Donald Trump

[Xier0]

How does one' answer questions when their own have been ignored.

I'll respond to you since Wins got his brain turned to mush by Spyder

Btw for those who think Terrorism relates to Islam; Islam, the word means Peace. There's always rotten apples in a pile of good.

Muslims have different interpretations of the Qur'an; hence why there are so many different sects, Sunni',(Majority) Shia (Shi'ite), Wahabi (Nearer extremist). This is similar to other religions too. Orthodox Jews, Reform Jews etc. Same for Christianity.

The reason why I mention this is, because what you may think or have heard or researched about; regarding the term Jihad and the context within the Qur'an, is not the same as it is for every other Muslim.

To me; Jihad defines what this person did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aitzaz_Hasan

Not by what ISIS is doing when claiming to be the representation of Islam; when majority of Islam's population is peaceful. That's like saying KKK is the perfect example of Christianity, it doesn't make sense.


If Muslims and Islam was that bad of a religion then why is majority of Islam still going about their own business ...with no relation to terrorism? Why are Muslims still being killed by terrorists? Do you think Muslims are immune to terror threats?

For that reason Trump is an absolute tool for wanting a ban on Muslims entering/in America. If anything his opinions is as bad as ISIS. And I'm genuinely glad for his disqualification.


Edit: Something I just can't seem to grasp the concept of; If the Qur'an states killing a single person, is like killing an entire population, and that suicide is a sin, then how can people still believe ISIS relates to Islam?

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

^This is a mostly factual and unbiased evaluation of Islam/IS/Terrorism. The fallback that there are "different interpretations" of Mohammad's actions/writings does not hold water. Mohammad owned slaves. He killed/conquered people. His writings tell people to fight nonbelievers who do not follow Islamic law. In order to "interpret" these things differently, you actually have to replace or ignore many parts of Mohammad's actions and teachings.

Now, there are a lot of people who say they are Muslims who don't follow Islamic law, or believe in Jihad, etc. However, Islamic fundamentalists, like IS, literally believe that Mohammad was a prophet, and that the Quran is the word of Allah.

Following takfiri doctrine, the Islamic State is committed to purifying the world by killing vast numbers of people. The lack of objective reporting from its territory makes the true extent of the slaughter unknowable, but social-media posts from the region suggest that individual executions happen more or less continually, and mass executions every few weeks. Muslim “apostates” are the most common victims. Exempted from automatic execution, it appears, are Christians who do not resist their new government. Baghdadi permits them to live, as long as they pay a special tax, known as the jizya, and acknowledge their subjugation. The Koranic authority for this practice is not in dispute.

To keep it on topic:

[YOUTUBE]kmqe4aLPiRo[/YOUTUBE]

^ I would assume Trump is poorly sourced, Ben Shapiro has some more extensive numbers here:

[YOUTUBE]g7TAAw3oQvg[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Wins]

I'll respond to you since Wins got his brain turned to mush by Spyder

Nop tim still here I'm just laughing at his opinions about the prophet and him agreeing to BAN ALL MUSLIMS but not just the Radical Muslims that aren't even muslims.

 

[Xier0]

[YOUTUBE]vZ7piCaqdf4[/YOUTUBE]

^ Stefan Molyneux has the best info on the subject

 

[YOUTUBE]vZ7piCaqdf4[/YOUTUBE]

^Molyneux probably the best sourced and qualified talk on this subject

It's certainly a strategical move, just like Germany invading Poland under Hitler was a strategical move, or how Italy invading Egypt under Mussolini was a strategical move.

It's certainly, however, not a fix, or rather one that isn't necessarily good. The guy made some good points in the video. He does mention that Trump plans on doing this until representatives can come to an understanding of why Jihadists hate America. All this does is add fuel to the fire of hate, and potentially radicalize resident Muslim Americans at a greater rate, still putting Americans at risk.

What happens if say, 2 more mass shootings/killings by Muslim Americans happen under Trump's reign as President in a short period of time? Would his plan of putting Muslim Americans in a database come to fruition? This again, would only radicalize more people, essentially making the fight against Islam that much harder.

