Donald Trump is an autocrat by large. That is customary of a business man who has significant controlling interest and ultimate authority. I'm an autocrat of a sole-proprietorship.
This is customary in business.
From face value, we are all dictators but are we the same as Hitler or Pol Pot or Idi Amin Dada or Magabe.
This doesn't mean we would run the country like those premium grade a--holes. Come on, man?
Those laws were from before the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution when completely made those Exclusion laws unenforceable and illegal.
It was dropped. None of those laws are enforced. It sat on the books until 1926 because they were not prioritized because when the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, it was nullified.
Nobody bothered to remove it until at some point in time, they felt the need to clean up the laws that were no longer enforced and just cluttered things.
It was officially repealed in 1926 during a legislative cleanup. Already by that time, it wasn't actively enforced.
Balkins you're a birther?! You're outside of your damn mind. And you continue to defend trump. He's an embarrassment, a clown, and an idiot.
Aug 27, 15 10:30 pm ·
·
Remember, we are not living in 1840s or 1850s. Seriously, do you think I care about a long gone and relatively short-lived legislation before I was born? The law was moot and Unconstitutional by the time of the 14th Amendment was adopted and 1867 and pretty much unenforced by 1870 except an occassional incident here and there.
Back in a time where blacks were seen as slaves and therefore not as citizens of the country. We are talking HOW long ago?
You dug up some historical footnote of a VERY VERY long time ago. Laws before your grandparents were born. Don't go punishing me because I am 'white' because of something that happened in U.S. history long before I was born and had nothing to do with. I have not oppressed people of African ethnicity. I live in Oregon because it is a nice and beautiful state.
"How many Presidents of the United States do you think we had that were racist, or xenophobic or misogynist?"
That's my point- you gave it a pass earlier, and you don't care now because you don't think it affects you. It's a narrow perspective, one that impacts people for generations.
Aug 27, 15 10:54 pm ·
·
rob_c,
I defend the rights of the U.S. Constitution for ALL American citizens. I defend the right of every natural born American, who has lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years and is 35 years old or older by the time of general elections to have the right to run a presidential campaign to be the President of the United States.
That means.... ANYONE who meets the Constitution requirements for someone to be the President of the United States.
From that point, YOU can choose who you wish to vote for and so shall I.
You say he is an idiot? Substantiate.
You say he is an embarassment? Substantiate.
You say he is a clown? Substantiate.
Right now, you are giving me your opinion. Okay. I will take it as such.
I argue that everyone has moments that are clownish, idiotic or embarrassing in there lives.
I can play devil's advocate and point things that he does have that can counter your argument. I never said, I will necessarily vote for him. There is a possibility but this is largely due to uncompelling aspects of those candidates. What they represent and want to do in cases are concerning.
Aug 27, 15 10:57 pm ·
·
Marc,
Just because someone becomes President doesn't mean they have the power to remove the rights of the U.S. Constitution and the Amendments.
A President of the U.S. is not a dictatorship. They don't have that authority.
They do have limits and one of them is the President can not pass Constitutional Amendments without the approval of both Houses.
There is a checks and balance system.
I do care but I am not at a panic because of the candidates or Donald Trump. Why should I fear him as the Presidential candidate?
NOTE TO BIG GREEN HEAD: could we possibly get another button -- similar to the "exclude academia" button -- to hide political threads for the next, say, 18 months?
I don't think I can stand the idiotic political debates that undoubtedly will attend the upcoming presidential election.
The average lifetime earnings of someone with a bachelor degree are more than $2 million higher than that of someone with only a high school diploma. Even if your starting salary were minimum wage (which it shouldn't be, as starting salaries for architecture currently average just under $20 an hour) your earning potential down the road would be considerably higher than what you've been making for the last several years by your own accounts. On the one hand you likely wouldn't recoup some of that difference at this point, because you're 15+ years into your prime earning potential already. On the other hand it will be that much more important for you to have higher earning potential, as your remaining working years are so much shorter and you're going to be playing catch up in retirement savings.
