Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I watched the video in question. I can't say Mr. Trump was in any way issuing a veiled threat. He was saying that his supporters would riot if that scenario were to happen. I agree there. I can't condemn him for that.
However, he certainly could have made clear (perhaps after the fact) that he does not condone a riot and rather condemns and discourages it.
Mick
I got the message as similar to when he said "I wouldn't call Megyn Kelly a bimbo..."
Trump would buy windows made in America but they don't made them here anymore.China makes them.
The factories here hire all illegals.so get real. We don't have factories here . The garment district is gone.
You are incorrect.
Google is your friend... there are lots of window manufacturers and garment manufacturers in the US. We've been through this before, and provided links, so I'm not doing it again just for you.
Factories don't really hire many illegals. The larger a company, the more likely it is to follow the employment verification process and stay legal. It is the little places, farmers, and those who can afford things like cleaning ladies and lawn services that hire a lot of illegals. They tend to pay in cash, and not claim the employees because they don't care, or don't want to pay the employment taxes.
I think we’ll win before getting to the convention, but I can tell you, if we didn’t and if we’re 20 votes short or if we’re a hundred short and we’re at 1,100 and somebody else is at 500 or 400, [because] we’re way ahead of everybody, I don’t think you can say that we don’t get it automatically,” Mr. Trump said on CNN’s “New Day.” “I think it would be — I think you’d have riots. I think you’d have riots.
Would the "rioters" be wearing brown shirts, or sheets? Inquiring people want to know.
Not a word from Trumy discouraging riots? Wouldn't that the responsible thing to do as a leader? Just like his rallies - he's promoting violence, isn't he?
Let's just say it was an education. Most of the crowd fit in well with Sarah Palin and her perspectives, with a similar intellect.
Flippin' scary.
You should be scared. Because your future and your freedoms are at stake. This is the real weakness of a democracy, as the world saw with the rise to power of Hitler and Mussolini. They were very effective at using the democratic process to gain the seat of power, then burning the bridges behind them by tearing apart the protections.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,974,224 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by GearHeadDave
You should be scared. Because your future and your freedoms are at stake. This is the real weakness of a democracy, as the world saw with the rise to power of Hitler and Mussolini. They were very effective at using the democratic process to gain the seat of power, then burning the bridges behind them by tearing apart the protections.
Would Trump attempt something like that? Maybe.
Could he? Not a chance in hell. He'd have to get both Congress and SCOTUS on side, which would never happen. Not to forget, the military is actually professional, and have oaths they care about.
If he ever got elected, he becomes as much of a failed president as Obama and Carter were. Neither of them could work with Congress. Heck, Clinton the first even worked with Gingrich, and Dubya with a Democratic congress.
I don't think he has a hope in hell of the general population voting for him. I live in a very Republican part of the Tampa Bay area, and my neighbors can't believe what is happening to their party. They are talking staying home and not voting, or holding their nose and voting for Hillary, with the thought that it could be corrected 4 years down the road.
I share an alma mater with The Donald, and I'm thinking I may need to suggest they rescind his degree, since he apparently graduated without understanding what a majority is.
Someone doesn't understand that who gets a majority of electoral votes isn't what determines who's nominated.
And that person wouldn't be The Donald, BTW, because he didn't say anything about a "majority." What he was railing against was the prospect of the RNC engaging in shenanigans at the convention to get behind someone who has, say, only 400 or 500 or so electoral votes instead of the one closer to (but not at) the number required.
And there's nothing wrong with anyone holding that opinion.
Someone doesn't understand that who gets a majority of electoral votes isn't what determines who's nominated.
And that person wouldn't be The Donald, BTW, because he didn't say anything about a "majority." What he was railing against was the prospect of the RNC engaging in shenanigans at the convention to get behind someone who has, say, only 400 or 500 or so electoral votes instead of the one closer to (but not at) the number required.
And there's nothing wrong with anyone holding that opinion.
what the rules say is not an opinion. And the Republican Party rules say that in order to have an uncontested win of the nomination, a candidate needs to have a majority of the delegates to be cast at the convention.
There are other factors that come into play if that doesn't happen, but that doesn't change the fact there are rules in place, and getting the most delegates doesn't automatically get you the nomination. No one's opinion changes that, and Donald's argument that he doesn't need a majority, just the most delegates, shows a lack of understanding, perhaps willful, of both the rules and of math.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.