Donald Trump softens stance on Muslim ban

[Chicog]

I see he's doing his best to hang on to his tax records.

I wonder why?

Edited May 12, 2016 by Chicog

[willyumiii]

Bit early to backtrack Donald. You got all this support with basically two pieces of vitriol. One was banning Muslims and the second building the wall. The wall is easier to get round I know because you just build it one metre high with gates every few metres. Question is if you scrap the racist cards now you are likely to lose at least two thirds of you supporters.

One thing I do agree on, if people get behind Bernie then at least the USA has a fighting chance. So come on republicans, ditch the duck and try to save some face here.

Isnt Bernie a Commie ?

Anyone who is not educated enough to know the difference between a communist and a socialist, is not worth listening to.

Go back to school and pay attention next time!

[willyumiii]

Bit early to backtrack Donald. You got all this support with basically two pieces of vitriol. One was banning Muslims and the second building the wall. The wall is easier to get round I know because you just build it one metre high with gates every few metres. Question is if you scrap the racist cards now you are likely to lose at least two thirds of you supporters.

One thing I do agree on, if people get behind Bernie then at least the USA has a fighting chance. So come on republicans, ditch the duck and try to save some face here.

Somebody needs to break it to the Donald that there is no need for a wall.

Net immigration, legal or not has been zero since the Bush administration tanked the U.S. economy.

A great number of Mexicans have gone home for a better life.

Al the talk of a wall was just to get the support of the over emotional ,uninformed potential voters.

[willyumiii]

Another Trump flip-flop? .....what a surprise. There's at least one per day. How do his fans feel? One day he says one thing, and all his fans jump up and down with glee. The next day he says something different, and all his fans jump up and down with glee.

Anyone who gets their panties in a bunch because candidate Trump changes his position during a campaign yet still supports Hillary should watch this video. You'll need to pause now and then because there are so many flip-flops your head head will spin...

You are correct.

They both suck.

[up2u2]

Hold on a minute isn't Trump the one deemed to 'tell it like it is'? Next you will be telling me he has had seconds thoughts on building a wall, sanctioning torture, targeting innocent family members, punishing women who have an abortion, 11M Mexican illegals will be removed, dismantling affordable health care, scraping trade deals, bombing the entire landscape of Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, protectionist tariffs, assaulting people like the 'good ol days'. You know all the things the Republican looney far Right Wingers voted for him on because he was a 'straight shooter' not politically correct not part of the 'establishment'. The old bigoted white folks in the south must be losing their minds. lol

Sucked in. Trump doesn't 'tell it like it is' he is not a 'straight shooter' he is a populist liar.

A classic case of "Here are my set of firmly held positions. Oh don't like them, no problem here is a whole new set of my firmly held positions"

[willyumiii]

By the way..

Look at the Brits now....

who is poking their nose into our business...

Is it a London Mayor?

Shoe is on the other foot. I think the Brits should keep their sniveling, uppity opinions on who we let into the USA...to themselves.

What the U.S. decides in this election will have a huge impact on the entire world.

Any country who is not worried about a Trump presidency would be foolish.

They are not foolish.

They are worried.

So am I.

[GeorgesAbitbol]

The muslim ban is a nonsense...it is not written on your passport...so he could choose to ban all muslim dominant countries and therefore anihilate all agreements with them. Or he could set up ham and cheese sandwich stands in every border control and ask everyone to eat some...anyway

Not possible anyway...one more stupidity from the Donald

[Jingthing]

He probably has been advised a Muslim ban, even a "temporary" one is both unenforceable and unconstitutional. It does wonders to stir up Trump's racist white supremacist base though. So he's walking it back a teeny bit now earlier in the game. What a sleazeball.

It is legal and enforceable to have bans on specific nationals and perhaps even (not sure) people who have traveled there.

[Koosdedooes]

Bit early to backtrack Donald. You got all this support with basically two pieces of vitriol. One was banning Muslims and the second building the wall. The wall is easier to get round I know because you just build it one metre high with gates every few metres. Question is if you scrap the racist cards now you are likely to lose at least two thirds of you supporters.

