Hey Veeky Forums so I found this and apparently trump is the emperor of mankind... Unfortunately

Trump's actual policies are pretty sound. The reason he's gotten so big is what he represents: people are tired of PC bullshit and Trump is the only one who doesn't care about it.

>Unfortunately

You are out of your mind. Romney was a bible thumping nutjob.

Trump wants to... Deport illegals or something. Really nothing particularly different from normal rhetoric of US politics.

Deport illegals, impose tariffs, etc.

So, y'know, not opening the US' bucker for the mexicans to plunder.

They weren't so much Romney supporters as people who really, really hated Obama. /pol/ was infuriated after the 2012 election, and that was when they really ramped up shitposting on other boards.

If Trump has policies, he's done a good job hiding it for the majority of his campaign. The reason he's gotten so popular is because he's presented himself as NOT a politician and AVOIDING talking about actual policy as much as possible. (There's a difference between talking about issues and talking about policy.) His campaign has been the dirtiest, playground mud-fling-iest one in recent memory and made it about personality, not policy.

THAT'S what his core appeal is, that's he's "not a politician". He's the candidate riding not on substance but on a wave of dissatisfaction raised against the previous administration and the general partisan system of the nation. What Trump actually says or believes is, in many ways, meaningless to his voters. His campaign is fuelled by negative, not positive cohesion of his voter base. Sure, the motto is "make America great" but the talking points are all about tearing people down - accusing people of rape and murder, denying people as being 'really American', going after people's families; Benghazi, emails, birth certificate (but not his own tax returns). He's pointing in Washington's general direction and going "see that person or thing you hate? I hate them/it too, hypothetical voting human, buy my steaks".

It wasn't for MONTHS into his campaign that we actually saw anything like proposed policies and even those were very light on the ground. Unsurprisingly they were also very "un-Trump" (based on what he was saying before and the core bases he wanted to appeal to) because his whole campaign is based on a constructed persona - not issues or policies, but media manipulation.

Eh, it's not really his plans, it's more how he presents them. As you said, Romney is a bible thumping nutjob, but that's come to be accepted as standard to getting into office. Trump, strangely enough, seriously does act like he's Emps or something, like everything he's going to do is going to fix mankind for good, while what he's actually doing is just accelerating stuff that's already happening and saying crazy-ass shit that he knows will get him votes.
We all might be tired of PC bullshit, but that's no reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Once again, /pol/ was right. I lost any ounce of respect for Obama after the thuglivesmatter bullshit he participated in.

> implying Trump will win
Pretty much the only people that like him are white men, mostly with limited education. There simply aren't enough of them to elect a president on their own.

What is the baby in this bathwater of PC, pray tell? What good has it actually done us?

You mean the media hides his policies. He mentioned tariffs a while ago. His healthcare stuff is also surprisingly sound, and approaches a middle ground of ideology.

Beyond that though, I don't really care. /pol/ makes goofy sometimes funny memes with Trump shopped into a pic like OP's pic.

Trump's opposition invades every board and brings him up out of nowhere from a topic unrelated. Trump has become an anti-intellectual magazine pop culture talk point and one side sounds more retarded than the other...

Why the fuck is this thread still up?

>We all might be tired of PC bullshit, but that's no reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Is there a baby though? If there is it's probably been totally ruined by the AIDS water and should be put out of its misery.

Up here Because it is not cancer and I was pointing out something in the pic that I thought would be funny and was not making or really trying to make a /pol/ statement

Well, I'm not talking about PC, I'm just talking about in general. I'm saying that even if the whole PC culture is basically shit, there's no reason to go the complete opposite direction, which is just as bad
Trump is not a middle-ground candidate, no matter how much he claims he is, unless you consider "making things better for ME" middle ground

That's the problem, user. There IS no middle ground candidate. We either get the same bullshit or we get some potentially new bullshit.

Frankly, I'd be all for new bullshit. If only because at least I'm not the devil in the new bullshit.

Ants can't vote.

Op here now this is slowly turning into /pol/ cancer sigh was nice while it lasted

>sigh

You started the thread with Trump. It was /pol/ from the get go.

>Trump is not a middle-ground candidate

Good, middle-ground just pleases no one. People are getting tired of leftist thought police and want to try something else.

>which is just as bad

But we've already had right thought police
Who else is there?
Environmentalist thought police?
Socialist thought police?
Vaporwave thought police, forcing me to listen to shitty music?

Well it is. Do you seriously want to go through another 8 years of Bush Jr.-level politics or lower?

> But we've already had right thought police
Leftist bullshit. The right is about the freedom to express ones beliefs, because it is through the open discussion of ideas and problems that we can reach solutions. It's the left that seeks to suppress anyone who would violate their "safe space" with "hate speech."

gladly

40k fanboys are dumb
trump fanboys are dumb

no wonder the 2 stuck together since the start

>But we've already had right thought police
The fact that there is a left thought police proves your statement wrong.

Better that than the community organizer in chief.

>But we've already had right thought police

Trump is not thought police, people like him because he'll say whatever.
Right wing politics as a whole has less ability to be able to become thought police because it's about individuals rather than collectives.

