Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Fair stance. Would you vote for Trump again if he runs in 2020? Do you STILL think he's the lesser of two evils?

Depends who he runs against, opposition could actually be worse.

Ok. Hard to imagine who that might be, but I appreciate the answer.

Flagpole wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Depends who he runs against, opposition could actually be worse.

Ok. Hard to imagine who that might be, but I appreciate the answer.

The better question would have been, "Do you STILL think he WAS the lesser of two evils in 2016?"

Obvi wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Sure. That is just a far fetched statement. Of course your opinion, but it was my ballot.

Igy

Yes, it was indeed. And you are a Trumpette. A moron. And Lying Gary's somewhat quieter alter ego (if you are not in fact one and the same).

I have no idea who Lying Gary is other than he disagrees with you. I gave you an honest answer. You seem very narrow minded when you label me the moron.

Igy

And I completely disagree with you. While I disagree with many of the stances he took, and votes he made:

1) he usually (not always) acted with class and decency, a very rare trait from right wing leaders in this Trump Era. You mention him defending Obama against the Arab charge. He also defended Obama against other vitriol yelled by his supporters.

2) You mention the "obama-care" vote, but leave out MANY other key instances where he bucked his party with votes or stances. Here are links to SEVERAL important instances-

And MORE:

More: (some repeated) -

"McCain voted against the Bush tax cuts, for reducing greenhouse emissions and for funding Obama’s executive action providing federal benefits to immigrants who are in the country illegally, in addition to arguing against torture. "

Don't forget campaign finance.

He's bucked his party on a lot of key issues. He's stood up for class and decency, even in defeat, many times. He's shown integrity.

And of course there is this:

"McCain’s conduct during nearly six years in a North Vietnamese prison, the infamous Hanoi Hilton, had become the stuff of legend. In 1968, less than a year after his Navy bomber was shot down, the imprisoned McCain was abruptly offered unconditional release by the North Vietnamese, perhaps because his father had just been named the commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific. McCain was still badly crippled from his crash and the poor medical treatment that followed, yet he adhered to the P.O.W. code of honor and refused to be repatriated ahead of American prisoners who had been in captivity longer than he. His refusal was adamant. His guard told him, “Now, McCain, it will be very bad for you.” He was tortured for his defiance, and ultimately spent more than two years in solitary confinement. The abuse, combined with the after-effects of his injuries, left him physically marked. He could have avoided it all, but out of loyalty and—one has to name it—love for his comrades, he chose not to."

So Mr Pig, in the name of decency, show some class and show some respect for Mr McCain. He is certainly not perfect, but he's done more than enough, certainly in contrast to the actions of most right wingers in these dark, classless, integrity empty political Trump Era times, to earn that from you. There is a reason so many Right Wingers hate him (and they truly do): He's not a soul mate of theirs, meaning: he HAS a soul.

Flagpole wrote:

Here is all you need to know:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIjenjANqAk

Yes, I mentioned this. But big deal! McCain explained the obvious fact that Obama is neither a terrorist nor an Arab to a couple of disheveled nutjobs even though his campaign had implied exactly that on numerous occasions. Why am I supposed to admire him for saying something that anyone with an ounce of decency and common sense would say?

I counter your video with an article:

The Better Question wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Ok. Hard to imagine who that might be, but I appreciate the answer.

The better question would have been, "Do you STILL think he WAS the lesser of two evils in 2016?"

That is a good question. I would like to know more about the apparent torpedo to the Sanders campaign; see more information on then somewhat nefarious dealings of Mrs. Clinton. My view remains that our politicians on both sides avoid the pressing issues of this country and feed the voting public with divisive narratives. This thread seems a rehash of cable news. I really avoid posting here for this reason. Have a good weekend and don’t drive yourself too crazy.

Igy

Not threat at all wrote:

The Gallant Pig Man wrote:

Make no mistake, the GOP and this administration are trying to rig the mid-terms. They are absolutely hostile to democracy because democracy is a threat to them.

Democracy is only a threat in the feeble minds of white male racists.

