Trump & Hillary

[Louigi]

I disagree with a bunch of Gary Johnson's platform stances and agree with some too. Although, too many I disagree with, therefore will not vote for him.

Cutting the military by 43% is probably the biggest. My position is the #1 thing the federal government should do is protect and defend our citizens and economy BEFORE doing ANYTHING else. Cutting that 43% is not something I can support.

Also, It is incredibly irresponsible to support the Fair Tax before supporting repealing the 16th amendment immediately. To have both at the same time is a recipe for disaster. I support the Fair Tax but his implementation is stupid.

I don't agree with his stance of the Federal Reserve. While it the Fed needs some serious reworking and transparency, opposing quantitative easing at all, when not opposing quantitative tightening tells me he does not understand monetary policy and is only using this rhetoric to tickle the ears of anti fed folks.

The fed actually has become more transparent. They used to never tell us when the were buying and selling bonds, now they advertise it. The fed has done quantitative easing and tightening throughout it's history. Sometimes they do this well, other times not so much. All this is, is either buying or selling government bonds to increase or decrease the money supply, M1-M4 (not printing or shredding money, the treasury does that).

Essentially Johnson does not like it when the Fed buys bonds, but does not mind it when they sell them. If the fed did not do this we would see wild swings in inflation/deflation. Not good for our economy.

Also the fed has performed massive quantitative easing recently while at the same time increasing bank reserve requirements to record levels, letting the bonds they bought mature without repurchasing, performing massive bank audits and approvals for all corporate actions, FDIC raising insurance premiums, and Dodd-Frank regulations gumming up bank lending. Those actually counteract "easing". Anti fed folks rail about the quantitative easing but conveniently leave out the other actions that "shred money". The massive inflation they warned us about 8 years ago never happened (as I predicted), because of this and massive productivity of the workforce. Just like when Ross Perot predicted the world would end because of Y2K.

Cue Strum to follow with anti fed poasts.......

 

[strummingram]

Cue Strum to follow with anti fed poasts.......

My feelings on the Fed, and your feelings, don't and won't matter one bit. Trump and Hillary have no intention of doing anything the Fed doesn't want them to do. Control a country's money and you control their government. You keep harping about the income tax and how it's unconstitutional. Well, the Federal Reserve Act and the 16th Amendment came as a set. You keep the Fed and you'll keep the IRS and the income tax. Our government doesn't have control over it's own monetary system. So, WE don't have any control over it.

And, as far as "defense" spending; This country has spent more on bombs, bullets, planes, missiles, and ships than every other country, empire, and village in history combined. We're evolving into a one-world, one-country existence. It's probably a good thing, actually. Being afraid of each other isn't progress. The reason I mention this is; No country is going to ever INVADE the USA and take it over. The USA is worth too much intact than it ever would be conquered.

The way Donald Trump speaks and acts publicly makes me fear a Trump presidency far more than a Hillary Clinton presidency. I would never vote for either of them. Especially when there is a much more qualified candidate on the ballot.

 

[Louigi]

You keep harping about the income tax and how it's unconstitutional. Well, the Federal Reserve Act and the 16th Amendment came as a set. You keep the Fed and you'll keep the IRS and the income tax.

JP Morgan was the Fed, before the Fed. If the Fed were abolished, banks would step in and do the same. You forget the 16th amendment made it allowable to tax individuals. Corporations were never exempt in the constitution and we always have had a tax collecting entity for this. Even if the 16th is repealed the corporate tax remains.

 

[strummingram]

JP Morgan was the Fed, before the Fed. If the Fed were abolished, banks would step in and do the same. You forget the 16th amendment made it allowable to tax individuals. Corporations were never exempt in the constitution and we always have had a tax collecting entity for this. Even if the 16th is repealed the corporate tax remains.

I never forgot that.

JP Morgan was part of the handful at Jekyll Island that created the Fed.

