The General Election

[NM11046]

You know how the tapes recently came out with past conversations Trumps' "PR Guy" had with the press (you know, the guy who's voice sounded just like Trumps?) I can't imagine he has the time, but is it possible that he is on this board spouting his catch phrases? Some of the comments here are just a little too "straight from the mouth" of the master.

 

Ex. "He's a terrific sales-person, and as long as you aren't concerned with the confrontational style he has, his pitch is phenomenal."

"Trump's got a great track record of being one of the best negotiators in the world. Everything with foreign relations, trade, war, national debt, etc. "

[knapplc]

You know how the tapes recently came out with past conversations Trumps' "PR Guy" had with the press (you know, the guy who's voice sounded just like Trumps?) I can't imagine he has the time, but is it possible that he is on this board spouting his catch phrases? Some of the comments here are just a little too "straight from the mouth" of the master.

 

Ex. "He's a terrific sales-person, and as long as you aren't concerned with the confrontational style he has, his pitch is phenomenal."

"Trump's got a great track record of being one of the best negotiators in the world. Everything with foreign relations, trade, war, national debt, etc. "

 

I'd chalk that up to lack of imagination more than anything else. People don't have their own thoughts so they regurgitate what they hear from their heroes.

 

It's not dissimilar to when my friends & I thought Tombstone was the greatest quote movie of all time and dropped "I'm your Huckleberry" into every conversation for a year.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

 

Further, every presidential race since at least Bush verses Dukakis has contained the claim that the Democratic candidate would "repeal the 2nd amendment". And in every case in which the Democrat won, the newly elected President has...done nothing to repeal the 2nd Amendment. If folks will recall, that was the claim when Obama ran the first time. What happened? Well, no repeal (obviously, for the reason above) - but there was a hell of a run on gun purchases and ammo. Enough that ammo prices shot through the roof and gun owners complained long and loud.

 

 

This paragraph hits on something that I have believed for a very long time.

 

The entire fear of "They are going to take our guns away" is funded, promoted and made up by gun and ammo manufactures in one of the most amazing acts of marketing in capitalism history.

 

Every single time a fear of some gun or ammo is flashed through the media, there is a rush to gobble up that item by gun owners that are scared those evil liberals are going to send in the black helicopters to take all our guns away.

 

It's really pretty impressive if you think about it.

 

Its also a great tool by the R strategists. They know they that the 2nd amendment won't be repealed, but they keep hammering it to help get people out to vote against those liberals.

 

Oh...exactly....

 

It's a full circle that just keeps building on itself.

 

Gun manufacturers fund NRA that promotes Dems are going to take our guns away.

NRA members believe it.

Republican candidate wants NRA support so they promote Dems are going to take our guns away.

NRA endorses Republican candidate.

Republican voters believe Dems are going to take our guns away because Republicans said so and NRA endorsed candidate.

NRA gains members.

Republicans solidify their base.

Gun manufacturers sell more guns and make more money.

Gun manufacturers donate more money to fund NRA telling everyone Dems are going to take our guns away.

 

 

 

It's the circle of life.

 

 

PS.....and yes...The Dems do the exact same thing from the other side.

[BigRedBuster]

 

You know how the tapes recently came out with past conversations Trumps' "PR Guy" had with the press (you know, the guy who's voice sounded just like Trumps?) I can't imagine he has the time, but is it possible that he is on this board spouting his catch phrases? Some of the comments here are just a little too "straight from the mouth" of the master.

 

Ex. "He's a terrific sales-person, and as long as you aren't concerned with the confrontational style he has, his pitch is phenomenal."

"Trump's got a great track record of being one of the best negotiators in the world. Everything with foreign relations, trade, war, national debt, etc. "

 

I'd chalk that up to lack of imagination more than anything else. People don't have their own thoughts so they regurgitate what they hear from their heroes.

 

It's not dissimilar to when my friends & I thought Tombstone was the greatest quote movie of all time and dropped "I'm your Huckleberry" into every conversation for a year.

 

I feel the NEED ....the need for SPEED!!!!

[knapplc]

PS.....and yes...The Dems do the exact same thing from the other side.

What's the Dem version of this? Education? Social programs? I don't know of anything that gets the same level of play as "They're taking your guns!" gets from the Right.

[BigRedBuster]

 

PS.....and yes...The Dems do the exact same thing from the other side.

What's the Dem version of this? Education? Social programs? I don't know of anything that gets the same level of play as "They're taking your guns!" gets from the Right.

 

It might not be at the same level but it's still there.

 

You see it many times when there is a mass shooting. Heck, we even had the Dem President come out almost immediately promoting gun control after mass shootings. Strange thing was, there were many of these shootings that the proposed regulations would still not prevent.

