Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Forgotten Man wrote:

Nixon resigned because he was a weak person. He didn't have to toughness to fight it to the bitter end. That's why he lost.

But President Trump is the toughest person you will ever see in your life. He will survive the smear campaign by the Deep State, and eventually prevail.

Given what we know about Nixon's crimes, are you saying he should have stayed in power?

Calyope wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

I will take that as a compliment.

Well, that's stupid, because that was not a compliment in any way. The mate said you were an idiot, and the next one agreed. I suppose you would rather be an idiot than a troll. Well, good on you, because you are an idiot, as noted by many.

Just another insult from you. Can you ever post ONE post without an insult in it? By the way ... You didn't get that I said "I will take that as a compliment" in jest. The person said "Sally is almost always sincere...just underinformed, misinformed, factually incorrect and over confident." He called me underinformed, misinformed, factually incorrect and overconfident." And I said that I take that as a compliment which I said in jest. Sheesh. Do you not have any sense of humor? Why are you always so angry all the time? Have some levity in your posts. Your blood pressure will drop. Do I say some goofy stuff at times? Sure, but this is place where everything has to be so serious. I don't troll but try to engage in honest discourse. God bless you.[/quote]

You never say "goofy" things, unless "goofy" in the states also means stupid. As the other poster noted, you say things that show you are "underinformed, misinformed, factually incorrect and over confident." This could potentially be funny, but you support an imbecile US President who is crooked and dangerous and needs a ride in a divvy van. "underinformed, misinformed, factually incorrect and over confident." You want a less serious topic, then go start a thread on knock knock jokes. Wanker.[/quote]

Knock knock

Whose there?

Cantaloupe

Cantaloupe who?

Cantaloupe tonight - Calyope has the car!

US Republicans are a bunch of winners. US President Nixon said, "Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal."

Bunch of bad blokes those Republicans.

Fat hurts wrote:

Forgotten Man wrote:

Nixon resigned because he was a weak person. He didn't have to toughness to fight it to the bitter end. That's why he lost.

But President Trump is the toughest person you will ever see in your life. He will survive the smear campaign by the Deep State, and eventually prevail.

Given what we know about Nixon's crimes, are you saying he should have stayed in power?

He should have fought like a real man. He may have been removed from office in the end, but at least he would have not been a chicken if he had fought to the end. But he was a weak person. Trump isn't weak.

The other difference is that Nixon was part of the Deep State. Trump is a people's president standing up against the Deep State. Nixon didn't have the people's support behind him. Trump is supported by millions and millions of patriotic hard working Americans.

Follow the Money wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:I have a serious question. Why is the US expected strike back at Iran after the attacks on the Saudi oil facility? The Saudis' defense budget is the third largest in the world. Why doesn't Saudi Arabia strike Iran? Iran attacked them?!!!

1. Because the Saudis spend a lot of money on Trump hotels and other properties. You are not supposed to like that?

2. And who knows if they are co-signing any of the multi-million bank loans Trump took to buy those properties?

Kind of silly. You are saying that Saudi Arabia, after an unprovoked attacked from a neighboring country, doesn't retaliate because they expect America will attack because Trump hotels get a lot of revenue from Saudis?? Are you seriously saying that?

Calyope wrote:

US Republicans are a bunch of winners. US President Nixon said, "Well, when the president does it, that means that it is not illegal."

Bunch of bad blokes those Republicans.

Bad blokes in both parties. I won't deny that.

Forgotten Man wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Given what we know about Nixon's crimes, are you saying he should have stayed in power?

He should have fought like a real man. He may have been removed from office in the end, but at least he would have not been a chicken if he had fought to the end. But he was a weak person. Trump isn't weak.

The other difference is that Nixon was part of the Deep State. Trump is a people's president standing up against the Deep State. Nixon didn't have the people's support behind him. Trump is supported by millions and millions of patriotic hard working Americans.

Nice post. Well said.

Sally Vix wrote:

Follow the Money wrote:

1. Because the Saudis spend a lot of money on Trump hotels and other properties. You are not supposed to like that?

2. And who knows if they are co-signing any of the multi-million bank loans Trump took to buy those properties?

Kind of silly. You are saying that Saudi Arabia, after an unprovoked attacked from a neighboring country, doesn't retaliate because they expect America will attack because Trump hotels get a lot of revenue from Saudis?? Are you seriously saying that?

Why is it silly? Trump's #1 interest is his own bottom line. Maybe the hotel revenue is not a big enough factor. But if the Saudis have co-signed his back loans, they can blackmail him any time they want. Of course, there is a very simple way to disprove this "silly" hypothesis, which Trump has been adamantly refusing to do. You have to wonder why.

Forgotten Man wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Given what we know about Nixon's crimes, are you saying he should have stayed in power?

He should have fought like a real man. He may have been removed from office in the end, but at least he would have not been a chicken if he had fought to the end. But he was a weak person. Trump isn't weak.