One thing I do agree on, if people get behind Bernie then at least the USA has a fighting chance. So come on republicans, ditch the duck and try to save some face here.

Isnt Bernie a Commie ?

Anyone who is not educated enough to know the difference between a communist and a socialist, is not worth listening to.

Go back to school and pay attention next time!

Oh dear...all socalists are commies and all commies are socialists, Trump said he was a commie so it must be true..dont believe me look it up ...so maybe direct your remarks at Trump comrade..

same as all Muslims are terrorists according to some on here... funny that innit ?

Edited May 12, 2016 by Koosdedooes

[willyumiii]

When John Kerry, a Democrat, learned more about an issue and changed his position, it was a horrible thing to do.

he was flipflopping!

But now that the flip flop is on the other foot......

[hansnl]

The issue is if Mr K from L in the UK would be banned from entering the US because of his "religion".

Yes, why not?

He is just a mayor, no politician doing foreign politics.

Moreover, many countries where his "religion" has the power, anyone having another faith is banned, hunted, killed, stripped of all possessions, banned from the country, forced to pay special taxes and so on.

Same same, as they say.

His plight is even less, he cannot visit the US.

So what?

[Koosdedooes]

^^^

No.

He is a Democratic Socialist. (Glad to clear that up for you.)

Try to keep up.

Or, are you just Trolling?

According to the Donald Trump Bernie is a pinko commie, so maybe less of labelling people trolls...suppose next your going to call all Muslims terrorists Edited May 12, 2016 by Koosdedooes

[Jingthing]

John Kerry is a good man. The only reason he didn't win the presidency is that the public didn't like his personality, which lacks charisma. The U.S. would have been much better off if he had won.

[wabothai]

Bit early to backtrack Donald. You got all this support with basically two pieces of vitriol. One was banning Muslims and the second building the wall. The wall is easier to get round I know because you just build it one metre high with gates every few metres. Question is if you scrap the racist cards now you are likely to lose at least two thirds of you supporters.

One thing I do agree on, if people get behind Bernie then at least the USA has a fighting chance. So come on republicans, ditch the duck and try to save some face here.

Isnt Bernie a Commie ?

Koos, go back in your doos (box).

[ggt]

Now...if we could just get the Muslims to soften their stance on killing non-Muslims...

Not going to happen...they are on a mission from God...hard to argue with that kind of mandate...

With ME immigrants flooding into the EU and soon the US and other nations...their dream of world domination under suppressive Sharia Law is well underway...

Glad I will not be here to witness the carnage...

Good luck...learn a little Arabic to survive...start with "Allah Akbar"..."God is Great"...which is what they shout while killing innocent people...

Isn't the God of Islam...Great?

Me neither...

[slipperylobster]

I watched the Clinton video. It's sobering, but her relatively few lies are stretched over many decades of public life. As a comparison, Trump has as many lies in any given week as Clinton has had in several decades. Neither are pure as the driven snow, but Clinton is the obvious better choice for Commander in Chief.

she would, in fact..be a terrible Commander in Chief.

She does not listen...and lies about real events. Her past proves that she is indecisive, when the krab hits the fan.

Trump would listen to his Generals...as he listens to his business advisors. He is trained for that. You don't have to be a rocket scientist...you just need to let your Military Leadership call the shots..in country.

Hillary would not even answer the phone...and if she did...she would put our Military "on hold".....same as Benghazi.

She has a long political record...that is why her lies spread over decades. Trump has just started....however, he has held no office and has not killed anyone by being indecisive.

"You don't have to be a rocket scientist...you just need to let your Military Leadership call the shots..in country. "

I would hope the next PIOTUS has more intelligence that this. The military has a very one sided view, and is not suitable to call the shots.

It is clear you have not a clue.

Political Indecisiveness has led to many catastrophes.

