If only...

negative from the perspective of his adoring followers

Ahh I see. And then kill/imprison/deport/silence the opposition remaining? I literally cannot believe these are THE PRESIDENT'S ambitions.

How about we cool it on the "person X should be the 2020 D pick" for a little while.

Obviously the proper play is to do what the GOP did, and throw like a dozen people up there and see who people gravitate towards.

It worked in 1992. It worked in 2008.

Recently the "anointed ones" (Hillary/Gore) have failed.

His only political ambition is to be president and be loved. He'd like for everyone to love him, but he'll settle for rabid love from his followers. If you look at it through that prism everything else makes sense.

Stupid question. Since when does the US President get to say "Investigate this person I don't like, because I think he wiretapped me but I have 0 evidence" or "Investigate this other person I don't like, because he legally made a joke about me", and then the investigations actually happen?? When did we start to model ourselves after Russia...Jan 20th?

Speaking of Russia, when there is real evidence for an investigation into that same person, he gets to openly obstruct it any way he can.

Is this a perk of the presidency that I'm not aware of, or is it completely illegal?

This is definitely not true. I thought it was at first, but sadly it isn't. He doesn't even try to earn the love of certain groups, while desperately trying to gain the love and respect of the biggest *******s on the planet, including his followers.

Also, money, power, vengeance all very much at the top of his needs.

or they couldve just put the most liked politician in the whole country as their nominee...

Oh wow...imagine how incredibly different this thread would be if it was "The Presidency of Bernie Sanders" instead?

I'm just thinking about Trump/Russia. Isn't the useful idiot theory a dead one? It's possible, but not likely, that Trump didn't know about active measures or election interference, but nobody (aside from Putin maybe) is forcing him to blatantly avoid criticism of Russia, or to weaken government agencies like the State Department, or to assign pro-Russian department heads like Flynn and Tillerson, or to tear apart the intelligence community, and on and on...

Putin says nice things about Trump. Trump says nice things about Putin.

You're giving Trump way too much credit for thinking any more deeply than that.

as if an authoritarian ever doesn't have full control of what's going on under him.

Total stupid argument that's probably gonna get him off the hook.

In every other case of it though, "When X disrespects/challenges/reverses on Trump, Trump counterpunches 2-10x harder." Not with Putin.

I'm not saying his lack of depth won't lead to terrible things. Quite the contrary.

so all the other russian connections and lies and coverups are just coincidences according to you?

14 lone wolves (so far).

"the presidency of mitch mcconnell"

Trump saving us money this weekend



https://twitter.com/mikememoli/statu...86891377815553

LOL @ the explanation of Trump using the phrase "America first." He was in an interview, the interviewer mentioned the phrase to him at some point, he thought it sounded nice and adopted it on the spot as a slogan, while being completely ignorant of the history of that phrase and the movement that was based on it.

About this Flynn transition story. Kislyak is the #1 Russian spy, everyone knew this already. Billingslea asked for a classified report on Kislyak to warn Flynn? BULL****! Billinglea got the report on Kislyak so Flynn could give it to Russia right?

Cock n penis be on you sir.

I have an opinion I have wanted to talk about for a while now. I personally think it is something that has to be done before the 2020 election. Here it is:

• We have to find a different word to describe Bernie and this progressive movement. It's time to stop using socialist/socialism.

He is not a socialist. Socialists believe in government owned production over free market production. Bernie, and all of us here I think, are not arguing for socialism. Using that word to describe him and his philosophies is not only inaccurate, it is going to be a major talking point for the right in any race Bernie or a Bernie-like candidate is involved in. For-the-people democrat, progressive democrat, anything other than socialist.

some are calling themselves neoliberals

but neo also has... you know -.-

I agree, but that's on Bernie, and I'm sure he's been advised on it. Also to flip now on how he labels himself would be used against him. I don't think it's as big of a deal as we automatically think it is. I have a relative who's probably voted Republican 80-90% of the time over the last 20 years, but wouldn't vote for Trump, so he's somewhat reasonable. He's a Fox News viewer and derisively called Bernie a socialist until he watched him speak and debate. Now he laments that Bernie didn't win the primary so he could vote for him.

The label shouldn't sink him in the primaries, and if he wins the nomination, his message will get out and people will hear it. Most of the people impacted by the label were never voting for him anyway.

All that said, Bernie will be 79 in 2020. He'd be the oldest person to ever win a major nomination. I think this was his one shot, unfortunately.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/sta...67117558099968

Does Donald look pretty in that picture or does Le Pen look ugly?