Redael Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 Currently the debate system is rigged to ensure no third party can contend for the presidency. Gary Johnson and the Our America Intiative hopes to allow third party candidates a chance to participate in the debates? Do you believe third party canidates who are on the ballot in the majority of states should be invited to debates? 2 Quote Gary Johnson 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 I fully suport every candidate with zero % chance of winning participating in every debate, so yes. 2 Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Hequ Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 Yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lyre Posted May 26, 2016 Share Posted May 26, 2016 Definitely *-* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redael Posted May 27, 2016 Author Share Posted May 27, 2016 I fully suport every candidate with zero % chance of winning participating in every debate, so yes. The idea is once the candidate gets into the debate and gets national recongintion they have a chance Quote Gary Johnson 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarke Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 (edited) The idea is once the candidate gets into the debate and gets national recongintion they have a chance You want politicians to choose the president as well? Edited May 27, 2016 by Lightning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordRahl2 Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 The idea is once the candidate gets into the debate and gets national recongintion they have a chance They still would not. But I love the theater so it would be good. Quote -signature removed for rules violation- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Jerry Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Yes they should. The lead candidate from any party should be allowed a seat at the cool kids table. I think the Dems and Repubs are so !@#$-ing scared of any third or forth party candidate that they set up the debates so it would only be them two......bunch of !@#$-ing !@#$! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speaker Faris Wheeler Posted May 27, 2016 Share Posted May 27, 2016 Currently the debate system is rigged to ensure no third party can contend for the presidency. Gary Johnson and the Our America Intiative hopes to allow third party candidates a chance to participate in the debates? Do you believe third party canidates who are on the ballot in the majority of states should be invited to debates? yes. It is only fair. 1 Quote Peace will never be accomplished without war, but war cannot happen without peace.... or something like that idk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redael Posted May 28, 2016 Author Share Posted May 28, 2016 Yes they should. The lead candidate from any party should be allowed a seat at the cool kids table. I think the Dems and Repubs are so !@#$-ing scared of any third or forth party candidate that they set up the debates so it would only be them two......bunch of !@#$-ing !@#$! Well since they can't defend their parties positions against rational pstitons, spthey have to silence the rational pstions Quote Gary Johnson 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted May 28, 2016 Share Posted May 28, 2016 Well since they can't defend their parties positions against rational pstitons, spthey have to silence the rational pstions First off you're no font of rational arguments considering your performance when I pressed you on your Anti-Trump talk. Second from what I am aware neither party "shuts out third parties", the networks and such would be. Now if a third party were to poll at 10%+ around the time they take place (Gary Johnson might do) then they may well invite him on, especially if the intention is that he'll damage Trump by suiciding into him while mostly ignoring Clinton, something I feel is a distinct possibility. It'd be like having Sanders on there too as a third party, he'd try as hard as possible to suicide into Trump. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnl023 Posted May 28, 2016 Share Posted May 28, 2016 Include third parties (Libertarians, Greens, maybe even Constitution) on polls, instead of simply the Democrats and Republicans. If the polls show a significant number of people support a certain party then add them to debate. