BY PHILIP 06/08/2016 0 COMMENTS The presumptive Republican presidential nominee and soon-to-be opener of the seventh seal as prophesied in the Book of Revelations, Donald Trump, met with his biggest Chinese American fans last Friday following his now infamous interview with CNN’s Jake Tapper where the Donald double-down on his racist remarks about the judge who’s presiding over the Trump University scandal case. What? The Donald has Chinese American fans?! Apparently, yes. They met with him at Trump’s Beverly Hills home and, among other things, presented him with a “Chinese Americans heart Donald Trump” t-shirt. Which, if I may employ a poetic metaphor, is like a group of porn stars meeting with gonorrhea and presenting it with a “We heart STDs” t-shirt. Considering that Trump’s racist rhetoric has extended to the Chinese–he has said that China was “raping” America and vowed to declare China a currency manipulator on his first day in the Oval office–why would any self-respecting Chinese American be a fan of Trump? Well, according to his Chinese American supporters, Trump is just using China as a “punching bag to gain support with voters”. In other words, it’s just talk and he doesn’t really mean it. You know, like how he’s not going to allow Muslims into the country or doesn’t think a “Mexican” judge can be impartial to his case because he’s building a wall–yeah, just the regular, every day talk that would come out of any legit Presidential candidate’s mouth. Besides, Trump told the Chinese American group that he loves “China and the Chinese people.” I’m assuming this means Trump will soon tweet out a pic of him eating a bowl of chop suey with the caption: “I love Chinese!” According to Wang Tian, the president of Trump’s biggest Chinese American fan club pictured below with the walking pile of hippo shit, he’s supporting Trump because the walking pile of hippo shit Trump isn’t afraid to be politically incorrect and is a “true alpha male”. Yeah, exactly the qualities I want in a President. But even if you were looking for the alpha male, I have to agree with comedian Bill Maher and declare that between our two presumptive nominees, I’m going to vote for the one with the bigger balls: Hillary Clinton.
So what if they are from mainland China. So what if they are not real ABC's? What are you saying? ABC's are not embarrassing? Is it because they are too Chinese for you? Not white enough for you? Or is it because they are supporting Trump? Either way, I think you are much worse than any of them: 1) instead of embracing your roots and be proud of who you are, you try to be white; while, at the same time, those whites are most likely ridiculing you for trying too hard to be "cool" and "white" that you have no identity. 2) They are proud Americans exercising their freedom of speech and choice. If you are an American, you should be ashamed of yourself. Just because they do not support the candidate of your choice, they should just shut up? Grow up and learn to respect others' choices. That is after-all the core of being an American! Fools? Bring you shame? Why? Because they are supporters of Trump? Or because they are exercising their freedom of speech and choice? All of us? Speaking for me, aren't you? Before you guys think I must be a GOP; let me tell you ... I have always been an independent that votes for the candidate of the least evil. I happen to like Bill Clinton alot; so much, that I'm willing to overlook the fact he signed DMCA into law, or, the matter he single-handedly is responsible in killing US' manufacturing industry. And I totally think the sex scandal is his private business of 2 consenting adults - admittedly, one is a dog and the other is a gold digger; but hey, who am I or anyone to judge? Under the least evil principle, yes, I plan to vote for Trump this cycle. Why? 3 simple reasons: 1) Because the country cannot survive another 4 years of same old nods and winks of Obama's policies aka his 3rd term. Because the no-border-country policy is not working. Because the political correctness policy is killing this country. Because ObamaCare is failing - and this is from my family and friends that are in the healthcare industry. 2) Because I don't trust Hillary C. to even hold my wallet, let alone my life. 3) Simply because her laughter makes my skin crawls
I do love my roots, but it's hard when you have mainlander's knocking off infant formula, buying up stuff like crazy cause their $ literally grows on trees it seems like, and coming into the US having kids here so they can be "US citizens" so it's an easy ticket for them come back into the states, without having to actually do it the correct way and work hard for it. I could go on and on, but not going to waste my time explaining myself to you. Every nationality has their embarrassment, I was just saying as a matter of fact and part jokingly that I'm embarrassed....I would like to have a true real leader to lead the US, but US has almost gone capitalistic so it'll be hard if either Clinton or Trump wins. You say you're the less evil, so why aren't you voting for Sanders then He's the independent in the race and seems less crazy and evil of the 2. Also the comment on "Chinese Americans" are the ones that are actually born here and have the better of both cultures intertwined into their being. Those in the pictures do not look like true "Chinese Americans" But hey what do I know, I'm just a "gwai lo ABC" according to you.
