It is amazing how few of Obama’s edicts Trump says he will overturn. For example, we will still be saddled with boys in girls’ locker rooms. Are you sure you are correct that they are not the same person?

You wrote: “(you have not even given him the opportunity to be tyrannical, the words of a yet to be empowered person attempting to become empowered is not tyranny. Tyranny is an action not a rumor. You keep blowing your nose.)”

Clinton has not ruled, either, yet you still believe that she will rule poorly. You believe not only that your guy will be benevolent but that *only* your guy will be. You have the same double standard as a Democrat.

You wrote: “do not blame me, blame Cruz and every other person that failed to make the cut.”

No. You are the one who voted for Trump, claiming that he was the only electable one — and now you claim that he is not electable after all. The blame does not go to Cruz but to those who fooled themselves into voting for Trump despite his despotic rhetoric. If Clinton wins, will you blame Trump? Of course not. You are already trying to blame me, not yourself or your guy. There’s that double standard, again.

If Trump hadn’t run, who would you have voted for? Instead of voting for *that* guy, you got yourself fooled by some smooth-talking liberal Democrat who is wearing Republican clothing.

Now that your mistake is clear to you, you are trying to pass the blame onto someone else, and that someone else *still* has yet to vote in the primaries. (What kind of person blames someone else for his own mistakes? Oh, that’s right.) That you chose to side with the unelectable candidate cannot be blamed on me; I never suggested that you vote for him and even suggested that you do not.

You wrote: “You will in time get over this and…………….move on.”

So says the guy who got the tyranny he desired.

Yes, you want me to move on, not work to save the country from tyranny.

“Your fault, not mine; you support him and his tyranny”

(you have not even given him the opportunity to be tyrannical, the words of a yet to be empowered person attempting to become empowered is not tyranny. Tyranny is an action not a rumor. You keep blowing your nose.)

If your need to blame is so strong and important to you then lets not be shy, do not blame me, blame Cruz and every other person that failed to make the cut. I am but one person writing my opinions and read of the situation on a blog.

You will in time get over this and…………….move on.

You just don’t like that it applies to your guy (you don’t say that “liberty” has lost its meaning, but I use it liberally, too). Just because you think that the other two candidates are worse does not mean that Trump isn’t bad. His own words tell the tale of his desire to rule as a tyrant.

You wrote: “this (Trump) right now is what we have to work with.”

Your fault, not mine; you support him and his tyranny — I don’t. This has been my point, which seems to elude you no matter how many times I say it explicitly. Because you support rather than oppose him, the rest of us have to work that much harder to bring liberty back to this country.

Are you too lazy to hunker down and do your part, or do you actually favor tyranny over liberty? Some of your comments in previous threads make me wonder about this. (e.g. one’s right to religion does not end at his front door, as you think it should.)

You wrote: “Lets at least agree to get things going in the correct direction first and then we can worry about the next move.”

Only if we agree that liberty is the right direction and that Trump will not put us in that direction. Otherwise we are at a philosophical impasse. If you think that Trump is in favor of liberty, then you have not listened to his words and his intentions; you have not paid attention to his past and who he supports. Indeed, that you think that Trump should not ask people who favor liberty to be his running mate shows that you are not willing to fight for liberty, but either want a tyranny or want the rest of us to do the hard work — to make all of the next moves.

You wrote: “In the mean time Trump, if he indeed does become the president, will I am sure be much more receptive to the people who have put him there in case he needs a Constitutional reality check.”

Once again, you are wishfully thinking that the people who would have put him in the presidency favor liberty. They, like you, do not. BTW: you are one of the ones who will have put him there, yet you still have no plan for getting him to be receptive to conservativism as his philosophy. It is merely wishful thinking on your part that other people will sway him away from his lifelong philosophies and behaviors.

You wrote: “I do not know if you have noticed but the people are getting very loud and forceful in how they communicate with their candidates”

Apparently you have failed to notice that those candidates are not doing as their voters wish. Otherwise Obamacare and Amnesty would not have been funded, and there would not be a Trump winning the Republican Party nomination.

You wrote: “And if Trump is not what is needed then we will recruit the next person, and then the next.”

