who else is afraid donald trump will get elected?

[TomFoolery]

In the Crazy Shit Donald Trump Says segment for today, apparently the Donald says the only way to beat a terrorist is to become a terrorist.

Donald Trump Says He’d ‘Take Out’ Terrorists’ Families
http://time.com/4132368/donald-trump-isis-bombing/

Donald Trump said Wednesday that he’d like to “take out” the families of terrorists.

“I would knock the hell out of ISIS… [and] when you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families,” the Republican presidential candidate said on Fox & Friends. “I say ISIS is our number one threat, we have a president who doesn’t know what he is doing and all he’s worried about is climate change, he thinks climate change is something that’s going to go kill us.”

Trump, who regained his standing atop the GOP field in a new national poll out Wednesday, has enjoyed a boost thanks in part to heated rhetoric about Muslims following the terrorist attacks in Paris last month. He said he was concerned about civilian casualties but that he believed militants are using civilians as human shields.

[Unbeliever]

I know so many dumbasses ready to vote for him. I think our country is headed down a dark road indeed.

I'm afraid the Chump will get elected, but I doubt very much that he will, so I'm not overly worried.

:c002:

At least we don't have to look forward to a Santorum surge!

[Youssuf Ramadan]

Now if we could just get the UN to encourage all international disputes be settled by team paintball tournaments ...

I'd rather we take anyone who wants war, drop them in a big desert with all the conventional weapons they need, and let 'em fuck each other up good.  Whoever wins, nuke them too. In an ideal world the rest of us could then just get on with our lives.   

Meanwhile....... 

[FaithIsFilth]

Fortunately Faux "We're Calling This Shit" News condenses it down for them into a few scary sound bites ending with "They're commin' fer yer guns!", which they very much should, but never really will.

Maybe that's because they very much so want to come for the guns. Hillary is saying the US should be looking at what Australia did with mandatory gun buy-backs. It couldn't be any clearer at this point. A lot of these politicians do want to take the guns, so I don't see why this "you're a moron if you think politicians want to take away yer guns!" meme is still going when Hillary and others are openly talking about looking at how Australia does mandatory gun buy-backs. You're blind if you can't see that Democrats want to take guns and ban many guns. Who knows how much they are really going to be able to achieve as far as taking guns, but guns are clearly a big part of their agenda. I don't say this because I'm a 'gun nut' or Fox News fan either. I've never owned or fired a gun. I voted for Justin Trudeau, someone far more liberal than Bernie Sanders, and I voted for a Muslim in my area, so yeah, I'm no right wing guy in love with guns, but it's clear that the Democrats are super anti-gun and they have every intention of trying to take away people's rights when it comes to guns.

[Baruch]

Unfortunately the elite think that their chosen or unavoidable activity ... will bring retribution.  Naturally in that case, any smart elite would want to enslave the people.  Unfortunately, after the 60s, the idea that the Establishment was part of the problem died out in a sea of irrational partisan politics.

There are a lot of other ways that the DINOs and RINOs are gunning for the citizens ... and there are steps that you can take to mitigate these bad policies, even before they are attempted on real people.  Negative interest rates and elimination of cash and checks ... is a direct dictatorial measure.

[aitm]

I will say to one thing. If I was to engage in a war with islamic nut jobs, i would indeed consider taking out their families as well. If it is going to be war, then war is what it is going to be. Frankly I almost think the donald would be a pretty interesting study in how "nazism" came to amurica.

[aitm]

and so there is no mistake, let me clarify. If I was in a war with "you" I would not kill you. I would kill every single member of your family except your youngest and let them understand why their mother or father was to blame for this and then let you live. Of course I would also cripple you to the point where you could not retaliate nor could your child. Yeah, I can be like god.

[Baruch]

A society where because of conditions, everyone is feral, randomly robbing and killing each other ... is exactly what we see at the end of the Roman Empire.  The Roman Empire is the mafia ... with powerful Dons ... but when they fall out and society collapses ... you have the war of everyone against everyone else ... exactly what feral capitalism is ... but with money and lawyers rather than swords and spears.  And in those conditions, families don't survive, just the fittest young thugs and their gun mols.  Bonnie and Clyde.

[JBCuzISaidSo]

I'm not even a little afraid Trump will win. Frankly, I don't think any Republican has a chance. But that doesn't stop me from poo-pooing Trump to my elitist Republican friends. Because ha-ha!

Vote Sanders in the primary, so the general is already won.

