Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Sally Vix wrote:

Should a doctor provide medical care to a baby who is alive and breathing? You tell me if you support that/

Yes. Did you bother reading the article? Too many words?

The bill was nothing more than political theater, which sides are guilty of. And you fell for it. Of course.

Sally Vix wrote:

agip wrote:

you cannot be serious saying that. Trump has totally taken over the GOP - there is no opposition allowed. That's why all these formerly good citizens in congress refused to conduct oversight or criticize him - you would get primaried instantly. and lose.

The GOP is considering not having a presidential primary this year, to consolidate around el spanky.

There is no dissent in the GOP, not really.

(not much in the Dems either, but at least they aren't supporting an organized crime family like the trumps)

I agree with some of what you say. But, in the Democratic party, if you don't support abortion you are not welcome. That is a litmus test. Please offer me something similar in the Republican party.

support for trump is mandatory in the republican party.

agreed that there is no place in the dem party for anti-abortion people

If you want policy rather than raw personality cult...I'd look at taxes. No one in the GOP can be for raising taxes.

Guns might be another - can you be a supporter of strong gun control and be in the GOP?

Can you be pro-choice and be in the GOP?

I mean these things are called wedge issues for a reason - they are binary, yes or no things.

The difference is that Trump is a terrible leader in every way other than his ability to consolidate opinions. He is shrinking the GOP but whoever stays is 100% a trumper. Nothing like that exists in the Dems.

There is a big difference between not wanting to outlaw something and supporting it.

There are a lot of people who do not drink alcohol but are not in favor of making it illegal to consume.

Democrats do not support abortion.

If anything they are far more interested in making birth control more available to prevent women from being in a situation to consider abortion.

Men have been in better position to make laws and those that want to outlaw abortion are predominantly men.

And women consider abortion because often men get them pregnant and then leave.

Abortion will happen legal or not.

Many want it to be legal to be safe and regulated.

I fully understand the argument against allowing it to be legal.

If life starts at conception, you are ending a life.

The majority of Americans do not want to have a full ban on abortions.

That doesn't make it right, but it does make it a political advantage.

Sally Vix wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Meh...nope. Victory will be mine, and it will be clear to everyone that yes indeed I was right about enough of it to declare victory. As I am honest and have integrity 100% of the time, I will declare defeat if indeed that is the case.

But you never declared defeat after you 100% guaranteed that Trump would not win the election. Instead you made up excuses.

1) I told you that you would reply to me again after you said you wouldn't.

2) I maintain today that as of TODAY, I was WRONG about the 2016 election. I have said this many times in this thread, so you of course are wrong again. I said so immediately after the election in the other big thread too that has since been deleted. I always admit when I am wrong about something...always and without exception. The caveat in this case is that IF (and it will be so) conspiracy to get Trump elected is proven, then I will be proven RIGHT about the 2016 election, for I gave the condition that there could not be cheating to get him elected and that aliens from space couldn't come down here and make it so. So, just to be clear...officially I remain wrong about the election. Technically as we sit here, I was RIGHT about the election, because the conspiracy DID happen, BUT I will not officially declare I was right until we have proof of that conspiracy.

Let me know if there are other things you want me to prove you wrong about.

The fair and impartial judge wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Meh...nope. Victory will be mine, and it will be clear to everyone that yes indeed I was right about enough of it to declare victory. As I am honest and have integrity 100% of the time, I will declare defeat if indeed that is the case.

No. You need to be 100% correct for a victory lap.

You do not make the rules.

Oh...but I DO make the rules. We have people here who are saying that Trump will win again in 2020 and will serve out two complete terms and that he will never be found guilty of anything because this is all a Democrat hoax. Get serious.

I have to be wrong about major things listed above to be wrong. If he isn't indicted for some other things we don't even know about or some other minor thing I have listed, then that doesn't prevent me from a victory lap. I set the world record if I am right on the money with all of my predictions. I just win the race if I am right about the big things (and I WILL be).

Mueller is coming.

The clown is done.

Sally Vix wrote:

nontrumper wrote:

I was right... you're beyond idiotic:

"What is the law currently?

Most legal experts we contacted agreed with this much of the Democrats’ argument: Killing a baby after birth is already against the law."

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2019/feb/28/donald-trump/fact-checking-donald-trumps-tweet-saying-democrats/

The specific law we are discussing made it a crime for a doctor to not care for a baby who had been born and was a viable baby. Should a doctor provide medical care to a baby who is alive and breathing? You tell me if you support that/

Ok since you are going to ask questions like a politician, I will respond in kind.

For the tiny number of cases this law would even apply to, are you definitively for taking decisions out the hands of parents and medical professionals and handing it to politicians, especially when those rare circumstances involve factors that are almost impossible to plan for and accommodate in advance?

But sure I’ll bite. If a newborn has a disability so horrible that it is incompatible with life (e.g. missing a brain or lungs) and they would not survive beyond a few hours or days and there is no technology or sufficient expertise to deal with that and the parents prefer to not try to continue life... then I think it would be absolutely wrong to prosecute the doctor involved.

Here’s a better question for you genius that will hopefully make you think a bit - how do you define execution after birth?

You’re right about the election & conspiracy; the only hangup is proving beyond a reasonable doubt that SPECIFIC Americans were in on it. The conspiracy itself, there’s abundant evidence. The indictment against Russians is hard to prosecute, since they can’t be extradited.

You make fair points.

Just out of curiosity, I am surprised by your comment about being "not for the Republican Party". I somehow had the impression that you leaned Republican but at the same time you saw the obvious, that Trump does not represent Republican values (or American values for that matter). Would you mind clarifying your general political leanings? Again, just curiosity.

Sally Vix wrote:

nontrumper wrote:

Your idiocy knows no bounds.

