I think you are way off on the dump Trump people or just really out of touch. I am not sure how you could base those assertions on anything anyone has said in this forum or any where except conspiracy theories or maybe a few "insiders" that want him out. Those people would most likely be Republicans that dont like an "insider" as their leader though. Since that fact would not effect the other side.
It has nothing to do with him being "an outsider" and there are plenty of very very good reasons. For me it is the lying that bothers me the most. There has not been a more dishonest politician in my lifetime. Almost anything he says that can be fact checked is a lie. It is shocking how dishonest and deceitful this Presidency is. Which is really saying something since Politicians are a deceitful group more often than not. Then there is the fact of his personality which is abrasive at best. His attitude bothers a lot of people and represents what is wrong in the world at times. The main reason I didnt want him as president is because I disagree with roughly 90% of his policies.
The one thing I do like about him is that he is not a career politician. I would not call him an outsider though since he is very financially tied to issues and is very influenced by people who are pushing those issues that I mostly dislike.
Then there the fact that he does not represent equality for people in his actions or speech. He also seems very unintelligent.
As far as economics go I dont trust someone like him to make good decisions. He has not made good decisions with his own money. Good news is the president isnt all that influential on the economy.
You would need to listen to Alex Jones, especially when he has Roger Stone on as his guest, talking about the "insider" thing. Sure, everybody knows Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney and McCain view Trump as an upstart, a phony Republican, and will never give Trump anything remotely connected to actual support. A lot of people call the Bush league Republicans "RINOs".
Mark Levin and Sean Hannity would concur to a degree. Levin decries the "Chamber of Commerce Republicans and the McConnell/Ryan element. Hannity decries them all as do-nothing re-election machines.
I probably find CNN, NYTimes, Wash Post and a hundred other "progressive" sorts of news spinners as unreadable as you would find the radio talk shows. But I do read/listen to them. I just find them freakin dishonest. When I can, I will listen to Andrew Wilkow and Breitbart as paragons of credibility, but frankly the voice, style and intellect of David Webb (
http://www.davidwebbshow.com/) is the most palatable of them all.
At any rate, choose your consciousness stream and swim in it all you want. I chose mine after listening to, and hating, the mainstream for decades, before Rush Limbaugh broke the silence for common sense Americans.
I find Thriller, b proof, and Red laughable actually. Yes, I know they love and believe their sources for their views. credulity, I call it. So without actually discussing the points, they(and you, it seems) just diss whatever.
how in the world could anyone think Hillary is more honest than Trump. Or Bill. I don't think Trump has ever fact-checked anything on the so-called fact-checking outfits. I wouldn't either. Millions of dollars in the Clinton Foundation coming in largish chunks from Russian, Saudi, dozens of other interests in pretty tight timelines corresponding to actions Hillary took as Sec State, and the fact checkers just couldn't see any connection...... but hey..... Trump is selling out America for nothing.... for Zilch, Nada..... with scores of Mueller Hillaryites on the job poring over every possible record. But Hillary gets an all-clear from Mueller's honcho Comey. Bottom line, the Fact-Checkers lose credibility the same way media does when failing to make obvious connections essential to the story, which most common sense humans just will never believe is possible without deliberate lies, bias, and agenda.
Are you freakin f'real, bro? You cannot possibly be serious in thinking Trump is the more corrupt, or the bigger liar.
but oh, you ignored all the news in the last two years, and attribute my information and sources as my own imagination. No, HIllary did acknowledge most of the essential facts, she just professed innocence.
It's the bottom line fact, people believe what they love. Not very many will assess things critically if their fond beliefs are at risk. I have done it, I deliberately try to do it. Most of my posts in here are jabs at folks somehow, I imagine, in need of doing it as well.
After all this time, the fact that some just simply talk over the points and facts I present must mean, reasonably speaking, that they are themselves determined propagandists rather than simple citizens believing the news is actually the reality.
