DamianTV
Member
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2007
- Messages
- 20,677
There are always valid and invalid reasons to either embrace or reject any candidate. Trouble is that most promises today are empty as our Congress is just as contempt and corrupt as the people we elect to be our President. They know damn well that the candidate with the biggest lies is the one that usually wins.
Since Trump has been brought up a number of times, I have to explain my position again.
The Status Quo is not all in kahootz with each other. They are at war with each other, but both agree that what constitutes a win is taking over the country for their own agendas. Trump is considered by the supporters as an "Outsider", but by non supporters as "More of the same". We all know we need something different, and I understand why people are flocking to him in droves.
Trouble with Trump is that he just represents another group that will benefit by his presidency, but maybe not the one that is currently in power. Trump is merely exchanging one set of problems for another by exchanging one group of people for a new Status Quo for a group of people from the old Status Quo. Things may be different, but in the end, they will continue to be equally as bad for us as long as we allow corrupt and bought out political leaders in every major position of power to go unchecked.
This is like complaining that a Dealer in Las Vegas is intentionally dealing shit hands. Its not the dealer, its the rules, and the rules are that the house always wins. For the record: in Vegas, the house always wins because of the math that has determined Payouts, not because of the Dealer themselves. We arent playing poker at a table, where one player has an equal chance of winning as compared to the other players, we are playing with a "One Armed Bandit" (slot machine) where the machine doesnt pay out on a pair of cards lower than Jacks. At a table, a pair of two's will beat any junk hand, but at a slot machine / video poker, the machine does not pay out the same way; a pair of cards will yield nothing if the pair is below Jacks, which manipulates the outcome based on the payout, not on the chance that any card or combination or series of cards will be dealt. We're blaming the dealers and the machines but not looking at the payout.
To me, that is what Ron Paul represented, and I was a bit more sketchy about Rand, but certainly do not have any confidence that Trump will do. I would expect Trump would keep the Federal Reserve Bank, Central Banks, Fractional Reserve Lending, and other very important things that most do not consider, such as using funds from Savings Banks for Investments. Bill Clinton did away with that, and very few noticed despite its monsterous consequences, and its those types of important things that I felt at the time Ron Paul would have tried to prevent, and I doubt that Trump would notice.
Since Trump has been brought up a number of times, I have to explain my position again.
The Status Quo is not all in kahootz with each other. They are at war with each other, but both agree that what constitutes a win is taking over the country for their own agendas. Trump is considered by the supporters as an "Outsider", but by non supporters as "More of the same". We all know we need something different, and I understand why people are flocking to him in droves.
Trouble with Trump is that he just represents another group that will benefit by his presidency, but maybe not the one that is currently in power. Trump is merely exchanging one set of problems for another by exchanging one group of people for a new Status Quo for a group of people from the old Status Quo. Things may be different, but in the end, they will continue to be equally as bad for us as long as we allow corrupt and bought out political leaders in every major position of power to go unchecked.
This is like complaining that a Dealer in Las Vegas is intentionally dealing shit hands. Its not the dealer, its the rules, and the rules are that the house always wins. For the record: in Vegas, the house always wins because of the math that has determined Payouts, not because of the Dealer themselves. We arent playing poker at a table, where one player has an equal chance of winning as compared to the other players, we are playing with a "One Armed Bandit" (slot machine) where the machine doesnt pay out on a pair of cards lower than Jacks. At a table, a pair of two's will beat any junk hand, but at a slot machine / video poker, the machine does not pay out the same way; a pair of cards will yield nothing if the pair is below Jacks, which manipulates the outcome based on the payout, not on the chance that any card or combination or series of cards will be dealt. We're blaming the dealers and the machines but not looking at the payout.
To me, that is what Ron Paul represented, and I was a bit more sketchy about Rand, but certainly do not have any confidence that Trump will do. I would expect Trump would keep the Federal Reserve Bank, Central Banks, Fractional Reserve Lending, and other very important things that most do not consider, such as using funds from Savings Banks for Investments. Bill Clinton did away with that, and very few noticed despite its monsterous consequences, and its those types of important things that I felt at the time Ron Paul would have tried to prevent, and I doubt that Trump would notice.
