Ok let me break this down for you dumbasses who think a trump presidency wouldn't be so bad.
Whoever gets into office come January, will likely be the one picking whether we have a progressive or regressive supreme court for the next... Oh I don't know 40 years or so?
Do you really want a bigoted manchild who has so many inferiority complexes it isn't even funny deciding what sort of Supreme Court this country has for the next half century or so?
Just in case you are comically stupid, the Supreme Court makes pretty much all the decisions on whether any given law or decision is constitutional or not, and can greatly impact the direction our society goes in as a country.
And thing is, they can and often do ignore the letter of the law to inject their own sometimes incredibly deleterious agendas into those decisions.
You do not want a child to decide. You want someone who is at least smart enough to know the basics of politics.
You do not want a failure of a man who has never made a dollar of his own money. Who still sends hatemail to a guy who made a joke about his tiny hands a decade ago.
No one that petty and childish should have any say in the future of this country.
This is the rest of your life we are talking about.
I'd take somewhat progressive right over regressive left if I could vote, but that's just me.
Christopher Kelly
Better than a supreme court that sucks black cocks
Sebastian Ross
3/10
I'm sure you'll get someone though, you clearly put in a lot of effort. The anime image is a nice touch.
Grayson Sanchez
Bad bait, its too long
Sage
Eli Allen
Literally not a single arguement in that text. Try again buddy.
Jonathan Watson
Yes I do And we'll put you and your hillary shilling family in a FEMA Camp :)
Bentley Murphy
Your republic is a failure dotted with intelligent men and women getting shit done amid a sea of idiocy.
Owen Ward
This has to be a radical leaf with a proxy
Thomas Perez
>it's bait becauze i don't like it xDd
:DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD
Logan Mitchell
>a "progressive" Supreme Court
You mean a Supreme Court that makes up its own laws? No, I don't want that.
Jeremiah Ward
Thanks for informing me about SCOTUS because I really had no idea what they did.
Jaxon Mitchell
>you're right, now I must put the bulldog down, she's been getting rowdy
Logan Gonzalez
if nothing else, hillary will put in anti gun judges and we dont know who trump would appoint. anyone who willingly gives up guns is beyond cucked
Jaxon Clark
>failure of a man
>billionaire >hot af milf wife >bathes in liberal tears
I don't see how he is a failure
Lincoln Stewart
>completely set womens and civil rights back to back to the 20s FUCK YEA TRUMP 2016
Brayden Wright
But I'd rather have Jim from down the street be a Supreme Court Justice than anyone Hillary would choose...
James Anderson
>hillary wins president >appoints SJW to SCOTUS >landmark 5-4 decision in favor of federal tax on being male >curfews for males >every job opening must hire female applicants before males >criminal actions of blacks and women no longer punished because laws only apply to white males >500,000,000 islamic migrants >handouts for all non-white-males >felony to be a CIS white male >economy collapses and the US turns into a totalitarian regime resembling south american socialist dictatorships
NO THANKS
Christopher Morgan
Argument is somewhat logical, but only attacking the person's character. Now lets have a civil conversation about his policies and what exactly he will do to drive this country forward. How and why is it a good or a bad thing?
Adam Miller
Firstly, Trump has no policies. I've already explained that early.
He has rhetoric, and if you can't tell simply by listening that it's overwhelmingly illegal I am not sure how to teach you.
You can't beat up people, you can't censor the press, you can't lock up people who disagree with you.
And I haven't even touched on the other bullshit he's spouted. It would take all goddamn day.
Let's suffice to say that with the exception of his tax policy(which will severely harm the middle class), everything else he has said will not happen. Not without the end of the republic and the beginning of a dictatorship.
As for his failure as a businessman, the metric is "you make money, you are successful. You lose money, you are a failure."
Trump is not good at making money. He inherited his money, and he hasn't made anything with it, he's lost money.
He could have made more simply investing in some basic ways.
Instead he squandered it, he banks entirely on people believing the myth that "trump equals success". If you wanted a successful businessman, his father would be a suitable fit.
Instead we just have a false role model for tiny handed bigots that want to screw their daughters.