 

[Wins]

It's certainly a strategical move, just like Germany invading Poland under Hitler was a strategical move, or how Italy invading Egypt under Mussolini was a strategical move.

It's certainly, however, not a fix, or rather one that isn't necessarily good. The guy made some good points in the video. He does mention that Trump plans on doing this until representatives can come to an understanding of why Jihadists hate America. All this does is add fuel to the fire of hate, and potentially radicalize resident Muslim Americans at a greater rate, still putting Americans at risk.

What happens if say, 2 more mass shootings/killings by Muslim Americans happen under Trump's reign as President in a short period of time? Would his plan of putting Muslim Americans in a database come to fruition? This again, would only radicalize more people, essentially making the fight against Islam that much harder.

EXACTLY! That is why i hate trump. He's just adding and basically asking for it. He's a fkin tv host he likes all this drama.

 

[Abe]

hope he doesn't win the election and I'm Canadian ....

 

I'll respond to you since Wins got his brain turned to mush by Spyder






http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

^This is a mostly factual and unbiased evaluation of Islam/IS/Terrorism. The fallback that there are "different interpretations" of Mohammad's actions/writings does not hold water. Mohammad owned slaves. He killed/conquered people. His writings tell people to fight nonbelievers who do not follow Islamic law. In order to "interpret" these things differently, you actually have to replace or ignore many parts of Mohammad's actions and teachings.

Now, there are a lot of people who say they are Muslims who don't follow Islamic law, or believe in Jihad, etc. However, Islamic fundamentalists, like IS, literally believe that Mohammad was a prophet, and that the Quran is the word of Allah.



To keep it on topic:

[YOUTUBE]kmqe4aLPiRo[/YOUTUBE]

^ I would assume Trump is poorly sourced, Ben Shapiro has some more extensive numbers here:

[YOUTUBE]g7TAAw3oQvg[/YOUTUBE]

You didn't even read the whole article I bet, neither did I because after reading first 2 pages they still didn't make any point.

As for you saying our Prophet owned slaves, where is your source ?
Did you know him personally ?
I bet your great... Grandfathers had more slaves than our prophet, that your family has killed more people than our Prophet.
Our Prophet set slaves free and banned slavery. Not the other way around.

Also everyone of your citations from the Quran can be proven wrongly interpreted by just adding the simple word "explanation" after it on google.

As for your radicalism vid, you're telling me they surveyed almost every muslim on the planet ?
Yeah right

All I ask (from everyone) is to do some research instead of instantly copying and posting something you found on foxnews,wikipedia, or search results after googling "islam promoted violence proof".

This is first and last reply.
Since I know you will rely with some more bullshit. Also off-topic.

 

[Logic]

Both parties have their fair share of "shady" representatives, saying democrats are shady isn't exactly an argument. Republicans want to cut taxes from the rich. That is the epitome of shadiness.




IRS 'Scandal' Fades As Documents Show Scrutiny Of Democratic Groups, ACORN Successors

I picked up the wrong story. If you're talking about this, it holds no merit.

The more shit you dig up on either of the party the better Trump will look. Can you understand this or should I write this again? And you wonder why I call you a dumb ****.

You never specified who "them" are. You said:

Who are these people? Political advisers? The same ones who encouraged him to go through with his plan of banning all Muslims from entry?

Again you fail to read and understand my sentence. Making calling you stupid justified because you can't understand a simple sentence.
Let me paint it out for you in RED:
NO IDEA,NO IDEA,NO IDEA,NO IDEA,NO IDEA,NO IDEA,NO IDEA!

Burden of proof

If you took the time to find the 4.5b figure and missed the 9bil figure then I suggest rethinking your sources of information. Pretty sure even the article I read about the topic said that they think Trump is overestimating his net worth. Don't even get it why you keep coming back to this point when it's not even relevant if it's 4,5,6,7,8 or 9 bil.