Speaking of... Gary’s absence coincides with the white anxiety index peaking around the same time... yeah right, no connection there

Trump’s imagined net worth has been the backbone of his ego since the very beginning. The right jumped on the bandwagon when he claimed Obama was not a legit American (and therefore POTUS), they hopped back on when he claimed HRC and the liberal globalist Deep State controlled everything. They supported him because it helped their team. But when it becomes clearer that his financial situation has been complete garbage and that it’s made him more criminal, he won’t have their support and no matters how much spin and lying, his soul will get completely crushed from the capitulation and utter embarrassment. He may consider resignation if there’s a real threat it all gets exposed. He was a laughing stock during his pageant visit to Russia only a few years ago, just imagine what Putin and the other oligarchs will think when they find out his wallet is about the same size as his hands.

Trollminator wrote:

… just imagine what Putin and the other oligarchs will think when they find out his wallet is about the same size as his hands.

Putin does his homework. He well knows that Trump is in a fragile financial position. The first time Trump accepted money from the Russian Mob he was DONE. He can never (could never) pay them back. Then it is Putin's turn to make use of the useful idiot Trump proved himself to be.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

The Better Question wrote:

The better question would have been, "Do you STILL think he WAS the lesser of two evils in 2016?"

That is a good question. I would like to know more about the apparent torpedo to the Sanders campaign; see more information on then somewhat nefarious dealings of Mrs. Clinton. My view remains that our politicians on both sides avoid the pressing issues of this country and feed the voting public with divisive narratives. This thread seems a rehash of cable news. I really avoid posting here for this reason. Have a good weekend and don’t drive yourself too crazy.

Igy

You are dodging hard. Try again with this one - if the election was this fall between HRC and Trump who would you vote for?

Your last answer only proves you have very little faith about not only our political system but also in your ability to judge people’s characters. How one could not have seen Trump continue to behave like a complete authoritarian and attract every bad element possible to mangle the most powerful and respected seat in the world is just shocking to me. You thought he was the better candidate??? I call total bull on that unless you are either a toothless numbskull red neck or wealthy enough to gain bigly from tax cuts. The perceived damage to our credibility alone should have been a huge alarm.

Also the lack of details around the Sanders debacle and her supposedly nefarious dealings resulted in you writing her off as a bad candidate but somehow Trump’s proven criminality, unethical behavior and known shady entanglements didn’t phase you???

The Gallant Pig Man wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Here is all you need to know:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIjenjANqAk

Yes, I mentioned this. But big deal! McCain explained the obvious fact that Obama is neither a terrorist nor an Arab to a couple of disheveled nutjobs even though his campaign had implied exactly that on numerous occasions. Why am I supposed to admire him for saying something that anyone with an ounce of decency and common sense would say?

I counter your video with an article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/06/16/john-mccain-obama-is-directly-responsible-for-orlando-attack/?utm_term=.76ddc314b463

No one is perfect. He's much more honorable than most politicians in my estimation, and in comparison to the crop of current GOPers, he's at the top.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

The Better Question wrote:

The better question would have been, "Do you STILL think he WAS the lesser of two evils in 2016?"

That is a good question. I would like to know more about the apparent torpedo to the Sanders campaign; see more information on then somewhat nefarious dealings of Mrs. Clinton. My view remains that our politicians on both sides avoid the pressing issues of this country and feed the voting public with divisive narratives. This thread seems a rehash of cable news. I really avoid posting here for this reason. Have a good weekend and don’t drive yourself too crazy.

Igy

I've come to the conclusion that people like this either buy into Trump's fear tactics when he goes after immigrants and people of color OR they couldn't bring yourself to vote for a woman. Hillary Clinton was perhaps the most qualified person for the presidency of all time. Where is the appeal to Trump? His inner circle is being indicted daily and we will know the truth soon enough about his dealings with Russia. How is that not enough to think that Hillary Clinton is the lesser of two evils??? Trump also has us involved in trade wars, is getting chummy with foreign dictators, and is giving tax cuts to the rich which in turn allows rich people to buy the Republican Party and put out campaign ads attacking immigrants so you won't pay attention to the fact that they don't have any actual policy to be campaigning on. If you were a 72 McGovern fan what is your rationale? McGovern was anti war, wanted to cut defense spending, and wanted to create a minimum income floor. What about Trump speaks to any of that?

