[RunItUpTheGut]

Now that some info is coming out about the judge and his ties with The Hispanic National Bar Association, which has vowed to target Trumps business interest by boycotting, this judge may end up on the hot seat. This will give the appearance of impartiality by the judge, he should have recused himself. Gonna get interesting now.

Funny how all this stuff is coming out now.
The list of his potential bias is coming on strong.

As stated above, this has done nothing but further help Trumps cause.

[TheRealThing]

⬆⬆ Wasn't one of the fundamental understandings of the Framers that "the people" also needed their power to be held in check?

Never saw anything in the founders writings which suggested anything of the sort. The only constraint is to operate within the system in a constitutional and lawful manner. Why not cite your reference?

[Hoot Gibson]

I have always, and will alwways vote for POTUS. I will never cast a useless/protest vote for a third party candidate that has zero chance in winning. If it were Obama vs Clinton in this upcoming election I would gladly cast one for Barry.

I have a 21 year old son that is still green as grass, I would vote for him before I would vote for Clinton...he would be less damaging IMO. I would vote for Trump over my son cause I feel he'd be the best of the two.

Outside of something extraordinary, one of two people will be the next president, Trump or Clinton. I fully understand that we have the right to vote for anyone we choose. If voters choose not to vote, or vote for a third party candidate that's their business and i respect that. IT IS MY PERSONAL OPINION that if you choose to not vote for Trump, you are In a sense enabling Clinton. If you choose not to vote for Clinton, you are enabling Trump.

I'm just an old hillbilly and think its our duty to vote for whichever one we think is best. I say fish or cut bait.

I respect your opinion but respectfully disagree with your position. I most likely would have ended up holding my nose and voting for any of the 17 Republican candidates except for Trump. I think Trump lacks the moral character to be president, just as I think Hillary lacks character. I did my duty to my country when I voted against Trump in the Virginia primary election, but I cannot in good conscience vote for Trump for president because he does not represent my political beliefs any more than Hillary does.

I agree with many of Trump's stated positions on some issues, but I have always weighed candidates' actions more heavily than their words. Trump has been a liberal all of his adult life until he decided that he had a better chance being elected president as a Republican than as a Democrat. He has made huge donations to nearly every major liberal Democrat and RINO in the country. Trump has made large donations to Attorneys General like Pam Bondi when states were weighing whether to pursue fraud cases against Trump University. IMO, Trump's past actions do not match his words.

I do not lump all Trump supporters into the same category as TRT and RunItUpTheGut. Most Trump supporters believe that they are supporting the lesser of two evils - not the second coming of Ronald Reagan. That is a reasonable position to hold and it is the same reason that I voted for Dole, McCain, and Romney. As long as I believed that the Republican candidate had a reasonable chance to make a good president, then I found a way to rationalize my votes for less than stellar candidates.

I just don't see the Trump candidacy ending well for this country. Either he will lose to the worst Democrat candidate in history, or he will win and become the most unqualified, reckless, and untrustworthy Republican president in history.

[TheRealThing]

I respect your opinion but respectfully disagree with your position. I most likely would have ended up holding my nose and voting for any of the 17 Republican candidates except for Trump. I think Trump lacks the moral character to be president, just as I think Hillary lacks character. I did my duty to my country when I voted against Trump in the Virginia primary election, but I cannot in good conscience vote for Trump for president because he does not represent my political beliefs any more than Hillary does.

I agree with many of Trump's stated positions on some issues, but I have always weighed candidates' actions more heavily than their words. Trump has been a liberal all of his adult life until he decided that he had a better chance being elected president as a Republican than as a Democrat. He has made huge donations to nearly every major liberal Democrat and RINO in the country. Trump has made large donations to Attorneys General like Pam Bondi when states were weighing whether to pursue fraud cases against Trump University. IMO, Trump's past actions do not match his words.

I do not lump all Trump supporters into the same category as TRT and RunItUpTheGut. Most Trump supporters believe that they are supporting the lesser of two evils - not the second coming of Ronald Reagan. That is a reasonable position to hold and it is the same reason that I voted for Dole, McCain, and Romney. As long as I believed that the Republican candidate had a reasonable chance to make a good president, then I found a way to rationalize my votes for less than stellar candidates.

