TexasCHLforum.com

This election is the most polarizing one in America in the history of elections in the last 100 years. Just look at what Trump did at the end of the debate! He patted Hillary on the back and then dissed the shill moderator by refusing to shake his hand so the moderator pretended to brush his hair in embarassment! Trump shows off that his is THE Alpha male of the free world. Hillary then complained and moaned about how Trump said disparaging remarks about an overweight beauty pageant contestant. Basically, she was saying that she didn't understand male locker room talk. She is saying that you do not prod overweight people to lose weight, but you nurture them. You do not engage in locker room talk. This election is very clear in what you are voting for; the ultimate Alpha male who will do battle or a complaining nurturer who will try to appease terrorists with 1.3 billion dollars for hostages. Mars or Venus.

I was against Trump before the debate because he said that he would torture people and even during the debate I was against him when he said that he would unconstitutionally stop and frisk everybody. I was thinking about voting for a 3rd party candidate. I couldn't possibly vote for someone who engages in pay for play. Wikileaks showed that Clinton sold access to the state department for donations to the Clinton foundation, mainly to middle eastern countries and Chines businessmen. I could not vote for someone who is going to sell America to Saudi Arabia and China.

Now, I'm not so sure. Trump is kind of a buffoon, BUT he is THE Alpha male who will make good trade deals for America and bring jobs back. I will wait for the 2nd and 3rd debates before I make up my mind. Meanwhile, I am going to make sure my voter registration is in order and I suggest that you do too.

P.S. nurturers don't like guns. You can bet that she's going to ban guns with her "common sense" gun control laws.

I feel about the "stop and frisk" the same as I do about having the nuclear codes, their is alot of people between the president and the people that actually carry out the task! No President can just order a nuclear launch and expect it to happen, the chain to launch is full of people that will also play a part, as far as stop and frisk goes that is law enforcement on the local level and the President has very little authority to make this happen, I have had alot of interaction with LEOs most of my life, I find it ridiculous that they know who the local BG is, they hace multiple run-ins with the same thugs but can't really do much about it, should the police stop and frisk just anybody? NO should they have a chat with the local thugs when they find them absolutely!

The debate was absolute trash in my opinion, and I have a feeling the rest of the debates will be the same. The media hates trump and will bash him at absolutely every chance they get as proven so far. I also was disappointed in Trump. I disagree with stop and frisk and I heavily disagree with no-fly lists having anything to do with purchases of firearms. Stop and frisk is a great idea on paper....along with socialism. However in reality when you factor in human interaction and decision making it will be a complete disaster. Also, even though I agree that it is a good idea on paper, it is very unconstitutional. No fly list? I think we are all on the same page here. I will still vote for Trump, but those statements disappointed me. Call me a bad sport but I really don't blame trump for not shaking Lester's hand. My handshake means something, and if I were Trump that guy would not have earned my handshake POST debate.

He did shake Lester's hand. But there was definitely an awkward moment there.

Trump patted Hillary on the back, then Clinton shook Lester's hand. Then Lester was going in for the shake with Trump and Trump turned away. Lester looked like he'd been left hanging before Trump turned back and came in for the shake.

I don't think that it was an intentional snub by Donald, but it may have been. I think that he was looking for his family to come up on stage or maybe someone yelled his name. But if you think that it was a sign that Trump is the alpha dog, then don't let me convince you otherwise.

Honestly, there's no third party candidate who would be a better choice than Trump. I used to think that Gary Johnson was a very smart leader. But his recent gaffe's with the media are showing me some concerns. I blew it off when it happened first with "What is Aleppo?", but the latest thing shows me that he isn't as quick a thinker as I thought he was. I remember being impressed by him in the Republican primary in 2012. Though I saw that he was a smart alec and a little out of touch with people. Of course I was for Perry.

jb2012 wrote:The debate was absolute trash in my opinion, and I have a feeling the rest of the debates will be the same. The media hates trump and will bash him at absolutely every chance they get as proven so far. I also was disappointed in Trump. I disagree with stop and frisk and I heavily disagree with no-fly lists having anything to do with purchases of firearms. Stop and frisk is a great idea on paper....along with socialism. However in reality when you factor in human interaction and decision making it will be a complete disaster. Also, even though I agree that it is a good idea on paper, it is very unconstitutional. No fly list? I think we are all on the same page here. I will still vote for Trump, but those statements disappointed me. Call me a bad sport but I really don't blame trump for not shaking Lester's hand. My handshake means something, and if I were Trump that guy would not have earned my handshake POST debate.

