I'm at work and don't have the time to play your games. Obviously he's not going to come out say "I promote violence against the police", but his actions certainly point in the direction that internally he wants this to be happening. His words say just as much if you just listen to him and read through the lines. He's blaming the police for the police being shot by a black man that admitted he was targeting white police officers. He's excusing the violence because he believe the police are to blame and he promotes the BLM movement which at this point should be labeled a terrorist organization.
It started with "Trayvon could have been my son" That was 100% a bull crap thing to say given his position. He has taken that stance on every incident.
I'm not playing a game, but I am trying to keep the BS to a minimum in this thread. Nothing he has ever said has promoted violence against police officers. If you choose Trump as your kids' role model that is fine, and I would've "liked" your post the same way I've liked every other post that gave a response and backed it up with a legitimate reason. Here's the transcript to his speech: Remarks by the President at Memorial Service for Fallen Dallas Police Officers | whitehouse.gov
This entire part of the speech, in my mind, is excusing the violence. At every turn, this president has had the opportunity to promote unity but instead he continues to divide. Race relations were 100% better 8 years ago than they are today. A black man was elected President of the United States of America almost 8 years ago. That is proof that we had made progress from the times of segregation. Today, we are not in the same place we were 8 years ago and a large reason for that is his rhetoric. We also know that centuries of racial discrimination -- of slavery, and subjugation, and Jim Crow -- they didn’t simply vanish with the end of lawful segregation. They didn’t just stop when Dr. King made a speech, or the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act were signed. Race relations have improved dramatically in my lifetime. Those who deny it are dishonoring the struggles that helped us achieve that progress. (Applause.) But we know -- but, America, we know that bias remains. We know it. Whether you are black or white or Hispanic or Asian or Native American or of Middle Eastern descent, we have all seen this bigotry in our own lives at some point. We’ve heard it at times in our own homes. If we’re honest, perhaps we’ve heard prejudice in our own heads and felt it in our own hearts. We know that. And while some suffer far more under racism’s burden, some feel to a far greater extent discrimination’s sting. Although most of us do our best to guard against it and teach our children better, none of us is entirely innocent. No institution is entirely immune. And that includes our police departments. We know this. And so when African Americans from all walks of life, from different communities across the country, voice a growing despair over what they perceive to be unequal treatment; when study after study shows that whites and people of color experience the criminal justice system differently, so that if you’re black you’re more likely to be pulled over or searched or arrested, more likely to get longer sentences, more likely to get the death penalty for the same crime; when mothers and fathers raise their kids right and have “the talk” about how to respond if stopped by a police officer -- “yes, sir,” “no, sir” -- but still fear that something terrible may happen when their child walks out the door, still fear that kids being stupid and not quite doing things right might end in tragedy -- when all this takes place more than 50 years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act, we cannot simply turn away and dismiss those in peaceful protest as troublemakers or paranoid. (Applause.) We can’t simply dismiss it as a symptom of political correctness or reverse racism. To have your experience denied like that, dismissed by those in authority, dismissed perhaps even by your white friends and coworkers and fellow church members again and again and again -- it hurts. Surely we can see that, all of us.
I think it's a stretch to refer to that as excusing or promoting violence, but I can certainly understand how that portion of the speech may have rubbed some people the wrong way. Personally, I thought it was unnecessary, and detracted from the other parts of the speech that were very good and honored the fallen officers.
Right he gave a speech about the fallen police officers and should have left it at that, BUT he didn't he went on to basically tell the world why this was happening(as he believes). That part of the speech is empowering to those that are willing to commit these types of violent attacks. Clearly it didn't dissuade them as there have been multiple attacks in the aftermath. He is a divider, not a uniter.
Maybe, but you really don't know that for certain. Obama has proven it. You are writing Trump off before ever giving him a chance.
I don't think it's possible for people to block out the last eight years of politics. The opinions would be different if Obama was running for his first term as well.
Let's see... Both Melania and Trump are vocally, enequivocally, unabashed proud American success stories. They (and Ivana) have raised a family of great kids, entrepreneurs, philanthropists, and patriots. The Obamas on the other hand; at nearly every turn denigrate, apologize for, or otherwise take the opportunity to bash the very Land that gave them (and I mean gave via Affirmative Action/political favor) the highest seat at the table. Obama grifted his way into and through Colombia and Harvard. Not Trump. This applies to the wives as well. Michelle was the one who had never been proud of her country. Not Melania. Michelle was the one who was paid over $400k/yr for a no-show job at Northwestern Hospital. (Wonder why healthcare costs are so high???) not Melania. The Trumps donate tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars to charity. Prior to the 2012 election, BO gave pittances. Trump Inc employs tens of thousands of people, the majority of which reportedly love working for him. BO has put over 13 million on food stamps. Sure, DJT may be a thin-skinned prick at times, and has a penchance for petty personal vendettas. But at his core he has done more good for more people than the other family could ever dream. It's not even close. The Trumps win by a mile. Which admittedly is kind of sad.
I dislike his politics and politics purely aside I sadly have to pick the Obama's. Try a Trump's Clintons poll....now that's a loose loose.
This one made me think for a while because I'm not a fan of either individual's politics. When you remove the politics from the equation, the scale tilts to the Obamas for me. Like them or not, both choices have been successful in their chosen careers so I see that as a wash. I guess the deciding factor to me comes down to family...in a world where multiple divorces are commonplace, I respect those who are able to keep a marriage together and raise a family.
It's not like Trump is some unknown. I've seen what I need of Trump to know that he isn't someone that I would want my kids looking up to.
Saw a story on Yahoo that evidently Ted Nugent might get involved with the music Trump uses in his appearances. Donald needs to stay far away from Ted. 1 nobody wants to listed to Ted's out dated crap music. 2 any involvement with that loudmouth pedofile is going to make me pump the breaks on my vote. Hillary is a disaster but Ted's involvement is unacceptable and will defiantly turn people off from the tentative support Donald has.
Judge a man by his friends, and his enemies. How could anyone choose to have their kids look up to someone who associates with/ was mentored by the likes of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Father Phleger, Bill Ayers, and Saul Alinsky...just because that man has had a successful marriage? You know who else has been able to stay married for over 30 years? The Clintons. So by that reasoning they're role models?
Unfortunately I have a feeling that DJTs campaign won't look deep enough into the situation that is Sweaty Teddy. That's one problem he has an outsider- he is not experienced with vetting every would-be supporter/public mouthpiece. We've already seen how the media LOVES to make these ridiculous linkages of "supporters" to the DJT campaign.