I just don't see the Trump candidacy ending well for this country. Either he will lose to the worst Democrat candidate in history, or he will win and become the most unqualified, reckless, and untrustworthy Republican president in history.

And heaven knows your convictions far outweigh the import of this election, as does your omnisciently precise and inerrant vision into the future. What a burden you must carry.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Never saw anything in the founders writings which suggested anything of the sort. The only constraint is to operate within the system in a constitutional and lawful manner. Why not cite your reference?

James Madison wrote of the "tyranny of the majority" in Federalist paper #10. A full trust in the crowd is just as foolish and dangerous to liberty as a blind, unchecked trust in government.

[TheRealThing]

James Madison wrote of the "tyranny of the majority" in Federalist paper #10. A full trust in the crowd is just as foolish and dangerous to liberty as a blind, unchecked trust in government.

The phrase you mention, "tyranny of the majority," is attributable to John Adams in 1788, a year after the Federalist #10 was published. So no, that phrase is not part of the text of F#10.

Madison did however, say the following in F#10, "the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority." Madison had an aversion to political parties which he referred to as factions. At the time of this writing, he was firmly committed to a one party system, suggesting that corruption was more unlikely in a vast republican form of government, and greater in a small society direct democracy because unholy alliances are much harder to form the more people who are involved.

Madison advocated for the power of the people to be vested in their elected delegates. That would have been the extent of the 'trust' that was to be visited upon the people. The reason was because human nature Madison believed, could not be tamed over a long period of time as all societal discontent is measured in the possession of property. In other words, as long as the people feel they have equality of opportunity, they are more likely to accept a self invested form of republican governance, because under that system, all seems fair.

Bernie and Hillary would be at the very bottom of Madison's list. They call for the equitable disposition of wealth, redistribution if one were to ask Barack. By definition according to Madison, the destroyer of any democratic form of government, because it leads to discontent and violent collapse. And the seeds of discontent have led to violence of late, have they not?

[TheRealThing]

...

[The Urban Sombrero]

⬆⬆ You are correct; it was John Adams. However, the Greeks had a term "ochlocracy" or "mob rule" and that did concern Jefferson and other Framers. There is more to right and wrong and justice than a poll or a showing of hands. The Bill of Rights addresses some of these concerns. I believe it is Federalist 51 that discusses tyranny of the majority in the last portion. We have a system of checks and balances, and "mob rule" is to be held in check as well where the mob seeks to deny or circumvent justice.

[Hoot Gibson]

And heaven knows your convictions far outweigh the import of this election, as does your omnisciently precise and inerrant vision into the future. What a burden you must carry.

The hypocrite speaks again.

[The Urban Sombrero]

I would like to add that the people have spoken and given us Clinton v Trump, and it is a very slippery slope for either party or group within either party to seek to overturn the popular will with shenanigans at either convention.

[Hoot Gibson]

In any case, it is not the crowd which is the subject of mistrust, it is the threat of shenanigans by the establishment, now that the crowd has spoken and chosen the ultimate delegate.

Trump is the ultimate crony capitalist insider. The "crowd" consists of 44 percent of the voters in Republican primaries and caucuses, which is not exactly an overwhelming mandate. It is becoming clear with each of your posts that Trump, a lying hypocrite and the ultimate self promoter is your perfect match as a candidate. You are nothing but a member of the mob, which is a minority of hard core Trump supporters, who are displaying all of the characteristics of cult members. Your attitude is one that has reared its ugly nationalist head around the globe repeatedly throughout modern history.

Some people have to believe that they are a member of the herd to feel good about themselves and you are obviously one of those people. Would be tyrants like Trump feed off the emotions of mobs. Celebrity worship has no rightful place in politics.

[Hoot Gibson]

⬆⬆ You are correct; it was John Adams. However, the Greeks had a term "ochlocracy" or "mob rule" and that did concern Jefferson and other Framers. There is more to right and wrong and justice than a poll or a showing of hands. The Bill of Rights addresses some of these concerns. I believe it is Federalist 51 that discusses tyranny of the majority in the last portion. We have a system of checks and balances, and "mob rule" is to be held in check as well where the mob seeks to deny or circumvent justice.

