Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Long Time Poster wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Two main things:

1) That Trump would not win the election unless one of two things happened; Cheating, or aliens came down here and made us vote for Trump. Cheating has already been admitted to by Trump with regard to Don Jr. (can't be cheating by Trump or anyone on his staff to help him win). Again, I will not declare I have been proven right about this until the conspiracy is official.

2) That Trump is a criminal and will not skate. He will be impeached and convicted OR he will resign, OR he will not be re-elected in 2020 and face a criminal indictment. He likely will not spend jail time due to some combination of pardon and plea bargain. In any event, it will be proven that he is a HUGE criminal with the bulk of that proof coming from the Mueller investigation. People keep saying things like "Mueller never". Well, I say Mueller is coming, so that's what I will be proven right about.

Mueller is coming.

The clown is done. Trump will lose his presidency, his legitimacy, likely a lot of money, and possibly his freedom (though not likely the freedom for the reasons I stated). He will be considered the worst President and most corrupt President in the history of the United States whether he spends a minute in jail or not. THAT makes him "done".

Do you have a link to #1?

I don't remember you saying that.

L L wrote:

"FREE STUFF for everyone is a great slogan...until you have to start paying for it somehow. Neither party really understands how to pay for shiz."

Let me provide a couple of examples of how to pay for free stuff.

Healthcare: Right now, premiums are paid by employers and/or employees to insurance companies for health insurance.

You could replace the premiums that are paid with an equivalent tax that would go to a general insurance fund.

This general fund would be available to all Americans and would be easily portable and not tied to your job.

So, regardless of your income level or if you are employed at any time, you would be covered for healthcare.

The current taxes collected for Medicaid would also go to this fund.

There would be a healthcare tax for employers and employees similar to the current Medicare tax payroll tax. Maybe an additional line on the corporate income tax.

People's net pay check would be about the same. Company's net income would be about the same.

The issue would be how to handle the insurance companies to stay in business because they are a big part of the economy. They make take a hit, but industries evolve, come and go over time.

Free college: You could make in state college tuition for public schools free just like high school. It's time to evolve to the next step. Yes, you would pay for it by raising taxes - both corporate and individual. But you wouldn't have to raise it by the amount of the increase in cost. And I wouldn't make room and board part of this.

Without the burden of tuition expense or higher student loans, people will have more money to spend into the economy and this will produce more tax revenue. And companies will have access to a more educated workforce that would be more productive for them and save them tuition reimbursement costs that many provide.

There would have to be more online classes to handle the higher volume.

College is still not for everyone and the credits could be used for qualifying trade schools.

Taking this financial burden away from young people will produce financial returns for the country.

Democrats usually do have plans to pay for their ideas.

Republicans simply cut taxes for high earners and big corporations, spend more on the highest expense (military) and run higher deficits, passing the debt to the next incumbent to deal with.

Knot True Sir wrote:

L L wrote:

"FREE STUFF for everyone is a great slogan...until you have to start paying for it somehow. Neither party really understands how to pay for shiz."

Let me provide a couple of examples of how to pay for free stuff.

Healthcare: Right now, premiums are paid by employers and/or employees to insurance companies for health insurance.

You could replace the premiums that are paid with an equivalent tax that would go to a general insurance fund.

This general fund would be available to all Americans and would be easily portable and not tied to your job.

So, regardless of your income level or if you are employed at any time, you would be covered for healthcare.

The current taxes collected for Medicaid would also go to this fund.

There would be a healthcare tax for employers and employees similar to the current Medicare tax payroll tax. Maybe an additional line on the corporate income tax.

People's net pay check would be about the same. Company's net income would be about the same.

The issue would be how to handle the insurance companies to stay in business because they are a big part of the economy. They make take a hit, but industries evolve, come and go over time.

Free college: You could make in state college tuition for public schools free just like high school. It's time to evolve to the next step. Yes, you would pay for it by raising taxes - both corporate and individual. But you wouldn't have to raise it by the amount of the increase in cost. And I wouldn't make room and board part of this.