Sure, I hate the junk Made in China. Who doesn't? But, if you think about it, who's to be be blamed? No one else except ourselves, Americans. In the beginning, WalMart and Made in China junk will ceased to exists if none of us cheap-a$$e$ have a demand for it. Now that they have pretty much kill Made in USA or Made in Anywhere's manufacturing industry, unless you want to go out in public nude, we are all pretty much out of luck. As for the "anchor babies" (excuse my political-incorrectness), I think the southern border states will agree Chinese are not the most concerning population that does it. And yes, I agree with you, I think it's wrong to go on the easy route. Yes, I go for the candidate with the least evil. I used to love Bernie, in 2012. Unfortunately, there are a few things I could not bring myself to agree with some of his suggestions - Free college, free this, free that, legalize marijuana; what's next? Free marijuana? Trust me, I would love nothing than not having to wake up in the morning to go to work. But, thinking through it, if every single person in America quits their job tomorrow and sits around waiting for the 1% to sends each of us a check every month - well, where will the money come from? There's simply not enough to take 100% from the top 1%, 5%, 10% to support the rest of the 99%, 95% or 90% of the population. And even if there's enough to go around, who wants to work hard to be top 1% and then giving everything away to support the rest of the 99%? There's always the beginning for every immigrant. Before there's ABC, there's a "gwai" (in your terms) someone in the family of the ABC. I just think it's important to acknowledge the someone in the family for their "non-cool, non-stylish" that gave up their lives somewhere to hopefully give the ABC a better chance in life.
they are both equally EVIL and LIARS but I believe hilary is the lesser evil of the two. trump acts like a kid when negative comments are thrown at him, imagine him holding the keys to our nukes? THAT'S A SCARY THOUGHT. hilary is a piece of shit too but at least she is always calm under pressure and won't do anything crazy.
Oh yeah my family immigrated from HK to the states, cause they knew China couldn't be trusted, so I def love my family for being smart to do so. And I agree we shouldn't be enabling hands out either which I'm sure Bernie isn't trying to really do but give everyone that wants it the opportunity to do so. Obviously it looks easy said then done though. At least the southern border states are willing to work for it, at least most of it, and they're not driving up the housing market. Does suck that the US sent a lot of jobs overseas...but yeah all I was saying I'm pretty sure those Chinese pictured with Trump aren't real ABC's, but I could be wrong...
lol, which pres. isnt a liar? They're all liars. My commander in chief Mr. Osama, i meant Obama, freed dangerous terrorists for a shitbag deserter. Not only that, he was trying to get refugees inside the home soil..which increase chances of getting attack... How about fix his own goddamn country first before trying to be a hero to other countries? Hillary, is scary as fuck, dunno what she's gonna do to the US military when she become pres. Take a look at the Benghazi attack and how she dealt with it. Politics is not my thing, but anyone, especially the "leaders" that attacks their own goddamn military, ill be piss.... because it's like saying "F U" to me for serving my own country. People taking the privilege of "freedom" to the limits... especially the douchebags that burn the American flag. That's another F U to all the Veterans and current soldiers that served/serving the country. IF they do that in other countries, their heads would be rolling.... but that aint gonna happen here, why? Because the US military is protecting the country, making us invulnerable from people that is trying to take the privilege away...
