Top products from r/AskTrumpSupporters

We found 45 product mentions on r/AskTrumpSupporters. We ranked the 176 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top comments that mention products on r/AskTrumpSupporters:

u/Black6x · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

I was a Sanders supporter. Sanders also supported closed borders. I was not a fan of Jeb. People make "low energy Jeb" jokes, but he brings back memories of Al Gore during the 2000 election. If Gore had been as excited about running for president as he was during An Inconvenient Truth, he would have won easily. I saw that movie, and said, "Who the hell is this guy, and where was he during the election."

Hillary was a terrible choice, and the Democrats knew it. Forget about Benghazi (which is mostly a BS issue, anyway). Forget about the emails (actions which would not have landed her in jail, but would have meant her immediate firing as Secretary). Forget the DNC collusion with her over Sanders. Those are all outside noise. When she had the time to talk, to make noise from the inside, the noise lacked substance. Most importantly, it lacked "Hillary" substance. I don't want to know why the other person is a bad choice. I want to know why you're a good choice. She never really figured that one out, and gave Trump extra help. In the polls, she and Trump were about even in favorability, but she had higher unfavorable ratings by around 3%.

It's the same thing that happened during the Republican debate that Trump didn't attend (but held a rally for wounded veterans). The first thing the other candidates (and I'm pretty sure it was Jeb) talked about was Trump. In a night where he wasn't even present, he owned their minds, and on a night where they could have acted like he didn't exist, they made him a star.

If you listen to how anyone sold her, she was either sold as a continuation of Obama, or "not Trump." Hillary basically followed whatever popular online movements were pushing. I'm not even talking important ones. I mean, even Trump said that transgender individuals should use whatever bathroom they want.

With Trump, at least his positions have been consistent for the past 30+ years. He's hated our trade agreements.

Realistically, he's not a Republican. I don't know if there's a definition for a political pragmatist. He has basically changed parties multiple times to leverage himself into the best political position counter to whatever the administration was at the time, all while being consistent on what and how he believes the government should be involved in stuff. He hated Reagan. He hated Carter.

His battle plan seems haphazard unless you read Art of the Deal. If you do, he is using the same media techniques that he used to fix the Wollman Rink. He will hire people who were once his enemy if they do a good job. The lawyer that NY used to sue him (in a case that Trump won)? He thought that guy was excellent and hired him. Yes, Trump churns staff, but he always has, and he will rearrange teams as situations change.

His economic policies seem weird unless you realize that he follows the American School of Economics. something that was great for us, and then abandoned while other countries used it against us, and grew strong economies. 6 of the last 7 presidents attempted tariff measures (Carter is the outlier, and also the one that gave China favored Nation status).

Let's use this when we look at repairing infrastructure and building. We need steel and we know that. Chine sells cheaper (both cost and grade) steel. If we use tariffs to force the price up, US steel becomes competitive and is better because of quality. So that money is spent here, which bolsters our economy vs China's. It goes to our workers, and they spend it here, which helps prevent a race to the bottom economic situation that happens with spending money overseas.

u/suburban_monk · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

...and that is the current state of America. I didn't make it this way, but it is the situation. People want to be entertained and amused ('ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED? ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED?!'), even when it comes to serious matters like government. Neil Postman said it already, we are 'Amusing Ourselves to Death'.

u/UnknownTrumpSupportr · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters


The purpose of the Unknown Trump Supporter is to give a public voice to the Silent Majority that cannot speak out or be known publicly for various reasons.

u/deepest_state · 4 pointsr/AskTrumpSupporters

>Pelosi said her declaration was enough.

Per the 2015 rules, it was absolutely enough. Federal courts agree
>Using the unilateral subpoena power under the 2015 rules means that this is just a regular House investigation. But foreign relations isn’t an area subject to normal Congressional oversight.

The House absolutely has oversight over foreign relations There is an entire sub-committee tasked with exactly that.

