Republican nominee for President

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

https://garyjohnson2016.com/

Over the weekend between spending time with boo jank and bbqs, I found a candidate for President that I would actually vote for. Kinda excited to have a dog in the game...If there was any year we needed a 3rd party candidate, its this one.

Take a look at Gary Johnson and the Libertarian party...take time and read through the issues and his common sense approach.

I wish the Libertarians would put a convention on and force the networks to show its ideals with the same amount of the time and effort the other two parties do.

Sent from my S6 Edge

[MTK]

Maybe this is part of their problem in getting... exposure

Libertarian Party chairman candidate strips on stage at national convention - Washington Times

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by MTK

Maybe this is part of their problem in getting... exposure

Libertarian Party chairman candidate strips on stage at national convention - Washington Times

Lol, love it

[Chico23231]

Gary Johnson, the only responsible candidate for president - Chicago Tribune

Wouldn't be something if one of the top newspapers in the country would endorse Gary Johnson?

The number 1 problem with getting support for a 3rd party is the media and its strong established ties to Washington and political parties. Its a sad country we live in these days folks....when you have media empires controlling who is elected. You see Facebook corruptness as well...social media platforms backing one side. Its amazing this isn't a bigger deal. The fucking NBC Today's show interviewed Trump almost every morning during the race for the Republican ticket...free advertising.

[htownskinfan]

Originally Posted by MTK

There were lines she lifted verbatim. Sorry but there's 0% chance it was a coincidence.

Melania Trump's speech was run through a plagiarism checker

Ok if that's true I'm even more confused.What would be the reasoning behind it for Trump? Are you saying she was sabotaged by the speech writer or any publicity is good publicity?

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Sometimes I think they fuck up on purpose because shit like this seems to be endearing to people who support Trump. I mean LOOK at the shit he's said and people just eat it up. I'm sure his supporters are like, "Aw, poor Melania."

[MTK]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Sometimes I think they fuck up on purpose because shit like this seems to be endearing to people who support Trump. I mean LOOK at the shit he's said and people just eat it up. I'm sure his supporters are like, "Aw, poor Melania."

It's amazing how many responses I've seen from people online that don't seem to think plagiarism is a big deal. The anti-intellectual crowd out there is unbelievable.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by MTK

It's amazing how many responses I've seen from people online that don't seem to think plagiarism is a big deal. The anti-intellectual crowd out there is unbelievable.

I don't think this particular instance is a big deal. A) nobody gives a shit what Michelle Obama said in 2008 at the democratic convention and nobody gives a shit what Melania Trump had to say this week. The spouses of the candidates, with the rare exception of Bill Clinton this year, have no relevancy to the race.

B) the material stolen from Michelle's speech is so innocuous that there's absolutely zero harm done. Michelle didn't have any IP stolen. There were no original or unique ideas expressed there. They both basically said everyone should be able to have the opportunity to work hard to achieve their potential. Who the fuck cares about that?

This is a very annoying much ado about nothing. Plagiarism is a big deal, but if you take it completely out of context then it's an inane academic discussion.

This was not impactful whatsoever and only serves to distract from helpful conversations we should be having.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I don't think this particular instance is a big deal. A) nobody gives a shit what Michelle Obama said in 2008 at the democratic convention and nobody gives a shit what Melania Trump had to say this week. The spouses of the candidates, with the rare exception of Bill Clinton this year, have no relevancy to the race.

B) the material stolen from Michelle's speech is so innocuous that there's absolutely zero harm done. Michelle didn't have any IP stolen. There were no original or unique ideas expressed there. They both basically said everyone should be able to have the opportunity to work hard to achieve their potential. Who the fuck cares about that?

This is a very annoying much ado about nothing. Plagiarism is a big deal, but if you take it completely out of context then it's an inane academic discussion.

This was not impactful whatsoever and only serves to distract from helpful conversations we should be having.

It's an unforgiveable sin to plagerize a candidate's wife's speech from 8 years ago. Lying to the FBI, hey stop the hate!

[MTK]

If anything people should be concerned with the way his campaign is being run, he's been mad sloppy, but of course his supporters don't really care.

[Schneed10]

Originally Posted by MTK

If anything people should be concerned with the way his campaign is being run, he's been mad sloppy, but of course his supporters don't really care.

Tell me something we don't already know.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by MTK

If anything people should be concerned with the way his campaign is being run, he's been mad sloppy, but of course his supporters don't really care.

I'm not a Trump supporter, but why should the campaign being mad sloppy for a non-politico, who is running as a non-politico, be an issue? I wouldn't be surprised if it was really this sloppy, or if it was just playing to the people who think life is more than a well packaged political thief like Clinton.

Most of your jabs seem tied to the fact that Trump, or non-democrats in general, is not a polished politician and god forbid, actually has human characteristics including failings and foibles. By most things you post I gather you would take Hillary over anything else that another party puts out, and a lot of that seems to be because they don't meet a level of sophistication that seems to be only reserved for democrats. Hate to spin it, but politicians have had every level of sophistication and some of our best presidents have been the least politically saavy. And certainly in this day and age when much of the media spins wildly out of control against any basic tenet that disagrees with their interests, the level of active demagoguery and political correctness foolishness intensifies 1000 fold.

I could care much less about how saavy a man/woman's political campaign is run then whether that same person is going to be an effective person in their office. Trump's campaign that you call clownish, was effective enough to put him dead even against a lifelong politician who also struggled in her primary contest. And even I know I won't vote for him, once Trump focuses his core group on winning the presidency(instead of the Republican nomination) I wouldn't be shocked if if he didn't end up winning convincingly, even with the so called clownish campaign.

[JoeRedskin]

Right and wrong are not necessarily discerned only by those with doctorates. There have been some very smart, very evil people in this world who got to power through very well run organizations.

I am no Trump fan but dismiss his campaign as clownish and his supporters as merely buffoons not worthy of consideration at your own risk.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I'm not a Trump supporter, but why should the campaign being mad sloppy for a non-politico, who is running as a non-politico, be an issue? I wouldn't be surprised if it was really this sloppy, or if it was just playing to the people who think life is more than a well packaged political thief like Clinton.

Most of your jabs seem tied to the fact that Trump, or non-democrats in general, is not a polished politician and god forbid, actually has human characteristics including failings and foibles. By most things you post I gather you would take Hillary over anything else that another party puts out, and a lot of that seems to be because they don't meet a level of sophistication that seems to be only reserved for democrats. Hate to spin it, but politicians have had every level of sophistication and some of our best presidents have been the least politically saavy. And certainly in this day and age when much of the media spins wildly out of control against any basic tenet that disagrees with their interests, the level of active demagoguery and political correctness foolishness intensifies 1000 fold.

I could care much less about how saavy a man/woman's political campaign is run then whether that same person is going to be an effective person in their office. Trump's campaign that you call clownish, was effective enough to put him dead even against a lifelong politician who also struggled in her primary contest. And even I know I won't vote for him, once Trump focuses his core group on winning the presidency(instead of the Republican nomination) I wouldn't be shocked if if he didn't end up winning convincingly, even with the so called clownish campaign.

Well said....C!

[punch it in]

There is always the theory that he is secretly backing Hillary? If thats the case he goes from moron to Einstein. Lol