I sometimes wonder if you even read some of the things I write in my previous posts and threads...

I'm not sure why you are saying I'm gullible, since funnily enough I was the one that pointed out his speech techniques. I'm saying he is effective in connecting with his audience. He has run a great campaign so far speaking simply but effectively. Ultimately it is the American Public that will vote the President into office, and the majority of the public is not interested in the fine details of politics. You seem unable to realize this.

Its not just Trump really. Look at Bernie Sanders. His biggest appeal is his ideas of healthcare and college education, his war on the so called 1% and a honest and consistent character. I think most of Bernie Sander's supporters will be hard pressed to detail on the spot the exact ways Bernie will carry out his reforms or quote his past political record, all they care about is they like the ideas he's putting on the table and their impressions of him.

Edited 1/26/2016 12:35:57

"I sometimes wonder if you even read some of the things I write in my previous posts and threads..."

I do, the thing is I actually believe the same about you, since you cannot stop truncating my own comments, as the first time I saw you here posting I truly never see you having any objective opinions, your main weakness is that you cannot conceive you are wrong sometimes, it never happened.
This is the main factor that shows how biased you are everytime when we are debating about some topics here... That's really sad tbh, because I am sure you could be a very nice debater if you could only listen to other people's opinions instead of purposely blinding yourself in your own dogmatic and twisted judgments.

"the majority of the public is not interested in the fine details of politics. You seem unable to realize this."

You see, it perfectly confirms what I said earlier, you are truncating or inventing words I never stated, I am perfectly aware that the majority of the public is sadly not interested about the fine details of politics, I already told you about the dangerousness of such personalities as Trump or Marine Le Pen (see previous threads), and that people are slowly perverted by their nauseating ideas. You see you are not even able to have a good debate with me, because all you are looking for is confrontation. Even if we agree on many things, you will skip this.

I truly never see you having any objective opinions, your main weakness is that you cannot conceive you are wrong sometimes, it never happened

Right, because you are objective all the time, and when was the last time you conceived you were wrong?

I have not conceded anything because I rarely get any arguments from you, all I get is accusations that I invent words out of you, which conveniently you don't elaborate on.

I am sure you could be a very nice debater if you could only listen to other people's opinions instead of purposely blinding yourself in your own dogmatic and twisted judgments.

Right, and every time you don't have a response to what I'm saying you accuse me of 'truncating' or 'inventing' words.

I am perfectly aware that the majority of the public is sadly not interested about the fine details of politics, I already told you about the dangerousness of such personalities as Trump or Marine Le Pen (see previous threads), and that people are slowly perverted by their nauseating ideas.

You see you are not even able to have a good debate with me, because all you are looking for is confrontation. Even if we agree on many things, you will skip this.

Good, so you are indeed aware. Funnily enough you don't respond or agree with my point about Bernie Sanders and his supporters then... but is that because he says what you want to hear? I only mention this because you are accusing me of 'skipping' things.

I have said many times, it is pretty pointless arguing with you. Your arguments have little content in them, they are mainly personal attacks and straw man accusations you pull out of nowhere. Accusing someone of 'inventing' words is easier than actually responding to arguments or conceding your own point of view, isn't it?

Edited 1/26/2016 13:17:35

Right, because you are objective all the time, and when was the last time you conceived you were wrong?

I have not conceded anything because I rarely get any arguments from you, all I get is accusations that I invent words out of you, which conveniently you don't elaborate on.

Nope, I recognise that I am not objective all the time, this is impossible anyway. And about how many times I conceived I was wrong, you should read more carefully my posts, you would see I indeed conceived I was wrong in many topics.
Well as you just avoid the arguments I usually post, so yeah it is not that difficult from you to concede nothing. You are the first one to not elaborate anything, you see, you skipped again to give me any good explanations about Trump's program, the one not able to elaborate or properly debate with solid arguments and sources is you dear Pulsey. And the fact you NEVER conceded anything is because you are just unable to do so with anyone here disagreeing with you, and even the ones proving you the blatant truth, you will keep saying that they are wrong.

Right, and every time you don't have a response to what I'm saying you accuse me of 'truncating' or 'inventing' words.

Stop saying bullshit would you, when I say you invented words, it is because you are actually really commenting in my name, whereas most of the time I never stated anything like this.
The last example here about me being naive and not knowing that people aren't interested about fine politics is the best example, I was here totally agreeing with you, furthermore I also many times pointed out this fact with my comments about Le Pen, as she has not any solid programs, the main source of her votes is the outstanding qualities of speech and the way she is able to pervert people's mind thorough fear and hatred, Trump is perhaps a lighter form of Le Pen, nevertheless he is quite the same, using the same strategy, about how he attracts his own audience and electorate. That's why they are both equally dangerous.

