Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Non-Running Politics
Reply
Moderation
1 3,737 3,738 3,739 6,337
Next
  • registered

    X-Runner

    Member since 09/23/2015.

    1,554 posts. Last post 4 years ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 1:10pm EST
    re: Trollminator

    Trollminator wrote:

    X-Runner wrote:

    My feeling is that Trump really has no chance at winning again.

    So the Democratic candidate's electability doesn't matter.

    but if too many dems think this way its game over due to complacency

    Of course. I really don't care for the predictions a year in advance anyway.

    How many predictions can a single person make for the same event?

    I'm more interested in what's going on now.

    We may have history in the making.

    There will likely be a vote on impeachment, a vote to acquit and then that president nominated by his party to run for re-election.

    Andrew Johnson was not nominated after he avoided conviction and Clinton could not run again after a second full term.

    Then history (and maybe voters) will scrutinize the senators votes to acquit.

    We are setting a precedent of what we will tolerate in future presidents.

  • registered

    Flagpole

    Member since 03/14/2003.

    35,438 posts. Last post 9 months ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 1:14pm EST
    re: Trollminator

    Trollminator wrote:

    Flagpole wrote:

    I'm not willing to call March as the time, but I agree with him that he won't make it to the end of this term. He is going to go to prison too once out of office...unless of course he dies before the process is complete or there is criminal or space alien behavior that prevents it.

    I do have this concern...that once he is removed that his health has a precipitous decline. He is fueled by his ego and false sense of importance, and once some reality hits (if he's even capable of accepting reality), he might fall apart quickly and die. I do not want that to happen. I would rather he spend some time in prison for what he's done.

    I am afraid we can't have both. The way things look now it will be either impeachment or jail, unless, and this is a huge unless, Pelosi defaulted to POTUS with a Pence impeachment and Congress refusing to approve another VP appointment. If Dems impeach there is almost no question Pence will pardon Trump, and a pardon will be treated as enough punishment... sure we would hear about a legal violation here and there in his post president life but he wouldn't be thrown in jail. If they don't impeach and he loses next year everyone will distance themselves from him and will be happy to hang him as the scapegoat. He would go to jail on one or some of the charges in that case. The only wiggle room I can see is if GOP starts to suffer so badly in the polls that they would turn on him. I believe the current growth in americans supporting impeachment is more due to additional Dems getting behind it. I don't think republican voters will ever get behind it enough.

    We can have both, and I believe we will. Pence can't pardon state crimes, and Trump is in big trouble with the state of New York.

  • Smorbun

    Anonymous Poster

    6 years ago 11/05/2019 1:17pm EST
    re: Ciro

    Ciro wrote:

    God*

    Yes. Bless his heart.

  • registered

    Trollminator

    Member since 07/29/2015.

    21,955 posts. Last post 1 year ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 1:17pm EST
    re: agip

    agip wrote:

    4) anyone who says there was no quid pro quo is full of it.

    Problem is trump has successfully moved the goal post from I don't know what you're talking about, to we talked but it was a perfect conversation, to yeah there was quid pro quo but everyone does it... Rs don't care.

  • Smorbun

    Anonymous Poster

    6 years ago 11/05/2019 1:21pm EST
    re: Rigged for Hillary

    Rigged for Hillary wrote:

    Nope. I own all of you triggered libs & NeverTrumpers.

    The only thing you own is a dunce hat.

  • registered

    jesseriley

    Member since 07/08/2018.

    8,675 posts. Last post 5 years ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 1:29pm EST
    re: Trollminator

    Wrong!!! They’re screwed!!!!

  • registered

    jesseriley

    Member since 07/08/2018.

    8,675 posts. Last post 5 years ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 1:31pm EST
    re: jesseriley

    Along with Barr, who unsuccessfully tried to obstruct this testimony, Perry, and whatnot!

  • Where’s Eric a Blair

    Anonymous Poster

    6 years ago 11/05/2019 1:32pm EST
    re: eric a blair

    Where’s Eric a Blair?????

    Hahahahahaha!!!!!!!

    Democrats lose again!!!!

  • WTF^n

    Anonymous Poster

    6 years ago 11/05/2019 1:33pm EST
    re: comedyrelief

    comedyrelief wrote:

    For what it's worth, Obama solicited help from Russia for his re-election campaign a number of years ago, so he is far from the only president to seek assistance from a foreign power in getting elected / re-elected. Here is his quid pro quo moment:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/mar/26/obama-medvedev-space-nuclear

    Notice how he dangled a missile treaty in front of the Russians in exchange for help from Putin in his reelection campaign?