And lastly, you linked an opinion piece to argue legal matters, that's red flag #1. Red flag #2, that same author wrote a book about how Clinton conspired with Russia to rig the 2016 election; a conspiracy theory as debunked as flat earth. I feel like I shouldn't have to explain to you that one conspiracy theorists opinion on the law and actually legal experts are not the same. One we respect and one we laugh at; and we are laughing at this.

Do you have any legitimate legal scholars to reference to support your argument? Maybe reference where in the Constitution or House rules that support your claim? Or is the best you have a complete misunderstanding of the law and conspiracy theorists' opinion pieces?

u/Trumpspired · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

Read the creature from jekel Island to redpill yourself. Gold standard has issues in particular the limited amount of Gold (After WWII the US had almost all the world's gold read the Lords of Finance for argumesnts against Gold standard). However almost anything would be better than the current system in which bankers effectively own the world and are always the hidden power behind the throne due to their ability to create money.

One of the major issues was that they wouldn't revalue the price of Gold as they were printing money (Gold was always $70 and they could have created a new standard pricing Gold at $400). So old way was not ideal but it could be made to work. (Don't ask me how) Current system also tends to favour boom and bust cycles and not stability.

I am happy he has brought it up as the current financial system needs complete overhaul.

u/U2_is_gay · 2 pointsr/AskTrumpSupporters

The southern strategy is over 150 years old and is such a fascinating and defining aspect of American politics. It's a must know of sorts for anyone that wants to talk about electorates. I don't look down on anyone who doesn't know much about it, but i suggest they learn.

Here is a really dope read on southern politics and here is an OK read somewhat debunking it.

u/EnthusiastGrade · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

I'm from California and I see what you're saying, with people equating Trump to Hitler and things like that, which I personally think is insulting for people who were actually affected by the Holocaust and things like that. I've literally heard some people say that Trump was going to put gays and immigrants into internment camps once he was elected, which is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

I think Facebook is purposely designed to be an echo-chamber, so that it guarantees people stay on there longer. The more you see people that agree with your views, the more likely you are to use their platform, the more you use their platform the more Facebook learns about your likes and dislikes and the better they can show you things that you like and remove things you dislike, and the cycle continues
Here are some interesting sources that talk about how social media acts as an echo chamber of sorts:?


u/slugsnot · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

So 3 of these examples are legal questions.

Putting aside ROSS for the moment, can I ask you a very hypothetical question?

If we made an AI which could review evidence and determine signifigantly better than humans whether a crime was comitted, would you be against robo-jury? If so, then what is your justificaiton?

(And FIY, I will be moving the goalposts on this question as we continue :)

also, check out love and sex with robots. The author does not see this as a bad thing.

u/Trumpy_Poo_Poo · 2 pointsr/AskTrumpSupporters

It has nothing to do with America and nothing to do with politics. I’m a huge fan of Johnathan Haidt, who wrote an entire book explaining how “us vs. them” is hardwired into human beings.

u/numberfaketwo · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

How am I supposed to have an honest conversation with you when you refer to Trump as Drumpf?

If you doubt Obama's prolific fundraising throughout his ENTIRE term then please read "Rise of the President's Permanent Campaign" which discusses this in depth.

u/TheManInBlack_ · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

Just popping in to recommend Black Rednecks and White Liberals, a collection of essays by Thomas Sowell that address these very topics. His arguments are quite convincing, as is his evidence.

u/ezralv · 0 pointsr/AskTrumpSupporters

We need to conserve our high energy for now.

C u next tuesday!

u/TheWestDeclines · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

Here is some information to help you get up to speed:

Spygate: The True Story of Collusion [Infographic]

Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency

Read them completely if you want to know what really happened, and what's likely going to happen moving forward. Or if you want to remain ignorant, don't read them. Your choice.

u/jackbootedcyborg · -2 pointsr/AskTrumpSupporters

So, you don't understand why we enacted the tariffs? There's actually a whole book on it. You can find it here.