Without the burden of tuition expense or higher student loans, people will have more money to spend into the economy and this will produce more tax revenue. And companies will have access to a more educated workforce that would be more productive for them and save them tuition reimbursement costs that many provide.

There would have to be more online classes to handle the higher volume.

College is still not for everyone and the credits could be used for qualifying trade schools.

Taking this financial burden away from young people will produce financial returns for the country.

Democrats usually do have plans to pay for their ideas.

Republicans simply cut taxes for high earners and big corporations, spend more on the highest expense (military) and run higher deficits, passing the debt to the next incumbent to deal with.

You are either lying or a very uninformed person.

My deductible is $5000 out of pocket. Call me a liar, go ahead. Feel free to place a bet, hence compensation, and post your email address. I'll bet ANY amount of money you'd like. This is where people always back down. They believe they are right and it's guaranteed money, but they won't bet.

My deductible is a direct result of ObamaCare, yes it is! It was $1200 out of pocket, then it went to $5000 when your guy was in Office.

If you have one reputable friend/relative in the medical field, they will tell you what you obviously don't know.

You seem to be on your game and know your stuff or at least most of it, but how you don't know the obvious is beyond me.

Knot True Sir wrote:

L L wrote:

"FREE STUFF for everyone is a great slogan...until you have to start paying for it somehow. Neither party really understands how to pay for shiz."

Let me provide a couple of examples of how to pay for free stuff.

Healthcare: Right now, premiums are paid by employers and/or employees to insurance companies for health insurance.

You could replace the premiums that are paid with an equivalent tax that would go to a general insurance fund.

This general fund would be available to all Americans and would be easily portable and not tied to your job.

So, regardless of your income level or if you are employed at any time, you would be covered for healthcare.

The current taxes collected for Medicaid would also go to this fund.

There would be a healthcare tax for employers and employees similar to the current Medicare tax payroll tax. Maybe an additional line on the corporate income tax.

People's net pay check would be about the same. Company's net income would be about the same.

The issue would be how to handle the insurance companies to stay in business because they are a big part of the economy. They make take a hit, but industries evolve, come and go over time.

Free college: You could make in state college tuition for public schools free just like high school. It's time to evolve to the next step. Yes, you would pay for it by raising taxes - both corporate and individual. But you wouldn't have to raise it by the amount of the increase in cost. And I wouldn't make room and board part of this.

Without the burden of tuition expense or higher student loans, people will have more money to spend into the economy and this will produce more tax revenue. And companies will have access to a more educated workforce that would be more productive for them and save them tuition reimbursement costs that many provide.

There would have to be more online classes to handle the higher volume.

College is still not for everyone and the credits could be used for qualifying trade schools.

Taking this financial burden away from young people will produce financial returns for the country.

Democrats usually do have plans to pay for their ideas.

Republicans simply cut taxes for high earners and big corporations, spend more on the highest expense (military) and run higher deficits, passing the debt to the next incumbent to deal with.

You are either lying or a very uninformed person.

My deductible is $5000 out of pocket. Call me a liar, go ahead. Feel free to place a bet, hence compensation, and post your email address. I'll bet ANY amount of money you'd like. This is where people always back down. They believe they are right and it's guaranteed money, but they won't bet.

My deductible is a direct result of ObamaCare, yes it is! It was $1200 out of pocket, then it went to $5000 when your guy was in Office.

If you have one reputable friend/relative in the medical field, they will tell you what you obviously don't know.

You seem to be on your game and know your stuff or at least most of it, but how you don't know the obvious is beyond me.

Flagpole wrote:

Long Time Poster wrote:

Do you have a link to #1?

I don't remember you saying that.

No I don't, because Letsrun took down that big thread on the 2016 election where I said that. So if you can get Letsrun to put the thread back (I have already tried and failed), then I could link it for you.

BUT, your question proves something...that even long time posters don't remember everything someone posts, because in this very thread (still there), I have explained this already about the other thread being removed, and I have done that at least twice before in this thread if not more.