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trump Posted May 28, 2016 Share Posted May 28, 2016 Include third parties (Libertarians, Greens, maybe even Constitution) on polls, instead of simply the Democrats and Republicans. If the polls show a significant number of people support a certain party then add them to debate. dont Constitution want to make gays illegal and ban porn? yeh ill pass on them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redael Posted May 29, 2016 Author Share Posted May 29, 2016 First off you're no font of rational arguments considering your performance when I pressed you on your Anti-Trump talk. Second from what I am aware neither party "shuts out third parties", the networks and such would be. Now if a third party were to poll at 10%+ around the time they take place (Gary Johnson might do) then they may well invite him on, especially if the intention is that he'll damage Trump by suiciding into him while mostly ignoring Clinton, something I feel is a distinct possibility. It'd be like having Sanders on there too as a third party, he'd try as hard as possible to suicide into Trump.Gary Johnson actually takes more from Hillary than trump in the polls. And Snaders would be good to have on their so trump can't chicken out of debating him. Also it's not the parties themselves it's the bipartisan debate commission.Include third parties (Libertarians, Greens, maybe even Constitution) on polls, instead of simply the Democrats and Republicans. If the polls show a significant number of people support a certain party then add them to debate. that's the plan now technically but it requires 15% of support in the polls which is impossible to get for a third party without getting national attention, which is most easliy done by being invited to the debates, so it's a cycle Quote Gary Johnson 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted May 29, 2016 Share Posted May 29, 2016 Gary Johnson actually takes more from Hillary than trump in the polls. And Snaders would be good to have on their so trump can't chicken out of debating him. Also it's not the parties themselves it's the bipartisan debate commission. that's the plan now technically but it requires 15% of support in the polls which is impossible to get for a third party without getting national attention, which is most easliy done by being invited to the debates, so it's a cycle It's a 1% difference and irrelevant to what I said as I am certain he'd try to suicide into Trump if given the opportunity. Gary Johnson is the usual Libertarian who believes in open borders (a view he shares with Clinton) which render the rest of his ideology dead, logic not being strong with Libertarians who even if by some miracle ever won the presidency would make millions of illegals citizens, have more get imported, and then be politically dead going forward as none of those people give one rat's arse about Libertarianism (they'd also kill Conservatism and make Nationalists extremely violent, good job that'd be). Thats just one thing that'll eliminate whats left of "NeverTrump" which is who Johnson has cynically been lying to, to try and get their support by playing up his government/business policies but not mentioning his immigration ideas (oh and being pro-choice too lets not forget) which would make any "True Conservative" as they label themselves flee for the hills. Man's a cuck. Libertarianism when not moderated is an ideology for cucks. He can join Our Dear Communist Friend in the cuckshed and leave it to an Alpha like Trump to tame the Hildabeast. He polled 9% last time and got 1% in the election, but perhaps he'll get 2% this time, still a yuge loser. Trump's demands were not met, and he has no obligation to debate a yuge loser who already made clear he was going to try and suicide himself for dear Hillary (lol if people think Bernie doesn't know he's done and this is something he can use to help Hillary by poisoning his supporters mind's by constantly calling Trump a racist). Gary Johnson actually takes more from Hillary than trump in the polls. And Snaders would be good to have on their so trump can't chicken out of debating him. Also it's not the parties themselves it's the bipartisan debate commission. that's the plan now technically but it requires 15% of support in the polls which is impossible to get for a third party without getting national attention, which is most easliy done by being invited to the debates, so it's a cycle Ross Perot managed it, and as Clinton needs a "spoiler" I'm sure her rich friends will work hard to try and get Johnson on there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 (edited) Include third parties (Libertarians, Greens, maybe even Constitution) on polls, instead of simply the Democrats and Republicans. If the polls show a significant number of people support a certain party then add them to debate. Something like this is already in place for ballot access in all states. The same should be for debates on public access, such as C-SPAN. However I have the distinct feeling there are going to be very few debates due to the Democratic candidate refusing to be at the same podium next to Donald Trump. Just a prediction. Edited May 30, 2016 by Lord Asmodeus Quote Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 Something like this is already in place for ballot access in all states. The same should be for debates on public access, such as C-SPAN. However I have the distinct feeling there are going to be very few debates due to the Democratic candidate refusing to be at the same podium next to Donald Trump. Just a prediction. Trump will schlong her in a single debate so teabagging her afterwards in further debates is unnecessary anyway. *AIRHORN* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trump Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 