• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

“Nobody is a fiscal conservative anymore”

Neutral Name

Active Member
Look no further than the rally in NC yesterday. In my mind, it is undeniable. If you continue to support Trump and the things he stands for, you support racist ideas.

Trump Attacks Congresswomen At N.C. Rally, As Crowd Chants 'Send Her Back'


Totally. I absolutely realized it when I saw this. "Mr. Trump blasted the asylum system, asserting that people are making up stories of being threatened by violence at home to be able to stay in the U.S. “It’s a scam. It’s a hoax,” Mr. Trump said. “I know about hoaxes, I just went through a hoax. Our system is full.”
Trump Says Southern-Border Asylum Seekers Are Running a ‘Scam’

Never mind that we have over 18,000,000 immigrants per year from other parts of the world. Our system isn't too full for them. He has never once mentioned people from other parts of the world. And he spoke about MS-13 gang members being dangerous and possibly getting into the United States but the people trying to come legally are lying when they say that they fear violence. You can't have it both ways. Is Central America violent or not? He proves himself so many times over.
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
Here's what it is; you would have a democratic president who would get criticized for this or that, but when a republican president came along who did the same or worse, they either flip-flopped or cooked up some cockamamie excuses, and then when a democratic president is in the seat again, they went back to the same song and dance, and now that a republican president is in power again who's crapping on all the principles they once swore by, they do the same pathetic about-face.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
My point is that for the 8 years prior to Trump, the right shrilled at the top of their lungs about anything Obama did (including the deficit). I am glad that he can not be exonerated from such accusations!
Presidents can do things which influence the deficit,
eg, start wars, continue wars, not start wars.
(I particularly like that last item.)
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
Presidents can do things which influence the deficit,
eg, start wars, continue wars, not start wars.
(I particularly like that last item.)
That was the point I was trying to illustrate. The original poster who made that comment has since rolled it back because they would rather do that than admit that all presidents, regardless of party, have a hand in it.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
Rush is right. Support for Trump has been demonstrated by multiple scientific studies to be most largely motivated by racism. I used to think there were other reasons, but the science is pretty much settled now, and to my surprise, it's racism that motivates most Trump supporters.

No one is supporting Trump in the hope he will be a fiscal conservative.
This has to be one of the most ludicrous posts I have ever seen.

¨the science is pretty much settled now¨, wow, I am so impressed, the arbiter of all things, science has spoken. Using big bad science as a cover, you are comfortable in slandering half of the population, what utter bulls**t.

Were these alleged scientific studies done by sociologists, psychologists, biologists, who ?

One of my degrees is in sociology, with a concentration in criminal justice. I have conducted studies of the type you may be alluding to.

How were participants screened, what criteria were used for selection ? How were these scientific studies implemented ? Direct questions, questionaires ? How far into the participants personal experiences, i.e. upbringing, hometown, socio economic conditions, white collar blue collar, etc. and how were these weighted ? I could go on all day exploring methodology and comparing it to established methodology reliability scales.

You invoked ¨science¨ as if it is always well done and accurate, that is a myth. Scientists with strong personal feelings on an issue, knowingly, or unknowingy interject their biases in their work all the time.

In other words, your scientific studies mean as much as the number of flea farts on Lassie in 1956.

Trump was, and is, a poor presidential candidate, yet he was a better choice than hillary, and he is a better choice than any of the simpletons running in the democrat party. Watching them¨debate¨ is like watching an auction, with they as the bidders for votes, promising trillions in goodies , bidding money that isn´t theirs.

Now to your idiotic racism charge. First, there are racists in every party, according to the bartender, Peolosi is a racist.

Second, the new style democrats call anyone who disagrees with them racists, which makes their dullard accusations as meaningful as calling someone a poop.

Democrats are obsessed with dividing people by all kinds of criteria, race being their favorite. It has become an amusing game watching them calling each other racists. Biden, being white, a male, and a senior citizen will be turned into a plantation overseer before this is over.

The ideal candidate is a black female, who is transgendered from a male, who is a lesbian, and a raving socialist, whose first language is Spanish.

The proof of the pudding is how it tastes, and instead of posting pap, you need to look at the policies of the Trump administration that you think are racist, thats where the rubber meets the road, I don´t think there are any, and immigration enforcement is not one, contrary to what the illegals and the bartender say.

Iĺl happily debate you on immigration, your call.

You should look in the mirror, and be ashamed that you had the temerity to brand many millions of people with a democrat slur. Black people, Hispanic people, Indian people, Native American people, Asian people, and White people. It is truly disgusting.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Yeah, that's what I thought. When you put the shoe on the other foot you fold immediately, predictable.


It's funny because the hypocrisy is so blatant.
I didn’t “fold” in any way. Furthermore My position is quite consistent. Yes, Obama, as the head Democrat, “owns” the deficits for when his Party controlled the House. Note I already said he should not be blamed for any deficits that occurred while he was President and the Republicans controlled the House. It is simply the fact that the deficits during the two years the Democrats controlled the House were much, much larger than during the rest of his Presidency while the Republicans controlled the House. Also if there was ever a case where a Republican was President and the Republicans also controlled the House, then I would also say such a President, as the leader of his Party, bore blame too. For example in 2005-2006 with G.W. Bush.

So much for your bogus hypocrisy charge. The facts are these. The Party that controls the House is to blame for all deficits. Should a President be of that same Party when a deficit occurs, he shares the blame. You just don’t like that these things are true and it makes the Democrats look bad.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
That was the point I was trying to illustrate. The original poster who made that comment has since rolled it back because they would rather do that than admit that all presidents, regardless of party, have a hand in it.
I know.
I hold people, including Presidents, only responsible
for the consequences of what they do.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
Is this true?

No. Rush is overlooking the two party system itself which becomes umbrella parties.

Do you agree with Rush?

No

Are you shocked that Rush admitted this? Is fiscal responsibility now an idea of the left?

Fiscal conservatism is not the same as fiscal responsibility.

The context of this statement is a caller on Limbaugh’s show suggested that right now the Republicans could nominate a young fiscal conservative who could win easily and go on for two terms. And Rush’s response is that nobody is a fiscal conservative. They would rather have a racist rapist misogynist xenophobe as the Republican leader than an actual conservative.

Rush is babbling.
 
Top