Author President Donald J. Trump  (Read 788346 times)

6 Members and 22 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #240 on: January 18, 2016, 02:22:15 AM »
No, Lynch will not prosecute.

Hillary will call it a political whack job of the Republicans. She will secure the democratic nomination.

I'll bet you $20 Hillary gets indicted. You in?

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #241 on: January 18, 2016, 02:34:54 AM »
confidently declaring Trump unelectable

I remember this exact shit happening with Ronald Reagan when I was 7 years old. Of course I had no idea what any of it meant, because I was 7 years old at the time, but I remember that the lesson of history is that people don't listen to the lessons of history.

Colonel Sanders and John Galt are our only hopes now. Repent! Repent, for the end is nigh!!

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #242 on: January 18, 2016, 02:35:42 AM »
I'll bet you $20 Hillary gets indicted. You in?

I hope for the sake of the country Loretta Lynch would prosecute her.  Imagine a Hillary Presidency after the AG refused to prosecute her.  It would tie up the political process by Republicans forcing impeachment proceedings.

I think our countries political system would hit rock bottom in that atmosphere.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #243 on: January 18, 2016, 02:37:59 AM »

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #244 on: January 18, 2016, 02:42:41 AM »
I think it'll have more substance than simple political mud.  Monica is mud. Benghazi is mud.  I think Trump will talk about HRC used the Senate job solely to build an '08 campaign chest, and how the Clinton Fdn is a salary generator for FOB&H, a shell for B&H political activity, and a shadow broker for deals to benefit the Clintons and their big contributors.

If he can do that without the abbreviations and do it with less words he will have a chance for a landslide. If he could get it down to 140 characters he may get all the votes except for B&H.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #245 on: January 18, 2016, 02:50:51 AM »
Yeah, I agree. The Republican Party, for whatever reason, has always left the kid gloves on regarding Hillary. Trump won't.

The reason is, Republican candidates are terrified of the "woman-basher" stigma. Trump has no such fear. He makes his own rules and even changes them as he sees fit.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #246 on: January 18, 2016, 03:00:55 AM »
No, Lynch will not prosecute.

Hillary will call it a political whack job of the Republicans. She will secure the democratic nomination.

WHEN the FBI presents their evidence, it will be overwhelming. Hillary will cut a deal to avoid prison, but her reputation will be utterly destroyed. she and Bill will then largely disappear from public life forever.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #247 on: January 18, 2016, 03:08:51 AM »
So let me get this straight, you would prefer the person that gets bought by special interests behind the scenes and then tells you they can't be bought over a person explaining to you how he's spent decades buying politicians. That doesn't make sense to me. You seem to want more of the same, but that wasn't working.

Not at all. I would enthusiastically support a candidate who bluntly called BS on everything that's been wrong with politics from the days of our beloved Founding Fathers, but I could never vote for Trump.  It has nothing to do with the current political climate, because I've never liked him.  He's a boorish, narcissistic, blustering braggart with questionable ethics, a long history of political opportunism, and a penchant for throwing tantrums when he doesn't get his way.  While I'm no expert in psychology by any means, his incessant need to loudly remind everyone how great he is has always seemed like a cover for insecurity. 

I also think he's a misogynist who reflexively responds to women who displease him with crude, childish remarks about their bodies.  He has a long record of doing that, and while I'm no fan of Rosie O'Donnell, I can't imagine any president engaging her in a stupid social media pissing match the way he did a few years ago. 

Quote
Failed business ventures don't stick. If they did, most presidents of the last century wouldn't have gotten elected. We all have our failures, bankruptcies, divorces, and bullshit happen in life. You bring up the Trump University thing, but that doesn't shock or surprise me at all. It just makes me wonder how so many writer's workshops, "film schools", etc. manage to exist in NY, because they do the same shit Trump did. Now, if he'd have gotten caught porking a member of the staff, then you'd have something.

Those film schools and workshops most likely weren't started by George Lucas and Stephen King with the intention of attracting students with grandiose guarantees of success that couldn't be fulfilled.  Trump University was not just a "failed business."  By all objective accounts, it was a shady, possibly criminal, enterprise deigned to deceive and fleece the credulous with ultimately false promises of learning Trump's secrets to amassing riches. You can look it up. 