1. Bombing of the Marine Barracks in Beirut (unarmed Marines???)

2. Hillary fails to answer the call for help in Benghazi.

3. Unclear Rules of Engagement in Iraq/Afghanistan endangers troops....as well as complicates/prolongs the mission. Can you imagine calling somebody halfway around the world...asking for permission to engage a potential enemy...while you have incoming fire?

well...I could go on and on. Just concede that.

In all respects, our Nation has failed to achieve many goals/victories due to political snafu's and policies that make it impossible for the Military to do their jobs. Putting troops in harms way, but then babysitting Generals.

Did you hear me??? Generals!!! What "Commander in Chief" does that? All of them...so far. We could go back 40 or 50 years...and it's always the same.

When you put the Military in....you support them, and allow them to do their job. Otherwise...leave them at home.

I am incredulous at your lack of knowledge on something so basic..!

Edited May 12, 2016 by slipperylobster

[stevenl]

I watched the Clinton video. It's sobering, but her relatively few lies are stretched over many decades of public life. As a comparison, Trump has as many lies in any given week as Clinton has had in several decades. Neither are pure as the driven snow, but Clinton is the obvious better choice for Commander in Chief.

she would, in fact..be a terrible Commander in Chief.

She does not listen...and lies about real events. Her past proves that she is indecisive, when the krab hits the fan.

Trump would listen to his Generals...as he listens to his business advisors. He is trained for that. You don't have to be a rocket scientist...you just need to let your Military Leadership call the shots..in country.

Hillary would not even answer the phone...and if she did...she would put our Military "on hold".....same as Benghazi.

She has a long political record...that is why her lies spread over decades. Trump has just started....however, he has held no office and has not killed anyone by being indecisive.

"You don't have to be a rocket scientist...you just need to let your Military Leadership call the shots..in country. "

I would hope the next PIOTUS has more intelligence that this. The military has a very one sided view, and is not suitable to call the shots.

It is clear you have not a clue.

Political Indecisiveness has led to many catastrophes.

1. Bombing of the Marine Barracks in Beirut (unarmed Marines???)

2. Hillary fails to answer the call for help in Benghazi.

3. Unclear Rules of Engagement in Iraq/Afghanistan endangers troops....as well as complicates/prolongs the mission. Can you imagine calling somebody halfway around the world...asking for permission to engage a potential enemy...while you have incoming fire?

well...I could go on and on. Just concede that.

In all respects, our Nation has failed to achieve many goals/victories due to political snafu's and policies that make it impossible for the Military to do their jobs. Putting troops in harms way, but then babysitting Generals.

Did you hear me??? Generals!!! What "Commander in Chief" does that? All of them...so far. We could go back 40 or 50 years...and it's always the same.

When you put the Military in....you support them, and allow them to do their job. Otherwise...leave them at home.

I am incredulous at your lack of knowledge on something so basic..!

Sidetracking, not what I said. But to continue with your sidetracking, it were the generals who wanted to invade Iraq. There is much more to war than just the military aspect.

And leave the insults at home please.

Edited May 12, 2016 by stevenl

[Koosdedooes]

Bit early to backtrack Donald. You got all this support with basically two pieces of vitriol. One was banning Muslims and the second building the wall. The wall is easier to get round I know because you just build it one metre high with gates every few metres. Question is if you scrap the racist cards now you are likely to lose at least two thirds of you supporters.

One thing I do agree on, if people get behind Bernie then at least the USA has a fighting chance. So come on republicans, ditch the duck and try to save some face here.

Isnt Bernie a Commie ?

Koos, go back in your doos (box).

Yeess Baaas

[boomerangutang]

I watched the Clinton video. It's sobering, but her relatively few lies are stretched over many decades of public life. As a comparison, Trump has as many lies in any given week as Clinton has had in several decades. Neither are pure as the driven snow, but Clinton is the obvious better choice for Commander in Chief.

she would, in fact..be a terrible Commander in Chief.