So, I didn't put my conditions in there every time I posted back in 2016, but I did it a few times and even used the example of Olympic gold medalists stripped of their golds for cheating as rationale for why I would consider cheating to make my "zero chance" declaration null and void.

So, if you need hard evidence other than my word (I never lie), then you will need to get Letsrun to put the thread back if they still have it saved somewhere.

Flagpole wrote:

DiscoGary wrote:

Probably thought she was an ally and would help with minority outreach. It's a huge hit on his judgement that she turned out to be so sleazy. I never understood that move. But you have to take risks and sometimes they don't work out.

DiscoGary, don't just stop with saying the black woman was a huge hit on his judgement. Look at all the others that were bad judgement:

Flynn - Obama warned him not to hire him even.

Manafort - He was known as a sketchy individual.

Gates - Same as Manafort.

Carter Page and Papadopolous - Really unknown entities who were brought on despite no real credentials.

DeVos - Seriously. She knows next to nothing about Education.

Ben Carson as HUD Director? Come on! He picked him because he's black and HUD has "urban" in it! Ben Carson would have been more appropriate as Surgeon General.

I could go on and on from Wilbur Ross to Price and on and on and on. Trump was supposed to get "the best people". Where the hell are they? Tillerson even said he wasn't qualified to be Secretary of State. When you are an a$$hole like Trump is, "the best people" simply don't want to work for you, and I saw that coming down Fifth Avenue. You were fooled to think that he could get "the best people".

You have now admitted it was bad judgement on his part to hire Omarosa. Get to that point with all the others (mostly white people) and then you'll be part way to getting why so many don't want Trump to be our president.

He makes bad decisions all the time...not just about hiring this one particular black woman.

Silliest of Willies wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

No I don't, because Letsrun took down that big thread on the 2016 election where I said that. So if you can get Letsrun to put the thread back (I have already tried and failed), then I could link it for you.

BUT, your question proves something...that even long time posters don't remember everything someone posts, because in this very thread (still there), I have explained this already about the other thread being removed, and I have done that at least twice before in this thread if not more.

So, I didn't put my conditions in there every time I posted back in 2016, but I did it a few times and even used the example of Olympic gold medalists stripped of their golds for cheating as rationale for why I would consider cheating to make my "zero chance" declaration null and void.

So, if you need hard evidence other than my word (I never lie), then you will need to get Letsrun to put the thread back if they still have it saved somewhere.

You certainly have not requested that LRC re-instate that 2016 election thread, as you were most definitely behind it's elimination in the first place. Plus, you look like a slightly bigger fool than you do on this thread for all of the "ZERO chance" nonsense.

As most everyone can acknowledge except for you- the cheater already lost. Hillary cheated Bernie, then tried to cheat in the general via a complicit FBI/DOJ and the MSM working in her favor. But cheaters never win. The weekly news now being exposed on the sham of an investigation into her server/emails, and the subsequent Russia Collllluuuuusssssion hoax is proving this out to the point of zero denials even coming from the Left. It happened. 15 people have been fired or forced to resign from the FBI. With ZERO evidence of COLLLUUUUSSSSSSIIIIOOOONNN. Unbelievable.

Mueller still never.

Clownpole still forever.

Silliest of Willies wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

No I don't, because Letsrun took down that big thread on the 2016 election where I said that. So if you can get Letsrun to put the thread back (I have already tried and failed), then I could link it for you.

BUT, your question proves something...that even long time posters don't remember everything someone posts, because in this very thread (still there), I have explained this already about the other thread being removed, and I have done that at least twice before in this thread if not more.

So, I didn't put my conditions in there every time I posted back in 2016, but I did it a few times and even used the example of Olympic gold medalists stripped of their golds for cheating as rationale for why I would consider cheating to make my "zero chance" declaration null and void.

So, if you need hard evidence other than my word (I never lie), then you will need to get Letsrun to put the thread back if they still have it saved somewhere.