More wishful thinking. We had 16 other chances to recruit the better person, this time, but that effort failed. What makes you think that with the rest of the Republican Party thinking like you do that you all will ever recruit a person who favors liberty?

What liberal thought *actually is* can be summed up more succinctly: From each according to his willingness to work, to each according to what the centralized leadership is willing to give him.

You actively vote for tyranny, vote against liberty, make it harder for me to rescue you from tyranny, then you complain when I refuse to help you turn this country into a tyranny.

Don’t complain when I work for your liberty. It makes you sound ungrateful. Kind of like the pro-socialist welfare-recipient who complains that his free stuff isn’t enough.

You wrote: “I thank God that many more American people are going to agree with me than you in this instance.”

More evidence that you actually prefer tyranny over liberty.

Things change incrementally, and this (Trump) right now is what we have to work with. And so we will work with it. Can we dial down the inflexible and dogmatic nerd down to a 7 instead of an 11? Lets at least agree to get things going in the correct direction first and then we can worry about the next move. In the mean time Trump, if he indeed does become the president, will I am sure be much more receptive to the people who have put him there in case he needs a Constitutional reality check. I do not know if you have noticed but the people are getting very loud and forceful in how they communicate with their candidates, Trump is not Obama. And if Trump is not what is needed then we will recruit the next person, and then the next. That’s how it works, things do not change over night because your inflexible rules are followed.

I thank God that many more American people are going to agree with me than you in this instance.

I found this article a bit more illustrative of what Liberal thought actually is and how counter intuitive, contradictory and dangerous it is, this is actual, real time tyranny. (PS: I and my positions are not mentioned)

http://nypost.com/2016/05/20/liberals-love-science-unless-it-proves-them-wrong/

You wrote: “I actually respect your point of view. I just disagree with your long term strategy regarding it .”

You are reminding me of socialism.

Here you are, content to strategize a vote in favor of tyranny but desirous of liberty.

Meanwhile, you hamper those of us who actually do something about rejecting tyranny and work toward liberty. If our long-term strategy succeeds, you get the benefit of our work.

Socialism is similar: some people do the minimum possible yet enjoy the benefits that come from the hard workers. Eventually the hard workers realize they are tools, quit working hard, and let the socialist system collapse, as we have seen with most socialist societies and as will soon happen to the rest.

America has become more and more socialist, lately, and you are helping it along. You may disagree with my strategy, but yours helps socialism take over the country.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oklahoma-introduces-measure-to-impeach-obama_us_573f34a7e4b0613b512a12fb

No money, no property, no gender, no rights to protect ones self, no free speech, no definitions, no borders, just one big happy blended human family.

Nassim Taleb
Aphorism #152

I actually respect your point of view. I just disagree with your long term strategy regarding it .

No longer talking about the election. Just talking about Trump’s “brilliance.”

But in terms of the election, I *still* will not support his tyranny in any way, shape, or form. Maybe the emotional voters are flocking to Trump, but just because everyone else is jumping off the bridge and into the tyranny does not mean that I will, too. If that means some people think that I am a bad American and a Clinton lover, then so be it. Many people think I am a global warming denier, too. And a Flat Earther.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections/election_2016/white_house_watch

He certainly has his short comings but the thrust of the emotion of the election is turning to Trump for many reasons and he appears to be transcending the negative. And that is happening for several reasons, the primary one being he is perceived as not a politician like the ones that have been consistently lying to the people for the past 30 years and saying one thing and consistently doing the other, plan and simple.

This is correct. He is famous for saying “you’re fired” instead of being a good leader. A good leader encourages and trains other leaders.

He is also famous for bankrupting four companies; even Obama bankrupted only two (however, that is 100% of the companies that he took over and ran). The brilliance of Trump that I grasp from his bankruptcies is his ability to screw over his creditors for his own gain.

I used to think that Continental Airlines was brilliant for spending so much time in bankruptcy, during which they could undercut the competition with lower ticket prices, since they were not paying interest on their debt — plus much of their debt went away at the end of both of their bankruptcies. (They have now merged with United Airlines — which also went through bankruptcy, leaving me with an option to get a bunch of useless magazine subscriptions in lieu of frequent flier miles.)

Yeah– you have everything about right. “… for months I was told that I should vote for Trump because he was the only electable candidate, but now it turns out that he isn’t electable without my vote.”