    That is so lame one can only feel sorry for you.

    WTF is wrong with you?

  • registered

    Ciro

    Member since 07/20/2018.

    3,365 posts. Last post 2 years ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 1:34pm EST
    re: X-Runner

    X-Runner wrote:

    agip wrote:

    Biden blowing out his lead again - back up to 8.5% over Warren as she falls back and Biden keeps his fan.

    I really think people don't want a massive activist president. Biden represents calm and experience.

    Biden/Harris would be a dream ticket. Wins everyone but the bernie bros. And even some of them would be excited about a female/black/multi-racial VP. Even if she is a cop.

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

    I think that's good for Warren.

    Since this is a running site, I will liken it to a distance race.

    It's better to stalk than to be stalked. It's hard to hold the lead.

    Warren has been quiet since taking the lead and getting more attacks.

    It's not a nationwide vote. It goes state by state.

    Warren is leading the Iowa and New Hampshire polls right now, where the campaigns are on the ground.

    If she wins those two states she gets big national press 2 1/2 weeks before South Carolina, which Biden should win easily. But if he doesn't, he's toast.

    "Biden represents calm and experience."

    Calm doesn't excite people and some people think of his experience as a step backward.

    But mostly he's old and we will see how his campaign stamina holds up. He has to look vigorous.

    I am not a fan of Trump but he does seem to have a lot of energy.

    And so does Warren.

    No offense but you’re not paying attention. The election will be decided in six battleground states, most of which are predominantly white working class rust belt.

    A poll today shows Warren wining only one of those six states against Trump. The same poll shows Biden winning four of those six states against Trump.

    Biden is by far the most likely to beat Trump in a head to head, in fact he’s likely the only candidate with a legitimate chance.

  • registered

    agip

    Member since 12/12/2010.

    40,907 posts. Last post 5 months ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 1:55pm EST
    re: Ciro

    Am I the only anti-trumper who is just not that overwhelmed by the ukraine case? ok, he did it. All the trumpers did it and they lied about it and they illegally covered it up.

    but the actual act...it's bad and corrupt but I think it will be pretty easy for Rs to simply say 'eh so what I don't care next.'

    I suppose on the other hand trump has done far worse than nixon in covering up and obstructing justice. But barr has let him...helped him.

    Is it obstruction if the AG is on your side and agreeing with everything you do? It's a loophole. The constitution assumed theAG would be on the side of hte people and a legit law enforcement officer, not a criminal helper.

    I'm just not sure this ukraine thing will mean much.

    Maybe somethign from the stone trial will stick. I mean it's clear that trumpers colluded with the russians...stone was the chief colluder. So maybe that will be interesting.

  • registered

    Ciro

    Member since 07/20/2018.

    3,365 posts. Last post 2 years ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 2:03pm EST
    re: agip

    agip wrote:

    Am I the only anti-trumper who is just not that overwhelmed by the ukraine case? ok, he did it. All the trumpers did it and they lied about it and they illegally covered it up.

    but the actual act...it's bad and corrupt but I think it will be pretty easy for Rs to simply say 'eh so what I don't care next.'

    I suppose on the other hand trump has done far worse than nixon in covering up and obstructing justice. But barr has let him...helped him.

    Is it obstruction if the AG is on your side and agreeing with everything you do? It's a loophole. The constitution assumed theAG would be on the side of hte people and a legit law enforcement officer, not a criminal helper.

    I'm just not sure this ukraine thing will mean much.

    Maybe somethign from the stone trial will stick. I mean it's clear that trumpers colluded with the russians...stone was the chief colluder. So maybe that will be interesting.

    Yeah it’s just the constitution, no big deal at all.

  • registered

    Rigged for Hillary

    Member since 08/19/2016.

    5,686 posts. Last post 4 years ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 2:07pm EST
    re: Smorbun

    Smorbun wrote:

    Rigged for Hillary wrote:

    Nope. I own all of you triggered libs & NeverTrumpers.

    The only thing you own is a dunce hat.

    Nothing dumber than predicting a Quid Pro Joe or a Pocahonky victory over Trump next year. The LR lib & NeverTrump echo chamber will be in full meltdown.

    #Trumplandslide

    KAG2020

  • registered

    agip

    Member since 12/12/2010.