He's radioactive. We thought GW hurt international perception, hahaha, wow. That will seem like pennies compared to the shitshow trump would bring.
Blake Bennett
dude you're fucking memeing. List some actual a hillary policies that are bad for the country.
Joseph Barnes
...
Christian Adams
>And thing is, they can and often do ignore the letter of the law to inject their own sometimes incredibly deleterious agendas into those decisions
Here is where you went wrong. This is true, but only for non-conservative judges. And those are exactly the judges Hillary will pick.
Conservatives take the wording literal. Liberals think "a right to privacy" means "it's okey to kill your child, the government can't interfere because that would be breaching your privacy"
Jaxson Perez
>Trump has no policies >Trump's tax policy is bad
Evan Kelly
Get out nigger.
Anthony Perry
The reason I'm voting Trump is because he's an isolationist and will let Russia fight proxy wars for us whereas Hillary is on record saying she wants to invade Syria and start WWIII.
FUCK YEAH PRAISE KEK SAGE GOES IN ALLLLL FIELLLLDSSSS
Dude I mean the list just goes on forever. FOREVER.
You are going to start a fucking world war if you elect this crooked bitch.
Bentley Williams
>muh hands >muh incest Don't you ever get tired of it?
Josiah Fisher
...
Ethan Reed
> Calling a billionaire entrepreneur a child. > Posting japanese cartoon screenshots on a Mongolian horticulture image board.
Alexander Young
How much more progressive can things get before the supreme court starts to trample on the rights of others?
Jack Wood
Yup, I personally want a supreme court who will uphold the constitution and the rights that are stated in it, not some retarded idea of one world limited by the whims of what ever leftist decides to say equality is. Trump is the best candidate, Hillary is an immoral dishonest criminal who would sell out our nation to the highest bidder weather they be overseas or domestic.
Lucas Rodriguez
Where do you think you are? That's exactly why we're voting for Trump. Hillary would destroy the first amendment with "hate speech" laws, and overturn the second all together. What you call "regressive" used to be called common sense by people doing a lot better, and living at a much higher level than we are now.
Nicholas Hernandez
And you are conveniently the final arbiter of what "progressive" and "regressive" mean? As if these terms are anything but subjective, meaningless buzzwords made up by arrogant, sneering fucks like you who view anyone who doesn't agree with you as a lesser human being?
Better to have a Supreme Court that actually interprets the Constitution as it was written, rather than an unaccountable rubber-stamp clique of commissars, peddling their repugnant homosexual degeneracy, nihilistic abortion agenda, and anti-gun lunacy.
Brayden Rogers
Dumb maki poster
Landon Moore
Ok, I'm sold. Trump it is.
Alexander Bailey
...
Asher Davis
Fuck everything. We're voting for Trump because he'll put this dying nation out of its misery. White men are losing our grip on western civilization, so we're going to burn everything to the ground and drag everyone down to hell with us. Let the feminists and spics and niggers and camelfuckers taste the bitter ashes of their pyrrhic victory. The fire rises.
Kevin Adams
Hate to tell you, OP. But the kiwi just scorched your ass.
Jordan Carter
>Firstly, Trump has no policies. We don't need policies. We need a fucking cultural shift.
>it's overwhelmingly illegal Since when has that ever mattered? That's not rhetoric-- if the powers that be want something bad enough, they always get it, sometimes without even a loophole to cover them.
>you can't lock up people who disagree with you. Has he called for that?
>Not without the end of the republic and the beginning of a dictatorship. The republic is rotten to the core. I agree that there's a chance that trump could open the door for a dictator (he's too old, himself, to end up with that position) but there's an equal chance he could reinstate sanity in our society.
>As for his failure as a businessman, the metric is "you make money, you are successful. You lose money, you are a failure." Well I don't have the scorecard handy, but I think he's pretty far ahead on this metric. Also irrelevant-- I'd have taken Bernie over any other candidate, and he didn't have a job until he was 40. For the rest, the whole screed just reeks of sophistic rhetoric.
Look, dude. Trump may not be perfect. He may fly off the handle. He may not even see the need to be extremely careful as other politicians are in his speech.