the present day we effectively has't a stag'd elections, in which the establishment (a. k. a. the system, the pow'r elite, the military-industrial-banking-oil-media-complex), presents two status quo (republican and democrat) candidates. to preventeth vot'rs from voting f'r a non-establishment (e. g. , a lib'rtarian 'r green party) candidate, the establishment uses a divide-and-conqu'r strategy: (1) chooseth republican/democrat platf'rm issues yond polarize vot'r opinion as closely as possible to a 50/50 did split; (2) has't h'rrible, frightening candidates f'r both parties; (3) by this means, manipulateth vot'rs such yond, to keepeth the m're fear'd candidate from winning, those gents wilt vote f'r the oth'r candidate; (4) crucial to this strategy's success is to has't sev'ral 'hot-button' issues (healthcare, gay feather-bed, taxing the rich, etc. ), to gallow vot'rs on both the hath left and right, and f'r news media focus on these issues so as to maximally inflame emotions. as a result, virtually ev'ryone (98% in the 2012 presidential election) votes f'r the democrat 'r republican candidate, maintaining the establishment pow'r elite. nothing changes: wars, pov'rty, lacking valor economy, nay jobs, po'r quality of life, hath continued 'rosion of values and m'rale. wealth transf'r continues from citizens to c'rp'rate owneth'rs. nomination of h'rrible republican and democrat candidates eke means many vot'rs shall simply not vote, which again w'rks in the establishment's fav'r. the racket shall continueth as longeth as t w'rks; 'twill stand ho w'rking at which hour a substantial prop'rtion of am'ricans vote f'r third-party candidates. voting f'r the democrat 'r republican candidate cannot beest did justify on the principle of choosing the less'r evil. regardless of which mainstream candidate is elected, the sh'rt-t'rm (say, 4 to 6 years) outcome shall beest m're 'r less the same. nothing much shall changeth as longeth as the two big parties, and the same establishment int'rests those gents representeth, controleth our state. but voting f'r third-party candidates anon shall potentially hasten the arrival of a timeth — p'rhaps 10–20 years hence — at which hour we doth has't a real choice, and real issues. thus, the genuine 'less'r evil' choice is to vote f'r a third-party candidate, coequal though one knoweth yond the candidate wonneth't beest elect'd. voting f'r a third-party candidate, th'ref're, shall not throweth thy vote hence. 'twill maketh a definite statement, both to the republican and democratic parties, and to thy fellow citizens. coequal though those gents representeth the same vest'd int'rests, th're is enow rivalry between the democratic and republican parties yond, if 't be true third parties taketh a sufficient prop'rtion of the vote, those gents shall beginneth to modifyeth their platf'rms, making m're concessions to citizens. furth'r, voting f'r third-party presidential candidates shall holp third parties reacheth the critical threshold of 5% of the popular vote — at which pointeth those gents shall qualifyeth f'r public campaign funding assistance. first, t shouldst beest evident to all yond the democratic and republican parties art 'in cahoots'. th're's not much real diff'rence between those folk. togeth'r those gents f'rm a duopoly with absolute political and economic pow'r. those gents distract public attention by arguing about sup'rficial diff'rences, obscuring the fact yond those gents concur on the maj'r issues liketh: the big government modeleth is the only option am'rica needeth a huge military budgeteth war is not insane nay t'rm limits the 'war on drugs' whatev'r else, keepeth those campaign contributions rolling in! then wherefore not just vote third-party? h're's the reasoneth many people giveth: "if i vote f'r a third party, wouldn't yond throweth mine own vote hence?". alloweth's dispel yond myth once and f'r all. first, if 't be true one thing is plain, t's yond thee has't thrown thy vote hence if 't be true thee vote f'r the democrat 'r republican candidate. the two parties art basically the same, and regardless of which party is in pow'r, things improveth not. recall yond t wast both the democrats and the republicans who is't did rush into the iraq war, waving the flag, without a planeth. the sooth is, the republicrat duopoly hast did arrange so yond we has't a democrat f'r one 'r two t'rms, then a republican, and then backeth again. t's a sweet system wh're both parties winneth. neith'r is out of pow'r f'r v'ry longeth. consid'r eke how both parties togeth'r has't did succeed in making thee feeleth thee has't to vote 'gainst someone. in 2000, f'r example, thee may not has't did like bush much, but hath felt thee did need to vote 'gainst al g're, 'r vice v'rsa. yond, i proposeth, is precisely what the two parties wanteth. those gents has't, by picking the right issues, did manage to completely polarize the am'rican public into two camps, did split almost 50/50. furth'r, those gents've setteth the tone of am'rican politics as one of constant acrimony and argument. far