I never said he was a rapist, I said he had accusations against him, specifically from his ex-wife.

It'd be nice if you could stop with the strawman arguments.

If that's not trying to assasinate someones characte by linking dogshit articles then idk what is. You shouldn't have even mentioned this in the 1st place, cause it's making you look stupid for wasting my time on UNPROOVEN statements.

You just labeled democrats as being "shady as fuck". I never attacked him for being a fascist, I just said he was, with undeniable proof to support my claim. How exactly is that stupid?

This is plain character assasination by association to fascists, no facts, no nothing, just dogshit. If we took your dumb logic as fact then we could say that 2 people(twins for example) who look the same are the same person. Just because someone talks and looks like Hitler does not mean he will act like Hitler. Need more examples why using this sort of character assasination is not justified or is this enough?

It would have to be approved. Ever heard of judicial reviews?

And you wonder why I call you stupid.

"The legislative body is not required to approve any executive order, nor can it overturn an order. The best it can do if it doesn't like an executive order is to pass a law to cut funding for the order's implementation. But even then, the president can veto such a defunding law".
source

Source


What exactly are they spending the 1 billion on? If you're talking about undocumented immigrants, this is a poor example. Undocumented immigrants paid 13b in payroll taxes in the year 2013. They don't receive welfare or foodstamps.

I suggest investing some time in real journalism and watch this 30min video about immigrants. If you disagree with something then the links are in the description: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u1J6EEhkyM
In all honesty I doubt you will watch the video, because you are clearly not interested in reality.

It's not about respecting me, it's about following the rules of this forum. I'm going to give you an infraction for flaming since I've warned you prior to this reply. If you can't debate without being civil, don't debate at all.

Ohh no, he called me stupid for making stupid arguments, I better infract him! I hope you didn't get a panic attack for being called stupid. Libtards are so soft hearted
#YouAreStillStupid

 

[Logic]

It's certainly a strategical move, just like Germany invading Poland under Hitler was a strategical move, or how Italy invading Egypt under Mussolini was a strategical move.

It's certainly, however, not a fix, or rather one that isn't necessarily good. The guy made some good points in the video. He does mention that Trump plans on doing this until representatives can come to an understanding of why Jihadists hate America. All this does is add fuel to the fire of hate, and potentially radicalize resident Muslim Americans at a greater rate, still putting Americans at risk.

Again, you have no idea, yet you claim this will not work. Seems to be working for Israel or did we watch different videos?

What happens if say, 2 more mass shootings/killings by Muslim Americans happen under Trump's reign as President in a short period of time? Would his plan of putting Muslim Americans in a database come to fruition? This again, would only radicalize more people, essentially making the fight against Islam that much harder.

Then we have x amount less muslim americans. If this continues then soon there would be even less of these muslim americans etc. Because I know that you are slow when it comes to understanding things then let me explain this to you in more simple terms.

You are gaining weight because you eat 500 grams of chocolate every day and scientists tell you that if you stopped eating the 500 grams then you would start to lose weight. So you agree that you won't buy any more chocolate, but you have managed to store away a few tons of chocolate at your home. Since you won't just throw away the chocolate then you will slowly start to go through your reserved and during this time the problem of gaining weight will not go away. No more chocolate = no more gaining weight.

Gaining weight - shootings motivates by islam
Eating chocolate - dealing with the people causing these shootings
Buying chocolate - muslim immigrants
Stored chocolate - local radical muslims

So in long term this would reduce the number of radical muslims in the US and even if that doesn't fix the problem then we can just throw away the chocolate

The real reason why muslims are doing this shit is because other people are scared to face the reality. They fear to be called racist and stuff. If people would let muslims know that they will not tolerate this shit and will go to the extremes if they have to. Maybe that would start a change. It's not that we want to, but we are forced to do some questionable stuff in order to save the freedoms we cherish. Trump understands this and that's why some people like him, because they too are willing to do some questionable stuff in order to save the freedoms they cherish.

 

The more shit you dig up on either of the party the better Trump will look. Can you understand this or should I write this again? And you wonder why I call you a dumb ****.

