Trump just handed Hillary the Presidency

[Tywysog Cymru]

People who think Rand wouldn't be winning are delusional. Yes some of the neocons wouldn't support him but the Republican base would. Rand hasn't supported left-wing policies or given money to the Clintons. The base has problems with Trump, but not Rand. And by the way, a large number of Republicans are desperate to find candidate that can appeal to minorities because it's essential to the party's survival. When it comes to foreign policy, many Republicans might not be excited, but they'll vote for him to stop Hillary. Sanders supporters would be more willing to stay at home or vote third party because the prospect of Rand Paul as President doesn't frighten them like the prospect of Trump winning does.

You don't have to play dirty to beat Hillary, you have to try to lose to Hillary. The fact that Trump is losing to her shows that he is a terrible candidate.

 

[CaptUSA]

Trump is the same person he's been for the past forty years of public life.

Do you mean a self-proclaimed member of the establishment? Or a gun control proponent? Or a universal health care proponent? Or someone who doesn't care about private property? Or a proponent of open borders? Or a pro-choice proponent? Or...

You know, because his campaign had been spending the last year or so trying to convince people otherwise.

I mean, I agree that he's the same (purely concerned with his own self-interests and ego) but that's not what's being sold.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

6339138[/URL]]Yes, because Johnson/Weld's would be so much prettier.

And what pray tell makes you think I want anything whatever to do with Johnson/Weld? Is this more of your 'Convention of States' bullshit where you just make shyt up and hope something hurts me?

 

[John F Kennedy III]

There it is. Trump has been wielding a brand of fake exposition, where he scratches the surface of truth but then redirects to false causes or fails to give the real/whole story.

Exactly.

 

[openfire]

There it is. Trump has been wielding a brand of fake exposition, where he scratches the surface of truth but then redirects to false causes or fails to give the real/whole story.

As opposed to going full "conspiritard" during a presidential debate?

 

[John F Kennedy III]

People who think Rand wouldn't be winning are delusional. Yes some of the neocons wouldn't support him but the Republican base would. Rand hasn't supported left-wing policies or given money to the Clintons. The base has problems with Trump, but not Rand. And by the way, a large number of Republicans are desperate to find candidate that can appeal to minorities because it's essential to the party's survival. When it comes to foreign policy, many Republicans might not be excited, but they'll vote for him to stop Hillary. Sanders supporters would be more willing to stay at home or vote third party because the prospect of Rand Paul as President doesn't frighten them like the prospect of Trump winning does.

You don't have to play dirty to beat Hillary, you have to try to lose to Hillary. The fact that Trump is losing to her shows that he is a terrible candidate.

Rand would beat Hillary in a fair election. So would Ron. This isn't a fair election. If Rand was the nominee the MSM wouldn't utter a sentence about him without following it up with "You know, his dad Ron is a racist." Or any other lines they used against Ron in 08/12. They'd also play clips of pre Romney endorsement Rand where he was much more of a mirror of Ron than he is now.

LOL Barbary Pirates.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

As opposed to going full "conspiritard" during a presidential debate?

Huh?

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

Rand would beat Hillary in a fair election. So would Ron. This isn't a fair election. If Rand was the nominee the MSM wouldn't utter a sentence about him without following it up with "You know, his dad Ron is a racist." Or any other lines they used against Ron in 08/12. They'd also play clips of pre Romney endorsement Rand where he was much more of a mirror of Ron than he is now.

LOL Barbary Pirates.

Rand would destroy Hillary in the debates and the American public by and large hates Hillary. If Rand couldn't beat her, no one could.

 

[RonPaulMall]

Rand would beat Hillary in a fair election. So would Ron. This isn't a fair election. If Rand was the nominee the MSM wouldn't utter a sentence about him without following it up with "You know, his dad Ron is a racist." Or any other lines they used against Ron in 08/12. They'd also play clips of pre Romney endorsement Rand where he was much more of a mirror of Ron than he is now.

LOL Barbary Pirates.

You haven't even gotten in to Aqua Buddha. Can you imagine how the media would paint that? We'd have gotten months of nothing but racist newsletters, then the final month the "Aqua Buddha" story would break and we'd hear about how Rand "kidnapped" a woman.

 

[CaptUSA]

You haven't even gotten in to Aqua Buddha. Can you imagine how the media would paint that? We'd have gotten months of nothing but racist newsletters, then the final month the "Aqua Buddha" story would break and we'd hear about how Rand "kidnapped" a woman.

The difference being that Rand would have pivoted. My guess is that he wouldn't have spent weeks focusing his own attention on Aqua Buddha.

 

[LibertyEagle]

You haven't even gotten in to Aqua Buddha. Can you imagine how the media would paint that? We'd have gotten months of nothing but racist newsletters, then the final month the "Aqua Buddha" story would break and we'd hear about how Rand "kidnapped" a woman.