Trump is a con artist. He colluded with Russia, many of his inner circle are heading to jail, and you're not sure who you would vote for in 2020? Maybe the problem isn't Hillary Clinton. Maybe it's white men who can't get over their egos and feelings to vote for someone that is not an actual criminal who surrounds himself with actual criminals. Imagine the response if Hillary had done any of the things Trump had done? Just imagine with me. Would she not be impeached by now?

Nice little clip from The Orange One...filled with misleading statements of course:

https://twitter.com/i/status/1033023735517863936

"...Your 4 point 1 is going to go even higher." [start at 44 seconds]

Does this guy know anything about anything?

"Two Corinthians"

"4 point 1"

Puts me in a brain fog just listening to his ignorant self.

He reminds me of the "Can you make it go" dude in Star Trek the Next Generation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WmGvYDLsj4

Worthy of a full read:

The first section is part of a longer interview between a former senior editor at AMI (National Enquirer parent) and a reporter. Only Trump was allowed to edit. or kill, stories in the National Enquirer. David Pecker (CEO of AMI) did not allow that privilege to anyone else. Only to his friend Trump.

At the bottom is a link to a longer version of the Q&A.

Q: I read it was rare for the Enquirer to pay for stories that never ran. So Trump in that way was the exception.

A: Exactly. It makes no sense to pay in advance. You never want to pay [for a tip] until publication, so that you’re assured you get your money’s worth. If you pay in advance, that is suspicious.

Q: Because it implies that there are other reasons beyond the editorial ones.

A: Right, it is obviously to keep a story off the market.

Q: And some reporters you knew worked on Trump stories that were run by the Trump Organization.

A: Every story was run by Trump’s attorney, which it turns out was Cohen, or by reps with his organization.

Q: How do you know that?

A: I know it because we talked to editors who ran them, and they would come back with fixes. They were given not only copy approval and headline approval and photo approval, but they would actually be sent pages, covers to show how the story was displayed and if they didn’t like the photo or the headline or the prominence, they had input, and it was always acted on. American Media was very, very accommodating.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/david-pecker-donald-trump-jerry-george_us_5b802d8ce4b0729515128cad

I've mentioned this many times, the devastating demographic realities ahead for the GOP. That's why they had to lie and cheat and summon Russia in 2016, toward the Supreme Court and other variables. Republican voters are dying off every day and the younger generations eventually replacing them as dependable voters are more and more Democratic. Trump is only accelerating the situation with his sustained inept approval rating, which shoves the new registers even further away from his party and ideology:

https://www.metro.us/news/politics/70-percent-millennial-women-are-democrats-survey

Of course, every time I post the generational ideology stuff you've always got the simpleton conservatives who desperately jump in with the lame conventional wisdom that people always become more conservative as they age.

That type of blather works only among people who don't know a damn thing. In other words, it is happy slap agreement when conservatives are talking to conservatives.

As I've mentioned, people are influenced by the political realities when they came of age as voters, the 18-21 year old range. If it is a conservative era then those people are inclined toward Republicans and it remains that way the rest of their lives. Right now the so-called Silent Generation born 1928-1945 is the oldest major block. They turned 18 with either an unpopular Democrat in office in Truman or extremely popular Republican in Eisenhower. Those people were never hippies, not in majority. They didn't become more conservative. They grew up predisposed to think like Republicans and it has remained that way. The Silent Generation are voting as every political historian predicted they would, going back five decades.

There have been entire generations that are exceptions to the notion that youth are the most liberal and oldest most conservative. In fact, it is early but right now it seems likely that the generation younger than millennials will be more conservative than millennials, and probably remain that way.

Pew is always the best source for this type of research. They seemingly so it at least once per year. Here is one related link from a few years ago:

"As the Pew Research Center has often noted, it is not always the case that younger generations are more Democratic. Two decades ago, the youngest adults – Generation X – were the most Republican age cohort on balance, while the oldest – the Greatest Generation– were the most Democratic. In 1994, 47% of Gen Xers (then ages 18-29) identified with or leaned toward the Republican Party, while 42% identified as Democrats or leaned Democratic. And members of the Greatest Generation (then ages 67-81) — favored the Democratic Party over the GOP (49% to 42%)."

http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/30/a-different-look-at-generations-and-partisanship/

When this ends for Trump (and it will), it will end quickly. I'm not the first one to say this here, but I join their augury. The news will state something like "Just a week ago..." referring to how things were in Trump world a week ago and how things were SO different then. Not sure when this will be just yet, but it will be before the end of his term, for he will not make it to the end of his term. Some have compared this week to June 1973, just a little more than one year before Nixon resigned. Mueller seems to be working quickly, and Trump is decidedly more criminal, so a year from now could be a good guess...or sooner...spring as L L suggested. Time will tell, but it WILL happen.

