Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

02-17-2017 , 10:09 PM
Rubio just did a photo op with Trump 2 days ago, you really think he'd do that if he knew Trump was F'd and going down?
02-17-2017 , 10:10 PM
a bunch of idiots are gonna protest in florida aren't they at the rally, just makes it look like he has more supporters to his supporters.
02-17-2017 , 10:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
I genuinely think without twitter he doesn't win the election and he has no shot next time. Unfortunately, it is the perfect medium for him. Also, if you look at his recent tweets just about every reply is people making fun of him. During the campaign, it was almost exclusively bots praising him. It's almost as if they went away after their success...
Bots/paid trolls are busy on another election.
02-17-2017 , 10:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobman0330
Does it matter whether Robert Reich or someone pretending to be Robert Reich made that story up?
I thought it was interesting. Honestly if I had any concerns about it being legitimate I probably would have not posted it. That being said I don't think it is very inflammatory so no probably not.

I think I have already arrived at the conclusion the story reinforces. Congress is made up of a bunch of cowards only out for self interest.
02-17-2017 , 10:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
Where can I place a bet the Trump purjures himself and then the House shrugs their shoulders?
'The President does believe that'
02-17-2017 , 10:15 PM
Here's a quote from an administration official talking about KT McFarland:

Quote:
It is dumb to demand Flynn’s people go. Why are you creating embarrassment? If you make that a precondition, you are not a loyal soldier and you don’t deserve the job.
WSJ article

I mean, holy ****. This is like something you would expect to hear from a dictator or a mafia boss or something. The best ****ing people though!

Last edited by JoltinJake; 02-17-2017 at 10:24 PM.
02-17-2017 , 10:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
It is what people think that matters in the voting booth, not the truth, as you well know.

But you didn't answer my question. Did "Hispanics" however you want to define them, who did not have an undocumented friend or relative, vote over 50% for Trump?
Jesus Christ
02-17-2017 , 10:16 PM
David for someone who should know about balancing your range you are ****ING AWFUL at disguising how right wing you are.
02-17-2017 , 10:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clovis8
I never made the last claim.
True, but I didn't see a sensible point of comparison for "Trump supporters are low income earners" other than comparing them to non-Trump supporters, which roughly means Democrats.
02-17-2017 , 10:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by markksman
I thought it was interesting. Honestly if I had any concerns about it being legitimate I probably would have not posted it. That being said I don't think it is very inflammatory so no probably not.

I think I have already arrived at the conclusion the story reinforces. Congress is made up of a bunch of cowards only out for self interest.
Jesus Christ do you people even ****ing ever read critically?

THATS NOT HOW REPUBLICANS TALK

That's how liberals imagine Republicans talk. For ****'s Sake.
02-17-2017 , 10:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASAP17
53% of white women WHO VOTED. Not 53% of white women period. Again it blows my mind how we don't mention those people in talking about who supports who. Why should non voters be let off the hook in discussing what happened on Election Day?
I feel like convincing some people who didn't vote because they are lazy/apathetic is a stronger strategy than trying to change the minds of people who are still defending trump.

Maybe if things go bad enough we will get enough people who didn't vote to come out next time.

I don't have any empathy for people not voting. It is one of my biggest pet peeves and I squarely blame them along with trump voters.

That being said the idea is to try to get people to vote or vote a different way I will first work on the non-voters. The others are a known comedy of badness. (Not all of them a good chunk is ignorant but still pretty bad).

Before this last election I would have thought the move was to change the minds of actual voters but the beliefs exposed to me this time around were so egregious I no longer think that way.
02-17-2017 , 10:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
David for someone who should know about balancing your range you are ****ING AWFUL at disguising how right wing you are.

It's cool DS, The vast RW conspiracy welcomes you with open arms.

Come on down
02-17-2017 , 10:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
We literally have 100% evidence of this. We just haven't seen anything that connects trump to it past a reasonable doubt.
We don't have evidence yet the Trump campaign actively worked with Russia to try to influence the election. We only know the Russians were trying to influence the election and the Trump campaign was in contact with them.