How so?

Again you fail to read and understand my sentence. Making calling you stupid justified because you can't understand a simple sentence.
Let me paint it out for you in RED:
NO IDEA,NO IDEA,NO IDEA,NO IDEA,NO IDEA,NO IDEA,NO IDEA!

If you have "no idea" who these people are, what justifies you in voting for him if he has no political experience?

That's like me hiring an employee to be manager with no experience in that field, but instead trusting that person because I have a feeling they would know how to assess difficult situations based off an interview alone.

If you took the time to find the 4.5b figure and missed the 9bil figure then I suggest rethinking your sources of information. Pretty sure even the article I read about the topic said that they think Trump is overestimating his net worth. Don't even get it why you keep coming back to this point when it's not even relevant if it's 4,5,6,7,8 or 9 bil.

The burden of proof lies with someone who is making a claim, and is not upon anyone else to disprove.

"Your replies consist of inaccurate information and ad hominems."

If that's not trying to assasinate someones characte by linking dogshit articles then idk what is. You shouldn't have even mentioned this in the 1st place, cause it's making you look stupid for wasting my time on UNPROOVEN statements.

It honestly couldn't be worse than the rape apologist or the communist.

My reply was:

It's funny you say that, Donald Trump was accused of being a rapist, and a rapist apologist of sorts. Even went as far as saying to Mike Tyson "you should've paid off the victims to keep quiet".

This proves you didn't read the article I linked as it was in relation to what he said to Mike Tyson, and him being accused was a supportive argument as to why he would say that.

Continue to straw man more.

This is plain character assasination by association to fascists, no facts, no nothing, just dogshit. If we took your dumb logic as fact then we could say that 2 people(twins for example) who look the same are the same person. Just because someone talks and looks like Hitler does not mean he will act like Hitler. Need more examples why using this sort of character assasination is not justified or is this enough?

Fascism, especially in its early stages, is obliged to be antitheoretical and frankly opportunistic in order to appeal to many diverse groups. Nevertheless, a few key concepts are basic to it. First and most important is the glorification of the state and the total subordination of the individual to it. The state is defined as an organic whole into which individuals must be absorbed for their own and the state's benefit. This "total state" is absolute in its methods and unlimited by law in its control and direction of its citizens.

A second ruling concept of fascism is embodied in the theory of social Darwinism. The doctrine of survival of the fittest and the necessity of struggle for life is applied by fascists to the life of a nation-state. Peaceful, complacent nations are seen as doomed to fall before more dynamic ones, making struggle and aggressive militarism a leading characteristic of the fascist state. Imperialism is the logical outcome of this dogma.

Another element of fascism is its elitism. Salvation from rule by the mob and the destruction of the existing social order can be effected only by an authoritarian leader who embodies the highest ideals of the nation. This concept of the leader as hero or superman, borrowed in part from the romanticism of Friedrich Nietzsche , Thomas Carlyle , and Richard Wagner , is closely linked with fascism's rejection of reason and intelligence and its emphasis on vision, creativeness, and "the will."

Source

That's essentially Donald Trump in a nutshell. Feel free to prove otherwise. Me calling Donald Trump a fascist was in reply to:

If he manages to do the same as president then good for him, if he can't then pohoo. It honestly couldn't be worse than the rape apologist or the communist.

Meaning it could be worse, in fact, it being worse is imminent.

This is plain character assasination by association to fascists, no facts, no nothing, just dogshit

Once again, you contradict yourself by doing the exact same thing.

I don't like labeling people and then attacking them on stuff other people did

Who is the "rape apologist and the communist"? Who is "shady as fuck"?

And you wonder why I call you stupid.

"The legislative body is not required to approve any executive order, nor can it overturn an order. The best it can do if it doesn't like an executive order is to pass a law to cut funding for the order's implementation. But even then, the president can veto such a defunding law".

Judicial review is the doctrine under which legislative and executive actions are subject to review by the judiciary. A court with judicial review power may invalidate laws and decisions that are incompatible with a higher authority, such as the terms of a written constitution.