Good, so you are indeed aware. Funnily enough you don't respond or agree with my point about Bernie Sanders and his supporters then... but is that because he says what you want to hear? I only mention this because you are accusing me of 'skipping' things.

I have said many times, it is pretty pointless arguing with you. Your arguments have little content in them, they are mainly personal attacks and straw man accusations you pull out of nowhere. Accusing someone of 'inventing' words is easier than actually responding to arguments or conceding your own point of view, isn't it?

About Bernie Sanders I wasn't skipping it, I just have nothing to say, because I know little about him, if I said nothing it is not because I was against what you said or ignored your comment, this is the contrary here, I am just not pretending to debate like you when I know nothing about one topic.

Pulsey, again in total hypocrisy you are saying I am not responding to your arguments, whereas 90% of what I posted was ignored. So yes, you are indeed truncating my comments and you keep doing it. The only time I said you were "skipping" something, it was about something we agreed on together. Again you are looking for pointless confrontation at any cost, which is a truly pathetic way of debating with someone.

you see, you skipped again to give me any good explanations about Trump's program

I hate to pick on this, but you said, and I quote 'Give me which are according to you these "many ideas" he offered? ' I couldn't understand your broken English. With your follow up I'm guessing you are asking me to list proposals Trump has put on the table and discuss its merits.

But are you really asking me to list some of Trump's campaign ideas? Build a wall along Mexico border, temporary ban on Muslims, these are just 2 of the most discussed policies he's brought to the table, and there are many others. I've pointed out the flaws in the plan and defended its merits in a previous post with you, but then you just kept accusing me of the same 'truncating' and 'inventing', so... meh.

And about how many times I conceived I was wrong, you should read more carefully my posts, you would see I indeed conceived I was wrong in many topics.

No... I don't.

And the fact you NEVER conceded anything is because you are just unable to do so with anyone here disagreeing with you, and even the ones proving you the blatant truth, you will keep saying that they are wrong.

And before your comment, where in this entire page have you accused me of being 'wrong'? I can't admit I'm wrong if you don't accuse me of being wrong!

pervert people's mind thorough fear and hatred, Trump is perhaps a lighter form of Le Pen, nevertheless he is quite the same, using the same strategy, about how he attracts his own audience and electorate.

I have never denied that. Indeed, a large part of Trump's appeal is his ability to say what many people see and want and are afraid to say, which is why I said on the first page he wouldn't have stood a chance 10+ years ago. But perhaps the appeal to pathos is justified today in 2016, when you have people swarming into borders and some committing fatal terrorist attacks, a ten thousand strong worldwide group threatening to wage terror in your country, the rise of China and Russian military presence, declining American industries, jobs shifting offshore, maybe there is something to fear after all? I don't know much about Le Pen to comment on her.

Edited 1/26/2016 14:39:58

As a bernie supporter,what Jai about democrats playing the immigrant and race cards are pretty accurate. Minorities are going to be very important this election. Oh how I wish that I could vote in this election.

Pulsey, indeed my question was very badly formulated, and as you may know I'm not a native nor fluent English speaker, I usually try to correct myself before posting it, but right now as I am on my phone, I did not really paid attention to it. I will never take it bad if you correct me as one of the reasons I joined this forum, is also to improve my English. Anyway you got the idea of it, I wanted to know if you ever read Trump's program, and excepted these demagogic suggestions he made about Muslims and Mexicans people, are there any serious campaign ideas? Judging from your evasive answer "many others" it seems you do not know at all any other campaign ideas rather than the Mexican wall and the Muslim ban.

Trump is playing a very dangerous game, playing with people's fears and paranoia. This always proved to lead to catastrophic paths and tends to worsen the situation instead of improving it. Trump is conveying messages of fear and hatred, much more like any far right political leaders, so tell me how this can be respectable?

Edited 1/26/2016 16:17:10

Either way it doesn't matter to me. I'm still voting Rand Paul even if he drops out of the GOP race. And if Trump is the nominee I'll go third party. Our country is doomed either way if Trump or Hillary or Bernie get's elected.

I don't know how I feel about Trump. On the one hand he's got no economic sense, no coherent foreign policy, he has a liberal past and he's an un-substantive demagogue. On the other, he seems to be genuinely patriotic and has a strong stance on illegal immigration. However, Cruz is by far my first choice, and then Paul of Carson

I would argue Trump understands more about economics and foreign relations than the other candidates on either side. His success in the private sector and in the GOP nomination show that. Also I prefer someone who supports common-sense policies rather than just agreeing with everything their party establishment says. All those attack ads are doing is "exposing" Trump as a man of reason.