The other difference is that Nixon was part of the Deep State. Trump is a people's president standing up against the Deep State. Nixon didn't have the people's support behind him. Trump is supported by millions and millions of patriotic hard working Americans.

You don't know much about history, do you?

Nixon was very popular. He had just won re-election winning 49 states. And he was no more part of the Deep State than Tiny.

Nixon at least had the decency to resign instead of dragging the nation through the humiliation of impeachment and conviction.

Tiny will not resign because he is too weak to swallow his pride and put his nation first.

Follow the Money wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

Kind of silly. You are saying that Saudi Arabia, after an unprovoked attacked from a neighboring country, doesn't retaliate because they expect America will attack because Trump hotels get a lot of revenue from Saudis?? Are you seriously saying that?

Why is it silly? Trump's #1 interest is his own bottom line. Maybe the hotel revenue is not a big enough factor. But if the Saudis have co-signed his back loans, they can blackmail him any time they want. Of course, there is a very simple way to disprove this "silly" hypothesis, which Trump has been adamantly refusing to do. You have to wonder why.

I am the Saudi president. MBS. My country was attacked by a foreign country. You are saying that Saudi will not retaliate because of hotel revenues???? Seriously?

Fat hurts wrote:

Rebates wrote:

All it would take is for California to offer a rebate for cars which meet their emissions standards. A lot more money for electric, and a smaller amount ($500 to $1000) for cars offering higher mpg. That will hurt automakers more than anything else, especially considering that the 13 other states that have joined California in the standards will likely follow along with similar rebate programs. The states represent about 1/3rd of the U.S. auto market for new car sales.

It would work, but it's expensive for the states to do that.

California is all in for clean energy. They will do whatever that have to in the end. Tiny will not win this one.

Higher taxes rates/fees for gas guzzlers would be one way to fund a rebate program.

Nixon put the country ahead of his personal needs. He was a criminal and a real bad guy but at least at the end he put the nation first.

As did the few R senators who agreed Nixon had to go and were willing to put their necks out to get it done.

Trump puts the nation well behind himself - he would rather have it all burn down than for him to take one for the nation. And he will attempt to burn it all down - he will try do destroy every institution in the nation - voting, the FBI, the IC, the military, universities...democracy itself.

and he has 90% support from Rs.

[quote]Obvi wrote:

You don't seem to get it.

Nobody here is arguing that EVs suck. Or that they, themselves are not interested in them. What is being put forth is that:

A) EVs have a relatively small share of the car market (is this disputable?)

-- so do gasoline luxury cars, and specialty cars/trucks

B) There must be reasons that EVs have a relatively small share of the car market (is this disputable?)

-- so do gasoline luxury cars, and specialty cars/trucks

C) Here are what I believe to be the primary reasons (these, of course are open to debate)

-- They are not intended to please everyone

Try to comprehend what you are responding to prior to responding.

-- Here is where your problem lies. You are trying to equate the market ALL gasoline cars to the market for ALL EVs. Just don't.

The Saudis maybe make $1 billion per day in oil revenue. They are going to not retaliate against Iran because of $300K in hotel revenue? Dude, you can't bring this to the tabel.

Boys this is amazing. Right now Uncle Joe Biden is having the largest bump from the debates of all the Dems. Despite the flubs, the weird talk of sociologists etc.

Biden is a man of the people - they don't really mind his flubs. What they want is his authenticity and core goodness as a person. And his respect for the system.

I'm really enjoying watching Biden snowplow far lefties. I mean it's kind of sad because all these young people will be disillusioned, but I think above all nations need to preserve the center. Not go in 180 degree swings every new president.

Sally Vix wrote:

Conundrum wrote:

Trump exceeds all these criterion. I think Nixon and Clinton were ethically heads and shoulders over Trump.

I think you meant criteria.

Yes, s/he did. "Criterion" is the singular form of the noun; "criteria" is the plural.

Trump approval/disapproval ratings:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

NOTE that in this compilation of polls, DJT has never had 50% approval--astonishing, considering how well the economy's been going.

Also NOTE that the polls relying on "likely" voters routinely accord him a higher approval rating than the other polls do. If the Dems are to defeat him they will *have* to get their voters to go to the polls.

agip wrote:

non-right wingers should be happier this week than most weeks. Although they have a lot of trouble ever being happy, true.

Netanyahu may finally be gone

Boris Johnson is in free fall in the UK

Trump is at near lows in approval ratings and virtually every indicator suggests he will get clocked next year. Impeachment by whatever name you want to give the process is starting.

Probably there are a few more examples. The tide may be turning.

You forgot about this.

kibitzer wrote:

Trump approval/disapproval ratings:

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

NOTE that in this compilation of polls, DJT has never had 50% approval--astonishing, considering how well the economy's been going.

Also NOTE that the polls relying on "likely" voters routinely accord him a higher approval rating than the other polls do. If the Dems are to defeat him they will *have* to get their voters to go to the polls.

yeah and for that reason someone on the ticket absolutely must be african american. I mean I hate identity politics as much as the next guy but the dems need to get the AAs out to vote.