And the kicker is– when he loses, it’s the fault of the sabotage perpetrated by Conservatives.
If he wins, it was in spite of the sabotage perpetrated by Conservatives.

You are a Trump Denier!…. You fail to grasp his Brilliance, you are a bad American & love Clinton (all 3 of them).

On a slightly different tact– Some of Trumps alleged choices for future Judicial appointment’s, are rock-solid. I just don’t believe he would ever appointment any of them & would never expend any political capital supporting them. It’s all apparently “up for negotiation” & “deal-making.”

You wrote: “In the context of this current election and the chess metaphor, you would have lost the game long ago”

Glad to know you give up so easily on your own liberty. It seems you resigned at the first move, abandoned your malleable principles, accepted Trump’s tyranny, went down with the ship, and moved on to your dystopia long ago. The game you are playing is short-term in nature, which explains why you had no plan to get Trump elected after he won the nomination; you did not look far enough ahead to see that Trump was not as electable as you thought.

You wrote: “I tend to test, weigh, evaluate and recognize the quality and value that individuals bring to the game of life, I have done it my entire life, it serves me well, I am very good at it, I am seldom wrong. Think about that.”

Thought about it. You will be disappointed about Trump, as this is one of those “seldom” times.

You say that you are very good at testing, weighing, evaluating, and recognizing the quality and value that individuals bring, but you already have missed the unelectability of Trump, which now has you worried.

What really pisses me off is that for months I was told that I should vote for Trump because he was the only electable candidate, but now it turns out that he isn’t electable without my vote. You make Trump’s campaign seem more and more like the ADA all the time.

Which brings up the question, why isn’t a vote for Trump in the primary likewise considered a vote for Clinton in the general election? You have insisted that not voting for Trump in the general election is the same as a vote for Clinton, but if Trump really wasn’t electable after all, then voting for him in the primary was clearly a vote to assure that the Democrat nominee is elected.

You don’t want Clinton’s type of tyranny, so you won’t vote for her. I don’t want Trump’s type, yet you insist that I vote for him anyway. Then you declare that it is *your* logic (this logic) that makes sense.

Your welcome for the work ethics, dedication and competence compliment I sincerely gave. If I am going to the moon I want an entire building filled with men and women just like you at the controls to ensure I receive a hearty welcome when I step off the capsule after I land back on earth.

I tend to test, weigh, evaluate and recognize the quality and value that individuals bring to the game of life, I have done it my entire life, it serves me well, I am very good at it, I am seldom wrong. Think about that.

Wiser people would take stock of the situation and figure out how to proceed. This is what I like about playing chess with computers. They don’t whine about their lost pieces or how they got into their sorry situation; they just figure out what to do now.

In case you think that I was whining with my previous post, re-read it. I was explaining to you why I am not responsible for your situation, the situation that I am now in, and what I have already decided to do about it: future moves, but not necessarily my next moves.

Cotour wrote: “Congratulations, your now a De facto Hillary supporter, like it, or agree with it or not.”

*Sigh* This statement sounds like it comes from a sore loser. It is similar to saying, “boo hoo; you won’t support my guy, so you must be a supporter of his adversary!”

But then, Trump himself is a sore loser, throwing a temper tantrum every time he does not win a state. With luck — maybe a lot of luck — he won’t win *my* state. I hope the majority of Republicans here are strong supporters of liberty and will not support tyranny.

It just is not sinking in to you, Cotour, but: _I will not support tyranny in any form that it takes_: Trump, Clinton, Sanders, Obama, or any other kind of form. I will *not* support one tyrant just to avoid being called a supporter of another tyrant, whom I also do not support. (Isn’t this similar to calling me a racist or a fascist; you are just trying to get me to conform or to shut up?)

Cotour wrote: “The politically disenfranchised people are at this moment getting closer to the time where they will have the opportunity to cut and live or not and die.”

Thank you, Cotour, for your recommendation that we find another political party, one that is closer to our values than the current Republican Party and much of its membership, but I already made this decision a couple of weeks ago. I still have not chosen a party to join, but I have plenty of time before I have to make that decision.

Cotour wrote: “Keep that picture of the two of them in your mind as you get closer to the time and imagine what four or even eight years of them again in the White House would be like for the country. How vial the thought.”