You aren't exactly a bright one, are you? Continue to call others stupid when you don't even read the articles you link.

I suggest investing some time in real journalism and watch this 30min video about immigrants. If you disagree with something then the links are in the description: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4u1J6EEhkyM
In all honesty I doubt you will watch the video, because you are clearly not interested in reality.

Anchor babies (who have birthright citizenship) receive benefits such as food stamps and welfare. Undocumented immigrant parents of those children are not always bound to staying, nor does them receiving benefits by association change anything. Anchor babies overtime outnumbers undocumented immigrants. We'd still be paying "X", regardless.

For illegal immigrant parents, being the parent of a U.S. citizen child almost never forms the core of a successful defense in an immigration court. In short, if the undocumented parent of a U.S.-born child is caught in the United States, he or she legally faces the very same risk of deportation as any other immigrant.

Source

Ohh no, he called me stupid for making stupid arguments, I better infract him! I hope you didn't get a panic attack for being called stupid. Libtards are so soft hearted
#YouAreStillStupid

Keep pushing it and it'll be a month ban from the forum.

Again, you have no idea, yet you claim this will not work. Seems to be working for Israel or did we watch different videos?

Israel is not America. Attempting to mimic other countries, or the laws of those countries do not always bare the same result, especially when there is decades of history that involves hate between two groups.

Then we have x amount less muslim americans. If this continues then soon there would be even less of these muslim americans etc. Because I know that you are slow when it comes to understanding things then let me explain this to you in more simple terms.

You are gaining weight because you eat 500 grams of chocolate every day and scientists tell you that if you stopped eating the 500 grams then you would start to lose weight. So you agree that you won't buy any more chocolate, but you have managed to store away a few tons of chocolate at your home. Since you won't just throw away the chocolate then you will slowly start to go through your reserved and during this time the problem of gaining weight will not go away. No more chocolate = no more gaining weight.

Gaining weight - shootings motivates by islam
Eating chocolate - dealing with the people causing these shootings
Buying chocolate - muslim immigrants
Stored chocolate - local radical muslims

So in long term this would reduce the number of radical muslims in the US and even if that doesn't fix the problem then we can just throw away the chocolate

The real reason why muslims are doing this shit is because other people are scared to face the reality. They fear to be called racist and stuff. If people would let muslims know that they will not tolerate this shit and will go to the extremes if they have to. Maybe that would start a change. It's not that we want to, but we are forced to do some questionable stuff in order to save the freedoms we cherish. Trump understands this and that's why some people like him, because they too are willing to do some questionable stuff in order to save the freedoms they cherish.

Americans are still at risk. Simply saying "Eh, we'll wait til the number of radicals decrease in numbers" is not a logical plan. The reason why Trump wants to ban Muslims from entry is to protect Americans. This doesn't solve that issue.

 

Both parties have their fair share of "shady" representatives, saying democrats are shady isn't exactly an argument. Republicans want to cut taxes from the rich. That is the epitome of shadiness.

Republicans do not want to cut taxes from the rich.
I understand what you're getting at, but the way something is worded is very important.

I've never understood how people are fine with giving away half of their weekly income to the government to be redistributed to the 40% of the country that are too lazy to work/dropped out of high school at age 16 because they were, "thuggin' too hard" to get an education.
Trump doesn't want to cut taxes from the rich, and the concept isn't shady. He wants to reduce the amount of money that people who work hard for a living have to sacrifice to pay for lazy folks who believe the government is there to support them.

Do some research, the United States government was never made to support its people financially, yet so many people believe so.
We aren't socialist, although we are heading that way on a b-line path.
It's like that one college-aged girl who was interviewed on CNN. She said that she'd be okay with having 99% of her income taxed and being redistributed if she made >$200k/year. LOL? What is she smoking, the meth stick? She'd be busting her ass to make $20k a year. Bull shit. There are too many young people who don't truly realize the way the world goes round.