The real appeal of him, besides the memes, is that he seems to understand that projecting this image of being "nice," whether it's with the public during his campaign, or when dealing with obviously disingenuous actors, isn't going to cut it.
>you can't beat up people, you can't censor the press, you can't lock people up who disagree with you Strawman fallacy. Any and all of his quotes about opening up libel laws is in the context of slander, which is already an offense admissible in court for a lawsuit.
>It's overwhelmingly illegal Burden of proof is on those who accuse, provide data and links or your argument is invalid and considered nothing but a slanderous attempt at a strawman
>His tax policy (which would hurt the middle class)... Burden of proof
>Nothing he said will happen without a dictatorship and the removal of a republic Misinformation, strawman, and slippery slope fallacy
>Trump has inherited his money I'll assume you mean all of his money, in which case, that is not true. Remember that loan of a million dollars? He made that into four billion. I urge you to look up the facts on this matter, and try to avoid cherrypicking please.
>He could have made more investing in certain ways Textbook non-argument, hindsight. If you believe you can make better investments, then I advise you do so.
>Tiny handed bigots who want to screw their daughters Ad hominem
>This will seem like pennies compared to GW Perception is objective, also what you said is pure speculation without any backing
No arguments to be seen. Anecdotally, your speech is common amongst psuedo intellectuals and the misinformed
Which Trump? On Fox, when talking about the minimum wage he gave 15 different positions on it in 45 seconds.
Nolan James
Go with the devil you know.
Never go with the devil you don't.
Clinton has clear policy plans, they may not be the great stride forward many of us wanted but they are better than no plans at all.
The only policy plan trump put out was his tax plan, which was shown to be a disaster if it was ever enacted. As for absolutely everything else, all anyone knows is that he's both for and against everything under the sun.
He flip flops so much he may as well be an electron when it comes to anyone being able to guess what his position is on anything at any given moment.
And when was the last time a conflict ended in that fashion? It's hardly a money matter. Isis is the current antagonist on the world stage and you would be absurdly stupid to suggest borrowing money from an extremist organization that has no money to speak of.
You simply don't understand how this works.
Levi Gonzalez
>progressive or regressive This is like claiming evolution has a direction. Get fucked.
Joshua Kelly
You don't know what an ad hominem is. Please don't attempt to use a term you've only just been introduced to. It is the height of disgrace to engage in pretense.
And none of it is opinion. It's all easily verifiable fact. It's just harshly worded.
Does that make your lip quiver? You implied you were conservative. Thought conservatives hated political correctness, now you want the "kid gloves".
Hilarious.
No, you see, darling, I insult and insulting isn't a logical fallacy. It's an irrelevancy.
Christopher Rogers
Say hello to the report button shill filtered and saged
Connor Morales
why are anime posters always dumb ?
didnt read more than half a dozen word btw
Asher Russell
Pretty much this. I'm actually a quadroon but I have no connections or associations with black culture - this includes family; those ties were severed when my cousin and uncle wanted me to start selling drugs and perform other niggerish acts.
But to the point, we're in a nose dive at 60,000 feet with half a wing. Our nation is going down. You can panic and try to warn everyone but they can't hear you. The only thing left to do is smile and push the throttle to 11.
Charles Gomez
Which candidate is the only one with balls to speak against mudslimes, BLM, and illegal immigrants? These people need put in their place, and only one person will do it. Guess who that is? As far as the other shit there are branches in the government so realistically a lot of the shit he said. I hope people are angry when he gets elected. They deserve to be for destroying society.
Jaxon Peterson
>Trump is not good at making money. He inherited his money, and he hasn't made anything with it, he's lost money. >He could have made more simply investing in some basic ways. Trump inherited some of his dad's money in 1999, when he died. Trump was already a billionaire by then.
Eli Mitchell
Ever heard of forum sliding
Landon Murphy
>successful business man >career criminal.
Gee I dont know, this is a real hard one.
Sebastian Jones
>Trump goes with whatever is popular at the time.
>This is a bad thing in a democracy.
Trump is EFFECTIVE and UNBUYABLE.