 

[prlyles]

I'm at a loss on this. I just can't see me voting for either one. I honestly don't know what in the hell to do.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

I have to admit I did find it quite entertaining watching Cruz NOT endorse him, although that was a low thing to do and I am sure it might hurt his career, unless of course, Trump actually wins this election and things fall apart like some of us think would happen in that case. I am hoping Trump will at least spend his time speaking tonight telling us EXACTLY what he plans to do and not waste any more of our time puffing up his ego and congratulating himself on his self-believed "greatness" and not spend any more time telling us how crooked Hillary is. We already know that stuff. I want to hear something new like what he plans to do besides build a wall and deport people, unless he wants to lay out his plan on HOW he will actually do that.

 

[UNC71-00]

I'm at a loss on this. I just can't see me voting for either one. I honestly don't know what in the hell to do.

Vote for Johnson so you can bitch about it either way. Plus Johnson will legalize weed, which you can sell at the store and then use the profits to pay off wagers.

 

[UNC71-00]

I have to admit I did find it quite entertaining watching Cruz NOT endorse him, although that was a low thing to do and I am sure it might hurt his career, unless of course, Trump actually wins this election and things fall apart like some of us think would happen in that case. I am hoping Trump will at least spend his time speaking tonight telling us EXACTLY what he plans to do and not waste any more of our time puffing up his ego and congratulating himself on his self-believed "greatness" and not spend any more time telling us how crooked Hillary is. We already know that stuff. I want to hear something new like what he plans to do besides build a wall and deport people, unless he wants to lay out his plan on HOW he will actually do that.

Don't waste your time watching, because he is going to be vague all the way and only speak to the identity of Make America Great Again.

Why in the world would he hop off his winning horse now?

 

[tarheel0910]

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Vote for Johnson so you can bitch about it either way. Plus Johnson will legalize weed, which you can sell at the store and then use the profits to pay off wagers.

Oh Johnson is the one I voted for last time and I am voting for him this time too. I just find this whole thing entertaining, especially with Trump. I am wondering how much crap will these people take just for the love of their party. It amazes me sometimes. I often wonder if behind the scenes they are all laughing their asses off and scratching their heads wondering what in the world can they actually do to get these people to see how ridiculous this is and that it really is all being done just to get Hillary the spot guaranteed! They could sell sh*t to a manure salesman, I suppose!

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Don't waste your time watching, because he is going to be vague all the way and only speak to the identity of Make America Great Again.

Why in the world would he hop off his winning horse now?

I totally agree and I find it amazing that all these people that support him don't want to know exactly what his plan is... they are literally blindly following this maniacal lunatic without question. I don't get it.

 

[UNC71-00]

I totally agree and I find it amazing that all these people that support him don't want to know exactly what his plan is... they are literally blindly following this maniacal lunatic without question. I don't get it.

How many politicians lay out plans and then stick to the plan? That's why most people don't care a candidate's plans- they rarely, if ever, come to fruition.

Trump is a combination of 2 phenomenons. The first is that a lot of voters elected Pubs to Congress to overturn the ACA, as that was what the Pubs campaigned on, and that didn't happen.
Furthermore the current administration has repeatedly lied, to our faces, without remorse. So people now have zero trust in what any of these fools say.

The second phenomenon is that many people voted for Obama and believed that he would bring the country together, when in fact, the country has never been more divided. The current rhetoric is absurd- if you support Trump you are a racist, a bigot, a homophobe, a sexist and a Nazi. So there are plenty of people who are giving people who espouse this nonsense the middle finger. I know I am.

In fact, you yourself are guilty of this type rhetoric in your poast above. Tell me, what makes Trump a manical lunatic? I want to know exactly the reasons, not some vague bs you saw on Hillary's Twitter feed.

 

[UNC71-00]

Oh Johnson is the one I voted for last time and I am voting for him this time too. I just find this whole thing entertaining, especially with Trump. I am wondering how much crap will these people take just for the love of their party. It amazes me sometimes. I often wonder if behind the scenes they are all laughing their asses off and scratching their heads wondering what in the world can they actually do to get these people to see how ridiculous this is and that it really is all being done just to get Hillary the spot guaranteed! They could sell sh*t to a manure salesman, I suppose!

What specific policy positions do you like about Johnson? Which don't you like?