Quote
That's because you grew up in the age of decorum and smoke screens. There was a time where senators would fist fight in the senate, one nearly beating another one to death with a cane at one point. Andrew Jackson's attacks on Buchanan make Trump seem like a pretty flower. Likewise, Trump has nothing on Teddy Roosevelt as far as bravado and arrogance. But over the course of the early 20th century, a pall of decorum was set up that presented a sort of "professionalism" to politics, an air of some kind of false dignity that did nothing but provide a smoke screen for politicians to hide their corruption behind. Trump broke that, and now, for some unknown reason, everyone seems shocked by it.


Andrew Jackson crapped bigger than Donald Trump.  If he were alive today, Old Hickory would kill him in a duel and whittle a flute out of his right femur.  I wish I'd been a guest at his inaugural party! 

We seem to agree on some salient points about the political process, so I really don't want to get into an extended argument with you about Trump.  My opinion of him is strictly personal and was formed decades before he became a presidential candidate.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #248 on: January 18, 2016, 03:20:51 AM »
I'll bet you $20 Hillary gets indicted. You in?

No,
I think she may get indited but will not be prosecuted, at least not by Lynch. As with all good Clinton scandals her lackeys will take the blame.

Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #249 on: January 18, 2016, 03:20:58 AM »
Trump is the slut you have fun with, Cruz is the one the voters will marry.

Every Trump person I speak to, always tells me the same thing: I like Trump and Cruz. I have a hunch that many of those alleged Trump supporters will have an epiphany once in the voting booth.  8)

Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #250 on: January 18, 2016, 03:23:02 AM »
Trump is the slut you have fun with, Cruz is the one the voters will marry.

Every Trump person I speak to, always tells me the same thing: I like Trump and Cruz. I have a hunch that many of those alleged Trump supporters will have an epiphany once in the voting booth.  8)

I am OK with Cruz, but I despise the flat tax. I also think there is 0% chance if Cruz is elected to the Presidency he will be able to push the flat tax through Congress.

 I find it hilarious that the politics thread is generally civil, while other threads are three ring circus.

Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #251 on: January 18, 2016, 03:28:43 AM »
I am OK with Cruz, but I despise the flat tax. I also think there is 0% chance if Cruz is elected to the Presidency he will be able to push the flat tax through Congress.

 I find it hilarious that the politics thread is generally civil, while other threads are three ring circus.

Yeah, exactly. That`s one of the fears with a Cruz Presidency. He`s made a lot of enemies in congress, so...there is that variable.

And don`t even get me started on that whole Art Bell series of threads. Wow.

Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #252 on: January 18, 2016, 03:31:46 AM »
Trump is the slut you have fun with, Cruz is the one the voters will marry.

Every Trump person I speak to, always tells me the same thing: I like Trump and Cruz. I have a hunch that many of those alleged Trump supporters will have an epiphany once in the voting booth.  8)

"I like the puppet on the left! I like the puppet on the right! Hey, wait a minute..."

Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #253 on: January 18, 2016, 03:34:11 AM »
Trump for POTUS!!! No, Cruz would never be elected as POTUS since he is too much of a right winger/conservative. But, Trump has alluded to having him as vice president.

Trump/Cruz 2016!

Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #254 on: January 18, 2016, 03:36:47 AM »
Trump for POTUS!!! No, Cruz would never be elected as POTUS since he is too much of a right winger/conservative. But, Trump has alluded to having him as vice president.

Trump/Cruz 2016!

I think both of them have too much ego to play second fiddle.

Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #255 on: January 18, 2016, 03:37:08 AM »
"I like the puppet on the left! I like the puppet on the right! Hey, wait a minute..."

Haha!  Trump is different I think. He doesn't need the money or the power, as he already has plenty. I believe he truly wants to make a difference and he wants to leave a legacy of having made this country great again.

Trump for POTUS!

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #256 on: January 18, 2016, 03:37:46 AM »
Which is why I scratched my head watching George Will repeat himself yet again today, confidently declaring Trump unelectable. No other candidate would skewer Hillary as Trump would.