too much attention is hath spent criticizing the oth'r campeth, and not enow on presenting new, positive ideas. t's a divideth and conqu'r strategy. by polarizing the am'rican public, the republicrat pow'r coalition hast hath kept people too busy fighting with each oth'r to seeth what the real problem is. t's the fusty case of 'let's thee and that gent square'. this maketh each p'rson bethink, "my vote is essential to preventeth the oth'r party from winning; i can't aff'rd to vote f'r a third-party candidate, 'r someone with 'riginal ideas. " but consid'ring the dearth of valorous ideas 'mongst the current republican and democrat candidates, t's evident yond, whichev'r wins, we'll beest did stick with anoth'r lacking valor president f'r at least anoth'r four years. this novemb'r, then, thee'll has't two choices: vote f'r the democrat 'r republican candidate, in which case thee truly shall throweth thy vote hence, 'r vote f'r a third-party candidate. in the second case, t's true thy candidate shall not likely winneth. but thee haven't thrown thy vote hence. if 't be true enow people doth this, then the democrats and republicans shall receiveth the message. by the timeth the next elections cometh 'round, those gents shall beest bethinking about adopting some of the ideas from the third parties. furth'r, any vote f'r a third party encourages the founding of new third parties, with valuable new ideas. the potential f'r positive changeth in am'rica exists. what we wilt doth is maketh a climate in which these ideas shall cometh to the f're in public discussion, and findeth implementation as social policy. third parties can meeteth this vital needeth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 Well I thought as much. Seems Billy "Renegade Jew" Kristol is hitching his failure to Mr Johnson here. If he does Redael I hope you'll be disvowing such cuckoldry pretty quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trump Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 (edited) as for the new party! Libertarian Party chair hopeful strips at convention By Kait Richmond, CNN Updated 1437 GMT (2237 HKT) May 30, 2016 Striptease at Libertarian convention 01:48 Story highlights Crowd at Libertarian Party convention boos party chairman hopeful doing striptease James Weeks drops out of running after performing stunt (CNN)The Libertarian Party convention caught the attention of a lot of people this weekend, and not just because the party was choosing its presidential ticket. James Weeks, who was running to be the party chairman, took to the stage in Orlando and performed a striptease. Yes, a striptease. "We could use a little bit of fun," Weeks told the crowd as well as viewers tuned into C-SPAN, which broadcast the convention. Weeks played music on his phone as he took off his badges and encouraged the crowd to clap. Scattered cheers were the best he got -- and that was before it was clear what he was up to. Things went south pretty quickly when he removed his suspenders and tie. By the time he ripped his shirt off, the crowd erupted into loud boos. "Sorry, that was a dare," Weeks said. "I'm gonna go ahead and drop out." What is Libertarianism? The convention mostly made headlines for selecting former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson to head the party's presidential ticket with ex-Massachusetts Gov. William Weld as his running mate, but some observers noted that Weeks' stunt could have a negative effect on the party. "They've got to do things like have some of their nominees stop stripping in front of the cameras," CNN political commentator Errol Louis said Monday on "New Day." Follow New Day ✔ ‎@NewDay Can Libertarians make a difference in the presidential race?@errollouis: They need to get past the "wacky stuff." 2:45 PM - 30 May 2016 44 Retweets 66 likes Weeks hails from Michigan, where "he has dedicated his life to achieving a free society," his website says. Watch New Day weekdays at 6am-9am ET. For the latest on New Day click here that is the third party folks... the stripers! Edited May 30, 2016 by Muhammad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doktor Avalanche Posted May 30, 2016 Share Posted May 30, 2016 Weeks is an idiot. 1 Quote Beer. Damn Good Beer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redael Posted May 30, 2016 Author Share Posted May 30, 2016 as for the new party! that is the third party folks... the stripers! He doesn't represent the libertarian party It's a 1% difference and irrelevant to what I said as I am certain he'd try to suicide into Trump if given the opportunity. Gary Johnson is the usual Libertarian who believes in open borders (a view he shares with Clinton) which render the rest of his ideology dead, logic not being strong with Libertarians who even if by some miracle ever won the presidency would make millions of illegals citizens, have more get imported, and then be politically dead going forward as none of those people give one rat's arse about Libertarianism (they'd also kill Conservatism and make Nationalists extremely violent, good job that'd be). Thats just