Do you want to live in your parents' attic and subsist on ramen noodles forever? If so, you're right, that doesn't take a college degree. But it doesn't qualify you to be dispensing academic advice, and your educational deficiencies make it difficult to follow your posts, about politics or otherwise.
you can get an education without getting a degree. you wouldn't have the degree of course, but you could learn more or less the same sorts of things. as we've used steve jobs as an example, he audited classes in such a way as to get the education but didn't get the credit or degree. you can't stamp drawings without a license, but there isn't any reason you couldn't make a decent living as a building designer. if you worked hard to educate yourself.
what i would suggest is to proofread your posts more, and cut out at least 3/4 of the text. say what you feel is important to be said without repeating it so many times. do some research into what formed your opinion on topics such as 'trump for president,' and lastly just stay out of constitutional law where constitutional law is not applicable and is not relevant to the topic at hand. there's nothing wrong with having an opinion on constitutional law or talking about constitutional law, but the reason trump is a joke and a shitty candidate for president, and the reason your support for trump is mocked, has nothing to do with constitutional law.
archinect should have a pop-up that detects when you type in all caps that says 'you switched out of cad.' i doubt big green head is reading this thread, but if someone wants to pass that along....
I would add: 1. Wikipedia is never an acceptable source. Never. 2. When you collect snippets from other sites to assemble into opinions, history lessons, and summaries of laws: always attribute credit, and always paraphrase into complete sentences, or at least into cogent phrases. Your cut-and-paste method results in contradictory statements and illegible gibberish. 3. Do some self-study on basic grammar. Nobody expects formal academic writing on an online forum, but it's always difficult to follow your posts that use words incorrectly in ways that affect meaning.
it would still be awesome. i'm sure you would still be allowed to post in caps, it would just be a friendly reminder in case it was not an intentional gesture. also, it would sort of be a reminder that this is an architect's forum, rather than a forum for people looking into investment ideas. sort of like an inside joke.
best idea i've had in a long time. let's run with it.
Good points. I am not supporting Trump to be the President of the United States anymore than any American citizen's right. My point with the Constitution is it applies to the legal requirements for a person to be President of the United States. It is the sole-law on the matter. Every person can judge the candidates however they feel. Some are missing my point very sadly. It isn't necessarily to support Trump as much as the law and for all people. I said enough on that.
As for:
you can get an education without getting a degree. you wouldn't have the degree of course, but you could learn more or less the same sorts of things. as we've used steve jobs as an example, he audited classes in such a way as to get the education but didn't get the credit or degree. you can't stamp drawings without a license, but there isn't any reason you couldn't make a decent living as a building designer. if you worked hard to educate yourself.
Yes. I'd still paying the same amount of money. How well does the return on investment work? There are a few strategies at work. In the building design business, I would have to do more to bring cash flow in. Biggest problem with service / consultant based businesses is a lot of your business depends on end client because you need people in need of your service. Right? But not just that. You need people in need of your service *WITH* money. Right? Clients with no money is not a client but a time waste.
Clients with little money needs an affordable way to have the design service work delivered to them. Clients with substantial amount of money can afford more personalized services for custom home design. As we move past the recession, the economy will improve in time. Sure, with dips every so often but not necessarily as deep cutting at the Great Recession. Anything can happen. I know. I am just being optimistic.
Actually, you can 'stamp' drawings. You just can't stamp them with an architect stamp without being licensed.
Everyone is taking about him, exactly as is intended. Here is my theory: He is not a serious candidate but a wind breaker, expending energy deflecting the media attention and helping to position the other candidates to make a stronger run later in the game.
DONALD TRUMP AS A CANDIDATE HAS BEEN PURPOSEFULLY CREATED BY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!
The fact that you are all talking about him is exactly what republicans want. Not only does it keep scrutiny off other candidate but all of his over the top rhetoric makes other conservative candidate seem moderate by comparison, which helps engage the swing vote. Meanwhile democratic candidate has to weather the full campaign while the republican candidates get to draft behind trump. Its pure NASCAR Strategy. Or a cycling domestique if you prefer that analogy.
MARK MY WORDS: Trump will fade quickly as soon as the primary races start.
It's a smart strategy and incredible dangerous for democrats who get drawn into the the "look how ridiculous he is conversation" because no one is talking about how ridiculous the other real candidates are.
Honestly, there are so many questions about Trumps opinions, morals and potential to cause serious harm to this country. Do we want to elect someone who can cause nuclear war in the first week of office? Best to be prudent and elect someone else.
