Good argument, though trying to justify New York brashness is lost on me.

Bullying often takes on more forms than many people realize and you don't always have to be physically abused to be a victim. To me...comments like "Lying Ted" and "Little Marco" are entirely inconsistent with gentlemanly conduct, leaning more toward bullying than debating, and have done little to win me over as one of Trump's supporters.

I still have to wonder, however, where we would be, now, if Ted Cruz had won the nomination...

Thats the most irrational response I've ever seen here. Did you just return from Wonderland?

The Trumpster is rather refreshing.

Well said, Herb. Our country will become The LATE Great United States of America,

Here, Here! And just think what day to day living will be like under a Hilldebeast administration. Your diet will be scrutinized...fat and sugar intake, if you exercise or not, and whether you belong to a Tea Party. If you're a Rush Limbaugh fan, forget it, he will probably be off the air.

Not voting doesnt make you responsible for what she does. You do have a chance to throw a monkey wrench into her plans if you vote for Trump this time. She will affect your life too, given that she has the power of government at least partially in her hands if elected. Forcing you to shrug is not a very appealing thing really.

Of course Trumpcare would be better than Obamacare, or Hillarycare. I was simply pointing out that Trump's proposals are socialist proposals. Unlike Obama, he does not seek to destroy the country and, unlike Hillary, he does not seek personal financial gain, but he is a socialist to the core. His administration will slow down America's dive into the Third World, but it will not reverse it. The others, of course, are just acts of national suicide.

I'm confused why you and others promote the rumor that Trump is a "bully".

Sure, he is a brash New Yorker, and a tough customer to negotiate deals with, but what evidence is there that he is anything like the bullies who beat up kids in school?

Donald Trump is more like the guy i want to protect me against bullies and cheats, the guy I want to along bring with me to a confrontation, the guy I want to represent me in an argument, the guy I want to hire to fight for my company, ... and maybe the best guy around to defend my country against external threats (both diplomatic and military).

He's a brash New Yorker a tough customer to deal with (if you're on the other side of the table), but I've seen no evidence whatsoever that he is the type of guy who starts fights or picks on pipsqueaks who leave him alone. there is ZERO evidence that Donald Trump is the type who initiates force as a method of winning what he wants.

You're welcome. Sadly, I believe some people want a "Commander-in-Chief" rather than Chief Executive (executing/administering the Constitution and congressional legislation) thus, probably, meaning Dictator (the sneaky type).

In love, it's better to have loved and lost than never to have loved at all. It's similar in voting, specially when you have the Supreme Court at stake.

Yes, Trump promises to repeal Obamacare, with its Federally-dictated choices, and replace it with choices made by patient & doctor, tax-deductible Medical Savings Accounts, interstate competition, etc.

Hillary will replace it with a "single-payer" system and even more Federal control.

I never said Trump's proposed replacement is perfect, but it's a Hell of a lot better than either Obamacare or Hillary's single-payer monopoly.

In fact, there is good chance that "Trumpcare" would be even better than the mess that we had in prior years, when corrupt state legislatures could outlaw all interstate competition and employers could dictated what insurance plans their employees are allowed to buy.

Thanks, the term CinC is thrown about so much it does seem that I use it loosely. My thoughts apply as well, perhaps more so to Trump as Chief Executive. Thanks again for the correction.

Humor appreciated.

Not criticizing, just pointing out...........the President is Chief Executive, not Commander-in-Chief......he is that only to our military forces (which is subsumed under Chief Executive).

I will not feel guilty about voting for myself. Hillary will not run my life. I can always shrug completely. Don't try to lay the Dagny Taggart guilt trip on me. I do not respond to others' needs.

THINKING ABOUT VOTING? READ THIS FIRST.
-
https://www.facebook.com/groups/tolfa...
-

Old dino looks like an easy mark in a big Walmart parking lot.
Before I was concealed carry, such was where I was during the 90s when this dude approached talking crazy stuff.
Then he spotted my officially deemed illegal since the 80s big oak prison baton in the trunk still kept there for emergencies..
He visibly started to shake and walked away.
Maybe he thought I was a loan shark for the Sopranos.