Yup. The picture is the same, no matter which of the two of them gets into the White House for the next term or two (or Sanders, for that matter). That has been my point all along. Glad you, Cotour, are starting to come around.

I am listening to “The Martian” on audio book, because I had borrowed my nephew’s book last fall. I also recently reviewed the movie. Among the lessons are to not give up, work through each problem, and communicate and coordinate with those who can help. The movie sums up some of this at the end, with the intro to the “stranded astronaut” class.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDYCLFE86Po (27 seconds — again, Robert, sorry for including a video link while you don’t have a good internet service)

Frankly, it is looking like everything has gone south on us, and we are just now getting over the part where we think to ourselves, “This is it. This is how liberty ends.” As I have been trying to say, I do not accept it as a permanent condition, and I will not support the tyranny in any way, shape, or form. I am looking for people to help begin, to do that math, and to help get to work. If we solve enough problems, we get to live in liberty, again, or maybe it is our descendants who do.

Something similar to this will have to be employed to recover from the tyranny.

An early step is for 37 states to call for a convention to propose some Constitutional Amendments that clarify the freedoms of the people and the states, and clarify the limits of the (currently malevolent) federal government.

I would recommend elimination of the 16th amendment, as it is the one most effectively used by the liberal progressives to usurp our freedoms and steal our property. Also, a reiteration that the federal government has only the powers explicitly delegated to it by the Constitution. It is appalling how many rights have been usurped by the government and that we have to restate them in order to overcome their misinterpretation by the malevolent Supreme Court. Maybe the Supremes need to be elected by We the People, and maybe We the People need the ability to recall recalcitrant representatives, presidents, and justices. I’m just “thinking out loud.” I haven’t pondered the ramifications of some of these thoughts.

But then again, this assumes a federal government that follows the US Constitution. I suspect, however, that just holding such a convention would put the fear of We the People into the federal government.

Wayne wrote: ” (Didn’t mean to recruit you to run for City Council while you were out of the room! (ha) )”

Sounds like Opus, when he gets nominated for VP while he is out buying the chips for their party’s convention. Nice “Bloom County” reference, and one of my favorite events from that comic, and I use it every time I nominate a person who is absent from a meeting.

Let that picture seep into your brain. You remind me of the guy who got his arm stuck between a rock and could not get it out and he realized that he had two choices.

1. Cut my arm of and live. or 2. Not cut my arm off and die trapped here under this rock.

In time, when it came down to it he summoned up the courage and chose correctly and was able to cut his arm off and he lived. The politically disenfranchised people are at this moment getting closer to the time where they will have the opportunity to cut and live or not and die.

Keep that picture of the two of them in your mind as you get closer to the time and imagine what four or even eight years of them again in the White House would be like for the country. How vial the thought.

At least with one arm you have something to work with and move into the future. I will take one arm and living over consciously choosing to be just plain being dead.

Lets be hopeful that in the coming weeks and months that Trump (assuming that he remains the presumptive candidate) is able to somehow instill some level of confidence that he will be more than instead of the less then that some are rightfully with cause assuming to push over this hump of alienation.

I usually leave hope for little girls and boys, but I will go there if I absolutely have to.

Cotour:
Your Guy beat Cruz. Be happy. It’s what you wanted. My Guy lost. (Now I support his Senate re-election. Until we repeal the 17th Amendment, Senate elections are basically National in nature.)
Neither you nor Trump however, appear to appreciate that in that Primary process, Trump alienated a large segment of the Conservative vote & he continues to demonstrate & expand his Crony Progressive ways, on a daily basis.
As I’ve said before; don’t hate the guy, but can not support him or his policies.

Telling me how foolish I am at every turn, doesn’t persuade me.

Another pouter who got their bubbles taken?

We can now all give up and everything can now all really go to hell because you did not get your way and your man, who I would have happily supported if he had prevailed, was unable to overcome what in the competition he was unable to overcome.

Well that is really how things should always be determined isn’t it.

Congratulations, your now a De facto Hillary supporter, like it, or agree with it or not.