Non-american here: Bush was more fun.

Yes. At least it would mean an end to the constant race-baiting, anti-white policies, and rampant lynchings of police that Obongo has cultivated

i wonder who made this the case

Trump has the GOP nomination and Sanders is going to win the dem primary. If they let it stand, Sanders wins and the Republican party probably splits. If they give the nomination to Hillary anyway, Trump wins and both parties split.

I'm almost giddy at the thought of a political system with more than two "choices" that are both actually the same thing.

Well, there's the fact that women are slightly more than 50% of the electorate. That's a big part of it.

Sanders is currently trailing, and has more or less moved back from the nomination in favor of trying to get other concessions out of the DNC. He won't get the nomination. Hillary will still win, because the GOP somehow managed to find and nominate the one figure in the country who is even less popular than she is.

Memes aside, Trump is the moderate candidate. He says stuff to rile up the conservatives, but his actual policies are middle-ground.

If he does what he says, he'll make a good president. Better than another Clinton, that's for sure.

I guess. I'm just remembering everybody complaining because they said they hated it.

You don't want that.

Trust me, I'm Canadian. Our system gave us a "liberal majority" that no on wanted.

>implying Clinton hasn't already bought her way to the office

Hillary is only winning in red states because she's literally Hitler and cousinfuckers like that shit. There's over 700 delegates to be had on June 7, and the vast majority of those will go to Sanders. Sanders will probably win, but either way it's going be within 100 delegates.

>194x259
What is this? A picture for minorities?

Doesn't the electoral college exist specifically to stop people who are popular but potentially disruptive to the status quo getting elected through pure mob rule?

The rise of /pol/ in the years since has shifted the whole site to the right. So while the people back then did hate the Bush years, they've since largely been overtaken by a larger and more vocal group that believes that Obama is infinitely worse.

Trump has already explicitly advocated strengthening libel laws and lessening media freedoms to prevent people from criticising him.

Whether this is a sincerely held belief (one which is, no word of hyperbole, a fascist one) or whether he's pandering to a demo that hates "LAMEstream media", neither option is good. Either he's a censor or he lies to your face. Given how he's done complete 180's about his campaign financing and reproductive rights issues, it's probably the latter. Which still isn't good.

And those people are correct.

Here's the thing: I heard that "the religious right was the norm!" but if it was then I never fucking saw it. Everything from childhood to adulthood has been leftist as hell.

Delegates are distributed proportionally for democrats, so Hillary isn't going to get completely shut out. And even if Sanders got 700 more delegates, he would still fall short. He's not going to get that many, even if he does get most of them. He needs 850 of the remaining 939 to get over the top, and there's no way he's getting more than 90% of the vote.

...

>no word of hyperbole, a fascist one
>reproductive rights

kek you're obviously extremely biased

Yeah, they support family right alongside murdering large numbers of people for disagreeing with them politically.

>Trump has already explicitly advocated strengthening libel laws and lessening media freedoms

I don't give a shit about big media, what I care about is what people talk about. I don't want to go to jail because I make a tweet that offends someone.

Better call the thought police on me then.

>he doesn't
Technically yes, although that's not what it was made for

Op here and so a cancer that I created grows in the sound of silence

Then maybe you should give a shit about the laws that would explicitly make your media punishable. This is what Trump explicitly has said he wants to do with the new media and libel, to be able to sue people who criticise him and "make lots of money" from it. So, yeah, you might end up in court for tweeting something that Dear Leader doesn't like.

Under-rated posts.

Libel only applies to lies, so only leftists have to worry about that. Seems fine to me.

not a leftist so I don't do that, your secret's safe with me

A third of Clinton's delegates are superdelegates, who are allowed to change their vote. And they will, once it becomes clear that Sanders is the more popular candidate. Especially since Trump is universally more popular than Clinton, which makes it pretty clear that she has no chance of winning the general election.

>the right doesn't lie
This is some pretty nice bait, peruvian nightcrawler?

Libel only sometimes applies to falsehoods, and US law has several statutes that don't count that defense against libellous statements which are "tending to blacken the memory of those dead" or "expose the natural defects of one who is alive".

>that's not what it was made for
I think it was, the american founding fathers were pretty clear about not wanting mob rule and tyranny of the majority, I'm just trying to find quotes - what I've mainly found is them wanting to avoid the mistakes of older, simpler direct democracy

> who are allowed to change their vote.
They won't. They are the party elite, and Hillary has been their buddy for a lot longer than Sanders. Yeah, it sucks, but that's party politics for you.

> And they will, once it becomes clear that Sanders is the more popular candidate.
They're not making their decision based on who the country likes. They are deciding based on who they like. They're not beholden to anyone, and they'll pick who they please.

> Especially since Trump is universally more popular than Clinton, which makes it pretty clear that she has no chance of winning the general election.
Clinton still leads over Trump. Her lead isn't as good as Sanders is, but it's still more than enough to win. Normally she would be a weak candidate, but the GOP somehow managed to pick someone even worse.