If one is not a consenting citizen, and thus a non-voter, the question is moot. If one is a consenting citizen, and does not exercise the franchise (political liberty), the loss of endowed rights is for naught.

The Clintons and their Weiner friends Blomenthal , Soros, will be exposed for their corrupt evil behavior sooner or later. The truth ultimately will prevail. Vote no to the Kakistocrats yes for Trump.
The only choice vote the best and ---- the rest.

I pity the fool who causes you to defend yourself.

Correction- Trump promises to repeal Obamacare AND to replace it with another version of socialized medicine (Trumpcare?).

Legitimate self-preservation from things Shillary may bring is why I've stocked up on guns and ammo.
A vote for The Donald is to protect the Constitution from the fascist hag's Supreme Court appointees, from a make Merkel blush flood of unvetted Muslim refugees, to protect my coal miner stepson (also his wife and 3 kids) and to keep his employer from laying off more workers and all of the USA and its battered economy from the best corrupt president money can bribe via the Clinton Crime Cartel Foundation.

Most libertarians strongly favor things like the following:
- massive tax reduction (and simplification)
- cancel all unconstitutional executive actions
- impose term limits on Congress (via Amendment)
- a hiring freeze on federal employees (to reduce it by attrition)
- ban bureaucrats and congressional staffers from lobbying (for 5 years)
-reduce the number of federal regulations by at least half.

also:
- lift restrictions on energy production and infrastructure (e.g. pipelines)
- cancel payments to U. N. “climate change” funds, and use the money ofr clean water and environmental cleanup
- renegotiate NAFTA and TPP to insure free trade (both ways)
- end Federal involvement in education
- protect Second Amendment rights of the individual
-bring American troops home from places like Belgium, Japan, and Baghdad.

and:
- repeal the “Affordable Care Act” (Obamacare)
- allow citizens to purchase insurance across state lines
-allow tax-deductible Health Savings accounts
- cut red tape at FDA (especially for approval of life-saving drugs)
-allow veterans to receive private treatment when VA fails to provide it

Most libertarians favor all or most of the above.
Gary Johnson proposes many of the above.
Hillary Clinton opposes ALL of the above.
Donald Trump has proposed and promised ALL of the above.
(Yes, this list was compiled from Trump’s “contract” in Gettysburg, but a lot of it sounds like Johnson.)

Unfortunately, there are some whose thought processes are so prejudiced by their visceral dislike for the man, that they refuse to even consider what a Trump Presidency would actually be like! Comparisons with Hitler and Brownshirts are utterly ludicrous — except that Hillary Clinton's White House would be far more fascist (and far more dangerous) than Donald Trump's could ever be. Furthermore, a Clinton Administration is certain to increase foreign military interventions and risk nuclear war, while curbing free speech, freedom of association, and free enterprise at home.

Lest we forget, the word “liberal” no longer has anything to do with LIBERTY, while the word “conservative” increasingly refers to conserving individual rights and insisting that the Constitution is meant to restrict Federal powers.

As for myself, I will probably cast my vote for Gary Johnson once again -- but this time it will be largely because I am disenfranchised via the corrupt winner-takes-all system that prevents citizens in my Congressional District from choosing our own Presidential Elector (who would most likely have been a Trump elector, had the politicians in Albany not stolen our vote!).

N.B. Voting for Gary johnson will also help the LP to receive Federal funds -- which is hardly a "libertarian" reason!

I've said this, before. Trump reminds me of the bullies who used to beat me up in school (so, I joined the Marines). In "good conscience" I shouldn't vote for him, but for my right to "keep and bear", for the possibility of the SCOTUS making sane rulings about "sex" issues and to keep a pathological liar out of the White House, I am willing to be flexible.

All I know, for sure, is that, with Trump, I may still retain the opportunity to improve things, four years from now. With Clinton...

Consider what a vote in a mob rule election really means. Unless you are either in the majority, or a major minority, your vote is ignored and you wasted your time voting. No one cares about you "making a stand".

In this election, either Hillary or Trump will be the next president. There are no other realistic choices. We get one or the other. So pick the one who will do the job of president better for the next 4 years.

In this election its either a crooked career politician, and a businessman who can offer some change from the status quo based on his success in business. We have already tried the career politicians, and how has that worked? Time for something new.