't be his year. I'd probably put the chances at .5% or so. I don't think he can raise money as easily as you think. The Kochs have huge investments in GOP candidates and run entire PACs supporting them. Not to mention he believes in climate change and a large portion of their business comes from fossil fuels.

I could see it happening sooner than later with a 3rd party candidate like that but don't think this is the year. Unless it is Trump but that's a different animal.

RenoChazz · Aug 23, 2015

PatsFan1283 · Aug 23, 2015

LOL I had no clue he was CEO of a weed company called Cannabis Sativa. Yeah he has 0 chance. America isn't ready for all that.

Enfuego · Aug 23, 2015

PatsFan1283 said:
LOL I had no clue he owned Cannabis Sativa. Yeah he has 0 chance. America isn't ready for all that.

Who would you like to see get the Republican nod PF?

PatsFan1283 · Aug 23, 2015

Enfuego said:
Who would you like to see get the Republican nod PF?

Marco Rubio

RenoChazz · Aug 23, 2015

PatsFan1283 said:
LOL I had no clue he was CEO of a weed company called Cannabis Sativa. Yeah he has 0 chance. America isn't ready for all that.

Really? He started out door to door mowing lawns, and grew into the biggest construction company in New Mexico. He had no 200 million dollar inheritance like some business men. Now he's investing in legal Marijuana. From the looks of things I think America is more than ready for legal Marijuana. But maybe it's just a west coast thing like wearing sox.

PatsFan1283 · Aug 23, 2015

RenoChazz said:
Really? He started out door to door mowing lawns, and grew into the biggest construction company in New Mexico. He had no 200 million dollar inheritance like some business men. Now he's investing in legal Marijuana. From the looks of things I think America is more than ready for legal Marijuana. But maybe it's just a west coast thing like wearing sox.

Yeah, in a logical world it would be fine. In this one? I'm not sure that plays in Peoria. I could be more jaded than you about that though.

There is a difference between people being cool with weed being decriminalized and accepting the POTUS as a weed entrepreneur.