Who gives a shit about his ideology(as policies are merely extension of ideology)?
He says he's going to build a fucking wall and he'll do it. He says he'll deport illegals and he'll do it. He has been nothing but firm on these issues, the only things he hasn't been solid on is the progressive fluff that gets thrown in everyone's face every election - the minimum wage and abortion.
These aren't my issues so I honestly don't give a shit, and quite honestly don't think he cares about, or will fuck with either of them.
A trump presidency will start a wave of nationalism across the west. This is what I care about. This is what matters to me. He has been a rock solid nationalist since the 80s.
Ending foreign entanglements and protecting the working class west from invaders and globalist competition.
Shutting the mouths of progressive faggots for another 16 years or so.
Joseph Taylor
So you admit to not having an argument?
>Verifiable fact, not opinion. You say this, but provide nothing. Burden of proof is on you, otherwise it is considered an opinion and therefore a fallacy.
Try harder, you are accomplishing nothing. I have faith in you
>15 different positions in 45 seconds I don't see any direct sources, or any arguments for that matter. It's not that hard to make an argument, just to inform you
Remember to sage
Cooper Taylor
Are you off your medication? None of what you said is true. The only one with aspirations towards dictatorship is Trump.
He's already doing things that way and for this brief period as a private citizen that is his prerogative, but if he becomes President, he will no longer be able to go on twitter tirades, start feuds with media personalities, send hatemail because he has tiny hands.
He certainly won't be able to blacklist the press like he is now.
All of his volatile rhetoric will have to vanish, like so much smoke.
He will in effect, have to shut the fuck up and let the grown ups work.
Somehow that seems entirely doubtful.
Pretty much all of his rhetoric is unconstitutional or illegal, and will remain so into a presidency.
He will be nothing more than a puppet for the incredibly right wing extremist organization masquerading as the GOP.
If you wanted someone on your side Sanders was the choice.
Trump is not an alternative. He is a know nothing, a failure of a businessman.
You do not want Trump in office. Seriously. Not unless you only have a few months to live and are the human equivalent of fetid rotting sewage.
>The only one with aspirations towards dictatorship is Trump Speculation, no clear sources
>if he becomes President, he will no longer be able to go on twitter tirades, start feuds with media personalities, send hatemail because he has tiny hands. More speculation. There are no laws in place that go against any of this, therefore he can do it as President.
>Pretty much all of his rhetoric is unconstitutional or illegal Burden of proof is on you, provide
>He will be nothing more than a puppet for the incredibly right wing extremist organization masquerading as the GOP. So far all I see is speculation with no proof, please continue though. You're only making a fool of yourself.
Remember to sage
Very well, but does it dispel the positions clearly laid out on his website? No. Everything that was said does not contradict another one of his claims on his website or even in the interview.
Well done though, you're doing better than this other user
Daniel Nelson
It's only because I'm talking to an idiot that I seem like the smartest person in the world, darling.
I know better than to think I can convince a Trump supporter. They don't deal in facts, and if you won't deal in facts... By default they cannot be swayed.
So please save me your dogshit replies and fuck off.
And *I* won't lose. Everyone will. The distinction is severe in its importance. This isn't about a single person and you are absurd for implying it is, not once but twice. Only someone who has entirely lost sight of what matters would do such a thing.
It's no goddamn wonder why you are so often suggested for ignoring.
Nicholas Reed
>>>/reddit/lgbt/
Luke Sanchez
...
Nathan Torres
>hurr durr trump is gonna ruin everything >even though a cokehead moron didn't
Jesus christ you're retarded. Spewing bullshit like this only encourages people to vote for trump.
Oliver Williams
SHILL THREAD
DO NOT REPLY TO SHILL THREADS
DOWNLOAD 4CHANX TO HIDE SHILLS
sage
Jackson Carter
sage
Bentley Price
Dodge Dodge Dodge Dodge
That's all you do.
Why do you come on a website to debate when you don't want to provide a source, or any information to back up your statements?
You're plainly fear mongering and you really don't want to debate anyhow.
This is why people don't take your kind seriously around here.