She does not listen...and lies about real events. Her past proves that she is indecisive, when the krab hits the fan.

Benghazi was proof of the pudding here.

Never responded to that 3am phone call. Definitely not POTUS material!

Republicans are trying soooo hard to make something out of Benghazi but it's like trying to make fudge out of mud. It just ain't working for reasonable people. Four Americans killed at Benghazi is lamentable, but there are prime factors in that scenario which overshadow anything HRC did or didn't do. Reps won't see it clearly any more than they can acknowledge that the world is warming largely due to activities of Man. There are a number of things for which Republicans have self-imposed mental blocks. No amount of truth is going to change that. It's like Christians believing in virgin birth or Noah's Ark, ....things which are stuck like glue in their brains.

[Searat7]

Another Trump flip-flop? .....what a surprise. There's at least one per day. How do his fans feel? One day he says one thing, and all his fans jump up and down with glee. The next day he says something different, and all his fans jump up and down with glee.

It was never a permanent ban...his original statement suggested the ban until the USA gets its act together and knows who they are letting enter the country. Not a totally unreasonable suggestion at the time it was made.

[arjunadawn]

By the way..

Look at the Brits now....

who is poking their nose into our business...

Is it a London Mayor?

Shoe is on the other foot. I think the Brits should keep their sniveling, uppity opinions on who we let into the USA...to themselves.

I think stupid, dribbling racists who tar a billion or more people with the same brush should keep their witless opinions to themselves as well.

But hey, you know, right to free speech and all that.

Obama has not dribbled and there are only 1/4 billion whites in the US that have been painted with his brush, not a billion or more.

Muslims are not a race.

[Jingthing]

It was more than a suggestion. It was a promise. An unenforceable, unreasonable, and un-American promise.

Probably part of Trump's game to moderate a bit for the general. He's not acceptable to be president. Period.

As if global Muslims are ever going to forget his rhetoric. Many Muslim friends of the U.S. will never trust him.

Edited May 12, 2016 by Jingthing

[arjunadawn]

By the way..

Look at the Brits now....

who is poking their nose into our business...

Is it a London Mayor?

Shoe is on the other foot. I think the Brits should keep their sniveling, uppity opinions on who we let into the USA...to themselves.

I think stupid, dribbling racists who tar a billion or more people with the same brush should keep their witless opinions to themselves as well.

But hey, you know, right to free speech and all that.

Don't you mean bigot, not racist?

It's a subject that has been beaten to death here;it is now accepted, if not technically precise, to refer to those who describe all muslims as terrorists as 'racists'. Or more descriptively "cultural racism".

But hey, if bigot works for you, stick with it.

The 'stupid' is more significant IMHO.

No, its "not technically precise." Its wrong. Its a bastardization of language, a poor marriage of meanings. Cultural racism is as contrived for pejorative as Islamophobia.

Cultural Racism is a deceit. "Racism" its the heroin while "cultural" is the needle. Its designed to dumb the mind, numb awareness and context, and silence. It is employed like a magician waving his hand while the other introduces the pejorative. Racism failed alone as pejorative in much the same way Global Warming failed to describe something- it was wrongly applied. But cultural-racism is circuitous enough to label and stick.

I invite anyone here to demonstrate where Trump has "describ[ed] all muslims as terrorists."

Tip: On a side note, implicit in the above assertion is that all cultures are relative; wrong! They are not.

[slipperylobster]

By the way..

Look at the Brits now....

who is poking their nose into our business...

Is it a London Mayor?

Shoe is on the other foot. I think the Brits should keep their sniveling, uppity opinions on who we let into the USA...to themselves.

Just maybe if the US took your advice, and kept their noses out of things, the whole of middle east wouldnt have been destabilised by phoney wars and the radical muslim problem wouldnt be the issue it is today...

That is really a strange thought.

Take off the funny, tin foil hat my friend...muslims problem is 12 or 13 centuries old.