Tariffs are a means, not an ends. The ends (goal) is zero tariffs.

u/MuvHugginInc · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

What are your thoughts on the contents of this article?

Are you familiar with the book The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness? (

u/5thquintile · 10 pointsr/AskTrumpSupporters

Ideally the role of the mainstream media would be to aggressively pursue the truth regardless of ideology. We have never had an ideal mainstream media, it has long been filled with ideologues pushing their agendas.

While I'd not say they are the enemy of the people exactly, they certainly are not serving our interests.

u/Ampage86 · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

"committing a felony" on its own hold very, very, little weight with me. Considering you probably committed Three felonies yesterday, I think most would prefer if you were judged by the circumstances and intent of the felony over the simple fact that is was committed.

u/[deleted] · 4 pointsr/AskTrumpSupporters

Those "double listings" are called "holdings" they are used to disperse risk and are a smart business move. They operate separately and have separate balance sheets.

Many of the businesses are created and built by him, then sold off. Similar to the airline company he once created. He usually does allow his name to be licenced to things, but a person does NOT become a billionaire this way.

If he licences his name to a company and then THEY fail as a company, I would disagree with blaming that on Trump .

Secondly, you will notice many of the companies owned by him are real estate (construction) related and require lots of bidding, negotiation, and dealing. Not just with private sector but also the government for things like zoning. His book the art of the deal is literally filled with his deals if you are interested:

u/mitreddit · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

if you are curious what destroys civilizations there's a book on the topic with some research / ideas on the topic

the thesis of that book is resource appetite exceeding supply causes a dramatic collapse.

so you favor a homogenous culture? ideologically or racially?

u/blatherskiter · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

>The swamp thinks that if you cut taxes and magically business will return. It won't.

Yeah, it's not like Trump has some magic wand he can wave, right?

>Companies will just pocket the money and continue shipping jobs overseas.

That's what liberals say, and they're wrong. You need this:

u/CptGoodnight · 2 pointsr/AskTrumpSupporters

There's a book by a psychologist named Jonathan Haidt called "The Righteous Mind." I found it there. Here is the excerpt:

From page 334 of The Righteous Mind (emphasis added):

In a study I did with Jesse Graham and Brian Nosek, we tested how well liberals and conservatives could understand each other. We asked more than two thousand American visitors to fill out the Moral Foundations Qyestionnaire. One-third of the time they were asked to fill it out normally, answering as themselves. One-third of the time they were asked to fill it out as they think a “typical liberal” would respond. One-third of the time they were asked to fill it out as a “typical conservative” would respond. This design allowed us to examine the stereotypes that each side held about the other. More important, it allowed us to assess how accurate they were by comparing people’s expectations about “typical” partisans to the actual responses from partisans on the left and the right)’ Who was best able to pretend to be the other?

The results were clear and consistent. Moderates and conservatives were most accurate in their predictions, whether they were pretending to be liberals or conservatives. Liberals were the least accurate, especially those who described themselves as “very liberal.” The biggest errors in the whole study came when liberals answered the Care and Fairness questions while pretending to be conservatives. When faced with questions such as “One of the worst things a person could do is hurt a defenseless animal” or ”Justice is the most important requirement for a society,” liberals assumed that conservatives would disagree. If you have a moral matrix built primarily on intuitions about care and fairness (as equality), and you listen to the Reagan [i.e., conservative] narrative, what else could you think? Reagan seems completely unconcerned about the welfare of drug addicts, poor people, and gay people. He’s more interested in fighting wars and telling people how to run their sex lives.