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

What specific policy positions do you like about Johnson? Which don't you like?

I like that he wants to attempt to do something about the Federal reserve, not sure anyone CAN actually do anything though, but an attempt would be a start perhaps. I like that he wants to separate church and state, as it should be. I like his civil rights beliefs.

I am not sure if I disagree with him but I admit I do not understand anything about Cap and Trade or the environmental issues so if I knew more about those, maybe we'd see things differently but the main things I do agree on.

 

[UNC71-00]

I like that he wants to attempt to do something about the Federal reserve, not sure anyone CAN actually do anything though, but an attempt would be a start perhaps. I like that he wants to separate church and state, as it should be. I like his civil rights beliefs.

I am not sure if I disagree with him but I admit I do not understand anything about Cap and Trade or the environmental issues so if I knew more about those, maybe we'd see things differently but the main things I do agree on.

"Doing something about the Fed" is vague. What does he want to do and why do you approve?

Where has the separation between church and state become blurred? What is his proposal to fix this?

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

"Doing something about the Fed" is vague. What does he want to do and why do you approve?

Where has the separation between church and state become blurred? What is his proposal to fix this?

Well he wants to end the fed but I honestly don't think that will be allowed by anyone. I think the banks run the country, but I'd love an attempt at controlling them and getting our dollar to a more sound level. The value of our dollar is nuts! It is worthless almost. He wants to balance the budget and make cuts on the thing we spend way way too much on, defense. He wants to cut down entitlement programs. He wants to stop bank bailouts, etc.

I think we put too much religion into politics. I'd like to see them completely separate. We have this thing now called the Evangelicals and they apparently have a lot of influence in politics. We need to just be worrying about Americans and let everyone be free to worship as they wish as long as they are not harming anyone.

 

[UNC71-00]

Well he wants to end the fed but I honestly don't think that will be allowed by anyone. I think the banks run the country, but I'd love an attempt at controlling them and getting our dollar to a more sound level. The value of our dollar is nuts! It is worthless almost. He wants to balance the budget and make cuts on the thing we spend way way too much on, defense. He wants to cut down entitlement programs. He wants to stop bank bailouts, etc.

I think we put too much religion into politics. I'd like to see them completely separate. We have this thing now called the Evangelicals and they apparently have a lot of influence in politics. We need to just be worrying about Americans and let everyone be free to worship as they wish as long as they are not harming anyone.

So you want to end the Fed. How will monetary policy be implemented?

Religion in politics has little to do with the issue of separation of church and state.

We also have things called corporations, environmental groups, associations of gun owners, etc that have a lot of influence in American politics. And if you vote for Hillary, lots of foreign interests will have influence too, unless you think they gave hundreds of millions of dollars to the CGI because they believe in the mission.

So far, you have been no more specific than the average Trumper and possibly less.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

So you want to end the Fed. How will monetary policy be implemented?

Religion in politics has little to do with the issue of separation of church and state.

We also have things called corporations, environmental groups, associations of gun owners, etc that have a lot of influence in American politics. And if you vote for Hillary, lots of foreign interests will have influence too, unless you think they gave hundreds of millions of dollars to the CGI because they believe in the mission.

So far, you have been no more specific than the average Trumper and possibly less.

ok, if you say so. I mean I suppose I can write you an essay and explain this in detail but this is the message board and apparently being vague about stuff is par for the course around here.

As for Trump, he might actually have some good ideas but he NEVER has told us what they are, so far I see he is excellent at insulting people and acting worse than a 12 year old so that alone has convinced me not to vote for him. Hillary is TOO political and I get the same feeling with the Clintons as I do with the Bush family, something does not sit well with me and my gut tells me they are borderline mafia or something sinister. I do not trust them at all.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

So you want to end the Fed. How will monetary policy be implemented?

Religion in politics has little to do with the issue of separation of church and state.

We also have things called corporations, environmental groups, associations of gun owners, etc that have a lot of influence in American politics. And if you vote for Hillary, lots of foreign interests will have influence too, unless you think they gave hundreds of millions of dollars to the CGI because they believe in the mission.