I actually agree with "turbobenx" with regards to Hillary holding the keys to our nukes perspective. And Benghazi is a great example. She has no leadership qualities whatsoever, and everything is political to her. Didn't she 1) tell the families of the Benghazi victims that it was the movie that caused the riots that lead to the death of their family members? 2) lied to the American people about the reasons? And now that her emails are released, it was shown she knew perfectly well that it was a targeted attack and not "the movie" like she claimed? And now she famously asks, "what difference does it make at this point?". Well, the difference: 1) how will a Commander in Chief lead if the military know she's not being honest to them? How do you be a leader if you are going to leave the people under your command to die? Who's going to join the military when that happens? 2) I doubt anyone will join in the fight for her after she blatantly lied to them and then asks "what difference does it make at this point?" How will she earn the respect of the POTUS office or for that matter the respect as Commander-in-Chief? As for the emotional state of crazies, well, perhaps I'm crazy; but, I think in certain situations, we need the crazy evil unpredictability that has no qualms to fight back to control the crazies of the world. Perhaps with Mr Trump's unpredictability, China will not dare to expand / tries to claim South China Sea as their territories. Would Putin have annexed Crimea without any hesitation not knowing what's going to happen? Unpredictable crazies may have its advantages, if you ask me.
Bottom line? If a war started between the US and the PRC; which side would you fight on? I had a big discussion with the missus the other day about just this question. Whether 'being' Chinese obligated one to automatically side with the PRC. This question isn't one in a vacuum. It could be asked of Jews vis a vis Israel, or any other race, religion, ethnicity or culture. Who do you put first, your Americaness and all that that entails, or your personal culture? My inner person happens to be an American. When pressed, the missus also conceded that she liked the way of life, political and education freedom, and would never leave the US to go back to China. So that brings us to the issue of Trump and China. If elected, do I want Trump (or anyone else) to be tough on the PRC? Absolutely. In fact, if Trump wins, I'm hoping he would bomb those islands that the PRC had illegally reclaimed from the South China Sea. Don't get me wrong, I love Chinese history, the Chinese people, and Chinese culture. But the political direction and leadership of the PRC is worthy of US military intervention, regardless of Trump or Hillary. Though it would have a better chance of happening under the Donald. So do I love Trump? No. But I can see why other American Chinese might. And I agree with ab289 that political unpredictability may have certain tactical and strategic advantages. Having said that, I think most candidates play the politics to their advantage. Trump, IMHO ran because he wanted the exposure and free press, and was as surprised as OJ (when acquitted) after people flocked to his banner. He tapped into the GOP's 'minority' voters. That is, for years, the Bostonian Bankers knew that they would never win any elections if they just told America that they wanted to steal your money. So, what they had to do was appeal to their own white 'minority'; the racist, gun loving, god fearing, anti-abortion, homophobic closet klansman. For years, this segment of the electorate was groomed by the republican party, who entered into every election cycle with implied importance to all the white minority fears while they controlled the stakes. Once upon a time, that worked fine for the money moguls. But there in laid the potential for disaster; when this political "baby..." this unkempt beer swizzling, gun toting, trailer park educated knucklehead, eventually took the reins of the party through the campaign of one (ie Trump) who really didn't give a rat's behind of the GOP stakes, republican leaders were shock that the well trained right wing dog on the leash they were holding suddenly tore itself loose, and now seeks to hump the nearest available bitch in heat. All attempts to regain control of the dog only got them a vicious snarl in response. Back in the days, we would call this the Frankenstein monster on the loose. So the GOP is only reaping what they sowed. Hillary is a career politician. Was she to blame for Benghazi? Yes and no. Yes in the sense that she worked for the State Department, but no, as it was ultimately Obama's watch. The interesting thing about what happened in Benghazi is that the US should have (notice I didn't say 'should of', because there's no such thing in grammar) abandoned Libya like all the other nations did after the revolt. Instead, not only