You certainly have not requested that LRC re-instate that 2016 election thread, as you were most definitely behind it's elimination in the first place. Plus, you look like a slightly bigger fool than you do on this thread for all of the "ZERO chance" nonsense.

As most everyone can acknowledge except for you- the cheater already lost. Hillary cheated Bernie, then tried to cheat in the general via a complicit FBI/DOJ and the MSM working in her favor. But cheaters never win. The weekly news now being exposed on the sham of an investigation into her server/emails, and the subsequent Russia Collllluuuuusssssion hoax is proving this out to the point of zero denials even coming from the Left. It happened. 15 people have been fired or forced to resign from the FBI. With ZERO evidence of COLLLUUUUSSSSSSIIIIOOOONNN. Unbelievable.

Mueller still never.

Clownpole still forever.

DiscoGary wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

DiscoGary, don't just stop with saying the black woman was a huge hit on his judgement. Look at all the others that were bad judgement:

Flynn - Obama warned him not to hire him even.

Manafort - He was known as a sketchy individual.

Gates - Same as Manafort.

Carter Page and Papadopolous - Really unknown entities who were brought on despite no real credentials.

DeVos - Seriously. She knows next to nothing about Education.

Ben Carson as HUD Director? Come on! He picked him because he's black and HUD has "urban" in it! Ben Carson would have been more appropriate as Surgeon General.

I could go on and on from Wilbur Ross to Price and on and on and on. Trump was supposed to get "the best people". Where the hell are they? Tillerson even said he wasn't qualified to be Secretary of State. When you are an a$$hole like Trump is, "the best people" simply don't want to work for you, and I saw that coming down Fifth Avenue. You were fooled to think that he could get "the best people".

You have now admitted it was bad judgement on his part to hire Omarosa. Get to that point with all the others (mostly white people) and then you'll be part way to getting why so many don't want Trump to be our president.

He makes bad decisions all the time...not just about hiring this one particular black woman.

You are a disgusting individual.

DiscoGary wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

DiscoGary, don't just stop with saying the black woman was a huge hit on his judgement. Look at all the others that were bad judgement:

Flynn - Obama warned him not to hire him even.

Manafort - He was known as a sketchy individual.

Gates - Same as Manafort.

Carter Page and Papadopolous - Really unknown entities who were brought on despite no real credentials.

DeVos - Seriously. She knows next to nothing about Education.

Ben Carson as HUD Director? Come on! He picked him because he's black and HUD has "urban" in it! Ben Carson would have been more appropriate as Surgeon General.

I could go on and on from Wilbur Ross to Price and on and on and on. Trump was supposed to get "the best people". Where the hell are they? Tillerson even said he wasn't qualified to be Secretary of State. When you are an a$$hole like Trump is, "the best people" simply don't want to work for you, and I saw that coming down Fifth Avenue. You were fooled to think that he could get "the best people".

You have now admitted it was bad judgement on his part to hire Omarosa. Get to that point with all the others (mostly white people) and then you'll be part way to getting why so many don't want Trump to be our president.

He makes bad decisions all the time...not just about hiring this one particular black woman.

You are a disgusting individual.

Fat hurts wrote:

XY wrote:

I’m sure you’re right about the race hustle and Omarosa is clearly self serving has no business being in the White House. She was a realty show participant.

Why did Trump select her?

I wasn't the least bit interested in Omarosa. She has zero credibility. But as I said, the tapes stand on their own. As she releases each one we get an interesting glimpse into Trump world. And that's actually pretty valuable.

But as to why Trump selected her, it's pretty obvious. He needed an African American in the West Wing.

The ironic thing is that Trump didn't appreciate what he had. Omarosa is EXTREMELY talented. She is really, really good on camera. She's obviously quite bright. But most of all, she knows how to play sleazy political games very well. No wonder she was so good at reality show competition.

Trump should have put her on camera a lot more. Frankly, I think she would have served him well as press secretary. While Huckabee-Sanders does a good job shoring up the base, Omarosa could have helped to broaden that base. Not because she is black. But because she is great on camera and she would have handled the press games a lot better.