So far, you have been no more specific than the average Trumper and possibly less.

Maybe my soul twin @strummingram can explain this better LOL

 

[tarheel0910]

So you want to end the Fed. How will monetary policy be implemented?

Religion in politics has little to do with the issue of separation of church and state.

We also have things called corporations, environmental groups, associations of gun owners, etc that have a lot of influence in American politics. And if you vote for Hillary, lots of foreign interests will have influence too, unless you think they gave hundreds of millions of dollars to the CGI because they believe in the mission.

So far, you have been no more specific than the average Trumper and possibly less.

 

[tarheel0910]

I mean I suppose I can write you an essay and explain this in detail but this is the message board and apparently being vague about stuff is par for the course around here.

Hello, I'd like to introduce you to @DSouthr

 

[UNC71-00]

ok, if you say so. I mean I suppose I can write you an essay and explain this in detail but this is the message board and apparently being vague about stuff is par for the course around here.

This is why you are intolerable.

1. You complain about people being too vague.
2. When you were asked for specifics, you responded with vagueries.
3. When called out for being vague, you complain about others being vague.

My grandmother was a very smart woman. She always said this country went to hell when women were given the right to vote, which we always thought was funny. I think she had you in mind when making that comment.

In all seriousness, why can't you just say that you are voting for Johnson because he is not Hillary or Trump? I just quickly showed that you don't have an informed opinion on the specifics of his policies, so you are like the vast majority of the rest of us in that regard. Why do you feel this need to pretend like policy details make a difference to you? They sure don't to me or most other people who are being honest.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

This is why you are intolerable.

1. You complain about people being too vague.
2. When you were asked for specifics, you responded with vagueries.
3. When called out for being vague, you complain about others being vague.

My grandmother was a very smart woman. She always said this country went to hell when women were given the right to vote, which we always thought was funny. I think she had you in mind when making that comment.

In all seriousness, why can't you just say that you are voting for Johnson because he is not Hillary or Trump? I just quickly showed that you don't have an informed opinion on the specifics of his policies, so you are like the vast majority of the rest of us in that regard. Why do you feel this need to pretend like policy details make a difference to you? They sure don't to me or most other people who are being honest.

I voted for Johnson last time and he was not Obama or Mitt! I voted for him because I do agree with his stance on social issues, civil rights and getting something done about the banks. Why is that so vague for you? I admitted that I have no knowledge in the Cap & Trade and the environmental issues. I do not claim to understand exactly every detail about the national debt but apparently this man has done well with handling the budget in his home state and got things really turned around. I am sure you will dispute this. You must "be that guy" that always does.

It is true that I do not trust Hillary or Trump whatsoever to take this office, however, I feel VERY sure that Hillary will. I don't find Mr. Johnson to be of bad character like I do the other two. Character is important to me. Sorry. I have personally met and spoke with a few presidential candidates before and I am sorry if you don't agree with my way of doing things but I do rely on my intuition for MANY things and so far it has not lead me in the wrong direction when I have paid attention to it.

So who is your candidate and WHY are you voting for them? Do tell!

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

How many politicians lay out plans and then stick to the plan? That's why most people don't care a candidate's plans- they rarely, if ever, come to fruition.

Trump is a combination of 2 phenomenons. The first is that a lot of voters elected Pubs to Congress to overturn the ACA, as that was what the Pubs campaigned on, and that didn't happen.
Furthermore the current administration has repeatedly lied, to our faces, without remorse. So people now have zero trust in what any of these fools say.

The second phenomenon is that many people voted for Obama and believed that he would bring the country together, when in fact, the country has never been more divided. The current rhetoric is absurd- if you support Trump you are a racist, a bigot, a homophobe, a sexist and a Nazi. So there are plenty of people who are giving people who espouse this nonsense the middle finger. I know I am.

In fact, you yourself are guilty of this type rhetoric in your poast above. Tell me, what makes Trump a manical lunatic? I want to know exactly the reasons, not some vague bs you saw on Hillary's Twitter feed.