Wrong, It's a trap! Your being played. Nobody considers him a real candidate. His entire campaign gained a bunch of traction because the "GOP Power Ranking" kept saying he was in the lead. so people payed attention, he said outlandish stuff which was his job, and the media ate it all up. Everyone likes to be outraged.
Its a purposeful strategy. And your all playing right into it.
So all this hype over trump started with "30 smart political minds" Gee who could they be?
I bet I could find 30 smart architectural minds who would say some Archinect troll is the greatest architect of our time right now...Let the media run with it, let him talk a lot, say some ridiculous things, it doesn't really mater what, the more ridiculous and pompous the better .......
When it comes time for people to hire an architect all of you look really appealing by comparison.
Trump is obviously smarter than all of you, because he's the front-runner to win the Presidency in 2016 despite having spent very little money on his campaign, outmaneuvering the entire political establishment, and having gotten all your panties in a twist in the process.
jonathan would suggest he's not really the front runner. . .
so you're saying trump is smart because he can whip a rabble into a frenzy by saying stupid and often racist or misogynistic things? from my perspective it doesn't sound so much like he's smart, but rather the people supporting him are just really dumb. i guess it's 6 of one, half a dozen of the other though.
I'm saying he's smart because he wants to be President and is going to accomplish that despite being opposed by two wealthy and corrupt political dynasties, most of the political establishment, most of the media, most of the chattering class, and having spent only a small fraction of the money his opponents are spending against him.
If you think that accomplishment is dependent on either his or his supporters' stupidity, then perhaps the person you ought to be accusing of diminished mental faculties is yourself.
American Psycho is a great movie because it shows that the traits of a maniac also happen to lead to a successful career on wall street. I would argue that this also applies to politics.
The best thing I can say about Trump is that he's very good at accomplishing what he set out to do.
Unfortunately for us that goal is merely to draw the most attention to himself. He wants to be president because he thinks it's a trophy to be won, not a job to be held responsibly. If - god forbid - he actually made it into the white house he'd likely crumple under his own weight within a few months.
I don't want a president who wants to be president for the fame it carries.
"I can't stomach any of the candidates, but trump is a clown" _ Yes this exactly is how every potentially moderate voter feels. And that's is exactly why trump is the perfect pawn.
Lately the republican party has had a real problem courting moderate swing voters. It's a result of all that working up the base talk and the obstructionist tactics of the tea party. Moderate voters see the party trending more conservative and less attractive.
To fix that without alienating the base you promote a candidate who is totally over the top. An eccentric conservative, laissez faire, far right rich old white guy, who talks the talk about no compromise, win at all costs, the baloney that gins up the bases. But such a candidate would never have a chance of winning because they cannot court the moderate vote.
When it comes time to get real, out come the same old republicans. Nothing has changed, same old obstructionist, divisive, and conservative policies no more moderate than they were before. But now by comparison they appear more moderate, more reasonable. Electable.
The whole time your fictitious candidate is out front your opponent is also forced to campaign. That's an extra 6 months at least that people are scrutinizing your false candidate along with your opponents front runner.
Its a way of creating change for the party without actually changing anything.
Its all about managing peoples perceptions. I would be curious to know how many Anti trump people. People on this thread included will end up voting republican when they had previously voted Democratic as a result of having your perception manipulated by this Trump nonsense.
Architects for TRUMP
David Cole,
Donald Trump is an autocrat by large. That is customary of a business man who has significant controlling interest and ultimate authority. I'm an autocrat of a sole-proprietorship.
This is customary in business.
From face value, we are all dictators but are we the same as Hitler or Pol Pot or Idi Amin Dada or Magabe.
This doesn't mean we would run the country like those premium grade a--holes. Come on, man?
Black Exclusion Laws in Oregon You need to do some reading to figure out the rest.
Those laws were from before the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution when completely made those Exclusion laws unenforceable and illegal.
It was dropped. None of those laws are enforced. It sat on the books until 1926 because they were not prioritized because when the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, it was nullified.
Nobody bothered to remove it until at some point in time, they felt the need to clean up the laws that were no longer enforced and just cluttered things.
It was officially repealed in 1926 during a legislative cleanup. Already by that time, it wasn't actively enforced.
Remember, we are not living in 1840s or 1850s. Seriously, do you think I care about a long gone and relatively short-lived legislation before I was born? The law was moot and Unconstitutional by the time of the 14th Amendment was adopted and 1867 and pretty much unenforced by 1870 except an occassional incident here and there.
