Donald Trump can suck our collective dicks

[Pamela]

He is not one of my favorite people, especially when he refers to transwomen as "mutilated men". However, he IS a major contributor to the National Review, News Machete and American Thinker.

All in all, I never pay attention to polls. They are too easily skewed and usually are wrong anyway. It's far too early to be calling the election, or eulogizing any candidates, IMHO

[tw]

Originally Posted by Pamela

All in all, I never pay attention to polls. They are too easily skewed and usually are wrong anyway.

Polls are not wrong. Polls are completely right. Wrong are so many who have opinions. Will completely change their opinions only in months and then deny that had been so easily manipulated.

Are polls measuring the people's logical thoughts? Of course not. A majority of adults think like children - conclude only from their emotions. For the same reason a majority in all nations also knew, beyond doubt, that smoking cigarettes increased health. They knew only because advertising and hearsay so easily manipulated their feelings. Facts be damned.

Polls were also right: well over 60% of Americans knew beyond a doubt that smoking cigarettes increased health. The polls were not wrong. People were.

One need only watch how Joseph McCarthy, Adolph Hitler, Alexander the Great, Donald Trump and Ted Cruz all got power and supporters. None (in this post) are good or bad. They just are - nothing more.

Many supporters even say Trump is wrong - as demonstrated in that previously cited NPR focus group. And still highly approve of Trump only because Trump (and his lies) inspire emotion. Most adults want to feel - don't want to know. That is both how and why demagogues gain power.

Polls are not wrong. If anything is wrong, it is why some many people approve of inferior leaders. Polls only demonstrate the actual problem.

[BigV]

Watched as much of the Republican debate tonight that I could stomach.

Trump, really, motherfucker?

You think it's a good idea for America's security, to kill the family members of members of ISIS.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/1...amilies-216343

[Griff]

The sad thing is that Hillary and Rubio will look acceptable by comparison.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by BigV

You think it's a good idea for America's security, to kill the family members of members of ISIS.[/url]

Dude needs to watch Princess Bride again.

"My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father. Prepare to die."

[classicman]

Originally Posted by Griff

The sad thing is that Hillary and Rubio will look acceptable by comparison.

That is sad, truly sad. We are so screwed. America isn't special anymore, we've been transformed.

[Big Sarge]

Originally Posted by BigV

Watched as much of the Republican debate tonight that I could stomach.

Trump, really, motherfucker?

You think it's a good idea for America's security, to kill the family members of members of ISIS.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/1...amilies-216343

I truly hate to say it, but he is correct. ISIL has shown no compassion for non-combatants. It is time to return the favor. I don't want US troops on the ground. I strongly support carpet bombing as a way to destroy their rat lines and morale. Plus a strong cyber warfare campaign, would affect their credibility and recruiting

[DanaC]

Carpet bombing is all well and good, except ISIL have stationed themselves in amongst a pretty much captive civilian population.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by classicman

That is sad, truly sad. We are so screwed. America isn't special anymore, we've been transformed.

Originally Posted by Big Sarge

I truly hate to say it, but he is correct. ISIL has shown no compassion for non-combatants. It is time to return the favor. I don't want US troops on the ground. I strongly support carpet bombing as a way to destroy their rat lines and morale. Plus a strong cyber warfare campaign, would affect their credibility and recruiting

Originally Posted by DanaC

Carpet bombing is all well and good, except ISIL have stationed themselves in amongst a pretty much captive civilian population.

Transformation complete.

[Undertoad]

i don't get it

[Griff]

Targeting relatives and bombing civilians are activities reserved for decidedly not special countries.

[Undertoad]

There's no transformation. We have to destroy the villages in order to save them.

[Griff]

Yeah, I guess we saved Dresden similarly.

[Big Sarge]

Carpet bomb them anyway and accept there will be civilian casualties. Precision strikes are not working and we are fast depleting our reserves of suitable munitions. The other choice is to send in 30-50,000 troops and be prepared to be there for years.

You have 2 options: Civilian casualties or US military casualties drug out for years. I believe President Truman had to make the same decision

[DanaC]

I'm sorry - I can't feel that casual about mass casualties. And that's what we're talking about if we go down the carpet bombing route. Thousands would die. And some variant of ISIL would reemerge in a new part of the region. Rinse and repeat.

My god, those poor people. They've been forced to live under these lunatics, and now the west is going to bomb them back to the stone age.

And as for this: 'You have 2 options: Civilian casualties or US military casualties drug out for years'. US soldiers sign up for that risk. Joe Raqqa and his wife and kids did not. And I get that each country's leaders have to think about their own people's safety first - but those US casualties drug out over years are unlikely to ever reach the heights that civilian casualties will reach in carpet bombing. So what we are saying there is that a few hundred US lives are worth tens of thousands of Syrian lives.

What is the end goal here? Is there one? Or is just that doing something is somuch better than doing nothing? Do we really think carpet bombing Raqqa is going to make us safe? Bullshit, is it.