First of all I don't follow twitter feeds at all. I see both of them saying things that have convinced me they are all wrong for this country. If you have heard Trump speak, you have heard him boast about how great he is and how wonderful he is and how perfectly and tremendously his businesses are run and then you have heard him insult people. Do you not find all the drama to be a bit of a put off? He wants to build a wall????? That's absurd and it won't work. He wants to deport all illegals, okay, fine... but tell me HOW? I just want to know HOW, he won't tell us. If Obama had got up on the stage and said the EXACT same things this nut has said you would be having a damn field day with it but because you obviously support the nut, it's suddenly okay... well, he is not okay for me and I don't have to explain why. My gut feeling is he will NOT win and if he did, we'd be more screwed. Sorry.

 

[UNC71-00]

I voted for Johnson last time and he was not Obama or Mitt! I voted for him because I do agree with his stance on social issues, civil rights and getting something done about the banks. Why is that so vague for you? I admitted that I have no knowledge in the Cap & Trade and the environmental issues. I do not claim to understand exactly every detail about the national debt but apparently this man has done well with handling the budget in his home state and got things really turned around. I am sure you will dispute this. You must "be that guy" that always does.

Because you aren't agreeing with any specific policy, you are agreeing with vague ideas- do something about banks, do something about religious people, etc.

Regarding Johnson on the budget (actual facts- you do with them as you will)

When Johnson took the tiller in New Mexico in 1995, the budget stood at $4.397 billion. When he left in 2003, it had grown to $7.721 billion, an increase of 7.29 percent a year. Of the eleven governors who filed to run for president this year (two Democrats, Johnson, and eight Republicans), only one had a worse record on spending growth...

....Johnson inherited a debt of $1.8 billion and left a debt of $4.6 billion, a rate of increase unmatched by the 22 governors in either party who have filed for presidential primaries in the past two decades, with the exception of Governor Tom Vilsack (D., Iowa) in 2007.....

It is true that I do not trust Hillary or Trump whatsoever to take this office, however, I feel VERY sure that Hillary will. I don't find Mr. Johnson to be of bad character like I do the other two. Character is important to me. Sorry. I have personally met and spoke with a few presidential candidates before and I am sorry if you don't agree with my way of doing things but I do rely on my intuition for MANY things and so far it has not lead me in the wrong direction when I have paid attention to it.

So who is your candidate and WHY are you voting for them? Do tell!

Voting for character is substantially different than voting for policy. Just don't be the person who votes for character and claims to vote for policy.

I am not voting FOR anyone, I am voting against Hillary and will therefore vote for Trump because has the best chance to beat her. Last year I went on record saying that I would vote for anyone other than Clinton or Bush because I don't think we need political dynasties. Nothing has changed- I voted Bernie in the primary and will vote Trump in November.

 

[UNC71-00]

First of all I don't follow twitter feeds at all. I see both of them saying things that have convinced me they are all wrong for this country. If you have heard Trump speak, you have heard him boast about how great he is and how wonderful he is and how perfectly and tremendously his businesses are run and then you have heard him insult people. Do you not find all the drama to be a bit of a put off? He wants to build a wall????? That's absurd and it won't work. He wants to deport all illegals, okay, fine... but tell me HOW? I just want to know HOW, he won't tell us. If Obama had got up on the stage and said the EXACT same things this nut has said you would be having a damn field day with it but because you obviously support the nut, it's suddenly okay... well, he is not okay for me and I don't have to explain why. My gut feeling is he will NOT win and if he did, we'd be more screwed. Sorry.

Of course you don't have to say why. In fact, it would be better for you to just say your gut tells you he's an awful person- no one can argue with that. But if you want to try to pretend there is logic involved, then be prepared to defend it, which you know you can't do. So why try?

But it's funny that you complain that Trump doesn't give you enough details. Why is it in Trump's (or any candidate's) best interests to provide details?

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Because you aren't agreeing with any specific policy, you are agreeing with vague ideas- do something about banks, do something about religious people, etc.