If you don’t see that Reagan is pursuing positive values of Loyalty, Authority, and Sanctity, you almost have to conclude that Republicans see no positive value in Care and Fairness. You might even go as far as Michael Feingold, a theater critic for the liberal newspaper the Village Voice, when he wrote:

>Republicans don’t believe in the imagination, partly because so few of them have one, but mostly because it gets in the way of their chosen work, which is to destroy the human race and the planet. Human beings, who have imaginations, can see a recipe for disaster in the making; Republicans, whose goal in life is to profit from disaster and who don’t give a hoot about human beings, either can’t or won’t. Which is why I personally think they should be exterminated before they cause any more harm)

One of the many ironies in this quotation is that it shows the inability of a theater critic-who skillfully enters fantastical imaginary worlds for a living-to imagine that Republicans act within a moral matrix that differs from his own. Morality binds and blinds.

u/zachowac · 0 pointsr/AskTrumpSupporters
  1. First congress restricted immigration to only white persons:

  2. Documented in here, but I got the audiobook so cannot quote it. But basically, immigrants who were poor returned to their home country if they couldn't make it in America; as we had no welfare state.
u/frodaddy · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

> action of breaking the law is a violent act

Wait, so, anytime you break the law, you consider it a violent act?

According to this book, the average American commits 3 felonies every day. Would that mean all Americans are violent if they commit so many violent acts?

u/_AnObviousThrowaway_ · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

The after effects, sure. But I don't think you can make the case that racism is the primary thing keeping black people down today. For example, take the period between the civil war and the civil rights act of 1964. Black people advanced socially in that time period much more quickly than in the period since the civil rights act, despite the fact discrimination was both legal and extremely common, at least in the south. This tells me there's something else going on. You can see a lot of the problems that plague the black community also plague some white communities, namely crime, poverty, and drug use. Charles Murray writes about said white communities here. And they appear to have similar causes, poor work ethic, single parenthood, and so on. As Thomas Sowell points out,, black culture and redneck culture aren't as dissimilar as you might think.

u/tryingtobecivil43 · 1 pointr/AskTrumpSupporters

I will look into Thomas Sowell. In fact, I will order one of his books right now. Which do you recommend?

Edit: Looking in him now. I find a lot of what he says to be rather "meh", but I'm going to give his book a shot. However, is he the only black scholar you read? We aren't monolithic and many well educated scholars would agree with many/some of his views.

In return, I ask that you look into "The New Jim Crow", which goes over a lot of what I've grazed upon, but from a much more eloquent and educated woman than myself.

I'm not saying technology alone was to blame. I'm saying that what people seem to not understand is that when black communities were hit, it had a larger impact, because black communities were not on a level playing field. Racism, especially systematic and institutional racism, added an extra set of challenges that white americans never had to face. As a black american, I acknowledge there are some issues in my community. But I also understand how things got to be so bad and that we cannot expect the government to fix it, the same people who really helped fuck it up. Same thing with Native Americans. Things are bad, but they didn't just get bad for no reason. We really have to take a nuanced look at history.

I linked some great sources, you should consider having a look.

I also suggest maybe rethinking relying on Ann Coulter.

"If we took away women’s right to vote, we’d never have to worry about another democrat president. It’s kind of a pipe dream. It’s a personal fantasy of mine.”

  • I don't have to explain why a woman who believes this is a problem. It's also simply not true. More white women voted republican, especially this year.

    “A lot of people are upset when I talk about Mexican child rapes, Muslims clitorectomies, Muslim honor killings…white people don’t do that. America is not used to these types of crimes. We are bringing in cultures where child rape is very common.” -

    male circumcision. Perhaps different reason, but child mutilation is wrong. Also, the catholic church? Lots of child rape.

    "In 1960 whites were 90% of the country. The census bureau recently estimated that whites already account for less than two-thirds of the population and will be a minority by 2050. Other estimates put that day much sooner. One may assume the new majority will not be such compassionate overlords as the white majority has been.”

  • Compassionate overlords?

    “This is a country created by white people…I am a Native because I am a descendant from settlers.”

    Correction, this country was stolen, then recreated by white people. Only natives are native americans.

    Basically, not to knock you, but this woman is part of the reason racial divides exists. I like to think we have a lot more in common than not, but rhetoric like Ann's unnecessarily furthers the divide. I'm sure there are much more reliable and less hateful conservative voices.