I mean, yeah, it's not a huge leap to assume they may have coordinated on the election, but we're not there yet. Only one step away though. And two steps to Trump.
02-17-2017 , 10:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
David for someone who should know about balancing your range you are ****ING AWFUL at disguising how right wing you are.
Well didn't he make all his poker money (playing money not writing money) by playing 100% exploitative?

Balance lol
02-17-2017 , 10:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Sklansky
There was a time when there was a chance that Trump would do exactly that. Maybe it was a longshot but his comments about infrastructure, social security and medical care may have led him to the conclusion that he had to raise taxes on the rich. But the extreme negative stuff coming from the left has probably convinced him that they can't be won over even a little. Which means that to keep his power he can't do anything that will upset the right.
I agree that it's possible trump might have swung back and forth but now never will but I wouldn't personally ask to see anything change in terms of how he has been treated, except to only be worse and more aggressive sooner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by weeeez
are you guys subscribed to online newspapers or you read news until free articles run out?
Im clicking on way too many articles and I find myself on blocked stuff too often (currently washington post),and Im not gonna sub one particular news site over another.
So people like end up stopping reading news or what?
Im curious how u guys do.

I haven't had a subscription for years but then a month or so ago I got a pop up on my iPad on wapo that I could use Apple pay and get two months for .99 cents. I have seen some other decent digital deals for first time subscribers as well so might look around.
02-17-2017 , 10:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoltinJake
Here's a quote from an administration official talking about KT McFarland:
Quote:
It is dumb to demand Flynn’s people go. Why are you creating embarrassment? If you make that a precondition, you are not a loyal soldier and you don’t deserve the job.
WSJ article

I mean, holy ****. This is like something you would expect to hear from a dictator or a mafia boss or something. The best ****ing people though!
02-17-2017 , 10:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketChads
He said this is the first President who has ever kept his promises, and words don't matter because Trump is going to be Trump
Except those promises about divesting, locking her up, going after bankers, not going on vacations, recognizing Taiwan...
02-17-2017 , 10:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
Except those promises about divesting, locking her up, going after bankers, not going on vacations, recognizing Taiwan...
Hiring foreign workers...


I get it. But like most of his base (I suspect about his base, at least) the only real promises my dad saw/sees is JOBSJOBSJOBS and ending sanctuary cities.

Obviously it's not possible to convince these people he's not actually creating jobs.
02-17-2017 , 10:33 PM
Interesting quote from JFK taking about the media, granted this was like a lifetime ago given how much its changed:

https://twitter.com/ReformedBroker/s...20781947846657
02-17-2017 , 10:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by aoFrantic
We literally have 100% evidence of this. We just haven't seen anything that connects trump to it past a reasonable doubt.
I think he is the missing dot, I agree. I am holding out hope they have his ass recorded on phone some how. I think even if it is Bannon, or someone else under Trump directly acting out treason, with the consent of Trump, I still think he gets impeached.
02-17-2017 , 10:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
Jesus Christ do you people even ****ing ever read critically?

THATS NOT HOW REPUBLICANS TALK

That's how liberals imagine Republicans talk. For ****'s Sake.
I don't even know what claims some of you are making as it relates to that story of a former republican congress person.

You are going to have to explain what you are saying because it's clear as mud.
02-17-2017 , 10:46 PM


it may be time to re-redo that OMGZ MEDIA ARGH BLARGH tweet
02-17-2017 , 10:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Cut
Bots/paid trolls are busy on another election.
yes this saw a story about it the other day, they're trying to get Le Pen or whatever her name is elected in France
02-17-2017 , 10:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sighsalot
I think he is the missing dot, I agree. I am holding out hope they have his ass recorded on phone some how. I think even if it is Bannon, or someone else under Trump directly acting out treason, with the consent of Trump, I still think he gets impeached.
Anyone following this closely knows he was involved. He is a huge micro manager.he even posed as his own publicist ffs.

You could make the argument they just didn't tell him like they did with the plane incident to get him to nominate pence but I think that's much less likely.

Last edited by aoFrantic; 02-17-2017 at 10:58 PM.
02-17-2017 , 10:50 PM
Before anybody starts taking impeachment seriously how about if we wait for some kind of sign that the House is actually inclined to actually do anything. No way am I giving them credit for anything at this point, and that goes for the Senate too. I see so semblance of honest oversight at all right now

      
m