Regarding Johnson on the budget (actual facts- you do with them as you will)

When Johnson took the tiller in New Mexico in 1995, the budget stood at $4.397 billion. When he left in 2003, it had grown to $7.721 billion, an increase of 7.29 percent a year. Of the eleven governors who filed to run for president this year (two Democrats, Johnson, and eight Republicans), only one had a worse record on spending growth...

....Johnson inherited a debt of $1.8 billion and left a debt of $4.6 billion, a rate of increase unmatched by the 22 governors in either party who have filed for presidential primaries in the past two decades, with the exception of Governor Tom Vilsack (D., Iowa) in 2007.....



Voting for character is substantially different than voting for policy. Just don't be the person who votes for character and claims to vote for policy.

I am not voting FOR anyone, I am voting against Hillary and will therefore vote for Trump because has the best chance to beat her. Last year I went on record saying that I would vote for anyone other than Clinton or Bush because I don't think we need political dynasties. Nothing has changed- I voted Bernie in the primary and will vote Trump in November.

[/QUOTE]

I voted for Bernie in the primaries. So you're giving me a bunch of crap because first of all, I admit that I am not ALL-KNOWING about financial policies but I do have enough sense to know that the banks are a serious problem in this country and would like"something done" about them... well, I don't care what you think then!

IN MY OPINION, voting AGAINST someone is the most insane, stupid thing anyone can do. We are to vote for the candidate that closely represents our own beliefs in how the country should be managed. THAT is what I am going to do. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil and that, to me, is absolutely not what Americans should do. Sorry, MY opinion.

 

[UNC71-00]

Oh and Chickie, you still haven't substantiated your "maniacal lunatic" assertion. Can you explain why Trump is a maniacal lunatic?

In fact, can you substantiate any negative thing you would say about him?

 

[UNC71-00]

First of all I don't follow twitter feeds at all. I see both of them saying things that have convinced me they are all wrong for this country. If you have heard Trump speak, you have heard him boast about how great he is and how wonderful he is and how perfectly and tremendously his businesses are run and then you have heard him insult people. Do you not find all the drama to be a bit of a put off? He wants to build a wall????? That's absurd and it won't work. He wants to deport all illegals, okay, fine... but tell me HOW? I just want to know HOW, he won't tell us. If Obama had got up on the stage and said the EXACT same things this nut has said you would be having a damn field day with it but because you obviously support the nut, it's suddenly okay... well, he is not okay for me and I don't have to explain why. My gut feeling is he will NOT win and if he did, we'd be more screwed. Sorry.

What I would or would not have said about Obama is not germane to this discussion.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Oh and Chickie, you still haven't substantiated your "maniacal lunatic" assertion. Can you explain why Trump is a maniacal lunatic?

In fact, can you substantiate any negative thing you would say about him?

Example 1:


I'll be glad to post some more when I return in a bit. There is plenty more where that came from! He's an idiot!

 

[UNC71-00]

I voted for Bernie in the primaries. So you're giving me a bunch of crap because first of all, I admit that I am not ALL-KNOWING about financial policies but I do have enough sense to know that the banks are a serious problem in this country and would like"something done" about them... well, I don't care what you think then!

IN MY OPINION, voting AGAINST someone is the most insane, stupid thing anyone can do. We are to vote for the candidate that closely represents our own beliefs in how the country should be managed. THAT is what I am going to do. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil and that, to me, is absolutely not what Americans should do. Sorry, MY opinion.

You really are this dense, aren't you?

I am giving you crap because you claim that monetary policy is important to you, but you have no idea about monetary policy. There's no shame in not knowing. But acting like you are informed while not having a clue makes you look like a fool.

OK, well, I won't argue with your opinion on why a person should vote for a candidate. But I think we are to vote for the candidate who will make the most difference, and no one could do more for this country at this point in any way that would make more of a difference than beating HIllary and keeping her out of the White House. Voting for someone who has no chance whatsoever is throwing away a vote and Americans should absolutely never throw away their vote. And I'm not sorry for my opinion.

 

[UNC71-00]

Example 1:

View embedded media

I'll be glad to post some more when I return in a bit. There is plenty more where that came from! He's an idiot!

Go to door #2 Chickie.


