Trump: 'Second Amendment people' could deal with Clinton

[jackstar7]

The LA Times has control over what goes on their opinion pages. Don't believe me? Print off a copy and sell it to someone and see how fast their lawyers tell you that it's protected content and exclusive property of the LAT.

Sure. You had nothing, so it's silly NOT to double-down. But again you came up empty. Painfully dumb. It'd be laughable, but you represent a nightmare come to life among the American public. Not just blissfully ignorant, but actively and willfully ignorant. You're pushing what I can only describe as an arrogant stupidity.

 

[retrospooty]

The LA Times has control over what goes on their opinion pages. Don't believe me? Print off a copy and sell it to someone and see how fast their lawyers tell you that it's protected content and exclusive property of the LAT.

Now your "ignunt" ass is confusing copyright / plagiarism issues with endorsement. LOL.

Keep trying though, its getting fun. Anything to avoid the fact that your candidate is a trainwreck.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Like I said, if Hillary respects gun rights like she says she does then what's to worry about? You believe her when she says she's not going to take away anyone's guns, don't you? So why worry about it?

No you really didn't say anything, you tried on your best drumpf and it fit as well for you as it does for him. Not getting a pass on this. If hillary is elected and somehow manages to have the 2nd amendment repealed or amended, are you calling for someone to shoot her? Because that is exactly what you and drumpf are implying. If not, then please educate me.

 

[Meghan54]

Sure. You had nothing, so it's silly NOT to double-down. But again you came up empty. Painfully dumb. It'd be laughable, but you represent a nightmare come to life among the American public. Not just blissfully ignorant, but actively and willfully ignorant. You're pushing what I can only describe as an arrogant stupidity.

Hell, even the "real" Bart Simpson isn't as blithely ignorant (I hesitate to use the word stupid, but if it fits....) as Bart*Simpson seems....to be outsmarted by a cartoon. Priceless!

 

[ivwshane]

Sure. You had nothing, so it's silly NOT to double-down. But again you came up empty. Painfully dumb. It'd be laughable, but you represent a nightmare come to life among the American public. Not just blissfully ignorant, but actively and willfully ignorant. You're pushing what I can only describe as an arrogant stupidity.

I'll be using that, thanks!

 

[Victorian Gray]

The LA Times has control over what goes on their opinion pages. Don't believe me? Print off a copy and sell it to someone and see how fast their lawyers tell you that it's protected content and exclusive property of the LAT.

Op-Ed, explained (LA Times)

"Sometimes we get e-mails complaining that the pieces we've run are biased. To which we reply: Of course they are! Unlike the articles in our news pages (where reporters endeavor to be objective), our articles are opinion pieces; bias and a point of view are expected. In that sense, they're like the editorials that appear on the opposite side of the page (Op-Ed, get it?).

Unlike the editorials, however, our pieces do not reflect the opinion of the paper, its owners, its publisher or its editorial writers. Rather, the Op-Ed page is where individuals with no institutional connection to The Times can voice their opinions (opinions, by the way, that often disagree with the paper's editorial stance).

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/sep/25/opinion/la-oe-pages23oct23

 

[nickqt]

When you read the transcript there's at least a reasonable part of you that sits back and says "You know, maybe he is very poorly attempting to appeal to advocates to go out and vote".

But then you actually watch the speech and it's delivery. Nope. Nope. Fuck nope. It's exactly as it's implied.

Reddit has totally lost it's shit on this topic. Most "high traffic" posts over there in /r/politics are 1000-1200 replies. This single topic is almost 13,000 comments.

Meh, it's in the words, period.

Strongman Trump makes clear that the SecondAmendmentPeople™ will have to act after Clinton is elected:
"If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks...although..." which implies that SecondAmendmentPeople™ will have to prevent her from "get[ing] to pick her judges", after elected.

And even if you want to give Strongman Trump the benefit of the doubt for dubious reasons, and that he means that they will have to go out and vote...they can vote before the election, and it will take more than just SecondAmendmentPeople™ to vote Hillary out.

SecondAmendmentRemedies™ isn't even a dog whistle. It's a euphemism for something that is obvious. Ask Sharron Angle.

SecondAmendmentPeople™ is just a euphemism for a euphemism.

Considering that Strongman Trump has posited that the election will be rigged, and that there might be violence afterwards...what more does Strongman Trump have to explicitly say?

