Brutal anti-Trump Ad Will Hurt Him With The Unconverted-

Just hammers home the point.....Trump is a Man-Baby.

 

Lord, I hope so. I'll take a person who honestly expresses himself, over a person who is Politically Correct and completely dishonest like Hillary.

Trump is a loudmouth and an Ass, but he made his money honestly and there are no pending federal charges that we are aware of. Hillary on the other hand, Let me ask you, how do people like the Clintons who spent their ENTIRE life in the public sector, amass HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS in personal wealth? How exactly does that happen??????? They were never in Private Business where that kind of income could be attributed, and the U.S. Government does not pay anybody to that scale, SO,,,,, where'd that money come from, and why???



Also, If a Black dude down in Alabama say, is in front of a judge who just so happens to be white and says "I can't get a fair trial because this judge is white and has a problem with me", That is to be taken seriously. But if Trump, who is on record against ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION says of a judge who worked for a liberal immigration activist group, "I can't get a fair hearing because the judge is Mexican", that's Racism on his part? Trump is complaining that an activist judge is demonstrating his sympathy for illegals, by unprofessionally releasing documents that had been sealed during a CIVIL suit, just to damage Trump, and Trump is the "racist"???

Strange, the double standard you're willing to let rule your thinking.

 

Yes, he did.


Or are we supposed to "ignore" the exaggerated PHYSICAL movements that Trump made and "only focus on what Trump said"?

- - - Updated - - -

Sorry, but "Hillary bad, she very bad, Jerry Seinfeld".....and calling Trump acting like an immature BOOR "not being politically correct"...

isn't going to fly with normal, non-partisan American voters.

 

Clinton made $14 million off her initial book deal and about $4 million in sales. The Clintons make thousands for every speaking
engagement. They have been in the private sector for about 12 years. Breitbart estimates their wealth at about $32 million.

The fact that Trump was being sued over Trump University was well known - the judge did not initiate the lawsuit, common people did.

 

Convenient for you not to answer my questions, is it not? I like many others am wrestling with the decision of who of the two unsavory candidates will I choose. You on the other hand are fully in the tank for Hillary, no matter what. I at least am willing to consider the pros and cons of BOTH candidates, and let the scales tell me what to do. You are just a Schill for for Hillary, without the honesty to examine her as fully as you do Trump.

Do you really think Hillary is about looking out for you? IF so then, explain the Clintons money to me. Come on, convert me, show the honest way in which the Clintons EARNED that dough.......

Told Ya!

 

I predicted Trumpsters and GOP partisans....would try to change the subject...

and you did.

 

NO no no, you completely ignore the Canadian Slush fund called the "Clinton Foundation". They don't really give that money away like a REAL charity would. That foundation is just a front for an "influence for sale" business being run by the Clintons and their cronies. Why are you so unwilling to see the obvious?

 

And it continues.....as I predicted in the OP.

Trump says something stupid/racist/outrageous?

Trump Cultist response? "HILLARY!!!!!!

Like a phone app...or a pre-programmed robot.

 

Well that's not exactly fair. You can't make a thread bashing oatmeal cookies, and make a disclaimer of "Now watch oatmeal cookie eaters change the subject and try to say raisin cookies are worse!" Well, it was going to happen. You calling it out beforehand doesn't make you Nostradamus nor does it make the others predictable topic changers, it just means you understand that that's the way the conversation is going to go and you don't want it to go there because it inconveniences you.

 

You asked how the Clintons could make millions - I pointed out that it was fairly easy and that they had been in the private sector
for 12 of the last 16 years. Breitbart (hardly a Clinton supporter) estimated their wealth at $32 million.

It's obvious that you want there to be some type of nefarious deal - but sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

I think Hillary is a terrible candidate - I just don't think you are thinking about their wealth in a rational manner

 

And I predicted that you would'nt have the balls or the integrity to answer my very reasonable questions, and so now it's YOU who are changing the subject and hiding behind your earlier statement. Do you really think that demonstrates something worthy on your part?