 

And there's also this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74TFS8r_SMI

 

[Logic]

Republicans do not want to cut taxes from the rich.
I understand what you're getting at, but the way something is worded is very important.

I've never understood how people are fine with giving away half of their weekly income to the government to be redistributed to the 40% of the country that are too lazy to work/dropped out of high school at age 16 because they were, "thuggin' too hard" to get an education.
Trump doesn't want to cut taxes from the rich, and the concept isn't shady. He wants to reduce the amount of money that people who work hard for a living have to sacrifice to pay for lazy folks who believe the government is there to support them.

Do some research, the United States government was never made to support its people financially, yet so many people believe so.
We aren't socialist, although we are heading that way on a b-line path.
It's like that one college-aged girl who was interviewed on CNN. She said that she'd be okay with having 99% of her income taxed and being redistributed if she made >$200k/year. LOL? What is she smoking, the meth stick? She'd be busting her ass to make $20k a year. Bull shit. There are too many young people who don't truly realize the way the world goes round.

Amen brother!

There honestly isn't any point in trying to debate with Ghast, he lacks some very basic knowledge and has little to no clue on pretty much anything.
Like how do you debate someone who keeps asking you to repost old statements Fuck that. You can tell him that both dem's and rep's attack Trump and that bringing up dirt of either of the party only makes Trump look better and better but he will just not connect the dots. Most likely he is doing this intentionally. Sugarcoating is his speciality when it comes to hitting children, government abuse etc.

And there's also this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74TFS8r_SMI

This is actualy quite good and got a cheeky smile on my face

 

[Xier0]

Republicans do not want to cut taxes from the rich.
I understand what you're getting at, but the way something is worded is very important.

I've never understood how people are fine with giving away half of their weekly income to the government to be redistributed to the 40% of the country that are too lazy to work/dropped out of high school at age 16 because they were, "thuggin' too hard" to get an education.
Trump doesn't want to cut taxes from the rich, and the concept isn't shady. He wants to reduce the amount of money that people who work hard for a living have to sacrifice to pay for lazy folks who believe the government is there to support them.

Do some research, the United States government was never made to support its people financially, yet so many people believe so.
We aren't socialist, although we are heading that way on a b-line path.
It's like that one college-aged girl who was interviewed on CNN. She said that she'd be okay with having 99% of her income taxed and being redistributed if she made >$200k/year. LOL? What is she smoking, the meth stick? She'd be busting her ass to make $20k a year. Bull shit. There are too many young people who don't truly realize the way the world goes round.

Epic response. Ghast, if your definition of "shadiness" is that they are advocating for less theft through taxes, you clearly have a warped moral compass.

 

[Wins]

I'll respond to you since Wins got his brain turned to mush by Spyder






http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

^This is a mostly factual and unbiased evaluation of Islam/IS/Terrorism. The fallback that there are "different interpretations" of Mohammad's actions/writings does not hold water. Mohammad owned slaves. He killed/conquered people. His writings tell people to fight nonbelievers who do not follow Islamic law. In order to "interpret" these things differently, you actually have to replace or ignore many parts of Mohammad's actions and teachings.

Now, there are a lot of people who say they are Muslims who don't follow Islamic law, or believe in Jihad, etc. However, Islamic fundamentalists, like IS, literally believe that Mohammad was a prophet, and that the Quran is the word of Allah.



To keep it on topic:

[YOUTUBE]kmqe4aLPiRo[/YOUTUBE]

^ I would assume Trump is poorly sourced, Ben Shapiro has some more extensive numbers here:

[YOUTUBE]g7TAAw3oQvg[/YOUTUBE]

You didn't even read the whole article I bet, neither did I because after reading first 2 pages they still didn't make any point.

As for you saying our Prophet owned slaves, where is your source ?
Did you know him personally ?
I bet your great... Grandfathers had more slaves than our prophet, that your family has killed more people than our Prophet.
Our Prophet set slaves free and banned slavery. Not the other way around.