Great post. I must point out however, the both Trump and Hillary seek to circumvent justice through suspicious political donations and political pressure. Both are dangers to the American way of life.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Trump is the ultimate crony capitalist insider. The "crowd" consists of 44 percent of the voters in Republican primaries and caucuses, which is not exactly an overwhelming mandate. It is becoming clear with each of your posts that Trump, a lying hypocrite and the ultimate self promoter is your perfect match as a candidate. You are nothing but a member of the mob, which is a minority of hard core Trump supporters, who are displaying all of the characteristics of cult members. Your attitude is one that has reared its ugly nationalist head around the globe repeatedly throughout modern history.

Some people have to believe that they are a member of the herd to feel good about themselves and you are obviously one of those people. Would be tyrants like Trump feed off the emotions of mobs. Celebrity worship has no rightful place in politics.

I do think Donald Trump has tapped into a deep vein of frustration that cuts across the political spectrum. I am concerned that for love of "America" many who do not necessarily grasp the delicate balances of liberty will be like the giant cartoon character who loves his little pet "George" so much he unwisely hugs him too tightly and suffocates him. My biggest concern is that some of what Donald Trump thinks makes America "great" is not in keeping with historic Constitutional principles.

[The Urban Sombrero]

Great post. I must point out however, the both Trump and Hillary seek to circumvent justice through suspicious political donations and political pressure. Both are dangers to the American way of life.

In a way, Bill and Hillary represent the political class, its phoniness and cynicism and "end justifies the means" immorality, it's kicking the can of tough issues down the road, etc. Donald Trump represents a sort of antithesis to the career politicians, but he doesn't seem to embrace a deep and comprehensive understanding of what a truly transcendent political figure who loves America and its great principles of justice and equality and opportunity unto all might accomplish. Too often, he takes the broad road of lowest common denominator rhetoric and seems to, like the narcissist, struggle to come to grips with his own shortcomings, hypocrisies, and moral failures. And that's a little disconcerting.

[TheRealThing]

Trump is the ultimate crony capitalist insider. The "crowd" consists of 44 percent of the voters in Republican primaries and caucuses, which is not exactly an overwhelming mandate. It is becoming clear with each of your posts that Trump, a lying hypocrite and the ultimate self promoter is your perfect match as a candidate. You are nothing but a member of the mob, which is a minority of hard core Trump supporters, who are displaying all of the characteristics of cult members. Your attitude is one that has reared its ugly nationalist head around the globe repeatedly throughout modern history.

Some people have to believe that they are a member of the herd to feel good about themselves and you are obviously one of those people. Would be tyrants like Trump feed off the emotions of mobs. Celebrity worship has no rightful place in politics.

I intended that post as a PS to Uno. Something funky happened as when I put it up you got quoted. There are those who want to be part of the herd and then there are those like you, who after years of rationalizations suppose that others, assumedly courtesy of the magic of clinical codependency, somehow only see the façade of your imaginations. Happily, I am outside the sphere of your imaginary targeted audience.

Trump's rise has nothing to do with celebrity worship whatever. It has to do with the people, the bill payers, being both sick of getting talked to like they are morons, and being lied to by the establishment. You choose to parrot the talking points of your bothers in arms, (the Democrats) to prosecute your #antiTrump campaign. Trump got 1 and a half million more votes than any Republican has ever gotten, but you would rather cast that as something negatively prophetic in saying he only got 44% of the vote.

We know Hillary and what she will do by two things. Her unswerving liberal record while in public office, and the fact that it has been verified and edified by epic scandal and her rigid rhetoric to that end during this campaign season.

Not so with Donald Trump who has no public record and who has spoken clearly in concert with the concerns of the conservatives of this nation. We have every reason to look toward his potential Presidency with optimism, especially in comparison to what will surely be "A Nightmare at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave." Part 3. If Hillary gets elected, and you are doing your dead level best to get her there, for you to state otherwise especially in the dogma of which you are guilty, is unconscionable to all except those of the #tin foil hat club.

