I said before, tinfoil hat and all, I wouldn’t be surprised if he had some back room deal with the Clintons to do everything in his power to get her elected. I don’t think he thought he’d be this popular, though.
The open letter I posted above says he was aiming for about 12% of the vote and was surprised at his popularity. He was a protest candidate and thought it would help his business.
I don’t think it involves the Clintons though, I think its all ego.
That wouldn’t surprise me. Lol, ya, conspiracy theories are not really my thing.
Start with Narcissist, everything else follows and makes sense.
The weird thing is all the other Trumps (obviously his sister is extremely accomplished and non-existent wrt publicity until now), including his children, seem “ok”. It’s like The Donald is the outlier Trump who was born without the filter that all the other Trumps possess(ed).
(For the record, my expert diagnosis is based upon the fact I smoke cigars and attribute all problems to Oedipal issues and penile allegories.)
This would actually make the most sense of anything to date.
SOOOOO If Trump pulls it off, is it the greatest political shenanigan of modern times?
Had to share this.
You’re conflating Admirals Richard Lyon and James Lyons, the latter of which was forced out of the Navy and has espoused conspiracy theories.
What do you believe to be valid facts according to Lyons? That the Benghazi attack was an Obama sponsored false flag operation? That homosexual service members are a dire threat to the good order and readiness of the navy? That the Muslim Brotherhood has penetrated every American security agency and is a de facto cabinet member? That the Obama doctrine is pro-Iran? That CIA director John Brennan is a Muslim convert and is hostile to American interests?
I’m not loathe to offend when the situation calls for it. My opposition to your pseudo-macho bullshit isn’t about political correctness, which I loathe. It’s about effectual and prudent policy. Part of that policy is by necessity public speech acts. You discuss foreign policy and national security policy like those subjects are as accessible to meaningful comprehension as the weather or sports. You aren’t so much as a dilettante. You enter these discussions without having a rudimentary understanding of the basic concepts that underpin an international issue, much less lucid, evidenced details of the issue itself. I’m playing tennis. You, on the other hand, are content with sodomizing yourself on the fifty yard line with a cricket bat and claiming you just scored a touchdown. To be frank, you’re out of your depth and are woefully unable or unwilling to recognize it. Perhaps you implicitly do and that’s why you feel the need to lash out at those who actually want to bring a modicum of rigor to the discussion.
Ignorance of a particular subject is fine. Specialization exists for a reason. I’m sure I don’t know shit about the energy industry vis-a-vis you. What’s not okay is bellicose arrogance that in reality isn’t supported by so much as 101 knowledge of the subject At hand. Contrary to the barstool bullshit you’re peddling here, foreign affairs and national security policy do not lend themselves to arguments by analogy or gut impulse. Rather, like other worthwhile disciplines, they take an enormous amount of diligent study to become proficient in. You’ve attempted to cheapen that with your reflexive and ahistorical anti-intellectualism in this thread.
Lastly, your casual, unevidenced embrace of both torture and the targeting of non-combatants in this thread is antithetical to core American values. It’s nothing short of pathetic and disgusting that an otherwise intelligent individual such as yourself is so quick to advocate for actions that are fundamentally at odds with the charter of the United States and stem from myopic fear mongering. Doing so doesn’t make you a hard-nosed realist with a cynical understanding that the ends justify the means (they do not). It makes you a nescient and shortsighted fool.
P.S., I do respect you, but I vehemently disagree with your positions. They are at their root at odds with the values of the Republic and the historical record, and have no place in the Realist tradition, which does have useful contributions to the formulation of policy.
Bill Whittle has always had provocative and thought provoking pieces.
Three things:
-
It’s fascinating (and scary in some ways) how EACH “side” considers the “other side” the New Fascist, Nazi’s, Communist, etc…and does so with “reasoned” argument.
-
It is also interesting to me how neither side (Right/Left; Conservative/Liberal) will “own up” to the dangerous aspects of their philosophies and to the those on the fringes who follow their beliefs.
-
Each side will use the “fringes” as being representative of the whole of the “other” side.
I think this is a big reason we are in the confusing mess we are in. NO ONE is really listening to anyone else…just to their own Propaganda …
1 Like
And if that occurs we might see a Cruz/Kasich ticket.
I most certainly am not.
James Lyons founded the anti-terrorism unit Red Cell…the unit that wrote the manual on facility anti terrorism. He was also instrumental according to many in bringing special forces to the forefront of terrorism response.
Richard Lyons was a one star, who had a SEAL command…kind of a large difference no?
And I know that those on the beltway who sit in offices and write policy probably hate guys like James Lyons, I mean what he says sounds crazy to them I’m sure. He wants to kill the people who want to kill us. I can think of no better candidate to ostracized from the service than a guy who says things that the bureaucracy find abbhorant.
Do I believe that the operations he was speaking of received the highest of approval, and then were shit canned by some bureaucrat down the chain of command? Yep.
Do I believe that these operations would have resulted in countless U.S. lives being saved down the line? Yep.
Do I believe that what he said about those operations being shit canned because somebody in an office someplace thought it might offend somebody in a far away land. Yep.
So again, I am not mixing up Lyons and Lyons…I’m gonna go with the 4 star who held the largest single military command in the world and was in the bunker when shit went down (I seriously cannot believe you just write that off.).
So I guess we will have to agree to disagree.
It must be hard looking down on such lower level intellectuals, from that high horse grazing in that ivory tower.
Listen to this old nag, this is the sound of a woman who every man didn’t get along with in life. Glad to see the greenies go after her.
Yeah, it’s important to remember how Hillary comes across. Granted the republicans have their hands full with Trump right now. But when the dust settles and the nominee is anyone but Trump the republicans will have an easy win. That is if Hillary is not indicted. I understand that she has an appointment to meet with certain FBI agents to give personal testimony soon. Her and her entire staff will be questioned over the next few weeks. I don’t think it’s a stretch to imagine that she will get tagged with lying to the FBI along with other charges before this is all over.
Unless Trump runs as a third party candidate, which he undoubtedly will…then the GOP candidate will finish a VERY distant third.
1 Like
Unless Sanders runs a third party as well… Could be interesting.
He would have to be a write in candidate for most states and it would take A LOT of money. I don’t see that happening.
I don’t believe so…his followers would absolutely LOSE their collective shit if he did not get the nomination.
Whoever the GOP threw to the wolves would be boycotted by Trump supporters,who would either not vote or write in Trump.
Plus the media coverage given to a split convention would be all the pub El Donaldo would need.
Sanders vs. Hillary vs. Trump vs. whoever the GOP picks
Now THAT would be entertaining.
2 Likes
What do you not believe? There are sore loser laws preventing the loser of the party nomination from getting on the general election ticket.
If Trump doesn’t get a majority, it is very unlikely he would get the nomination on 2nd or 3rd ballots. If he loses Wisconsin (which it looks like he will) the chances of an open convention are fairly high.
Trump supporters are going to have to decide to support the nominee or vote for Hillary. The same goes for non-Trump supporters if Trump gets the nomination. I know that I will vote for the GOP nominee if it is not Trump, but if it is I will leave it blank.