I expect a much stronger showing from Trump in the 2nd debate, whether or not he gets any help from the moderator. Kellyanne Conway is going to have him ready to go. He will miss far fewer opportunities to hit Clinton on her record. He will spend less time talking about the Trump Organization and more time talking about all the things that he's going to fix that Hillary and Obama messed up. All he has to do is watch the tape of the first debate. There were times where he almost made a strong hit, but he didn't follow through. An example of something that plagued him was when he was talking about isis, and he said that Hillary and Obama's Iraq strategy is why isis was able to grow. He could have easily driven home the point by highlighting how many tanks and weapons isis acquired from us as they flooded past the Iraqi army into Mosul. Most viewers don't tie it all together. We aren't all a bunch of political junkies. He needs to help us out a little more and make an argument that will really cause Hillary to go on defense rather than just blowing off his attacks like she was doing.

Ted Cruz has offered to work with him on debate prep for the next two.

John Galt wrote:Ted Cruz has offered to work with him on debate prep for the next two.

hopefully has Ted talking to him through an earpiece.

John Galt wrote:Ted Cruz has offered to work with him on debate prep for the next two.

oooh,that ought to be fun.....

hmmm, I wonder if we could get Trey Gowdy to help out?

SewTexas wrote:

John Galt wrote:Ted Cruz has offered to work with him on debate prep for the next two.

oooh,that ought to be fun.....

hmmm, I wonder if we could get Trey Gowdy to help out?

Haha yes!! Gowdy is the man!! It would be a pretty ugly sight for hillary, if Gowdy had anything to do with it.

I never liked Trump. But what are our options? Hilary, vote her into jail.

Beiruty wrote:I never liked Trump. But what are our options? Hilary, vote her into jail.

That pretty well sums up my perspective…

Looks like we have two choices and only two choices here, Hillary or Trump. Any vote against Trump, whether it is by not voting, voting third party, or voting for Hillary, is a vote for Hillary. We have no other choice than to vote for Trump. Horrible choices I agree but in this case you must vote for the lesser of the two evils

drjoker wrote:.........I was against him when he said that he would unconstitutionally stop and frisk everybody.

I'm not Trump's biggest fan, but actually he never said that. But he did say he'd encourage police to use that tactic.....which means that some people will get stopped and frisked, but not "everybody".

Now that said, the moderator and Clinton both flat out lied when they said it was unconstitutional. "Stop and frisk" is a "Terry stop" - okayed by SCOTUS in 1968, and legal ever since. The objection in NYC was that black people were being stopped and frisked out of proportion to their representation in the general population. That's easily explainable........more of them are committing crimes. That's not racist. That's just a sad fact of life in the ghetto. So more of them are acting in a manner that invites a Terry stop by NYPD. Now, what the debate moderator and Clinton ALSO lied about is this: The NY judge to called stop and frisk unconstitutional was actually thrown off the case because of her well-publicized bias against police. AND, what the moderator and Clinton both lied about is that the decision did NOT stop the stop and frisk policy, because Mayor Bloomberg (a gun owner's best friend ) continued the policy. It wasn't stopped until the current commie got elected - Bill de Blasio. He's the one who stopped it, long after the bad judge was tossed off the case.

Here is a more detailed explanation of that particular issue, and how it was lied about in the debate: https://patriotpost.us/posts/45077. Whether or not Terry stops are a good idea, I'm not the definitive opinion. I'm uncomfortable with them, because I can see how that authority can easily be abused......but I also can see the utility of the practice from the law enforcement side well enough to understand that as long as it isn't abused, it can be another good tool in the LEO toolbox.........as long as it isn't abused and heavy handed.

Hillary has had 30 years to get things done. Her husband was a former President for Pete's sake! Why should I trust her to suddenly "get it right" and "make a difference"? I believe the truth is she will continue to tax the middle class to give benefits to the poor. She will not tax the wealthy because they can take their bag of marbles and leave the country. Trump seems to realize this and knows that taxing the rich has to involve some enticements for them. I think he is the only one who could ever have a chance to do such a thing.

Let's not forget the ghost in the room, the Supreme Court selection of nominees. Anybody here want to give Hillary the ability to put people in power for 30 or 40 years?

Not sure when my vote became a token for others to spend.