[Baruch]

Elections these days are arranged ... to be 50.0001 in favor of A and 49.9999 in favor of B, so that only one voter has to be bribed to turn the outcome one way or another.  Too bad Chad wasn't hung in 2000 ;-(  I don't really believe that voters are that evenly divided.

[doorknob]

Don't under estimate the stupidity of humans is all I'm gonna say. If trump would win for some reason I may stop taking my pills and run away to live the rest of my life as an insane hobo eating from your garbage bins so I don't have to deal with anything. Ignorance is bliss after all.

[widdershins]

Maybe that's because they very much so want to come for the guns. Hillary is saying the US should be looking at what Australia did with mandatory gun buy-backs. It couldn't be any clearer at this point. A lot of these politicians do want to take the guns, so I don't see why this "you're a moron if you think politicians want to take away yer guns!" meme is still going when Hillary and others are openly talking about looking at how Australia does mandatory gun buy-backs. You're blind if you can't see that Democrats want to take guns and ban many guns. Who knows how much they are really going to be able to achieve as far as taking guns, but guns are clearly a big part of their agenda. I don't say this because I'm a 'gun nut' or Fox News fan either. I've never owned or fired a gun. I voted for Justin Trudeau, someone far more liberal than Bernie Sanders, and I voted for a Muslim in my area, so yeah, I'm no right wing guy in love with guns, but it's clear that the Democrats are super anti-gun and they have every intention of trying to take away people's rights when it comes to guns.

That is not even remotely correct.  They do not want to take "your guns" away.  Certain guns, yes, but taking "certain guns" is a far cry from taking "your guns", which implies all.  And they very much should be looking at some reasonable gun laws and taking certain guns away because it works.

As for Democrats being "anti-gun", that is also not true for the most part.  Most Democrats want common-sense gun laws, just like more than 80% of the country last I knew.  Guns for hunting and self defense, those can be defended with realistic, common sense arguments.  Assault rifles with 30+ round clips, not so much.  We don't need them for hunting.  We don't need them for self defense.  We want them because it makes our dicks feel bigger.  And you can take them without removing any rights whatsoever.  We have "the right to bear arms", not "the right to bear any weapon we feel we need".  I can't have a bazooka.  I can't have a nuclear missile.  Or any missile, for that matter.  I'm pretty sure a flame thrower is right out.  Artillery cannon, I've never seen one.  I can't make my own guns in my garage.  I can't saw off my shotgun.  And STILL I have the right to bear arms.  If we took away the weapons used in mass shootings and only those weapons I would STILL have the right to bear arms AND (and this is the important part) there would be fewer mass shootings!

The fact of the matter is that almost all of the pro-gun arguments are partially or completely false.  They are not coming for "the" guns, as even your non gun-nut argument plainly suggested.  They are coming for "some" guns, as past laws already have (I still don't have that RPG), and I very much hope they get them.  Enough is enough already.  How many grade schools need to be shot up before the NRA is finally ready to say, "You know what?  If I just go with the penis enlargement it won't just FEEL bigger, it will BE bigger!  I'm good with that."?

So no, you are NOT correct that Democrats are coming for "the guns" and a person is not automatically "anti-gun" if they want to remove SOME guns as anti-gun suggests doing away with the Second Amendment altogether, which very few extreme leftists are proposing, Hillary Clinton NOT being one of them as the Australian gun buyback did not take THE guns, it took SOME guns.  Your entire argument there was fallacious and disingenuous.  Want to try again with an honest argument?

[SGOS]

That is not even remotely correct.  They do not want to take "your guns" away.  Certain guns, yes, but taking "certain guns" is a far cry from taking "your guns", which implies all.  And they very much should be looking at some reasonable gun laws and taking certain guns away because it works.

As for Democrats being "anti-gun", that is also not true for the most part.  Most Democrats want common-sense gun laws, just like more than 80% of the country last I knew.  Guns for hunting and self defense, those can be defended with realistic, common sense arguments. 

I'm sorry, the rules are quite clear.  In all gun debates, no middle ground can be considered as valid for consideration.  Any argument which doesn't argue from the extremes and employ the fallacy of the excluded middle, will be invalidated by the judges.  You shouldn't have to be told this.  Everyone knows it.   

[wolf39us]

I hear Canada's nice

[widdershins]

I'm sorry, the rules are quite clear.  In all gun debates, no middle ground can be considered as valid for consideration.  Any argument which doesn't argue from the extremes and employ the fallacy of the excluded middle, will be invalidated by the judges.  You shouldn't have to be told this.  Everyone knows it.   

Sorry.  I should know better.