Also everyone of your citations from the Quran can be proven wrongly interpreted by just adding the simple word "explanation" after it on google.

As for your radicalism vid, you're telling me they surveyed almost every muslim on the planet ?
Yeah right

All I ask (from everyone) is to do some research instead of instantly copying and posting something you found on foxnews,wikipedia, or search results after googling "islam promoted violence proof".

This is first and last reply.
Since I know you will rely with some more bullshit. Also off-topic.

Don't worry about him chechen. He doesn't know what he's talking about 100% time. He doesn't read just copy/pastes. He can't even read a definition lol and i also think he doesn't even know about the america's history or what the white people have done. Let him post so he say to his friends that he is in a debate.

 

@chechen - the point of a survey is to NOT have to survey the entire planes population under study, chief.
A survey is used to make generalizations about an entire population based on a smaller sample of said population. Stay in school, kid.

 

Don't worry about him chechen. He doesn't know what he's talking about 100% time. He doesn't read just copy/pastes. He can't even read a definition lol and i also think he doesn't even know about the america's history or what the white people have done. Let him post so he say to his friends that he is in a debate.

What have, "the whites people done in America?"
Please elaborate.

 

[Xier0]

i also think he doesn't even know about the america's history or what the white people have done.

This isn't about races, this is about Muslims.

 

Republicans do not want to cut taxes from the rich.
I understand what you're getting at, but the way something is worded is very important.

I've never understood how people are fine with giving away half of their weekly income to the government to be redistributed to the 40% of the country that are too lazy to work/dropped out of high school at age 16 because they were, "thuggin' too hard" to get an education.
Trump doesn't want to cut taxes from the rich, and the concept isn't shady. He wants to reduce the amount of money that people who work hard for a living have to sacrifice to pay for lazy folks who believe the government is there to support them.

Do some research, the United States government was never made to support its people financially, yet so many people believe so.
We aren't socialist, although we are heading that way on a b-line path.
It's like that one college-aged girl who was interviewed on CNN. She said that she'd be okay with having 99% of her income taxed and being redistributed if she made >$200k/year. LOL? What is she smoking, the meth stick? She'd be busting her ass to make $20k a year. Bull shit. There are too many young people who don't truly realize the way the world goes round.

Jeb bush's tax plan is a large tax cut for the rich.

Source

Donald Trump's tax plan is a large tax cut for the rich.

Source

Marco Rubio's tax plan is a large tax cut for the rich.

Source

Ted Cruz's tax plan is a large tax cut for the rich.

Source

Ben Carson's tax plan is a large tax cut for the rich.

Source

Do some research, the United States government was never made to support its people financially, yet so many people believe so.

Tell me where I said the government was made to support it's people financially. EVERYONE SHOULD BE TAXED BASED ON THEIR INCOME. The rich shouldn't receive a set tax percentage across the board that doesn't take into account the wealth they're receiving.

Amen brother!

There honestly isn't any point in trying to debate with Ghast, he lacks some very basic knowledge and has little to no clue on pretty much anything.
Like how do you debate someone who keeps asking you to repost old statements Fuck that. You can tell him that both dem's and rep's attack Trump and that bringing up dirt of either of the party only makes Trump look better and better but he will just not connect the dots. Most likely he is doing this intentionally. Sugarcoating is his speciality when it comes to hitting children, government abuse etc.

Says the guy who contradicts himself every time he replies with inaccurate information. :laugh:

Epic response. Ghast, if your definition of "shadiness" is that they are advocating for less theft through taxes, you clearly have a warped moral compass.

It's called logic and common sense. You get taxed based on your amount of income.

 

[Xier0]

It's called logic and common sense. You get taxed based on your amount of income.

EVERYONE SHOULD BE TAXED BASED ON THEIR INCOME. The rich shouldn't receive a set tax percentage across the board that doesn't take into account the wealth they're receiving.

You can't just proclaim something is "logic and common sense" without proving it first. How could you possibly consider it permissible that anyone be forced at gunpoint to pay taxes? It is theft, which is clearly immoral.