 

[rudder]

People with such short memories....

http://www.hannity.com/articles/ele...-threaten-republicans-with-violence-14996226/

I can't believe this thread is still going on.... Oh wait LIberal Brain Defect. Almost forgot.

 

[nickqt]

People with such short memories....

http://www.hannity.com/articles/ele...-threaten-republicans-with-violence-14996226/

I can't believe this thread is still going on.... Oh wait LIberal Brain Defect. Almost forgot.

"Don't bring a knife to a gun fight" is a common phrase that means that you shouldn't come unprepared for a fight. It isn't a literal phrase.

That you and Trump's Chumps are attempting to BothSidesDoIt™ to obfuscate what Strongman Trump said is hilarious. And sad.

But you go ahead and keep on keepin' on. Whatever allows you to stay in denial that US conservatism really is what the dirty hippies have been saying it is for the past 50 years.

Enjoy!

 

[woolfe9998]

Exactly. It's telling that the Trump camp has had two distinct responses to the outrage over this comment. Giuliani has said that the comment was not meant to refer to violence toward the President or the USSC. Corey Lewandowski (no longer a member of the Trump campaign but still a loyal supporter) has said it was merely a joke.

To me the comment makes no sense as anything other than an implication that Second Amendment advocates might assassinate a President Clinton and/or her Supreme Court nominees or appointees, since the entire situation (in which Second Amendment advocates might be able to "do something" about a Clinton nomination) would arise only after she was elected and made a nomination. At that point, as Trump said, it would no longer be possible to change her ability to make judicial appointments in the voting booth.

I agree he was probably joking, but a man running for President can't publicly joke about the assassination of a rival, or foreign powers spying on his rival for political purposes, or any number of other things he has "joked" about, without repercussions. Regardless of what Trump intended, someone (whether mentally ill or otherwise - think John Hinckley or Jared Loughner) might take his joke seriously, and might change American history in the process. These "jokes" are the height of irresponsibility.

This latest gaffe is yet another reason I am so puzzled by why the Paul Ryans of the world continue to support Trump despite his endlessly crude, ignorant, idiotic behavior. He is quite likely the least-viable Presidential candidate in history, yet they are choosing to tie their own fates to his rambling wreck of a campaign. It really beggars belief.

Agreed, and this is not just an isolated comment. It's the totality of Trump's messaging that is dangerous. For example, take his insinuation that if he loses, the election will have been rigged. Consider what that says to fringey supporters who may be mentally unstable - that they cannot effect change through the ballot box because the system is rigged. And the same candidate "jokes" about Second Amendment remedies. Trump is catering to a particular type of voter, the type most likely to take comments like this seriously. It's beyond irresponsible.

 

[umbrella39]

LMAO at the willful ignorance and pathetic attempts at false equivalence displayed by Bart and now Rudder. You two are pathetic and embarrassing yourselves, go stick your heads back in your DERP bubble...

 

[Paratus]

Dog whistle heard loud and clear by Bart and rudder.

Remember folks the Donald has "the best words" and people like him because unlike career politicians, "he says what he means".

 

[brycejones]

People with such short memories....

http://www.hannity.com/articles/ele...-threaten-republicans-with-violence-14996226/

I can't believe this thread is still going on.... Oh wait LIberal Brain Defect. Almost forgot.

Sheesh, can't believe someone came in and tried yet again to deflect from the dumpster I mean trumpster's word.

 

[pcgeek11]

Maybe he just had a "short circuit" like Hillary did when she lied on camera to Chris Wallace during the interview.

 

[ivwshane]

Maybe he just had a "short circuit" like Hillary did when she lied on camera to Chris Wallace during the interview.

Maybe he's a narcissistic, pathological liar who has a base of supporters who are easily manipulated by conspiracy theories and propaganda who will defend one of their own... an old, white male, whiny little bitch.

Didn't you say you were a trump supporter? Yeah, I think I nailed it.

 

[stormkroe]

I would love nothing more than for strumpet to win pres, if only to show people that we're at a point in government evolution where all officials are the exact same.
However, if you think his statement was anything other than a bad joke about shooting her, you may need to see your doctor. It was exactly like your crazy uncle telling a dead baby joke in front of the just-a-bit-too-hot-for-you girl you're trying to convince to not drop you.