Wasn't it Rand who got in a bit of trouble over something he said about the Civil Rights Act? If I am remembering that correctly, the media would have run with that for all they were worth.

 

[Tywysog Cymru]

You haven't even gotten in to Aqua Buddha. Can you imagine how the media would paint that? We'd have gotten months of nothing but racist newsletters, then the final month the "Aqua Buddha" story would break and we'd hear about how Rand "kidnapped" a woman.

Aqua Buddha back fired on Conway.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Dirty tricks and gotcha questions would be used by the media against any candidate running against Queen Hillary. All it took was "Aleppo" and "name a foreign leader" to take down Johnson. If simple gotcha questions don't work, they will escalate.

There is always a crack smoking prostitute somewhere that would be willing to say they had sex and smoked crack with a candidate. Doesn't have to be a shred of real evidence. The media would run with it.

 

[alucard13mm]

Dirty tricks and gotcha questions would be used by the media against any candidate running against Queen Hillary. All it took was "Aleppo" and "name a foreign leader" to take down Johnson. If simple gotcha questions don't work, they will escalate.

There is always a crack smoking prostitute somewhere that would be willing to say they had sex and smoked crack with a candidate. Doesn't have to be a shred of real evidence. The media would run with it.

Indeed. Rand is mostly clean without much skeletons in his closet. In this day and age, all it takes is a rape allegation or sexual assault (without proof) and you are guilty automatically. Bring out 10 accusers, its gg.

Yeah.. i acquited a gang banger of 1st degree murder with a vehicle. The prosecution just kept saying how bad of a person he was and just slinging mud. Even if Hitler killed 6 million people 70 years ago, he would not be automatically guilty for murder if he allegedly killed a person today.

 

[jllundqu]

The sooner we cull this herd of the weak, the better. I actually hope Hillary tries to ban guns! Good luck with that.... that may be just the spark this country needs, imo

 

[TheTexan]

People who think Rand wouldn't be winning are delusional. Yes some of the neocons wouldn't support him but the Republican base would. Rand hasn't supported left-wing policies or given money to the Clintons. The base has problems with Trump, but not Rand. And by the way, a large number of Republicans are desperate to find candidate that can appeal to minorities because it's essential to the party's survival. When it comes to foreign policy, many Republicans might not be excited, but they'll vote for him to stop Hillary. Sanders supporters would be more willing to stay at home or vote third party because the prospect of Rand Paul as President doesn't frighten them like the prospect of Trump winning does.

You don't have to play dirty to beat Hillary, you have to try to lose to Hillary. The fact that Trump is losing to her shows that he is a terrible candidate.

Rand would have lost because he hates black people, as evidenced by his stance on civil rights act

And also because he's an isolationist

And also because he's a libertarian who probably thinks people shpuld run around naked smoking pot all the time (yes, he has denied that specifically, but who knows whats true)

And also because I think he wants old people to be homeless on the streets - though I may be mixing that up with his father Ron

 

[devil21]

As opposed to going full "conspiritard" during a presidential debate?

Hmm....only if you think, for example, that it is "conspiratard" to admit that Benghazi was where the CIA and State Department jointly ran weapons from Libya to Syria to arm ISIS, who "we" are now supposedly so concerned about destroying that "we" have to overthrow Assad to "defeat" ISIS. Instead, Trump said that Obama and Hillary created ISIS by leaving a vacuum in Iraq (false in multiple ways), instead of speaking the truth of the cause that ISIS is an intel operation of CIA, Mossad and other intel agencies being used as excuse to take over Syria. But since Trump is surrounded by Israel-firsters, that would never happen and the true cause would never be revealed. Like I said, fake exposition. A classic misdirection tactic where the premise is truth (Obama and Hillary created ISIS) but the cause is false, thus maintaining the official narrative.

So, "conspiratard" like that?

 

[misterx]

Trump pulled so many punches in the debates it wasn't funny. His actions haven't been the actions of someone trying to win.

The second debate was. I think he just got bad advice in the third debate. Too many people in his own campaign trying to sabotage him.

 

[undergroundrr]

Controlled opposition, scientifically executed by professionals, lubed by the most media-hypnotized populace that's ever existed.

War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.

trump is now the exemplar of free markets, dovish foreign policy, 2nd amendment rights, individual choice, anti-social justice. The inheritor of the Ron Paul Revolution, beloved by Alex Jones, Stefan Molyneux and Walter Block.

Has a mission ever been more beautifully accomplished? Pay your respects.

And for "non-trump supporting" concern trolls - consider being very ashamed of yourself just for a moment.

 

[TheCount]

I mean, even the police state issue, wasn't Hillary the one who ordered the US military on Waco?

The first lady is in charge of the FBI?