DescentBB

....realize they are being HAD?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/23/politics/ ... index.html

If Trump supporters haven’t figured out they are being had by now…they never will.

Spidey wrote:If Trump supporters haven’t figured out they are being had by now…they never will.

isn't that sad?

Is that a real question?

Why do you say they are being had? Since you don't understand Trump you fail to see his statement as tongue in cheek. His followers see it.

apparently, Spidey is correct. And, no, Spidey, the second question was rhetorical.

woodchip wrote:Why do you say they are being had? Since you don't understand Trump you fail to see his statement as tongue in cheek. His followers see it.

sure, I suppose this stuff is for chuckles, too, right? I swear, he's a Dem plant. In sequence, he has hitched the GOP brand to hating Hispanics, asians, the disabled, war veterans, women, and far too much time retweeting neo-nazi posts. But, seriously, you don't get that the joke is on YOU yet?

http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/donald ... eed/23652/

Daily News Bin? I don't see this in any main stream news source.

there are at least 30 outlets reporting this, and she was dancing around addressing it on CNN.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... -call-for/
conservative enough source?

apparently, these remarks were 2-3 years back by Ms Pierson, but the National Review made them public, and the question is why is she still in the employ of the Republican front runner, and how well do you present your party when she's been a public voice of the right wing of the GOP for years(since the Cruz campaign, where she went on welfare so she could quit her job and work for Cruz......this woman simply oozes irony).

callmeslick wrote:...these remarks were 2-3 years back by Ms Pierson...

After reading her defense I can see her point. There is definitely some missing context in those tweets and the sarcasm can't be detected outside of her sphere of influence, which of course is the best reason not to tweet something like that. It's extra weird since her job is PR. Then again, everyone is entitled to a slip-up now and then. I'm always willing to give people the benefit of the doubt, until they really prove themselves to be ignorant.

also this is funny:

National Review -- yes, THAT National Review -- is running a poll right now asking if the debate was better, worse, or the same without Trump. "Better" is winning with 80% of the total.

I'm honestly beginning to believe that his end-game is to run third party specifically to try to pull enough support from the Republican establishment to get Hillary elected.

vision wrote:

callmeslick wrote:...these remarks were 2-3 years back by Ms Pierson...

After reading her defense I can see her point. There is definitely some missing context in those tweets and the sarcasm can't be detected outside of her sphere of influence, which of course is the best reason not to tweet something like that. It's extra weird since her job is PR. Then again, everyone is entitled to a slip-up now and then. I'm always willing to give people the benefit of the doubt, until they really prove themselves to be ignorant.

And some people won't see the damage until it's far too late.

I thought that last debate was pretty good, except for the constant harping on ISIS.