The pundits have called Trump wrong the entire time since he entered the race. The guy could landslide it or fail spectacularly, nobody knows. He's a wildcard. I like that.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #257 on: January 18, 2016, 03:41:34 AM »
The pundits have called Trump wrong the entire time since he entered the race. The guy could landslide it or fail spectacularly, nobody knows. He's a wildcard. I like that.
I think He is teflon Don at this point. There's no taking him down. Trump for POTUS!

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #258 on: January 18, 2016, 03:42:40 AM »
The pundits have called Trump wrong the entire time since he entered the race. The guy could landslide it or fail spectacularly, nobody knows. He's a wildcard. I like that.

GOP voters take a huge risk with Trump. Like you said, he`s a huge wildcard. The GOP should be able to win this election with practically anybody as a candidate. Why take a chance on a wildcard like Trump, who may be an unmitigated one term disaster as a POTUS, when you can elect the sure thing with out all the  shiny fun stuff?


Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #259 on: January 18, 2016, 04:05:53 AM »
GOP voters take a huge risk with Trump. Like you said, he`s a huge wildcard. The GOP should be able to win this election with practically anybody as a candidate. Why take a chance on a wildcard like Trump, who may be an unmitigated one term disaster as a POTUS, when you can elect the sure thing with out all the  shiny fun stuff?

I think you underestimate Clinton. All political markets have the Democrats favored to win the presidency in 2016. I think Clinton would beat Trump by double digits.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #260 on: January 18, 2016, 04:18:30 AM »
I think you underestimate Clinton. All political markets have the Democrats favored to win the presidency in 2016. I think Clinton would beat Trump by double digits.

To this day I still have never met a Hilary supporter, seen a Hilary bumper sticker or a political front yard sign. I've seen quite a bit of Sanders and Trump propaganda locally but not Hilary. I find it hard to believe that anyone except the most ardent feminist would vote for her.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #261 on: January 18, 2016, 04:48:02 AM »
...I can't imagine any president engaging her in a stupid social media pissing match...
Art bell for president!  (too soon?) ;)

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #262 on: January 18, 2016, 05:29:42 AM »
Art bell for president!  (too soon?) ;)


Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #263 on: January 18, 2016, 05:41:22 AM »
To this day I still have never met a Hilary supporter, seen a Hilary bumper sticker or a political front yard sign. I've seen quite a bit of Sanders and Trump propaganda locally but not Hilary. I find it hard to believe that anyone except the most ardent feminist would vote for her.

How does it go? LUG, Lesbian until graduation? Not calling Hillary one (would explain a thing or two, but that would be too easy), but it seems to me most of her supporters are around for the ride, but will bail on the inevitable outcome of her not getting elected. Could be most of her public support comes from college campuses.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #264 on: January 18, 2016, 11:29:23 AM »
Art bell for president!  (too soon?) ;)

Nah, you're good!  ;D

Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #265 on: January 18, 2016, 12:21:24 PM »
I turned on the TV this morning and found Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC all covering Trump's speech at Biblethumper U live and apparently complete.  Same old stump speech; the wall, Iran, etc.   Trump was news in September; now he's one of several candidates. This free frequent saturation coverage of DT is really grossly unfair to the others. 

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #266 on: January 18, 2016, 02:51:13 PM »
GOP voters take a huge risk with Trump. Like you said, he`s a huge wildcard. The GOP should be able to win this election with practically anybody as a candidate. Why take a chance on a wildcard like Trump, who may be an unmitigated one term disaster as a POTUS, when you can elect the sure thing with out all the  shiny fun stuff?

To be honest, I think the GOP has been taking huge risks since Bush left office by running establishment candidates that were unlikely to win elections. McCain/Palin was a risk, Romney was a risk, Trump less so because he actually has a shot at winning. He's the least risky up there. That's what's so weird about the establishment and social conservative mindset, everyone knows that it doesn't resonate any longer with enough of the population to win presidential elections, yet the GOP wants to keep going out of their way to put up unelectable candidates. It doesn't even work with candidates seen as anti-establishment, Ted Cruz can no more win an election against Hillary than I can sprout wings and fly away. It's just a matter of the electoral college, conservatives should have learned from Romney that the playing field is different now and trying to win with the same old socially conservative principles isn't going to cut it from here on out.