Trump expects fealty, and that doesn't last forever, especially not for a person who is not liked. Even the GOP members who back him do not like him. He is a tyrant. They are afraid of him or at a minimum don't want to deal with him being upset with them. People do not remain loyal to tyrants forever, and they won't here either. The nature of people is why they will leave him, but it is the facts of his crimes that will end him.

Mueller is coming.

The clown is done.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Obvi wrote:

Yes, it was indeed. And you are a Trumpette. A moron. And Lying Gary's somewhat quieter alter ego (if you are not in fact one and the same).

I have no idea who Lying Gary is other than he disagrees with you. I gave you an honest answer. You seem very narrow minded when you label me the moron.

Igy

No, not really. Anyone who thinks Trump is the lesser of two evils is indeed a moron.

"Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."

-John McCain, 1998

I respect certain things about McCain's life, especially when it comes to his time in captivity. But if you want people to understand the answer to the question of "how did we get here?" with regard to the rise of Trump and Republican authoritarianism, I don't think it is healthy to sanctify someone like John McCain and gloss over the damage he has helped cause. He should not be absolved from an honest accounting of his record just because he's not as crazy as the current crop of elected Republicans whom he helped usher in. But the entire Beltway media is going to do just that over the next few days, so I will continue to be a jerk on the internet.

1.) Again, his defending Obama against accusations of being an Islamic terrorist is a pretty low bar. And there is more to that story. McCain and his campaign: sent out a fundraising email portraying Obama as a friend of Hamas; put Sarah Palin in the spotlight and her go around the country claiming that Obama was palling around with terrorists; cited Obama's "long association with a domestic terrorist" in a defense of...McCain's healthcare plan; noted that Obama returned money from Palestinian donors during a speech and asked his audience to consider who the real Obama was; sent out flyers with a mugshot of William Ayers that read "terrorist, radical, friend of Obama." These were not so much dog whistles as they were sirens.

2. The WP article you cite does not do much for your case. He was unwilling to call Huma Abedin a Muslim Brotherhood conspirator? He defended the Khan family in the wake of Trump's indefensible remarks? He wasn't vindictive against Obama in his concession speech? I mean, that's all well and good but, again, these are all low bars. I don't think they reflect well on McCain so much as they reflect poorly on the current state of the Republican Party. The only example that had anything to do with policy was his support for the torture report release, which I already noted and appreciate.

The Vox article isn't much better. It notes that he spoke out against sending troops to Lebanan in the early 1980s. He also went and had a friendly meeting with Pinochet in Chile at a time when the guy was killing off political opposition and supporters of democracy. He supported the idea of US troops occupying Iraq for 100 years. He suggested we "bomb bomb bomb Iran." He was arguing for adding more troops to Afghanistan just last year. He recently helped block a measure that would restrict the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia in order to help them continue committing war crimes in Yemen. This list goes on and on.

It also points out he worked on legislation to push US energy towards renewables.... and then says he pulled the bill to fend off a potential primary challenge. It says he was against the Bush Tax Cuts, but he was a pretty consistent supporter of tax cuts on the wealthy and opponent of progressive tax increases in general. He voted for the Bush cuts extension in 2006, he voted to expand Reagan tax cuts in 1983, and he voted for the TCJA.

What about campaign finance? McCain-Feingold was a nice idea, but it was a total failure and (hopefully inadvertently) brought about the rise of the Super PACs due to the restrictions it placed soft money donations to political parties.

It's not that I hate McCain and think he's an evil person, but I find the over-the-top, fawning treatment he receives to be roughly as inappropriate as you might consider my speaking negatively of him while he's on his deathbed.