[TheRealThing]

⬆⬆ You are correct; it was John Adams. However, the Greeks had a term "ochlocracy" or "mob rule" and that did concern Jefferson and other Framers. There is more to right and wrong and justice than a poll or a showing of hands. The Bill of Rights addresses some of these concerns. I believe it is Federalist 51 that discusses tyranny of the majority in the last portion. We have a system of checks and balances, and "mob rule" is to be held in check as well where the mob seeks to deny or circumvent justice.

Mob rule was something one could only see in the movies before B-Rock-Head ascended. Rioters would have found themselves prosecuted for burning a town to the ground under any other President in history. Had Eric Holder come out and clearly stated that such insurrection would be dealt with by the full force of US law, it would not have happened. And if Trump gets elected I would expect him to deal with the forces of anarchy in an appropriate fashion.

But this is all a smoke screen. You initially said that the framers had and wrote about the concept of keeping the power of he people in check, and that that concept was set forth by Madison in F#10, or did I miss something? Your premise was a conflation of two separate issues. The federal government's responsibility to provide an orderly society in preventing mob like outbreaks of violence and destruction such as Ferguson, MO., against the power of the people, which was a clear reference to the power of their votes. Hence, Madison's reference to vesting the power of governance and the administrations of that power by our elected delegates in F#10.

There is but one thing outside of this nation's fear of God Himself, which separates us from the voluntary forfeiture of the precious freedoms our forefathers sacrificed so much to attain and for which so many have paid the ultimate price in order to defend, our right to vote. In other words, that unspeakable gift the founders handed down to us, now seems likely be to handed right back into the hands of tyranny by mushrooms who have lost appropriate gratitude and understanding of what they have. Make America Great Again.

[The Urban Sombrero]

⬆⬆ Thank you for your brief, concise response. You act like the Framers existed in a vaccuum and had no knowledge or interest in the Greek model or other movements and forces contemporary and historical. At any given time a majority of voters might vote for referendums that deny the minority basic civil rights. How many lynch mobs carried out swift injustice? The Framers certainly did not entrust the fate of our nation entirely to the whim and caprice of the public. We have a Constitution and established checks and balances, coupled with representative democracy.

[Hoot Gibson]

I intended that post as a PS to Uno. Something funky happened as when I put it up you got quoted. There are those who want to be part of the herd and then there are those like you, who after years of rationalizations suppose that others, assumedly courtesy of the magic of clinical codependency, somehow only see the façade of your imaginations. Happily, I am outside the sphere of your imaginary targeted audience.

Trump's rise has nothing to do with celebrity worship whatever. It has to do with the people, the bill payers, being both sick of getting talked to like they are morons, and being lied to by the establishment. You choose to parrot the talking points of your bothers in arms, (the Democrats) to prosecute your #antiTrump campaign. Trump got 1 and a half million more votes than any Republican has ever gotten, but you would rather cast that as something negatively prophetic in saying he only got 44% of the vote.

We know Hillary and what she will do by two things. Her unswerving liberal record while in public office, and the fact that it has been verified and edified by epic scandal and her rigid rhetoric to that end during this campaign season.

Not so with Donald Trump who has no public record and who has spoken clearly in concert with the concerns of the conservatives of this nation. We have every reason to look toward his potential Presidency with optimism, especially in comparison to what will surely be "A Nightmare at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave." Part 3. If Hillary gets elected, and you are doing your dead level best to get her there, for you to state otherwise especially in the dogma of which you are guilty, is unconscionable to all except those of the #tin foil hat club.

Most people support Trump because he is not Hillary. The rest are mainly Trump's cult followers, such as yourself. Deny it all you want, but when your response to somebody criticizing Trump is to grab your trusty thesaurus and write a long rant full of personal insults aimed at Trump's critic, you have penetrated deeply into cult territory. What a waste of time and space you have become.

[TheRealThing]

Most people support Trump because he is not Hillary. The rest are mainly Trump's cult followers, such as yourself. Deny it all you want, but when your response to somebody criticizing Trump is to grab your trusty thesaurus and write a long rant full of personal insults aimed at Trump's critic, you have penetrated deeply into cult territory. What a waste of time and space you have become.

Oh we all know on here that you are the supremely educated governor of eloquence and that your self coronation affords you the right to talk down to anybody you choose. It's all part of your grand delusion. :Thumbs:

LOL, if you want to see the quintessential example of what a waste of time and space looks like, go and reread your "Case Against Donald Trump" thread.