YOUR WITH HER >

You wrote: “Edward however may need some calming medication to be prescribed if Trump were to prevail. I don’t think he can take a Trump administration on top of two terms of Obama. I however may need to begin to drink a lot more wine if Hillary prevails after two terms of Obama, no prescription drugs or hard liquor for me.”

Nah. I am already resolved to the loss of liberty in America. It took a few days, after Cruz dropped out, but the panic attacks and hyperventilation come less often, now, without alcohol or medications.

Unless a miracle occurs, things will only get worse under any of the probable scenarios. However, you may end up drinking harder stuff than wine when Trump does not do as you hope. As President Snow in the movie “Hunger Games” said, “Hope. It is the only thing stronger than fear. I little hope is effective; a lot of hope is dangerous. A spark is fine, as long as it’s contained.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_e3wADQ7IXw (41 seconds — Sorry, Robert, for including a video link while you don’t have a good internet service)

You wrote: “Your entire premise and extreme dislike is based totally on something that you are assuming, that he will be or is a “tyrant”.”

It is not as much assumption as you think. Once again, you are projecting your own reasoning onto me. I am going by the things that he has actually said that he would do. On the other hand, I do not know why you assume that he will do otherwise. Your reasoning seems to be the flawed reasoning, using assumptions and hope that he will do other than he says.

You wrote: “Evidence, not your assumption based on rhetoric found in the media, actual evidence that he acts in such a way.”

As I have said, my evidence is his own words. You are the one assuming from rhetoric you found in the media that “Much of what he says is to keep his opponents off balance.” I don’t know what he has said to make you think this. But if this *is* his strategy, then how do you know what is true and what is lie? How do you know what you can trust about him? Apparently he is giving you a spark of hope; a contained hope. Obama used this same tactic and disappointed many of his supporters.

You are also assuming that I have an extreme dislike of the man. I don’t know what I may have said to give you that impression. You seem to be applying the assumption that liberals make that a disagreement with someone is the same as a hatred of him.

You wrote: “What do you know that I do not”?

Apparently, a lot. The definition of tyrant, for one thing, and the words that he has used to inform us that he plans to be one, for a second thing.

You wrote: “Trump is just the asymmetrical political leadership medicine that the country desperately needs”

Once again, this is an assumption on your part. His words indicate that he favors bigger government, more central control, and less individual freedom. None of his words indicate that he is what the country needs, unless you think that it needs bigger government, more central control, and less individual freedom.

If he favored dragging America back to the Constitution, then he would: 1) know more about the Constitution, and 2) wouldn’t favor policies that go directly against it. Shutting down speech that he does not like and using government to confiscate property are just two of his well-known anti-constitutional goals.

You wrote: “Trump may be theee one candidate that is most like … many of the founders themselves!”

Maybe, but there is nothing to indicate this possibility. A quick look finds several other 2016 presidential candidates who could be much more like the founders than Trump. Trump thinks that the United States should bully countries, companies, and citizens into submitting to government’s desires, rather than the government existing to serve the citizens. Wikipedia has a list of 2016 third party and independent candidates. Several of the right-leaning Libertarian Party and the right-leaning American Independent Party candidates are more likely to be less tyrannical and more constitutional than Trump.

You wrote: “PS: Just like Edward being in love with the word “tyrant” and throwing it around to me it is just about drama and effect when you are unable to present evidence that that indeed is how Trump comports himself.”

It is not how Trump “comports himself.” I stated very clearly that it is what he has *said* that tells us that he intends to rule as a “person in a position of authority who exercises power oppressively or despotically.” You are the one who ignores his actual statements and goes on the hope (without evidence) that he is lying about who he is and how he intends to rule and hope that he is a latent constitutionalist who will rescue us from people who say things like he does.

You wrote: “Hillary Clinton must not become the president of the United States. I think everything being equal you would regret that much more than a Donald Trump presidency.”

Everything being equal, there is no difference between the two, no matter who Trump chooses for vice president, and you are merely hopeful that there is. It does not matter which one becomes president, the US is not going to go back to the country that you say you want it to be. Stopping Clinton only leaves us with Trump, who has stated no strategy to make it so and has stated that he will make it into the same country that Clinton would turn it into. That you favor Trump’s methods over Clinton’s methods does not interest me. The difference between Clinton and Trump is that Clinton currently receives the bribes and Trump currently pays the bribes. I have no illusions that after you are finished voting for tyranny, the US will be anything other than a tyranny.