The best thing the GOP could do is take notes from the libertarians instead of the preachers. Gay marriage isn't an issue worth losing elections over, opposition to pot legalization isn't an issue worth losing elections over, abortion is an unsolvable issue that isn't worth losing elections over, and so on. Barry Goldwater said as much decades ago, but no one listened. Instead, the GOP allowed the religious right to set the post 1970's agenda. It's done so for so long that we now have candidates like Cruz that outright act like preachers hoping to snow the evangelicals into voting for them based on how they carry themselves. It's ridiculous.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #267 on: January 18, 2016, 02:56:37 PM »
To be honest, I think the GOP has been taking huge risks since Bush left office by running establishment candidates that were unlikely to win elections. McCain/Palin was a risk, Romney was a risk, Trump less so because he actually has a shot at winning. He's the least risky up there. That's what's so weird about the establishment and social conservative mindset, everyone knows that it doesn't resonate any longer with enough of the population to win presidential elections, yet the GOP wants to keep going out of their way to put up unelectable candidates. It doesn't even work with candidates seen as anti-establishment, Ted Cruz can no more win an election against Hillary than I can sprout wings and fly away. It's just a matter of the electoral college, conservatives should have learned from Romney that the playing field is different now and trying to win with the same old socially conservative principles isn't going to cut it from here on out.

The best thing the GOP could do is take notes from the libertarians instead of the preachers. Gay marriage isn't an issue worth losing elections over, opposition to pot legalization isn't an issue worth losing elections over, abortion is an unsolvable issue that isn't worth losing elections over, and so on. Barry Goldwater said as much decades ago, but no one listened. Instead, the GOP allowed the religious right to set the post 1970's agenda. It's done so for so long that we now have candidates like Cruz that outright act like preachers hoping to snow the evangelicals into voting for them based on how they carry themselves. It's ridiculous.

I agree with most of that, but I saw Romney as more of a moderate than a conservative. And one thing I have never heard discussed, probably because it was politically incorrect, and that is my gut tells me a lot of the evangelicals did not vote for Romney strictly because he was a Mormon. You don't hear that discussed anywhere. Obama got less popular votes in 2012 than he did in 2008 and he still won. Something caused the Rebublican base to sit that one out, and I think it was the fact the Romney was a Mormon.

Re: Donald Trump 2016 Thread
« Reply #268 on: January 18, 2016, 03:01:28 PM »
Not at all. I would enthusiastically support a candidate who bluntly called BS on everything that's been wrong with politics from the days of our beloved Founding Fathers, but I could never vote for Trump.  It has nothing to do with the current political climate, because I've never liked him.  He's a boorish, narcissistic, blustering braggart with questionable ethics, a long history of political opportunism, and a penchant for throwing tantrums when he doesn't get his way.  While I'm no expert in psychology by any means, his incessant need to loudly remind everyone how great he is has always seemed like a cover for insecurity. 

I just don't see the difference between Trump and Teddy Roosevelt. The same things can be said of both.

Quote
Those film schools and workshops most likely weren't started by George Lucas and Stephen King with the intention of attracting students with grandiose guarantees of success that couldn't be fulfilled.  Trump University was not just a "failed business."  By all objective accounts, it was a shady, possibly criminal, enterprise deigned to deceive and fleece the credulous with ultimately false promises of learning Trump's secrets to amassing riches. You can look it up.

I have, and wasn't impressed. Like I said, it looked like a million other quasi-educational ventures. Turn on the TV, there's tons of people out there making a living by promising to tell people their "secrets" to success. I also saw some accusations from the Trump side about local politics in NY. Well, I know how messy that can be.

Quote
Andrew Jackson crapped bigger than Donald Trump.  If he were alive today, Old Hickory would kill him in a duel and whittle a flute out of his right femur.  I wish I'd been a guest at his inaugural party! 

Indeed! Though, I actually have little respect for Jackson's policies lol. But yeah, he was quite a piece of work that seemed to delight in making veiled references to Buchanan being gay.


Re: Donald Trump
« Reply #269 on: January 18, 2016, 03:12:26 PM »
Today Limbaugh and Levin both kept faith with their fundie audiences and went after Trump for calling out the asshole from TX as nasty and roundly disliked; a 100% true description.  When will the fools realize that their goal is not good government, but more sales of Gold Bond Powder and the latest drek from Regnery Publishing.