one thing that'll eliminate whats left of "NeverTrump" which is who Johnson has cynically been lying to, to try and get their support by playing up his government/business policies but not mentioning his immigration ideas (oh and being pro-choice too lets not forget) which would make any "True Conservative" as they label themselves flee for the hills. Man's a cuck. Libertarianism when not moderated is an ideology for cucks. He can join Our Dear Communist Friend in the cuckshed and leave it to an Alpha like Trump to tame the Hildabeast. He polled 9% last time and got 1% in the election, but perhaps he'll get 2% this time, still a yuge loser. Trump's demands were not met, and he has no obligation to debate a yuge loser who already made clear he was going to try and suicide himself for dear Hillary (lol if people think Bernie doesn't know he's done and this is something he can use to help Hillary by poisoning his supporters mind's by constantly calling Trump a racist). Ross Perot managed it, and as Clinton needs a "spoiler" I'm sure her rich friends will work hard to try and get Johnson on there. Johnson has said that republicans are the lesser of two evils compared to democrats, and he even used to be republican. He is pro open borders and pro choice beacuse that's his parties platform, and while I am pro-life most of his his beliefs are closer to mine than other . He is not going to suicide into trump as he said he thinks that neither party republican or democrat could defend themselves against libertarian beliefs. He opposes trump yes, but he also opposes Hillary. And he isn't trying to win the never trump crowd, he says he wants to sway independent voters. Anyways he is way more similar to trump than Hillary beacuse is isn't politically correct and he talks about how the current political system needs to be different. Quote Gary Johnson 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 Johnson has said that republicans are the lesser of two evils compared to democrats, and he even used to be republican. He is pro open borders and pro choice beacuse that's his parties platform, and while I am pro-life most of his his beliefs are closer to mine than other . He is not going to suicide into trump as he said he thinks that neither party republican or democrat could defend themselves against libertarian beliefs. He opposes trump yes, but he also opposes Hillary. And he isn't trying to win the never trump crowd, he says he wants to sway independent voters. Anyways he is way more similar to trump than Hillary beacuse is isn't politically correct and he talks about how the current political system needs to be different. Moot point as he won't be seeing Trump as a Republican but a Fascist and Racist. What was John Cuckson's first firing shot? Johnson described the real estate mogul's immigration policies as "just racist," particularly the Republican's call to deport 11 million undocumented people currently in the country. What do Libertarians religiously follow? Give you a hint. Globalism, sorry, "free trade". Which Hillary is fully for and Trump has made a big deal out of being against. Who is he trying to woo by saying how Conservative he is? NeverTrump, Renegade Jew's posse who seem to be getting behind the Libertarians to try and stop Trump (by helping Hillary). Ultimately the Libertarians, or at least those of Johnson's stripes, are never as smart or pure as they like to make themselves out to be. They try to appeal to Bernie lads with their stance on drugs, war, and "kindness" in regards to minorities. When those Bernie lads learn of the uncaring nature of Libertarians and how for globalism they are... boom, they run for the hills. They try to appeal to NeverTrump True cuckservatives with how uncaring they are and how for globalism they are. When those True Cuckservatives learn about the drugs, war, abortion, and other stances they also run for the hills. If they get up on a debate stage it will be used to try and suicide into Trump and you know what? It won't matter because Johnson is a joke and everybody knows it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 http://libertyhangout.org/2016/05/gary-johnson-shoots-himself-in-the-foot-throws-out-austin-petersens-gun/ Wow... He's a nasty guy. This man has the gall to attack Trump's character when he pulls moves like that. Very dishonest. Sad and Pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailor Jerry Posted May 31, 2016 Share Posted May 31, 2016 (edited) And Trump is such a model !@#$ ing citizen. So much crap comes out of that guys mouth, he could fill an entire landfill with that shit. It's hard to believe in this day and age that some people like clinging on to old, nasty, dirty douchbags. “I’m the worst thing that’s ever happened to ISIS.†— Trump to Barbara Walters in December 2015 after some worry he is playing into the terrorists’ hands “Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.†— at a rally in Charleston, S.C. in December 2015 “Did you read about Starbucks? No more 'Merry Christmas' at Starbucks. No more. Maybe we should boycott Starbucks." — at a rally in Springfield, Ill., in November 2015 “Sorry, there is no STAR on the stage tonight!