I take no responsibility in stopping Clinton, because people like you eliminated the only viable alternative. Trump is not an alternative; he is the same tyrant in a different guise. The current situation is your own making and your own fault. That you feel the need to convince me to help you now is your own problem.

My help would have been to vote for a non-tyrant, but all of those in the Republican Party have been eliminated by your guy, so my vote (in November, I’m voting for Cruz in June, as he is still on the ballot) goes elsewhere. I will let you live with the consequences of your own choice, since you have left me with no choice – tyranny is the future, and it is your fault, not mine. No matter how much you complain, you made the choice for me before my state could weigh in on the issue. Don’t try to make me feel any responsibility for your poor decision-making capabilities; I will not take on that responsibility.

(BTW: thanks for the compliment about being the right person to put people back on the moon. And thank you, Wayne, for your similar compliment.)

My point is that I will not have taken part in supporting tyranny.

You wrote: “Hopefully anyone who reads these interactions will better understand what the bigger picture is and perhaps will help them to do what some believe must be done.”

Correct. The bigger picture and what must be done is to oppose, not support, tyranny.

http://nypost.com/2016/05/14/owellian-administration-brands-criminals-justice-involved-individuals/

(this is the kind of liberal / leftist brain washing that will be allowed to continue if Hillary is allowed to appoint the next Supreme Court Justices)

And this sentiment of yours:

“Not my responsibility to stop Clinton— that’s all on Trump now.
Trump is your Guy. It’s your responsibility to expand his base and drag him over the finish line.”

Its like your a hurt child who is taking his marbles and going home because you lost or someone stole your bubbles. If YOU are willing to allow Hillary Clinton to inhabit the White House and allow her to appoint the next Supreme Court Justices among the many, many other reasons that she should not be the president is very stunted and narrow IMO. I now better understand why you do not quite get the implications and applications of the principles of S.O.M.

Your Conscious choice to allow such threats to America borders IMO on unpatriotic. Who cares if you did not get exactly what you wanted and may have to settle for someone who is not your ideal? No one, we have to take care of business.

“It’s your responsibility to expand his base and drag him over the finish line.”

Hopefully anyone who reads these interactions will better understand what the bigger picture is and perhaps will help them to do what some believe must be done. So you see, it very much is YOUR responsibility, not just mine.

(How am I doing so far dragging him across the finish line? What say you now?)

I’d put Edward in charge of any number of things, not exclusively “science-related,” School Board, City Council, anything. It’s not any techie/engineering skills per-se, it’s the clear thinking & grasp of Good Old Fashioned Americanism. Citizen Legislator— do his bit & return to the private-sector.

If Palin is so toxic, why doesn’t Trump disavow her?? He could have rejected her endorsement (or active current campaigning,) but then again he doesn’t mind being endorsed by a convicted rapist or an Alex Jones type. (I have no clue what she has morphed into, but I now know what she is not.)

Sarah Palin, “will contaminate [Trump’s] his potential.”
Everything else he does, makes no difference? Hiring all the Crony’s & usual-suspects he can find & changing his opinions by the day— an ex-Governor & failed VP candidate, will “contaminate his potential?”
(Don’t worry, he won’t pick her. And he would never appoint a Cruz or a Lee, to the Judiciary, much less expend any political-capital.

Not my responsibility to stop Clinton— that’s all on Trump now.
Trump is your Guy. It’s your responsibility to expand his base and drag him over the finish line.

“(I’d put Edward in-charge of number any of things & sleep soundly at night.)”

Absolutely (no sarcasm intended at all in this comment), Edward is the first on the job and the last to leave, knows every element of his responsibilities and everyone else’s, he is smart and reasonable and uncompromising. He is the high IQ nerd that you need to actually get things done and operational. Want to put someone on the moon and make sure they come home? Find Edward and other people like him and get the job done.

Trump finds, hires and pays Edwards all day long.

“Don’t tell ME it’s my responsibility to stop her” Sorry to inform you, but it is your responsibility.

“Just to confirm— if Trump picks Palin, that’s a deal-breaker (?)”

What is your fascination with this issue? I will go over it once again.

