Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Fat hurts wrote:

Democrats lose again wrote:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1090967053689937921?s=20

And Republicans have become the party of criminals. The author of that tweet is headed for prison.

That tweet is insane. His comments lately have been batsh!t crazy. And, he IS headed for prison.

PIO!! wrote:

Trump may well be a thief. But those sums that you are quoting are miniscule.

minuscule

Stabuckee wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

I didn't say anything about boycotting Starbucks. My comments were about boycotting in general. I even went so far as to say, "I'm not a boycotter".

Thanks for telling us that you didn't say anything about boycotting Starbucks. We can all read.

The question is, and I'll type it very slow for you and others, what did Starbucks do wrong to get boycotted?

So, your first two sentences can be interpreted a couple different ways, but I will interpret it as in you believe that I suggested Starbucks should be boycotted. I did nothing of the sort, and you can not provide proof that I did.

I maintain that any company can be boycotted for any reason. If it's a good reason, the boycott may be large and have staying power. If it's a bad reason, it won't.

Fat hurts wrote:

Starbuckee wrote:

Explain to me what Starbucks did wrong again to get boycotted?

Starbucks has a founder and major shareholder who is endangering the world by throwing the 2020 election to a Russian asset.

It is wrong to endanger the world.

What about the rest of us shareholders? We're just collateral damage?

Flagpole wrote:

Stabuckee wrote:

Thanks for telling us that you didn't say anything about boycotting Starbucks. We can all read.

The question is, and I'll type it very slow for you and others, what did Starbucks do wrong to get boycotted?

So, your first two sentences can be interpreted a couple different ways, but I will interpret it as in you believe that I suggested Starbucks should be boycotted. I did nothing of the sort, and you can not provide proof that I did.

I maintain that any company can be boycotted for any reason. If it's a good reason, the boycott may be large and have staying power. If it's a bad reason, it won't.

I see that you are a very weak writer - starting a sentence with "So." I digress.

Your interpretation is incorrect. I was clear.

The dance around the question is perplexing.

Starbuckee wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

So, your first two sentences can be interpreted a couple different ways, but I will interpret it as in you believe that I suggested Starbucks should be boycotted. I did nothing of the sort, and you can not provide proof that I did.

I maintain that any company can be boycotted for any reason. If it's a good reason, the boycott may be large and have staying power. If it's a bad reason, it won't.

I see that you are a very weak writer - starting a sentence with "So." I digress.

Your interpretation is incorrect. I was clear.

The dance around the question is perplexing.

I am not dancing around anything. You believe that I believe Starbucks should be boycotted OR that for some reason I am defending or will defend a boycotting of Starbucks. I have not connected boycotting to Starbucks in any way, so I do not have a dog in this fight. Someone else answered your question. I suggest you converse with that person on this issue.

I will say this again about boycotting...people can boycott any company for any reason, and NO reason bothers me in the slightest. If it is a GOOD reason, it may be large and have staying power. If it's a bad reason, it won't.

What about me? wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Starbucks has a founder and major shareholder who is endangering the world by throwing the 2020 election to a Russian asset.

It is wrong to endanger the world.

What about the rest of us shareholders? We're just collateral damage?

Shareholders of any company do not need to continue being shareholders for ANY reason. That reason could be that the company did something that politically you don't like, or that their profits are going down, or that their company name has two "oo"s in it which reminds you of Moose, and you don't like Moose. Doesn't matter the reason. You can stop being a shareholder at any time.

Racket wrote:

Runningart2004 wrote:

Start as a BPA in December 2017 as a GL-5 and make $52,583 per year

Be promoted in December 2018 to GL-7 and make $62,949 per year

Be promoted in December 2019 to GL-9 and make $70,784 per year

Be promoted in December 2020 to GS-11 and make $83,054 per year

Be promoted in December 2021 to GS-12 and make $97,486 per year

Gotta love government jobs. Don't forget the added benefits of best healthcare ever and impossible to be fired!

Impossible to be fired??? LOL . . . tell that to all the people Trump has fired.