The fact is, you opened this thread as just another hit piece on the opposition, and when anybody makes a reasoned push back on your BS premis, you run for cover and say "Told Ya", like you're some kind of savant or something. You are'nt, you're just another entirely predictable liberal schill, who only see's problems with "Those Other People", just like any other bigot does. Your brand of bigotry runs along political partisan lines, but you're a bigot none the less.

Now, grow some balls and answer my question already, Where did the Clintons make their hundreds of millions, sheltered in a fraudulent Canadian charity from? Demonstrate that you're just as willing to critique the Clintons, and then I'll give you some credibility regarding criticism of Trump. Put up or shut up!

 

The subject is an ad showing Trump mocking a disabled reporter....

please explain how "the Clinton Foundation" is "on topic"?

 

Absolutely. Well said.

Trump is already destined to be a LOSER in November.

The only question is whether he can avoid a Goldwater-like landslide defeat.

He is making even his most stalwart supporters look like fools for buying into the snake oil.

Embarrassing.

His candidacy is an insult to the American political process.

He WILL be defeated. It is just a matter of margin.

 

BTW, can any Trumpsters, Hillary Haters, or plain ol' "My GOP Right or Wrong" partisans tell me....

what demographic is that ad aimed at?



(If you want to say "gullible people"...go for it. Again, a predictable foe is a defeated foe....read your Sun Tzu. )

 

I guess you're gonna see what you want to see and make it make sense to you.

Your "isn't going to fly with normal, non-partisan American voters" remark should be preserved for Hillary.

 

Trump is already both "predictable" and DEFEATED.

He is an amateur, who is so far in over his head that he might as well be drowning in the Marianas Trench.

 

Is that what you call it when your hypocrisy is called out?

 

Because talking about how much of a dirtbag one main candidate is will inevitably cause people to bring up how much of a dirtbag the other is? This is on topic brother, whether you like it or not

 

You just hit the nail on the head...

 

Where are you when in a thread about Hillary or Obama, and the let's response is: but Bush, or TRUMP!!
Are you calling those people out, too?

Actually you should go on those threads and predict the subject will be changed then you actually will be right 100% of the time.

Oh, wait, I think I remember you changing the subject in some of them?? Did you or not?

 

Odd I never saw him make those odd gestures when calling Ted a liar

 

LOL! Yeah because attack ads have kept Trump from getting the nomination......

 

That is a dang good ad. It shows Trump acting like a kindergarden kid instead of someone running for the highest office in the land. Very, very unpresidential on Trump's part. I do agree with you, that his supporters don't care and probably got a big kick and a laugh out of it.

Now I doubt any ad run today that will ever have the impact of the Daisy Girl ad back in 1964. LBJ only ran it only once. Then the media ran it over and over and over again. Regardless, it is one effective ad. I assume there will be more to come.

 

The general electorate is entirely different than the electorate that voted in the GOP primaries. Trump still only received 40% of the GOP vote. The ad is very effective. One also has to remember when it comes to politics, it is all about perspectives, not necessary the truth or facts. It is how the voters of all stripes see the ad and the conclusions they draw. The perspective they have on it.

This ad shows Trump acting like a 5 year old fool, not at all presidential. You would be surprised to find out how many people out there base their vote upon the person who looks the most presidential. Trump lost this round.

 

Meh.

"To all those Bernie Sanders voters who have been left out in the cold by a rigged system of superdelegates, we welcome you with open arms," Trump said during his speech, which struck an uncharacteristically conciliatory tone after high tensions from within his own party this week.

Trump has often channeled Sanders as a kindred spirit, arguing that both were being kept down by a "rigged system" and applauding his stance on trade. On Tuesday, he equated Clinton with an unfair process.

"We can't fix a rigged system by relying on, and I mean this so strongly, on the very people who rigged it," he added, bashing Clinton and her "corrupt dealings."

"The Clintons have turned the politics of personal enrichment into an art form for themselves," he said.

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...comes-sanders-supporters-left-out-in-the-cold