 

[rommelrommel]

I would love nothing more than for strumpet to win pres, if only to show people that we're at a point in government evolution where all officials are the exact same.
However, if you think his statement was anything other than a bad joke about shooting her, you may need to see your doctor. It was exactly like your crazy uncle telling a dead baby joke in front of the just-a-bit-too-hot-for-you girl you're trying to convince to not drop you.

Wat

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I would love nothing more than for strumpet to win pres, if only to show people that we're at a point in government evolution where all officials are the exact same.
However, if you think his statement was anything other than a bad joke about shooting her, you may need to see your doctor. It was exactly like your crazy uncle telling a dead baby joke in front of the just-a-bit-too-hot-for-you girl you're trying to convince to not drop you.

You'd vote for that crazy, dead-baby-laughing uncle for President of the United States, and you're telling us that WE should go see our respective doctors?

 

[trenchfoot]

Doesn't matter what Trump says or does. In the very end when each and every Repub/Conservative/Religious Fundie/Anti-Gay/Aryan/2A fanatic is in the voting booth, party loyalty and/or their visceral hatred of Hillary will have almost all of them unquestionably voting for Trump with ease.

There will be no gnashing of teeth, no intellectual struggle, no second guessing themselves.

Duty to Party is a very strong, emotionally driven factor when faced with difficult choices, more so with contemporary conservatives than liberals IMO.

 

[pcgeek11]

Maybe he's a narcissistic, pathological liar who has a base of supporters who are easily manipulated by conspiracy theories and propaganda who will defend one of their own... an old, white male, whiny little bitch.

Didn't you say you were a trump supporter? Yeah, I think I nailed it.

No. I have never claimed to be a Trump supporter. So once again you are full of shit.

You missed once again.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Like I said, if Hillary respects gun rights like she says she does then what's to worry about? You believe her when she says she's not going to take away anyone's guns, don't you? So why worry about it?

No you really didn't say anything, you tried on your best drumpf and it fit as well for you as it does for him. Not getting a pass on this. If hillary is elected and somehow manages to have the 2nd amendment repealed or amended, are you calling for someone to shoot her? Because that is exactly what you and drumpf are implying. If not, then please educate me.

Typical, like speedy or lk, you talk a lot of shit, and when you're called on it you either tuck tail and run or give innuendo ladened messages, but no direct answers, like your bloated orange gas bag hero, fucking cowards all of you.

 

[K1052]

Dog whistle heard loud and clear by Bart and rudder.

Remember folks the Donald has "the best words" and people like him because unlike career politicians, "he says what he means".

It's amazing how much time he, his campaign, and surrogates must devote to painfully explaining what he actually meant when he's out there "saying what he means" since it's often something objectively terrible. Anybody who thinks he meant anything else than, even in partial jest, endorsing the idea of political assassination is deludedly wading through bullshit up to their eyeballs.

 

[zinfamous]

So now that he's got the "2nd amendmenters" all riled up, all he's got to do is remind them that Obama and Clinton are the founders and de-facto spiritual inspiration for our current worst enemy: ISIS!
I say remind them, because the fascists that support this lipstick pig already believe that in their hearts.

Game, set....!

 

[Jaskalas]

Last week, his train was crashing through a brick wall. This week, you discover the brick wall was an attempt to prevent the train from going over the cliff on the other side of the wall. Next week... ocean and man-eating sharks at the bottom of the cliff. The following week?

A journey to the center of the earth?

So I hear Trump's comment, and a call to violence is exactly what I first think.
And this man wonders why we can't use nukes.
We want him in the Whitehouse?

Imagine these threats to other countries.

 

[FerrelGeek]

Sorry bro, but to be perfectly frank I see this same thing in Hillary supports. And you bloody well know I'm no Trumpophile.

Doesn't matter what Trump says or does. In the very end when each and every Repub/Conservative/Religious Fundie/Anti-Gay/Aryan/2A fanatic is in the voting booth, party loyalty and/or their visceral hatred of Hillary will have almost all of them unquestionably voting for Trump with ease.

There will be no gnashing of teeth, no intellectual struggle, no second guessing themselves.

Duty to Party is a very strong, emotionally driven factor when faced with difficult choices, more so with contemporary conservatives than liberals IMO.