I met Cory back when I lived in NYC and..... wrote:

I met Cory about 10 years ago when I lived in NYC and he was the mayor of Newark. Great guy.

But, he has no chance in this election. I really like him and will vote for him if he is the Dem candidate but he did not come across well on TV during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings.

You never met Cory Booker.

^those are the only things this poster has posted in this string.

how the hell do you get that he is saying you believe starbucks should be boycotted or you are defending the boycotting of starbucks.

have you gone insane?

Racket wrote:

Runningart2004 wrote:

Start as a BPA in December 2017 as a GL-5 and make $52,583 per year

Be promoted in December 2018 to GL-7 and make $62,949 per year

Be promoted in December 2019 to GL-9 and make $70,784 per year

Be promoted in December 2020 to GS-11 and make $83,054 per year

Be promoted in December 2021 to GS-12 and make $97,486 per year

Gotta love government jobs. Don't forget the added benefits of best healthcare ever and impossible to be fired!

Speaking of jobs. Look at that January jobs report.

Expected: 170,000

Actual: 304,000

M-A-G-A!!!

What about me? wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Starbucks has a founder and major shareholder who is endangering the world by throwing the 2020 election to a Russian asset.

It is wrong to endanger the world.

What about the rest of us shareholders? We're just collateral damage?

Idiot. Sell SBUX NOW!!! And then BUY back later! Sell high. Buy low. Maximize profit.

Flagpole wrote:

What about me? wrote:

What about the rest of us shareholders? We're just collateral damage?

Shareholders of any company do not need to continue being shareholders for ANY reason. That reason could be that the company did something that politically you don't like, or that their profits are going down, or that their company name has two "oo"s in it which reminds you of Moose, and you don't like Moose. Doesn't matter the reason. You can stop being a shareholder at any time.

I invested in Trump University. I got nothing when Trump bankrupted it. So, WHAT ABOUT ME?

sell-buy wrote:

What about me? wrote:

What about the rest of us shareholders? We're just collateral damage?

Idiot. Sell SBUX NOW!!! And then BUY back later! Sell high. Buy low. Maximize profit.

Personally, I find this threat to boycott Starbucks by many Dems just because Schultz wants to run for office shameful. If he were planning to run as a Dem, they would have no issue whatsoever.

Join us or we will ruin your life (and thousands of other people's lives). It reeks of organized crime.

Flagpole wrote:

What about me? wrote:

What about the rest of us shareholders? We're just collateral damage?

Shareholders of any company do not need to continue being shareholders for ANY reason. That reason could be that the company did something that politically you don't like, or that their profits are going down, or that their company name has two "oo"s in it which reminds you of Moose, and you don't like Moose. Doesn't matter the reason. You can stop being a shareholder at any time.

I hope you are purposely being obtuse.

A good addition of 300,000 jobs.

But 800,000 federal workers didn't get paid at all in January.

Plus contractors didn't work and won't get back pay for that.

Back pay goes out today.

Regular pay resumes next week.

Hopefully things get back on track but it was projected that $3B was permanently lost from the economy during that time.

Curious to see the final 2018 GDP growth.

3%?

Ashamed wrote:

Personally, I find this threat to boycott Starbucks by many Dems just because Schultz wants to run for office shameful.

Personally, I find Trumpers supporting liberal Schultz to run for office because it helps their IQ45 Orange Turd from getting completely crushed in 2020 grotesque.

L L wrote:

A good addition of 300,000 jobs.

But 800,000 federal workers didn't get paid at all in January.

Plus contractors didn't work and won't get back pay for that.

Not a single one of the 800,000, plus the unpaid federal contractors, are considered unemployed by the Trump WH jobs calcs.

shameful wrote:

Ashamed wrote:

Personally, I find this threat to boycott Starbucks by many Dems just because Schultz wants to run for office shameful.

Personally, I find Trumpers supporting liberal Schultz to run for office because it helps their IQ45 Orange Turd from getting completely crushed in 2020 grotesque.

Paul Ryan is planning to run against Trump for 2020. Official announcement to come at a later date.