Do conservatives welcome those that support pro-choice? Do conservatives welcome those that believe in gun control?

Question for YOU. Do you support the legislation that was turned down that made doctors offer care to babies who had been born. These are Babies who are alive. The legislation was to protect these babies. Every fricking Dem said screw those babies and let's kill them!

When will you stop beating your wife?

Wrong sT wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Meh...nope. Victory will be mine, and it will be clear to everyone that yes indeed I was right about enough of it to declare victory. As I am honest and have integrity 100% of the time, I will declare defeat if indeed that is the case.

So, you just view this as some sort of game or contest? Mentally stable people don’t take a victory lap for discussing criminality in the WH.

Disgusting.

Well, the victory lap (The I Told You So that I will level) is just to provide justice to those who have called me everything under the sun just for making a prediction. Like a parent punishing a child, I won't enjoy doing this, but it is deserved, and I am all about teaching moments whenever possible. This is not a game to me at all. It is very serious, which is why I follow it so closely. Like I have said several times, I will level the I Told You So, and it will be just one time (unless I am challenged on it), and I will not even mention names, because I am righteous yet kind.

Sally Vix wrote:

not true wrote:

INCORRECT! Universities and entertainers are actually MOSTLY conservative.

Conservatives will welcome you as long as you are old and white.

Seriously? You really think universities and those in Hollywood are conservative? Come one.

Hmm...going to have to AGREE with you here Sally Vix. I will add these extra tidbits:

1) Entertainers in the US are overwhelmingly liberal.

2) As an overall statement, university professors in the US average liberal, BUT, it is not as heavily liberal as many conservatives would have everyone believe. Also, as a student looking for a good fit, there are a TON of conservative universities in the US including an almost unbelievable number of "Christian" universities. The political climate at any university is easily found with an online search, so no one should scream that liberal professors are polluting young minds, because you can go to any type of college you wish to. Finally, if you go to a state school in a red state, you will find that there are plenty of conservative professors there.

As I pointed out to Sally Vix, professors are almost always far more concerned with their own department and university politics (especially if they want tenure) than they are with US politics.

The idea that they're all sitting around plotting how they're going to instill all their liberal ideas into undergraduates does amuse me though

jesseriley wrote:

You’re right about the election & conspiracy; the only hangup is proving beyond a reasonable doubt that SPECIFIC Americans were in on it. The conspiracy itself, there’s abundant evidence. The indictment against Russians is hard to prosecute, since they can’t be extradited.

1) You are correct that I was correct about the election and conspiracy.

2) I will NOT consider myself to be right if ONLY foreign actors worked to get Trump elected. It MUST include people in his campaign, Trump himself, or someone with close ties working with Trump or the campaign (like Roger Stone for example). ANY of that makes me right about the 2016 election. My PREDICTION though includes that Trump himself knew about the conspiracy and is therefore also guilty of it.

3) Whether those Russians are prosecuted was never any part of my prediction or criteria for being right about anything.

Should really be asked wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

Question for YOU. Do you support the legislation that was turned down that made doctors offer care to babies who had been born. These are Babies who are alive. The legislation was to protect these babies. Every fricking Dem said screw those babies and let's kill them!

When will you stop beating your wife?

FYI - the question is "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

jesseriley wrote:

You’re right about the election & conspiracy; the only hangup is proving beyond a reasonable doubt that SPECIFIC Americans were in on it. The conspiracy itself, there’s abundant evidence. The indictment against Russians is hard to prosecute, since they can’t be extradited.

This is an issue of paramount importance for the US to not only get right but set the right precedent. A line has to be drawn between acceptable collection and use of dirt to damage an opponent and being at most passive in allowing a foreign entity to interfered in our legal processes. Since we can’t force other governments to stop interfering or prevent elements within their country from doing that we have to police our own and come down hard on those who are actively working (whether directly or indirectly) with foreign elements and then looking away when democracy takes a hit at their benefit.

Agree, but let’s not forget foreign actors committed many of these crimes on US soil.

Yep. This is why Don Jr., and Kushner will be indicted and Manafort will have an additional indictment added. Don Jr. was supposed to forward that e-mail he received that day directly to the FBI, and instead not only did he agree to the meeting and said "I love it", but he told them precisely when he would like the dirt on Hillary to come out "especially later in the summer."

To recap:

1) Jr. received information that Russia would like to provide to him dirt on Hillary Clinton as part of the Kremlin's support for Trump to win over Hillary.

2) Jr. responded that "I love it" and then also told them WHEN he would love it the most "especially later in the summer."

3) Jr. then had the meeting and invited the two biggest people in the campaign other than The Orange One himself.

That is all you need to know. THAT is collusion. THAT is conspiracy. There actually doesn't have to be a proven gain from the conspiracy (meaning that we know for sure what the Trump Campaign received from all this). You can conspire to kill someone, and if they find that out but you didn't actually kill the person, you go to jail for conspiracy to commit murder.

That conspiracy won't be shown is a pipe dream for Trumpers.

Sally Vix wrote:

Pink Panties wrote:

You claimed you were banned from LRC for two years. And that you were only recently allowed to visit and post on the forums. Just another one of your lies--your harry nuts seem to be overly constrained by your pink panties.

Actually, i was banned and didn't even bother to post here for a long time. I wasn't banned for 2 years. Your post reveals how juvenile you are. Hopefully, you will mature and post more mature posts.

0/10

Ghost of Igloi made the claim about Harry and pink panties yesterday. You failed to call him out for the "immature" post. I was simply testing you to see your reaction from someone you might think was not a Trumper. And you epically failed to prove you were not a diehard Trumper. But, of course we already know that. You, of course, claim that you are not.

And Christie just said that the SDNY investigation is unlimited, unlike Mueller, and totally out of trump’s jurisdiction. They’re toast!