 

Mass shooting happens ( no matter if the gun was purchased and owned completely legally or not even after proposed regulations come into affect)

Dem politicians go on interviews espousing how their gun regulations would prevent these (even though they wouldn't).

Non-gun owners who are scared of guns feed off of that as the Dems are going to save the world from these crazy gun owners.

They donate more money to the Dems.

Dems gain votes and solidify their base.

 

 

As the world turns.

[Red Five]

 

PS.....and yes...The Dems do the exact same thing from the other side.

What's the Dem version of this? Education? Social programs? I don't know of anything that gets the same level of play as "They're taking your guns!" gets from the Right.

 

Repealing Roe v Wade?

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

PS.....and yes...The Dems do the exact same thing from the other side.

What's the Dem version of this? Education? Social programs? I don't know of anything that gets the same level of play as "They're taking your guns!" gets from the Right.

 

Repealing Roe v Wade?

 

 

 

Gun control and abortion are two HUGE hot button issues that solidify the bases and both sides really have absolutely no desire to actually change.

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

 

PS.....and yes...The Dems do the exact same thing from the other side.

What's the Dem version of this? Education? Social programs? I don't know of anything that gets the same level of play as "They're taking your guns!" gets from the Right.

Repealing Roe v Wade?

Beat me to it. Though, in this case, Rs have long talked openly about overturning the ruling at a federal level and punting the discretion back to the states, which would effectively actually remove reproductive rights from women in conservative areas.

 

Clinton or any other Dem for that matter hasn't advocated for repealing or overturning anything, just tightening up areas people may abuse the existing framework with malicious intent.

 

I've long felt that regardless of what they do, if you're clean with your background check, you'll get your gun. Period.

 

I don't know how easy it is to overturn a SC decision, though.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

I thought Obama's pitch 8 years ago was phenomenal as well, because he's a great speaker. The problem is, most of the executive orders he has put through in office have been a disaster.

 

 

 

Interesting...I missed this comment the first time I read your post.

 

 

 

Soooo.....you are admitting that you fell for a candidate last time because of how the talked.

 

Buuut....now you are falling for another candidate because of how he talks.

[HuskerShark]

 

 

 

I thought Obama's pitch 8 years ago was phenomenal as well, because he's a great speaker. The problem is, most of the executive orders he has put through in office have been a disaster.

 

 

 

Interesting...I missed this comment the first time I read your post.

 

 

 

Soooo.....you are admitting that you fell for a candidate last time because of how the talked.

 

Buuut....now you are falling for another candidate because of how he talks.

 

 

Yes, I bought Obama's pitch 8 years ago. Then after his first term, it was obvious that he shouldn't have been re-elected, so I voted against him in '12.

 

My view is that Trump is the only candidate pitching big changes, and he deserves a chance to show if he can do it or not. If he gets elected and his first term is less than desirable, I'll have no problem voting against him.

 

But yes, to answer your question, I'm absolutely buying what he's selling. And he tells it how it is, which I love. You don't have to like that, but I do.

[QMany]

According to you, Hillary is going to repeal the 2nd Amendment. That certainly sounds like "big changes."

[teachercd]

Talk of a President repealing the 2nd Amendment - or any amendment, for that matter - inevitably points out the lack of education and critical thinking in this country. Presidents don't repeal amendments. In fact, Presidents play virtually no part in amendments.

 

To repeal an amendment, you have to pass a new amendment that "overwrites" the amendment to be repealed. That means you have to begin with a proposed amendment that must be voted approved by a 2/3 majority of both legislative bodies of the US Congress. The proposed Amendment must then be sent ot every individual State's legislature for consideration. Each state follows its own parliamentary process to arrive at a yea or nay on the proposed Amendment. For the proposed Amendment to become a Constitutional Amendment, 3/4 of the individual States must vote a final yea. With 50 states, the required number of State ratifications to adopt the new amendment is 38. Upon the confirmation of the 38th yea, the Amendment becomes part of the Constitution, amending, or changing, whatever the subject of the amendment covers--whether it be a new cause, or eliminating an old Amendment. That's why, of all the amendments, only a single one - just one - has ever been repealed (and that's why we can drink beer on game days, thank the gods).

 

See? No involvement by the President.

 

Further, every presidential race since at least Bush verses Dukakis has contained the claim that the Democratic candidate would "repeal the 2nd amendment". And in every case in which the Democrat won, the newly elected President has...done nothing to repeal the 2nd Amendment. If folks will recall, that was the claim when Obama ran the first time. What happened? Well, no repeal (obviously, for the reason above) - but there was a hell of a run on gun purchases and ammo. Enough that ammo prices shot through the roof and gun owners complained long and loud.