†— via Twitter during the Democratic debate in October 2015 “Look at that face! Would anyone vote for that? Can you imagine that, the face of our next president?" — Trump says of opponent Carly Fiorina in a September 2015 interview with Rolling Stone. He later backtracked during the GOP debate saying: "I think she's got a beautiful face. And I think she's a beautiful woman." “We have to have a wall. We have to have a border. And in that wall we’re going to have a big fat door where people can come into the country, but they have to come in legally.†— on The Late Show With Stephen Colbert in September 2015 “I’m owned by the people! I mean, I’m telling you, I’m no angel, but I’m gonna do right by them!†— Rolling Stone in September 2015 “I think apologizing’s a great thing, but you have to be wrong. I will absolutely apologize, sometime in the hopefully distant future, if I’m ever wrong.†— on The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon in September 2015 “When these people walk in the room, they don’t say, ‘Oh, hello! How’s the weather? It’s so beautiful outside. Isn’t it lovely? How are the Yankees doing? Oh they’re doing wonderful. Great.’ [Asians] say, ‘We want deal!’†— discussing Asians at an August 2015 rally in Iowa “You haven’t been called, go back to Univision.†— dismissing Latino reporter Jorge Ramos at an Iowa rally in August 2015 “Heidi Klum. Sadly, she's no longer a 10." — New York Times article in August 2015 “You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes. Blood coming out of her… wherever.†— Trump of GOP debate moderator Megyn Kelly during a CNN interview in August 2015 Megyn Kelly: "You've called women you don't like 'fat pigs,' 'dogs,' 'slobs,' and 'disgusting animals'..." Trump: “Only Rosie O'Donnell.†— at the GOP debate in August “He’s not a war hero. He’s a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.†— of John McCain at a Family Leadership Summit in Ames, Iowa, in July 2015 “No more massive injections. Tiny children are not horses—one vaccine at a time, over time.†— via Twitter in September 2014 “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending the best. They’re sending people that have lots of problems and they’re bringing those problems. They’re bringing drugs, they’re bringing crime. They’re rapists and some, I assume, are good people, but I speak to border guards and they’re telling us what we’re getting.†— Trump, referring to Mexicans as rapists during a speech announcing his presidential candidacy in June 2015 “NBC News just called it ‘The Great Freeze’ — coldest weather in years. Is our country still spending money on the GLOBAL WARMING HOAX?†— via Twitter in 2014 “I have a great relationship with the blacks. I’ve always had a great relationship with the blacks.†— in an interview with Albany’s Talk Radio 1300 in April 2011 “Do you know that Hillary Clinton was a birther? She wanted those records and fought like hell. People forgot. Did you know John McCain was a birther? Wanted those records? They couldn’t get the records. Hillary failed. John McCain failed. Trump was able to get him to give something — I don’t know what the hell it was — but it doesn’t matter.†— during a CNN interview with Anderson Cooper about whether he was wrong for questioning President Barack Obama’s birthplace in July 2015 “Rosie O’Donnell’s disgusting both inside and out. You take a look at her, she’s a slob. She talks like a truck driver, she doesn’t have her facts, she’ll say anything that comes to her mind. Her show failed when it was a talk show, the ratings went very, very, very low and very bad, and she got essentially thrown off television. I mean she’s basically a disaster.†— adding fuel to his ongoing feud with the talk show host in 2006 “It’s like in golf. A lot of people — I don’t want this to sound trivial — but a lot of people are switching to these really long putters, very unattractive. It’s weird. You see these great players with these really long putters, because they can’t sink three-footers anymore. And, I hate it. I am a traditionalist. I have so many fabulous friends who happen to be gay, but I am a traditionalist.†— explaining his stance on gay marriage in a New York Times profile in May 2011 I’ve said if Ivanka weren’t my daughter, perhaps I’d be dating her.†— commenting on his entrepreneurial daughter’s attractiveness on The View in 2006 “All of the women on The Apprentice flirted with me — consciously or unconsciously. That’s to be expected.†— on the social dynamics of his hit NBC reality show, to the Daily News in 2004 “The line of ‘Make America great again,’ the phrase, that was mine, I came up with it about a year ago, and I kept using it, and everybody’s using it, they are all loving it. I don’t know I guess I should copyright it, maybe I have copyrighted it.†— Trump, claiming that he was the first person to coin the phrase in March 2015. Ronald Reagan used the slogan over 35 years ago during his campaign. Edited May 31, 2016 by Sailor Jerry 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.