Welcome to the modern world..by the way. We could of acquired the middle east at the end of the last world war. Could of settled affairs in Korea, Russia and China as well.

If it was up to MacArthur...we would of.....and there would be fewer problems today.

Your historical views on the middle east are very shallow...indeed !

Edited May 12, 2016 by slipperylobster

[slipperylobster]

John Kerry is a good man. The only reason he didn't win the presidency is that the public didn't like his personality, which lacks charisma. The U.S. would have been much better off if he had won.

You might want to take that back.

He made up his own version of his heroics in vietnam...that were discounted by many who served with him.

He lost the respect of the military.

[arjunadawn]

John Kerry is a good man. The only reason he didn't win the presidency is that the public didn't like his personality, which lacks charisma. The U.S. would have been much better off if he had won.

You might want to take that back.

He made up his own version of his heroics in vietnam...that were discounted by many who served with him.

He lost the respect of the military.

Kerry is another example of "Blink." The reason he lacks charisma is the same reason the public does not like his personality. It does not matter what that reason is, in all likelihood it is for most also a "Blink" issue. Kerry is intuitively untrustworthy, contrived, selling a car, closing a home, practicing the podium at home at night sycophant. Obama is disliked far more than Kerry yet I assert is also far more personally agreeable then Kerry. Obama has charisma. People like Obama's personality, just not his politics. So, what Kerry is missing is a very fundamental piece of character, an essential... something.

And for those who are old enough to recall Kerry admitted to personally committing war crimes. People may have their own "Blink" with Trump but Trump never killed people, or as Kerry offered, murdered. We know Kerry, Hillary, and Obama have murdered people (even American citizens). We know it. That standard alone says it all. Next.

Edited May 12, 2016 by arjunadawn

[stevenl]

By the way..

Look at the Brits now....

who is poking their nose into our business...

Is it a London Mayor?

Shoe is on the other foot. I think the Brits should keep their sniveling, uppity opinions on who we let into the USA...to themselves.

Just maybe if the US took your advice, and kept their noses out of things, the whole of middle east wouldnt have been destabilised by phoney wars and the radical muslim problem wouldnt be the issue it is today...

That is really a strange thought.

Take off the funny, tin foil hat my friend...muslims problem is 12 or 13 centuries old.

Welcome to the modern world..by the way. We could of acquired the middle east at the end of the last world war. Could of settled affairs in Korea, Russia and China as well.

If it was up to MacArthur...we would of.....and there would be fewer problems today.

Your historical views on the middle east are very shallow...indeed !

Yes, the military making the political decisions is not a good idea, as you underlined with your MacArthur example.

[connda]

I said it before and I'll say it again: Trumps's 'stances' are gamesmanship and pageantry. His narratives will start looking more and more 'main-stream' the closer we get to November. Personally I love the guy because he has jerked just about everybody's chain. If he can make the 'Establishment' cringe, what's not to love? Everybody hates him except disenfranchised voters. And imho, there are a whole lot of disenfranchised voters in the US. Stay tuned...

[mopar71]

^^^

Why be so narrow minded? And fixated on Clinton?

You can vote Bernie.

He leads Trump by over 15 points.

Your choice is rapidly backtracking on all his campaign "promises" that attracted you to him in the first place. Right?

Best to go with the only candidate of substance that is remaining.

Seems logical to me.

As much of a disaster this presidential election is for the country, it could still be a big step in the right direction if the race were between Trump & Sanders.

Two candidates who do not really belong to either of the major parties AND who the establishment dislikes AND who get a lot of votes from people instead of just Washington power brokers.

That part would be great for America. Although it will all come crashing down in November because someone has to win and actually become president.

[Emster23]

Trump's appeal is his loose cannon, shoot from the hip, outrageous entertainment value. If the Donald were to start thinking things through, have measured responses, consider global realities, he would lose that quality that sets him apart. His fan base would feel betrayed "Hey ya mook, don't go start talking sense. You acting just like other politicians. I'm outta here".