 

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The people who swallow the claim that "Candidate X" will repeal the 2nd Amendment are those that lack sufficient education and any degree of critical thinking. They are the ones that wallow in propaganda and hype. Unfortunately, despite their ignorance they still are permitted to vote. Like I said, it would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

 

 

This is a discussion that comes up a lot during some of my lectures. How educated should one have to be to vote. I get very interesting answers.

[NM11046]

 

Talk of a President repealing the 2nd Amendment - or any amendment, for that matter - inevitably points out the lack of education and critical thinking in this country. Presidents don't repeal amendments. In fact, Presidents play virtually no part in amendments.

 

To repeal an amendment, you have to pass a new amendment that "overwrites" the amendment to be repealed. That means you have to begin with a proposed amendment that must be voted approved by a 2/3 majority of both legislative bodies of the US Congress. The proposed Amendment must then be sent ot every individual State's legislature for consideration. Each state follows its own parliamentary process to arrive at a yea or nay on the proposed Amendment. For the proposed Amendment to become a Constitutional Amendment, 3/4 of the individual States must vote a final yea. With 50 states, the required number of State ratifications to adopt the new amendment is 38. Upon the confirmation of the 38th yea, the Amendment becomes part of the Constitution, amending, or changing, whatever the subject of the amendment covers--whether it be a new cause, or eliminating an old Amendment. That's why, of all the amendments, only a single one - just one - has ever been repealed (and that's why we can drink beer on game days, thank the gods).

 

See? No involvement by the President.

 

Further, every presidential race since at least Bush verses Dukakis has contained the claim that the Democratic candidate would "repeal the 2nd amendment". And in every case in which the Democrat won, the newly elected President has...done nothing to repeal the 2nd Amendment. If folks will recall, that was the claim when Obama ran the first time. What happened? Well, no repeal (obviously, for the reason above) - but there was a hell of a run on gun purchases and ammo. Enough that ammo prices shot through the roof and gun owners complained long and loud.

 

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The people who swallow the claim that "Candidate X" will repeal the 2nd Amendment are those that lack sufficient education and any degree of critical thinking. They are the ones that wallow in propaganda and hype. Unfortunately, despite their ignorance they still are permitted to vote. Like I said, it would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

 

 

This is a discussion that comes up a lot during some of my lectures. How educated should one have to be to vote. I get very interesting answers.

 

When I asked if you were a teacher the other day you said no - what's the deal TeacherCD?

[teachercd]

 

 

Talk of a President repealing the 2nd Amendment - or any amendment, for that matter - inevitably points out the lack of education and critical thinking in this country. Presidents don't repeal amendments. In fact, Presidents play virtually no part in amendments.

 

To repeal an amendment, you have to pass a new amendment that "overwrites" the amendment to be repealed. That means you have to begin with a proposed amendment that must be voted approved by a 2/3 majority of both legislative bodies of the US Congress. The proposed Amendment must then be sent ot every individual State's legislature for consideration. Each state follows its own parliamentary process to arrive at a yea or nay on the proposed Amendment. For the proposed Amendment to become a Constitutional Amendment, 3/4 of the individual States must vote a final yea. With 50 states, the required number of State ratifications to adopt the new amendment is 38. Upon the confirmation of the 38th yea, the Amendment becomes part of the Constitution, amending, or changing, whatever the subject of the amendment covers--whether it be a new cause, or eliminating an old Amendment. That's why, of all the amendments, only a single one - just one - has ever been repealed (and that's why we can drink beer on game days, thank the gods).

 

See? No involvement by the President.

 

Further, every presidential race since at least Bush verses Dukakis has contained the claim that the Democratic candidate would "repeal the 2nd amendment". And in every case in which the Democrat won, the newly elected President has...done nothing to repeal the 2nd Amendment. If folks will recall, that was the claim when Obama ran the first time. What happened? Well, no repeal (obviously, for the reason above) - but there was a hell of a run on gun purchases and ammo. Enough that ammo prices shot through the roof and gun owners complained long and loud.

 

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The people who swallow the claim that "Candidate X" will repeal the 2nd Amendment are those that lack sufficient education and any degree of critical thinking. They are the ones that wallow in propaganda and hype. Unfortunately, despite their ignorance they still are permitted to vote. Like I said, it would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

 

This is a discussion that comes up a lot during some of my lectures. How educated should one have to be to vote. I get very interesting answers.

When I asked if you were a teacher the other day you said no - what's the deal TeacherCD?

I don't like labels