did the US stay, they assigned a very dedicated and passionate statesman that eschewed safety despite the high risks, hoping to be rewarded with a better political payoff at the end. In essence, this was a very bad gamble and Stevens (the ambassador) fully knew it but went ahead with it anyway. The political stakes were real in the fact that the US could not be seen as an imposing force on the ground whilst the Libyans "sought their own political course" in the world. Thus, the weak tactical posture was in fact, already dictated by a more overriding strategic concern; ie. appearing on the world stage as not a nation who took advantage to controlling Libya through the insertion of forces when Libya didn't want us. A philosophical military question was once asked of me by an instructor that centered on that same theme. Essentially, would I, as a soldier, when ordered, personally participate in an attack, knowing that the purpose of the attack was only a weak feint and that I would likely be killed, while the main assault would be launched elsewhere after the enemy committed his forces to counter my weak feint? In essence, like a chess game, where one would lose a pawn to win a greater valued piece. My answer was 'yes'. My position as a soldier didn't require me to be a general; battlefield strategy was his domain, not mine. When I signed up, I was willing to give my life for the needs of my nation. Period. Benghazi was certainly sad. But all those who participated, knew the risks. They were placed there through the ambitious machinations of the US State department, knowing that, with strategic considerations, there was little that could have been done if they were attacked. And sadly, they were attacked. In fact, they were lucky that more didn't die. Was any of this Hillary's fault? No.
I can't see how Donald trump would be good for USA, political unpredictability is a gamble and could go horribly wrong. Looking at DT's past history and current actions it scares me how much he can fuck up the country. If you didn't know, almost every business he started he has bankrupted, he is completely clueless when it comes to foreign/domestic policy. He's great at shit talking against others but when it comes to serious topics regarding domestic or foreign policy he is more clueless than Bush. The only vague proposal he has come up with was building a wall (and making mexico pay for it lol) and coal jobs. He keeps saying he'll make America great again but has never mentioned a clear path to achieving this besides using "common sense". There's recent news that Donald trump offered Kasich VP and power of all Domestic/Foreign policies which isn't a bad idea letting Kasich call the shots, he is far better than DT but from this you can clearly see DT is obviously in over his head. Don't let him fool you
acersrspro: Could have been, would have been ... Kasich nor Carson did not win the GOP party nomination, did they? At this point, it's either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump or person(s) running as independent / green / etc parties. Be honest ... without googling, can you tell me who and what that 3rd / 4th / 5th / ... person(s) stand for? So, I ask, what is your alternative for me? I actually like his idea about the fence and his immigration - can't remember which point he was making, but, he did say he's not going to let anyone send any money back to Mexico; which totally defeats the purpose of illegals and / or Mexican government turning a blind eye on the situation. And don't tell me they cannot track where the money is going when they are tracking my bank accounts both of which are in USA. I only moved $2k between my banks to buy some stuff (because 1 bank charges me $15.00 to issue wire transfer and the other bank doesn't). I was asked a bunch of questions (where did the money come from? what is the money going to be used for? etc) when I tried to make a deposit and the money was on hold for 2 weeks "pending verification" (whatever that means). And remember - this was cash deposit. And that wasn't the first transaction of this nature in my accounts.
Not sure what your point is here, I was pointing out that Trump wanted Kasich to take the VP position and to be responsible for foreign and domestic policies. Essentially DT just wants the title of President and not the responsibility that comes with it. If you think that is actually a good idea, then there is not much to say here except I understand why you support Trump. Thinking it isn't possible is simply naive, it is very possible and happens all the time in other parts of the world.
After all said and done, I am curious of what previous respondents would have to say now, about how things have turned out?
OK, now that Trump has shown his stripes and was not reelected, who here is still pro-Trump, with the firm knowledge that he tried to overthrow the US government?