He is protectionist. While this is an option for some, I prefer free-market. However, it is still far more economically viable than socialism. And I think he has good ideas on foreign policy at times, but seems inconsistent and not readily understood.

Fair enough, he's a protectionist and that's not optimal.

Foreign relations change so fast that anyone can be seen as inconsistent if you look at their record long enough. Plus, Trump rightly argues that the US shouldn't be too open about their intentions or foreign powers will take advantage of that. Inconsistent doesn't have to mean ineffective.

Fair point

I would argue Trump understands more about economics and foreign relations than the other candidates on either side. His success in the private sector and in the GOP nomination show that. Also I prefer someone who supports common-sense policies rather than just agreeing with everything their party establishment says. All those attack ads are doing is "exposing" Trump as a man of reason.

1) How does he understand foreign relations? Just building businesses abroad doesn't mean you understand diplomacy. He's short tempered, puerile, and loves to pick fights. He'll destroy foreign relations. Half of Europe already hates him. The UK tried to stupidly ban him. And he has no sense of subtlety.

2) "Common-Sense Policies" - besides his deportation and border defense proposals I can't name another "common-sense" policy of his.

3) "Man of Reason" - LOL. Yes the man who's changed party, ideology, and policy positions more times than I can count is a man of reason. You're being duped in my opinion. This guy stands for nothing and believes in nothing other than what will get him elected. He's using the GOP base and we're all in store for either a huge betrayal if he wins or a catastrophic defeat if he loses, because if he loses we'll also lose the Senate, several Governorships, and the supreme court.

1) How does he understand foreign relations? Just building businesses abroad doesn't mean you understand diplomacy. He's short tempered, puerile, and loves to pick fights. He'll destroy foreign relations. Half of Europe already hates him. The UK tried to stupidly ban him. And he has no sense of subtlety.

One strategy that Trump has used during his campaign is that if someone hits him, he hits back harder. So far that has been very effective and only poor Jeb still consistently attacks him, in vain. That works just as well in international politics as in GOP primaries.

Trump is not short-tempered. He can be inflammatory if he chooses to, and he deliberately picks fights with his opponents, with those fights almost always ending in his victory and their defeat. He doesn't pick fights he knows he'll lose.

Most of Europe hates the GOP and thinks that Obama is a jesus. The Nobel committee gave Obama the Peace Prize for being black. Just goes to show that the European media and establishment is extremely biased. Half of Europe hates Trump? So what.

2) "Common-Sense Policies" - besides his deportation and border defense proposals I can't name another "common-sense" policy of his.

I'd be surprised if he actually built a wall or deported all illegals. He just says that to get into the headlines, but he will actually be a lot more moderate. I don't care if he builds a wall or just strengthens border forces, as long as he deals with the issue.

3) "Man of Reason" - LOL. Yes the man who's changed party, ideology, and policy positions more times than I can count is a man of reason. You're being duped in my opinion. This guy stands for nothing and believes in nothing other than what will get him elected. He's using the GOP base and we're all in store for either a huge betrayal if he wins or a catastrophic defeat if he loses, because if he loses we'll also lose the Senate, several Governorships, and the supreme court.

Just goes to show that he's neither a hardcore Republican or Democrat but an Independent who acts based on issues and not dogmatically by ideology.

Trump is someone who gets things done and has a lot of support across party lines. He doesn't have to sign executive orders to get his way, like Obama and probably Cruz who has recently alienated the GOP establishment. A lot of people don't agree with Trump but they can still work with him.

Republicans *need* to get rid of some guys who are still living in the 1980s, and replace them with better candidates. They might lose a few governorships, but they will gain a lot of new ones.

Tl;dr

The autism is strong with this thread

i hope bernie wins but i'm scared that if he becomes the democrat presidential candidate, trump or even worse, cruz, will win

Cruz worse than Trump? Now there's a rare opinion.

Also, if Bernie becomes the Democrat candidate his opponent will immediately flood the airwaves with scare ads regarding his Socialism. Considering a heavy chunk of Americans still have an intense fear/hatred of Socialism said event could ruin Sanders' chances.

Also, if Bernie becomes the Democrat candidate his opponent will immediately flood the airwaves with scare ads regarding his Socialism. Considering a heavy chunk of Americans still have an intense fear/hatred of Socialism said event could ruin Sanders' chances.
yeah thats what i mean

Cruz worse than Trump? Now there's a rare opinion.
thats only because i agree with trump on prochoice healthcare and guns, even though i despise his policys on immigration and stuff like that

Edited 1/26/2016 22:54:49

Cruz worse than Trump? Now there's a rare opinion.

Yeah, right. Half of Republicans is next to nothing. But if poor Jeb says so, then it must be true. I mean, he got mommy's endorsement.