Back in a time where blacks were seen as slaves and therefore not as citizens of the country. We are talking HOW long ago?
You dug up some historical footnote of a VERY VERY long time ago. Laws before your grandparents were born. Don't go punishing me because I am 'white' because of something that happened in U.S. history long before I was born and had nothing to do with. I have not oppressed people of African ethnicity. I live in Oregon because it is a nice and beautiful state.
"How many Presidents of the United States do you think we had that were racist, or xenophobic or misogynist?"
That's my point- you gave it a pass earlier, and you don't care now because you don't think it affects you. It's a narrow perspective, one that impacts people for generations.
rob_c,
I defend the rights of the U.S. Constitution for ALL American citizens. I defend the right of every natural born American, who has lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years and is 35 years old or older by the time of general elections to have the right to run a presidential campaign to be the President of the United States.
That means.... ANYONE who meets the Constitution requirements for someone to be the President of the United States.
From that point, YOU can choose who you wish to vote for and so shall I.
You say he is an idiot? Substantiate.
You say he is an embarassment? Substantiate.
You say he is a clown? Substantiate.
Right now, you are giving me your opinion. Okay. I will take it as such.
I argue that everyone has moments that are clownish, idiotic or embarrassing in there lives.
I can play devil's advocate and point things that he does have that can counter your argument. I never said, I will necessarily vote for him. There is a possibility but this is largely due to uncompelling aspects of those candidates. What they represent and want to do in cases are concerning.
Marc,
Just because someone becomes President doesn't mean they have the power to remove the rights of the U.S. Constitution and the Amendments.
A President of the U.S. is not a dictatorship. They don't have that authority.
They do have limits and one of them is the President can not pass Constitutional Amendments without the approval of both Houses.
There is a checks and balance system.
I do care but I am not at a panic because of the candidates or Donald Trump. Why should I fear him as the Presidential candidate?
NOTE TO BIG GREEN HEAD: could we possibly get another button -- similar to the "exclude academia" button -- to hide political threads for the next, say, 18 months?
I don't think I can stand the idiotic political debates that undoubtedly will attend the upcoming presidential election.
Comb,
Thank you for the bucket of ice water over the head.
Balkins, reading what you write is like listening to Sarah Palin speak extemporaneously.
It's incredible. Now please write a 4-8 paragraph response and put off college a little longer.
Yeah, whatever. Considering next year or so, IDP 'intern' (until a standard term comes into vogue) entry level pay rate is going to be minimum wage.
Why would go to college for and accrue more debt when I wouldn't get any more pay than minimum wage?
What's the incentive for college education when I am not getting more pay than a person with only a high school diploma?
Okay, maybe 2019 but geez, that isn't long from now.
The average lifetime earnings of someone with a bachelor degree are more than $2 million higher than that of someone with only a high school diploma. Even if your starting salary were minimum wage (which it shouldn't be, as starting salaries for architecture currently average just under $20 an hour) your earning potential down the road would be considerably higher than what you've been making for the last several years by your own accounts. On the one hand you likely wouldn't recoup some of that difference at this point, because you're 15+ years into your prime earning potential already. On the other hand it will be that much more important for you to have higher earning potential, as your remaining working years are so much shorter and you're going to be playing catch up in retirement savings.
Do you want to live in your parents' attic and subsist on ramen noodles forever? If so, you're right, that doesn't take a college degree. But it doesn't qualify you to be dispensing academic advice, and your educational deficiencies make it difficult to follow your posts, about politics or otherwise.
you can get an education without getting a degree. you wouldn't have the degree of course, but you could learn more or less the same sorts of things. as we've used steve jobs as an example, he audited classes in such a way as to get the education but didn't get the credit or degree. you can't stamp drawings without a license, but there isn't any reason you couldn't make a decent living as a building designer. if you worked hard to educate yourself.
what i would suggest is to proofread your posts more, and cut out at least 3/4 of the text. say what you feel is important to be said without repeating it so many times. do some research into what formed your opinion on topics such as 'trump for president,' and lastly just stay out of constitutional law where constitutional law is not applicable and is not relevant to the topic at hand. there's nothing wrong with having an opinion on constitutional law or talking about constitutional law, but the reason trump is a joke and a shitty candidate for president, and the reason your support for trump is mocked, has nothing to do with constitutional law.