Donald Trump denies mocking a New York Times reporter’s disability during a campaign speech Tuesday night, saying he’s never seen the reporter before and has no knowledge of his physical appearance.

The Republican presidential candidate outraged The Times after waving his arms in an awkward manner at a rally in South Carolina while talking about a comment made by reporter Serge Kovaleski, who has arthrogryposis, a congenital condition affecting joint movement.

“We find it’s outrageous that he would ridicule the appearance of one of our reporters,” a Times spokesperson toldCNNMoney.


Mr. Kovaleski previously worked at The Washington Post and the New York Daily News, and had covered Mr. Trumpmany times in New York, but the billionaire magnate said he didn’t know Mr. Kovaleski.

“I have no idea who this reporter, Serge Kovalski (sic) is, what he looks like or his level of intelligence,” Mr. Trump said in a statement, CNN reported. “Somebody at the financially failing and totally biased New York Times said that, over the years, I have met Mr. Kovaleski. Despite having one of the all-time great memories I certainly do not remember him.”

Mr. Trump said that in his speech at the rally “I merely mimicked what I thought would be a flustered reporter trying to get out of a statement he made long ago. If Mr. Kovaleski is handicapped, I would not know because I do not know what he looks like. If I did know, I would definitely not say anything about his appearance.”

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Go to door #2 Chickie.


Donald Trump denies mocking a New York Times reporter’s disability during a campaign speech Tuesday night, saying he’s never seen the reporter before and has no knowledge of his physical appearance.

The Republican presidential candidate outraged The Times after waving his arms in an awkward manner at a rally in South Carolina while talking about a comment made by reporter Serge Kovaleski, who has arthrogryposis, a congenital condition affecting joint movement.

“We find it’s outrageous that he would ridicule the appearance of one of our reporters,” a Times spokesperson toldCNNMoney.


Mr. Kovaleski previously worked at The Washington Post and the New York Daily News, and had covered Mr. Trumpmany times in New York, but the billionaire magnate said he didn’t know Mr. Kovaleski.

“I have no idea who this reporter, Serge Kovalski (sic) is, what he looks like or his level of intelligence,” Mr. Trump said in a statement, CNN reported. “Somebody at the financially failing and totally biased New York Times said that, over the years, I have met Mr. Kovaleski. Despite having one of the all-time great memories I certainly do not remember him.”

Mr. Trump said that in his speech at the rally “I merely mimicked what I thought would be a flustered reporter trying to get out of a statement he made long ago. If Mr. Kovaleski is handicapped, I would not know because I do not know what he looks like. If I did know, I would definitely not say anything about his appearance.”

Here is the difference between you and I on this one... You believe what he said, I do not! If that was the ONLY time the man had insulted someone, I might buy that but that is the millionth time. Hey, if you're okay with that running the country, good for you. However, I am not.

I was trying to answer your request for answers that were not vague and even admitted to not knowing a lot about those things but what I do know, I realize there is a problem there. If I knew HOW to fix this crap, I'd run for office myself!

You're just the typical argumentative male and you simply cannot see that all those things you said about me, can be said about you as well, even if you refuse to see it. Good day, sir!

 

[tarheel0910]

I do have enough sense to know that the banks are a serious problem in this country and would like"something done" about them

Just curious, why do you think the banks are a serious problem?

 

[UNC71-00]

Here is the difference between you and I on this one... You believe what he said, I do not! If that was the ONLY time the man had insulted someone, I might buy that but that is the millionth time. Hey, if you're okay with that running the country, good for you. However, I am not.

OK, no one expects you to support him. In fact, no one cares- SC is not even in play. But, I'm not surprised you would hate a man and call him a liar. In fact, I generally expect comments like that from you.

I was trying to answer your request for answers that were not vague and even admitted to not knowing a lot about those things but what I do know, I realize there is a problem there. If I knew HOW to fix this crap, I'd run for office myself!

So you sense there is a problem, but you just aren't sure what it is or how to fix it. Join the club.

You're just the typical argumentative male and you simply cannot see that all those things you said about me, can be said about you as well, even if you refuse to see it. Good day, sir!