[Hoot Gibson]

Oh we all know on here that you are the supremely educated governor of eloquence and that your self coronation affords you the right to talk down to anybody you choose. It's all part of your grand delusion. :Thumbs:

LOL, if you want to see the quintessential example of what a waste of time and space looks like, go and reread your "Case Against Donald Trump" thread.

I don't need to reread it. I read it as I post it. I am sure that you are assiduously avoiding reading, watching, or listening to anything that contradicts the sentence fragments uttered by the object of your affection. :hilarious:

[TheRealThing]

⬆⬆ Thank you for your brief, concise response. You act like the Framers existed in a vaccuum and had no knowledge or interest in the Greek model or other movements and forces contemporary and historical. At any given time a majority of voters might vote for referendums that deny the minority basic civil rights. How many lynch mobs carried out swift injustice? The Framers certainly did not entrust the fate of our nation entirely to the whim and caprice of the public. We have a Constitution and established checks and balances, coupled with representative democracy.

So the conversation which began with your contention that the Framers saw crowd control not as a matter of law enforcement, but was dealt with directly in F10 by no less that Madison himself, which was completely false, has now morphed into a debate about the influences European schools of thought may have had on the Framers mindset as that would apply to our founding?

I just went through all this, and that according to Madison, and this really is in F10, the people through their right and power to vote, invest said power in their elected delegates. Said delegates who then govern those who just endued them with the power of office under the dictates of the Constitution, thusly creating that system of checks and balances. How are you coming up 'with the framers entrusting the fate of our nation entirely to the whims of the public?' :dudecomeon:

[TheRealThing]

I don't need to reread it. I read it as I post it. I am sure that you are assiduously avoiding reading, watching, or listening to anything that contradicts the sentence fragments uttered by the object of your affection. :hilarious:

And again I give you the opportunity. Tell us all, what was your resolution for the Presidential dilemma again? Oh yes I remember, your advice for the people of the greatest self governing free people of all time is to eschew the polls on election day and just go stand in the corner and pout. That about right?

[Hoot Gibson]

And again I give you the opportunity. Tell us all, what was your resolution for the Presidential dilemma again? Oh yes I remember, your advice for the people of the greatest self governing free people of all time is to eschew the polls on election day and just go stand in the corner and pout. That about right?

I certainly did not make the decision to devote myself to a personality cult. Had I chosen to support Trump as the lesser of two evils, I certainly would not have insulted people who could not persuade themselves to make the same decision that I did.

Your behavior and the behavior of other obnoxious Trump supporters of your ilk will cost Trump many votes over the next five months. Call me crazy, but insulting people who oppose Trump is a very questionable strategy if you really want him to win in November. Such bizarre, irrational behavior goes with the territory when you become a cult follower of a celebrity.

[TheRealThing]

I certainly did not make the decision to devote myself to a personality cult. Had I chosen to support Trump as the lesser of two evils, I certainly would not have insulted people who could not persuade themselves to make the same decision that I did.

Your behavior and the behavior of other obnoxious Trump supporters of your ilk will cost Trump many votes over the next five months. Call me crazy, but insulting people who oppose Trump is a very questionable strategy if you really want him to win in November. Such bizarre, irrational behavior goes with the territory when you become a cult follower of a celebrity.

Somebody else already did that. And again I ask you the same question. What is your resolution to the problem other than the hundreds of insult and innuendo laden posts you have put up? You can't answer, can you.

[Hoot Gibson]

Somebody else already did that. And again I ask you the same question. What is your resolution to the problem other than the hundreds of insult and innuendo laden posts you have put up? You can't answer, can you.

Repetition of your hypocritical posts will not make them any less nonsensical. When you look in the mirror, do you see Donald Trump staring back at you? Is that why you take my criticism of him so personally? When voters do not hold their parties and candidates accountable for bad behavior, we have no right to expect better candidates. Liberal Democrats have blindly supported inner city Democrats for decades and the result has been disastrous for cities like Detroit, Baltimore, and Chicago. You advocate supporting the worst Republican presidential candidate in a long list of bad nominees simply because he is a Republican. Your reasons for supporting a liberal candidate are no better than those given by two time Obama supporters.