I kek'd

Trump leads in every swing state and overall. A vote for Hillary is effectively a vote for Trump.

> Trump leads in every swing state and overall.
Source?

Why would a white man not vote for Trump at this point?

Because he's a con man. He has a long track record of taking support, using it to enrich himself and himself alone, and then leaving his supporters holding the bag.

THat's not an argument you dumb faggot, and I'm not even a Trump fan.

And by the way if you actually got your own information instead of gobbling up what the MSM spoon feeds you, you might have been able to see how minorities and women of all colors and creeds support Trump.

But its easy to tell you're a brainwashed peasant, probably a gommie, too.

I'm not American and I don't know anything about American politics, but I thought that assertion was interesting so I went and did some research. I got as far as the first swing state before I realised is completely wrong. Ohio saw Clinton win overall, and Kasich got a higher percentage than Trump (46 v 35).

But that's first hand research, take it with a grain of salt.

Better someone who won't help at all than shillary and even more white genocide.

Different polls show different things. The media changes its report every airing.

Besides, the polls aren't too valuable for this election, I think. Trump literally came out of nowhere and invigorated a population that had sat out of polls for so long that politicians had forgotten them.

I did some searching. Turns out OP is correct.
I haven't followed the US elections closely this year.

From what I know of the candidates, I know that Hillary is the definition of scum gunt.

I hope my US brethren across the pond, don't have to endure her stay at the helm.

Yeah I'm going to stop you there faggot.

>Le Trump isn't serious candidate meme.
>N-no policies guise!
>ALL his policies and platforms posted on his site.
>Crying about mud flinging.
>Totally ignores the Federalist part and their rivals, ignores Jacksonian Era politics.

Yeah shut up. I don't care if I'm biting bait, but don't act retarded without expecting consequences.

> Besides, the polls aren't too valuable for this election, I think. Trump literally came out of nowhere and invigorated a population that had sat out of polls for so long that politicians had forgotten them.

Trump says that, but there's no data to support it. The voters that he's energized are people who have been consistent GOP supporters dissatisfied with the GOP elite's inability to deliver on their promises. These are people who have been involved, but have seen nothing for their efforts, and are pissed about that.

As for different polls showing different things, that's why we have aggregated polls. And those still show Clinton beating Trump both over all and in critical swing states like Florida and Ohio. In fact, the only individual polls that put Trump in the lead are Fox and Rasmussen, which aren't exactly the most reliable. Remember, people at Fox were absolutely convinced that Romney was going to win in 2012 and that it wouldn't even be close. It played out quite differently in reality.

Trump is a scum gunt
Hillary is a scum gunt
Bernie is kindoff scum
Jeb Bush was kindoff scum

It sounds to me like hte best choices are allready defeated/almost defeated.

I'm dutch btw

>Only ignorant WHITE MALES.
>Conveniently forgets in the U.S that whites are a large majority.

Even in your weak argument you ignore reality.

Since we're talking about the US election. What happens with the Democrats if the FBI puts forth criminal charges against Hillary for that e-mail bullshit?
Does Sanders win by default, or can Hillary elect someone to run in her place?

That picture is so beautiful.

In fact the seven swing states go:
State - Repub Winner (Most Votes)
Ohio - Kasich (Kasich)
Colorado - No Republican data (Sanders)
Iowa - Cruz (Cruz)
Nevada - Trump (Trump)
New Hampshire - Trump (Sanders)
Virginia - Trump (Clinton)
Florida - Trump (Clinton)

So, interestingly, the only swing state where Trump won both the Republican primary and achieved the most votes overall was Nevada. Your political system is fascinating.

But communists aren't human user.

Isn't trump very pro-Israel?

>Kindof.
>The communist and Guac merchant Bush.
>Dutch aware of U.S politics.

Mate, just don't even try. This topic ain't going to good for ya.

White males are not a majority. Whites are 75% of the population, but white men are only half of that. So about 32%. And only the less educated of those, so we're already below 30%.

Now you are just pulling my toe there boy, no Bush can be called a communist.

No. Not after they made disparaging comments about him.

He cancelled all his trips and business meetings in Israel until the end of the political campaign.

Bernie mate. The communist is Bernie.

All candidates are pro Israel. You don't go far in U.S politics, if you aren't.

He is pro/anti Israel based on what they say about him. Not what they do, not whether or not they help the US, but based on what they say about him. Classy.

white men are essentially forced to vote for trump.
the other choice is a party that hates whites, and hates men, and seeks to enslave/parasitize them via taxation, quotas, and family courts.

trump is going to win. hillary is one of the weakest candidates the democrats have ever fielded, and he has rapiddly closed the voting gap and just yesterday showed +5 in a national poll.

Isn't Trump the first Republican candidate to be this popular with non-whites in decades, if ever?
Hillary will still get the brunt of those votes, but Trump will steal more of them than any other GOP candidate could.

> Isn't Trump the first Republican candidate to be this popular with non-whites in decades, if ever?

No. Romney, McCain, and Bush Jr. were all more popular with non-whites. In the first two cases, it still wasn't enough.