>shill, CTR, blah blah blah
2/10
Parker Brooks
You mean liberal or conservative SC, you fucking shill. I will vote for Trump to ensure a conservative is chosen for that spot. Globalism = Marxism = liberalism = failure. Fuck off and saged
Eli Flores
I've done this since January or December. But when you're faced with people who believe in conspiracy theories, who are racist and sexist or believe hyperboles like "liberals want to seize guns" or "Clinton wants to bring 1 million Syrian refugees unvetted", that you bring articles, sources and numbers and they're dismissed because they don't believe it, and when the candidate you're arguing against IS screaming over and insulting people left and right, you start losing patience. Hence the "impervious to logic and facts".
I'vew never yet once seen a Trumpite willing to debate facts - they debate myths and conspiracies. They don't believe in any slources but their Furers, and generally act like him: entitled bratty man-child who think they're the smartest people in the room.
So yeah, I'm fucking out of patience now. I'm tired of seeing well constructed and supported facts dismissed by a simple "bah, liberal media is always lying", or by "Clinton's killed people, hang her" kind of rhetoric.
All I have left is say, to all Trumpites, they can go fuck themselves. Because everything else, they don't understand.
Notice my post a few poages back with facts? Not one of you fukkker has addressed it. So take your high horse and shove it up your ass.
Parker Martin
Damn, must've triggered someone
Angel Barnes
Sorry, what? This isn't twitter. I don't have a character limit worth mentioning and I'm not writing a children's book.
I will not apologize for having things to say, and you can't divine anything from how many words I use other than that, "hey this person sure can write about shit".
And also, you were having a back and forth with someone else and I wholesale ignored it because I don't give a shit about your tiff with someone else.
It was only until you quoted me that I responded and it was not with vitriol. It was with reality.
Any sting you felt is common to every post I make, and doesn't make the content any less what it IS.
You see were this a matter of less critical importance, you might actually be able to annoy me as you seem to be doing, otherwise why else claim to have "triggered" me, why else make those other pitiful jabs? But this is too important.
I don't factor in. My feelings don't factor in.
That is what you do not understand. I am not intetested in feelings.
David Clark
>We thought GW hurt international perception, hahaha, wow. That will seem like pennies compared to the shitshow trump would bring.
Is english not your first language or have you got SSDS? (shill sleep deprivation syndrome)
Noah Richardson
TL;DR Austism 1/10
Easton Thomas
>I seem like the smartest person in the world Disagreeable, your measureable intelligence is most likely far from given the averages of human intelligence. To say you are above average, may or may not be true in claim, but would be more appropriate (alongside proof, of course)
>They don't deal in facts I'm assuming this is anecdotal, because there is no data to support this. Even so, to provide them would make your non-argumentative posts have some substance.
>This isn't about a single person and you are absurd for implying it is I have implied nothing. I am beginning to wonder if your posts are even if your own creation, rather than a pasted reply.
>It's no goddamn wonder why you are so often suggested for ignoring. I have not been accused of ignoring anything, nor is that an argument against any points.
As said, I suggest you read that if you have not already.
Why can you not make any arguments? It is not hard to do so.
Also, remember to sage
Robert Peterson
>My feelings don't factor in. >his arguments are how he feels trump will change others feelings about america
William Williams
He's using a proxy m80
Austin Sanchez
>So yeah, I'm fucking out of patience now. I'm tired of seeing well constructed and supported facts dismissed You need to actually state facts to have them dismissed.
>Notice my post a few poages back with facts? Not one of you fukkker has addressed it. You have not posted once in this thread with any evidence, arguments, or facts.
Sage, remember it. It seems like some of you are forgetting to do this.
But if the court swung the other way that would literally be a good thing.
Go fuck yourselves degenerates.
Daniel Richardson
That is what I thought! Thank you for that, it was genuinely fun.
Aaron Fisher
When Trump starts banning all the free trades and forcing american corporations to manufacture their goods in US soil generating a yuuuge capital flight, inflation shit salaries, tax raises and finally at some point the goverment won't be able to give welfare, then all the NEETs from Sup Forums will get mad.
