Donald Trump wants to ban ALL Muslims entering the US

'Murica, where the most powerful country in the world, lives in FEAR from .000014% of the world's population.

 

Donald Trump knows the common denominator and how to appeal to it.

If you listen to what Trump says, it is classic rhetoric. He has studied how to appeal to people for 30 years, he has studied Hitler and his speeches, JFK, Chairman Mao and Fidel Castro.... and it shows in his style of low denominator populous BS.

The Trump highlights:

1. Tell everyone how great you are and how simple the problem is;

2. Tell you supporters that THEY are smart, that they "get it";

3. "Spitball it", talk like a guy at the bar, say something controversial about a maligned group and then double down. By doubling down you excite your base;

4. Attack, attack, attack. By attacking often enough, you keep your adversary from having an opportunity to attack you.

5. Don't know specifics or complicated policy issues? No worries, say that the issue is being overly complicated to confuse and deflect, turn the issue into one of your pet issues.... immigration control, out of control blacks, corporate culture or Muslims.

 

I don't know what's more terrifying: Donald Trump's sinister, disgraceful beliefs or the people who support him.

I cannot understand how anyone supports such a delusional, narcissistic candidate. Is it a character flaw?

I hope The Donald runs as an independent. His existence is insulting for the decent Republicans out there.

 

Decent republicans are an ever shrinking minority.

 

Because of the fear that he'll go independent.I'm sure they are still holding out hope that Trump sinks himself .He keeps saying he won't as long as he is "treated fair " and as the front runner but who even knows what that means except him

 

Yeah he pretty much has GOP by the balls at this point

if he goes independent GOP just throws the whole election into the trash.

 

Question, which terrorists are not Muslims?

 

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Most voters support Trump’s Muslim ban: <a href="https://t.co/dHfRWj4U9M">https://t.co/dHfRWj4U9M</a> <a href="https://t.co/9nT2DZlrp0">pic.twitter.com/9nT2DZlrp0</a></p>&mdash; The Hill (@thehill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thehill/status/675065237385670657">December 10, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

Do you support this proposal, Commodore?

 

The ones from the Carolinas.

 

Trump is trying to lose by saying outrageous crap even he doesn't believe to ensure a loss because he really doesn't want to win. Instead it's having the opposite effect and he's surging!!! Got to love those Tea Party Rebuptards!!!

I hope he hands over his campaign supporters list to the FBI after he's done with his mock campaign. Be a nice starting point for a domestic terrorist watchlist. Nice American Hero legacy he could build.

 

What?

 

I would make it geographic (outright ban for certain ME countries with ISIS controlled territory, extra scrutiny for European countries with known jihadi problem).

A religious test is not practical.

Even then it wouldn't stop every jihadi, but it would prevent the large migration of radicals that we now see in Europe, that they have no means of eliminating.

In general though, a dangerous ideology is allowed to escape scrutiny by cloaking itself in religion and screaming bigotry at any pushback.

 

No, he doesn't want to lose.

 

Did you just not read the paper today about how Robert Dear told the court he was a "warrior for the babies"?

 

I just refuse to believe Trump is going to win this thing. The convention isn't until July, right? A LOT can happen before then.

 

Yea don't see it happening there is just no way he can pull this off.

 

http://www.wsj.com/articles/wsj-nbc-poll-finds-majority-opposes-trump-plan-to-ban-muslims-1449784927

 

Ok, some more?

 

This seems like the practical version. Still, I think it would be hard to do. If you ban ISIS countries (Syria and Iraq, then?), does that mean you take no refugees? And how will our European allies who are awash in refugees going to take that? What about Iraqi collaborators to whom we promised US citizenship? And then, how about the other Middle Eastern countries we know have an extremism problem though not an ISIS problem? Will you tell Saudi Arabia that none of their people can come to the US? Or Nigeria? They'd be highly offended. What does that do to the oil business? What about Pakistan who have a Taliban problem. We have a sizable Pakistani population here. Can they not come and go now? They can't have family come?

On the European front, Congress is considering something that will not cancel the no-visa travel with those countries but would require more disclosure and cooperation from those countries. Could be helpful and only somewhat onerous administratively. Anything more is probably a very bad idea. And all of these things puts a drag on business, and hurts our international reputation, especially with Muslims.

And besides all that, you're right that it will only make things incrementally harder for jihadis and won't eliminate the problem. They can still use US citizens. They can still sneak over the border. They can still find Europeans not on any watch list. It'd all help on the margin, but ISIS will only change their tactics. So is it all worth the cost for a marginal benefit?