I hardly ever agree with Mitch McConnell, but he was right when he observed that Trump needs to select a strong VP candidate because he knows so little about issues himself. Trump has not done anything to warrant my support.

[TheRealThing]

Repetition of your hypocritical posts will not make them any less nonsensical. When you look in the mirror, do you see Donald Trump staring back at you? Is that why you take my criticism of him so personally? When voters do not hold their parties and candidates accountable for bad behavior, we have no right to expect better candidates. Liberal Democrats have blindly supported inner city Democrats for decades and the result has been disastrous for cities like Detroit, Baltimore, and Chicago. You advocate supporting the worst Republican presidential candidate in a long list of bad nominees simply because he is a Republican. Your reasons for supporting a liberal candidate are no better than those given by two time Obama supporters.

I hardly ever agree with Mitch McConnell, but he was right when he observed that Trump needs to select a strong VP candidate because he knows so little about issues himself. Trump has not done anything to warrant my support.

I have repeated a question that you won't answer and everybody on here knows why, you can't.

[Hoot Gibson]

I have repeated a question that you won't answer and everybody on here knows why, you can't.

If you want a questions answered, then you might try not burying them under an avalanche of personal insults. In any case, given the tone of your posts, you should not delude yourself into believing that you are in any position to issue demands. Being offensive is not a good defense of Trump's behavior.

[The Urban Sombrero]

So the conversation which began with your contention that the Framers saw crowd control not as a matter of law enforcement, but was dealt with directly in F10 by no less that Madison himself, which was completely false, has now morphed into a debate about the influences European schools of thought may have had on the Framers mindset as that would apply to our founding?

I just went through all this, and that according to Madison, and this really is in F10, the people through their right and power to vote, invest said power in their elected delegates. Said delegates who then govern those who just endued them with the power of office under the dictates of the Constitution, thusly creating that system of checks and balances. How are you coming up 'with the framers entrusting the fate of our nation entirely to the whims of the public?' :dudecomeon:

You just built a straw man. Congratulations. My point was the public and wariness of mob rule was included in the calculations of the Framers. I am not for Hillary Clinton, but she is going to win in an electoral landslide. The reason is that Trump lacks discipline in staying on message, the message that resonates. He just won't do it, and in the general election, that matters much more than in the primary season.

[TheRealThing]

You just built a straw man. Congratulations. My point was the public and wariness of mob rule was included in the calculations of the Framers. I am not for Hillary Clinton, but she is going to win in an electoral landslide. The reason is that Trump lacks discipline in staying on message, the message that resonates. He just won't do it, and in the general election, that matters much more than in the primary season.

And I say that you are wrong on both counts. Ironically, Madison did define the underlying cause of what he believed was at the root of all public insurrection. And his 'calculations' on the matter led him to believe that as long as the people perceived equality of opportunity to be the controlling factor in their society, as protected by the federal government, they would be happy and mob rule would never raise it's ugly head.

American history has proven the wisdom of his thoughts on the matter to be exactly right. Riots have been rare here in this land, that is until people were led to believe that successful Americans (those wicked 1 percenters) were somehow nefarious white collar gangsters stealing money from the unfortunate masses. The father we voters let the federal government take us down this road, the more we will all rue the day. Therefore, in my calculation the pack of rats leading the charge for the Republicans against Donald Trump need to wake up, we can not allow Hillary to extend the policies of the Obama Era.

In any case and in consideration of the mobs of the recent past, I hardly think the framers intended method to control the mob would have been for DC to order the police to stand down and let them destroy.

Trump's problem isn't staying on message as much as it is the incredibly intense effort from within his own party to scuttle his campaign.

[TheRealThing]

If you want a questions answered, then you might try not burying them under an avalanche of personal insults. In any case, given the tone of your posts, you should not delude yourself into believing that you are in any position to issue demands. Being offensive is not a good defense of Trump's behavior.

No, I didn't say I wanted the question answered. I said you cannot answer the question. And given your internet persona which is I suppose, that you are some kind of informed genius, the silence of your inability to answer especially in the face of hundreds of anti-Trump rants you keep putting up, is obvious to all.