If Trump were to choose Palin as his vice presidential pick it would show very poor judgement and he would loose. That is my statement. I also was interested in Palin when I voted for McCain and that he chose her but it turns out that she is a gaff machine and politically a repellent IMO, reasonable people will not vote for her, she is a deal breaker. McCain turned out to be the RINO that he is and refused to tear up or confront Obama in order to win the White House, I no longer like either of them. Trump needs to keep her at an arms length plus distance or she will contaminate his potential.

Does that put your curiosity to bed on the subject? Or do you need more?

And you can believe me when I tell you living in NYC for me is an interesting experience politically, to say the least. Those more Conservative, non leftist, non liberal among us who can take it take it, those who can no longer take it, move to Arizona. I totally understand the move, a lady friend of mine who worked for 20 years for the Visiting Nurse Service evaluating all of the truly needy and all of the scammers right here in the belly of the beast just retired and immediately moved to Arizona because she could not take it any more.

For someone who allegedly agrees with me 98% of the time, I would think that you have a lot to think about and reconcile on this subject at hand.

Talk about “drama and effect,” you are the Poster Child for such! (not a slam, just an observation)

Can’t speak on Edwards behalf, but agree with his sentiment to an extraordinarily high confidence level. (I’d put Edward in-charge of number any of things & sleep soundly at night.)

As I mentioned– we could quibble over the degree, but Trump is a Statist. (Or tyrannical,” I don’t care what adjective we use.)

New York gave us Senator Clinton– thanks a lot. Don’t tell ME it’s my responsibility to stop her, you people let that ship sail a long time ago.

Your “disturbing thought” isn’t disturbing— it’s ridiculous. And I would suspect– to bait any of us who think differently. (The fascination with Billionaires & Communists in New York City is amazing– they appear to be interchangeable.)
((NYC had a Mayor, that lived in the Bahama’s, need I say more?))

Just to confirm— if Trump picks Palin, that’s a deal-breaker (?) If Trumps picks someone else, “he’s brilliant.”
(You didn’t vote for McCain, did you?)

Trump is just the asymmetrical political leadership medicine that the country desperately needs in order to drag it back to where it needs to be dragged to break this continuing un American, un Constitutional anti American sovereignty internationalist trajectory we are documented to be on.

Trump may be theee one candidate that is most like……………………..get ready………………..this is going to be a disturbing thought……………………many of the founders themselves! If you have big problems to solve you need a big unique personality to deal with them. And I again point out that I have some serious problems with Trump myself, but something has to be done and Trump at this moment in time is applying for the job and he may in the end get it.

Chew on that for a while, that thought alone may put Edward in a home on oxygen.

PS: Just like Edward being in love with the word “tyrant” and throwing it around to me it is just about drama and effect when you are unable to present evidence that that indeed is how Trump comports himself. Controversial fine, he is asymmetrical, but tyrannical?

Absolute power breeds contempt, and that is what the Congress and Supreme Court functions to counter balance. Any way you look at it, Hillary Clinton must not become the president of the United States. I think everything being equal you would regret that much more than a Donald Trump presidency.

We could quibble over the degree, but it’s tyrannical. Make no mistake.

Edward is correct.

It’s a soft-tyranny, but morphing harder at an increasing rate. We’re on that slippery-slope to Serfdom & have been so the past 100 years. It’s that last 10% where things get really weird & the Strong Man steps up, promising to save us all, if we just give him more Kontrol.

He certainly is different but your assumption IMO that he is a tyrant is just that, an assumption. He from what I know does not run his businesses in a tyrannical way, why do you assume that he would be tyrannical as the president? He runs a very balanced and focused business with very happy employees from what I can see.

Much of what he says is to keep his opponents off balance, both current and future opponents. Please provide your evidence that he is in fact a “tyrant”. Evidence, not your assumption based on rhetoric found in the media, actual evidence that he acts in such a way.

What do you know that I do not, besides what opinions that you have developed as a function of his media antics?

I respect your reasonable choices and strategy. Edward however may need some calming medication to be prescribed if Trump were to prevail. I don’t think he can take a Trump administration on top of two terms of Obama. I however may need to begin to drink a lot more wine if Hillary prevails after two terms of Obama, no prescription drugs or hard liquor for me.