+++ rob_c you're fired
curt, well said. I've tried to keep quiet here because I'm not so consistently patient and charitable.
comb, I've been unplugged from "news" media for some time now and must say I am much happier without that daily wagon full of manure.
Alternative, we're on page three of your roll call thread and the count is 2. Looks to me like most architects are smarter than you think.
Are they, Miles? ;)
OH ALTERNATIVE YOU SCAMP
archinect should have a pop-up that detects when you type in all caps that says 'you switched out of cad.' i doubt big green head is reading this thread, but if someone wants to pass that along....
Great advice from curt to Richard.
I would add: 1. Wikipedia is never an acceptable source. Never. 2. When you collect snippets from other sites to assemble into opinions, history lessons, and summaries of laws: always attribute credit, and always paraphrase into complete sentences, or at least into cogent phrases. Your cut-and-paste method results in contradictory statements and illegible gibberish. 3. Do some self-study on basic grammar. Nobody expects formal academic writing on an online forum, but it's always difficult to follow your posts that use words incorrectly in ways that affect meaning.
The caps were intentional, but thanks for the forum policing. It really makes this place more awesome.
it would still be awesome. i'm sure you would still be allowed to post in caps, it would just be a friendly reminder in case it was not an intentional gesture. also, it would sort of be a reminder that this is an architect's forum, rather than a forum for people looking into investment ideas. sort of like an inside joke.
best idea i've had in a long time. let's run with it.
ALLCAPS SHAMER!
Wait, so;
Black Panther Party = Klu Klux Klan?
Really.
curtkram,
Good points. I am not supporting Trump to be the President of the United States anymore than any American citizen's right. My point with the Constitution is it applies to the legal requirements for a person to be President of the United States. It is the sole-law on the matter. Every person can judge the candidates however they feel. Some are missing my point very sadly. It isn't necessarily to support Trump as much as the law and for all people. I said enough on that.
As for:
you can get an education without getting a degree. you wouldn't have the degree of course, but you could learn more or less the same sorts of things. as we've used steve jobs as an example, he audited classes in such a way as to get the education but didn't get the credit or degree. you can't stamp drawings without a license, but there isn't any reason you couldn't make a decent living as a building designer. if you worked hard to educate yourself.
Yes. I'd still paying the same amount of money. How well does the return on investment work? There are a few strategies at work. In the building design business, I would have to do more to bring cash flow in. Biggest problem with service / consultant based businesses is a lot of your business depends on end client because you need people in need of your service. Right? But not just that. You need people in need of your service *WITH* money. Right? Clients with no money is not a client but a time waste.
Clients with little money needs an affordable way to have the design service work delivered to them. Clients with substantial amount of money can afford more personalized services for custom home design. As we move past the recession, the economy will improve in time. Sure, with dips every so often but not necessarily as deep cutting at the Great Recession. Anything can happen. I know. I am just being optimistic.
Actually, you can 'stamp' drawings. You just can't stamp them with an architect stamp without being licensed.
^ can you use these?
bloopox great observation. i often accuse Balkins of being a Bot
Sure, whatever floats your boat that doesn't violate licensing laws.
I was thinking more along the lines of certified professional building designer stamp and such.
Then there is the wet stamped copyright notice stamp and the like.
A great and very accurate article on Trump's appeal. Enjoy the debate this evening!
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2015/09/14/3701084/donald-trump/
code name Humble
Trumps a goombauche
I think Burns wears the Hillary costume, too.
Everyone is taking about him, exactly as is intended. Here is my theory: He is not a serious candidate but a wind breaker, expending energy deflecting the media attention and helping to position the other candidates to make a stronger run later in the game.
DONALD TRUMP AS A CANDIDATE HAS BEEN PURPOSEFULLY CREATED BY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY!
The fact that you are all talking about him is exactly what republicans want. Not only does it keep scrutiny off other candidate but all of his over the top rhetoric makes other conservative candidate seem moderate by comparison, which helps engage the swing vote. Meanwhile democratic candidate has to weather the full campaign while the republican candidates get to draft behind trump. Its pure NASCAR Strategy. Or a cycling domestique if you prefer that analogy.
MARK MY WORDS: Trump will fade quickly as soon as the primary races start.