And, once again, you make a derogatory comment about men. I feel sorry for you, and I don't mean that in the way you think.

You really are obtuse as hell or just dumb as a bag of hammers. I have said umpteen times in this thread that I don't vote on policy positions. You are the one trying to position yourself as the informed one who votes on the finer nuances of policy. My point has only been that you don't and neither does anyone else.

So what is it that I have said about you that you could say about me that I haven't already said about myself? Give me one thing Chickie. Just one. Either that or just be quiet.

 

[UNC71-00]

Just curious, why do you think the banks are a serious problem?

Because banks are bad. Now leave her alone, she is on her period.

 

[Raising Heel]

“Somebody at the financially failing and totally biased New York Times said that, over the years, I have met Mr. Kovaleski. Despite having one of the all-time great memories I certainly do not remember him.”

Not the best example, because it only proves that Trump is either FOS about his "all-time great memory" or about not knowing Kovaleski:

In an interview on Thursday, Mr. Kovaleski said that he met with Mr. Trump repeatedly when he was a reporter for The Daily News covering the developer’s business career in the late 1980s, before joining The Post. “Donald and I were on a first-name basis for years,” Mr. Kovaleski said. “I’ve interviewed him in his office,” he added. “I’ve talked to him at press conferences. All in all, I would say around a dozen times, I’ve interacted with him as a reporter while I was at The Daily News.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/27/u...new-york-times-reporter-was-misread.html?_r=0

 

[UNC71-00]

Not the best example, because it only proves that Trump is either FOS about his "all-time great memory" or about not knowing Kovaleski:

In an interview on Thursday, Mr. Kovaleski said that he met with Mr. Trump repeatedly when he was a reporter for The Daily News covering the developer’s business career in the late 1980s, before joining The Post. “Donald and I were on a first-name basis for years,” Mr. Kovaleski said. “I’ve interviewed him in his office,” he added. “I’ve talked to him at press conferences. All in all, I would say around a dozen times, I’ve interacted with him as a reporter while I was at The Daily News.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/27/u...new-york-times-reporter-was-misread.html?_r=0

He might be FOS about both.. I don't care.

Seems to me though, that if Kovaleski was as close w/Trump as he says, that he would have published at least one interview where they had a 1 on 1 conversation. Wouldn't you think this would be the case?

 

[strummingram]

Maybe my soul twin @strummingram can explain this better LOL

I can try, but I think you're expecting what doesn't exist.

I don't know that you're ever going to get detailed answers from politicians... especially presidential candidates. I like Johnson because I know he is FOR many of the things that I am for. Politicians are rarely specific. They aren't required to be specific. They're mostly required to pander and they do that in abundance. I don't expect a great deal of substantial results from the American political process. So far, I've never been let down.

You've mentioned a support for Ron Paul on here, which I was a huge supporter of his myself. I was a big supporter, mostly, for his ideas on foreign policy. I learned about the Fed through his candidacies (which I assume must be the motivation for your comments on the Fed). I liked his solutions- invoke competing currencies, he could even issue an executive order like Kennedy's 11110, which allowed the Treasury to issue notes backed by silver, and not be indebted to the Fed. Monetary policy was a big part of his platform. But, eliminating the Federal Reserve is extremely difficult.As far as military intervention, he would have been Commander In Chief and could have called the troops home and issues the orders to do so.

Johnson wants to end the War on Drugs, he wants to scale back heavily on our military presence all over the world. His social and fiscal ideas reflect mine. I don't know that I've ever heard him discuss, specifically, how he plans to make it happen. But, I know that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are not even FOR the same things that I am. So, my choice is simple.

And, to address the 19th Amendment, I don't think that was a setback for society. I'm much more critical of the 16th and 18th.

 

[Raising Heel]

He might be FOS about both.. I don't care.

Seems to me though, that if Kovaleski was as close w/Trump as he says, that he would have published at least one interview where they had a 1 on 1 conversation. Wouldn't you think this would be the case?

I care, because character actually matters to me. This whole campaign cycle has been nauseating.

Not necessarily, if it wasn't a 1 on 1 interview.