Jack Sanchez
>And thing is, they can and often do ignore the letter of the law to inject their own sometimes incredibly deleterious agendas into those decisions.
No shit. Some of us have notice that every time the left loses at the ballot box, they go running to a panel of judges to get the will of the people overturned. We're sick of it.
Luis Gutierrez
>trump's decisions will have far reaching consequences >well past the one term he may get, wherein he can do minimal damage >and he'll likely select conservative SCJs
Well, you've sold me on Trump.
Zachary Cox
>implying Hillary wouldn't just give the nomination to someone who has done her "favors"
she is a corrupt old hag and I'd rther have another scalia before we get whatever devil Hillary gives the nod to.
Samuel Harris
Shills are out in full force today. One or two bait threads is to be expected but this is getting ridiculous at this point
Henry Davis
>child
sage
Jeremiah Turner
>wall policy
>triple ICE size, deportations policy
>withdraw from or renegotiate NAFTA policy
John Lopez
If you take offense, ever think you might be incredibly wrong? I have every right to cut at the fools who are allowing this country to sink into ruin.
If you lack the foresight to see the immensely negative impact electing a child is, then I really don't think you should be allowed outside.
You do not give petulant children power. You certainly don't make them the head of a country that posesses the most dangerous weapons ever created. You certainly don't put them in charge at a time where the direction of the country for the next 40 years will be decided.
For a child, you want a throwaway. This presidency will be the most impactful one for a while. It is not a throwaway.
You do not want Trump naming Justices unless you sincerely want a decidedly bad future.
Trump and his rhetoric are a direct threat to the integrity of the republic.
While it would be lovely to have a nice and tidy angelic alternative, that is seldom the case in these scenarios.
Luis Lewis
>progressive or regressive supreme court I'd rather not have the progressive. Progressives will want to make it illegal to disagree with transgenderism. And Scalia kept the already progressive members from weakening the Second Amendment and curbing free speech.
>bigoted manchild who has so many inferiority complexes...deciding what sort of Supreme Court this country has for the next half century or so? implying the Senate can't do something about that
>they can and often do ignore the letter of the law to inject their own sometimes incredibly deleterious agendas into those decisions see my first point
>You do not want a failure of a man who has never made a dollar of his own money. mfw
3/10 go home son
Angel Turner
>Calling people you disagree with children >Not an argument
Aiden Morris
Lost what argument?
You must be new. I'm not hostile as a result, I'm hostile because it is deserved.
Also you might want to refrain from ad hominems by the way, especially in the same breath as claiming that the target of said ad hominem has "lost the argument".
It looks *really* bad~
Or maybe you honestly don't know that you blundered right into a logical fallacy?
I don't think someone claiming authority to call an argument won or lost can be forgiven for not knowing.
You only get off due to the fact that the entity I am opposed to won't participate to begin with, leaving us bereft of a discussion, let alone an argument, to begin with.
That being said, not actually getting off the hook for it, because shame on you. Take it down a notch.
Dominic Lee
Tldr; Single issue voter dat pro 2nd amendment.
TRUMP R U M P
Ryan Adams
Love how these paid Shillary posters can't name a single good thing about Shillary, but they love to make inaccurate jabs at God Emperor Trump. Your dumbass can't even name a single way that a "regressive" Supreme court would be bad. >Hasn't made a single dollar of his own money. Ar-are you this damn stupid? He payed his father back the 1 million dollars even before he was a billionaire, he was smart enough to turn turn 1 million into 4 billion. >Petulant children Making jabs at people on Twitter is not "petulant" especially when Shillary will sulk for days when something doesn't go her way. Once again, you keep on calling him a child, but you still refuse to name one bad thing he will do as President. You would think that Shillary would pay smarter debaters, but I bet she found your dumbass on Etsy huh?
William Roberts
Do you understand any of the words that you are using? Discrediting someone by calling them a child is a prime example of an ad hominem attack which is what I pointed out you were doing. And yet, I'm the one using ad hominems? Get real shill
Lincoln Fisher
tldr
Lincoln Kelly
OP calls Trump a regressive, man-child. Gets really defensive when called out