It's a smart strategy and incredible dangerous for democrats who get drawn into the the "look how ridiculous he is conversation" because no one is talking about how ridiculous the other real candidates are.
FUCK TRUMP!
It's all about who hads the most money and unfortunately that will always be Trump :/
Wrong, It's a trap! Your being played. Nobody considers him a real candidate. His entire campaign gained a bunch of traction because the "GOP Power Ranking" kept saying he was in the lead. so people payed attention, he said outlandish stuff which was his job, and the media ate it all up. Everyone likes to be outraged.
Its a purposeful strategy. And your all playing right into it.
The GOP power ranking by the way which is really how trump has risen to attention is created by "asking 30 smart political minds each week who is strongest in the field." Source: http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/11/17/usa-today-gop-power-rankings-week-12/
So all this hype over trump started with "30 smart political minds" Gee who could they be?
I bet I could find 30 smart architectural minds who would say some Archinect troll is the greatest architect of our time right now...Let the media run with it, let him talk a lot, say some ridiculous things, it doesn't really mater what, the more ridiculous and pompous the better .......
When it comes time for people to hire an architect all of you look really appealing by comparison.
LOL at you guys.
Trump is obviously smarter than all of you, because he's the front-runner to win the Presidency in 2016 despite having spent very little money on his campaign, outmaneuvering the entire political establishment, and having gotten all your panties in a twist in the process.
jonathan would suggest he's not really the front runner. . .
so you're saying trump is smart because he can whip a rabble into a frenzy by saying stupid and often racist or misogynistic things? from my perspective it doesn't sound so much like he's smart, but rather the people supporting him are just really dumb. i guess it's 6 of one, half a dozen of the other though.
I'm saying he's smart because he wants to be President and is going to accomplish that despite being opposed by two wealthy and corrupt political dynasties, most of the political establishment, most of the media, most of the chattering class, and having spent only a small fraction of the money his opponents are spending against him.
If you think that accomplishment is dependent on either his or his supporters' stupidity, then perhaps the person you ought to be accusing of diminished mental faculties is yourself.
I'm saying he's smart because he wants to be President
Anyone who wants to be president is either a lunatic, a megalomaniac, or a narcissist. Trump happens to be all of the above.
You seem to have a reading comprehension problem.
American Psycho is a great movie because it shows that the traits of a maniac also happen to lead to a successful career on wall street. I would argue that this also applies to politics.
Cunning, conniving, manipulative, opportunistic, fearless, shrewd.
The man is many things, most of which can be attained without being particularly intelligent.
I cant stomach any of the candidates, but trump is a clown.
The best thing I can say about Trump is that he's very good at accomplishing what he set out to do.
Unfortunately for us that goal is merely to draw the most attention to himself. He wants to be president because he thinks it's a trophy to be won, not a job to be held responsibly. If - god forbid - he actually made it into the white house he'd likely crumple under his own weight within a few months.
I don't want a president who wants to be president for the fame it carries.
"I can't stomach any of the candidates, but trump is a clown" _ Yes this exactly is how every potentially moderate voter feels. And that's is exactly why trump is the perfect pawn.
Lately the republican party has had a real problem courting moderate swing voters. It's a result of all that working up the base talk and the obstructionist tactics of the tea party. Moderate voters see the party trending more conservative and less attractive.
To fix that without alienating the base you promote a candidate who is totally over the top. An eccentric conservative, laissez faire, far right rich old white guy, who talks the talk about no compromise, win at all costs, the baloney that gins up the bases. But such a candidate would never have a chance of winning because they cannot court the moderate vote.
When it comes time to get real, out come the same old republicans. Nothing has changed, same old obstructionist, divisive, and conservative policies no more moderate than they were before. But now by comparison they appear more moderate, more reasonable. Electable.
The whole time your fictitious candidate is out front your opponent is also forced to campaign. That's an extra 6 months at least that people are scrutinizing your false candidate along with your opponents front runner.
Its a way of creating change for the party without actually changing anything.
Its all about managing peoples perceptions. I would be curious to know how many Anti trump people. People on this thread included will end up voting republican when they had previously voted Democratic as a result of having your perception manipulated by this Trump nonsense.
The entire slate of Republicans is unpalatable.
Half of the Democratic slate is unpalatable.
TRUMP IS A CHUMP
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.