    40,907 posts. Last post 5 months ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 2:08pm EST
    re: Ciro

    Ciro wrote:

    agip wrote:

    Am I the only anti-trumper who is just not that overwhelmed by the ukraine case? ok, he did it. All the trumpers did it and they lied about it and they illegally covered it up.

    but the actual act...it's bad and corrupt but I think it will be pretty easy for Rs to simply say 'eh so what I don't care next.'

    I suppose on the other hand trump has done far worse than nixon in covering up and obstructing justice. But barr has let him...helped him.

    Is it obstruction if the AG is on your side and agreeing with everything you do? It's a loophole. The constitution assumed theAG would be on the side of hte people and a legit law enforcement officer, not a criminal helper.

    I'm just not sure this ukraine thing will mean much.

    Maybe somethign from the stone trial will stick. I mean it's clear that trumpers colluded with the russians...stone was the chief colluder. So maybe that will be interesting.

    Yeah it’s just the constitution, no big deal at all.

    explain pls - what's the constitutional connection to the ukraine heist?

  • Here's the thing

    Anonymous Poster

    6 years ago 11/05/2019 2:09pm EST
    re: agip

    agip wrote:

    Am I the only anti-trumper who is just not that overwhelmed by the ukraine case? ok, he did it. All the trumpers did it and they lied about it and they illegally covered it up.

    but the actual act...it's bad and corrupt but I think it will be pretty easy for Rs to simply say 'eh so what I don't care next.'

    I suppose on the other hand trump has done far worse than nixon in covering up and obstructing justice. But barr has let him...helped him.

    Is it obstruction if the AG is on your side and agreeing with everything you do? It's a loophole. The constitution assumed theAG would be on the side of hte people and a legit law enforcement officer, not a criminal helper.

    I'm just not sure this ukraine thing will mean much.

    Maybe somethign from the stone trial will stick. I mean it's clear that trumpers colluded with the russians...stone was the chief colluder. So maybe that will be interesting.

    Here's the thing. There is absolutely nothing, not one single thing, that Trump could possibly do and NOT have the Trumpettes say, "eh so what I don't care next."

    Trump could fire some nuclear missiles at some sh!thole country on the grounds that some "terrorist" lived there, vaporize 50 million innocent civilians and the Trumpettes would say, "Eh so what? I don't care. Next."

  • registered

    Ciro

    Member since 07/20/2018.

    3,365 posts. Last post 2 years ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 2:12pm EST
    re: agip

    agip wrote:

    Ciro wrote:

    Yeah it’s just the constitution, no big deal at all.

    explain pls - what's the constitutional connection to the ukraine heist?

    Here you go.

    https://www.lawfareblog.com/constitution-says-bribery-impeachable-what-does-mean
  • registered

    agip

    Member since 12/12/2010.

    40,907 posts. Last post 5 months ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 2:22pm EST
    re: Ciro

    Ciro wrote:

    agip wrote:

    explain pls - what's the constitutional connection to the ukraine heist?

    Here you go.

    https://www.lawfareblog.com/constitution-says-bribery-impeachable-what-does-mean

    well ok...you'd have to buy into this whole thing as being 'bribery'

    but it isn't what you generally think of when you think of bribery. This is more like hardball diplomacy. You'd have to prove that trump really knew bidens were innocent, that ukraine had nothing to do with 2016. I seriously doubt trump thought either of those things.

    But sure, ok, some legal scholars might see 'bribery' here. seems weak to me tho.

  • registered

    Trollminator

    Member since 07/29/2015.

    21,955 posts. Last post 1 year ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 2:23pm EST
    re: Ciro

    Ciro wrote:

    [quote]X-Runner wrote:

    No offense but you’re not paying attention. The election will be decided in six battleground states, most of which are predominantly white working class rust belt.

    A poll today shows Warren wining only one of those six states against Trump. The same poll shows Biden winning four of those six states against Trump.

    Biden is by far the most likely to beat Trump in a head to head, in fact he’s likely the only candidate with a legitimate chance.

    I fully agree. Someone else would have start looking strong in those states to be taken seriously.

  • registered

    Ciro

    Member since 07/20/2018.

    3,365 posts. Last post 2 years ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 2:25pm EST
    re: agip

    agip wrote:

    Ciro wrote:

    Here you go.

    https://www.lawfareblog.com/constitution-says-bribery-impeachable-what-does-mean

    well ok...you'd have to buy into this whole thing as being 'bribery'

    but it isn't what you generally think of when you think of bribery. This is more like hardball diplomacy. You'd have to prove that trump really knew bidens were innocent, that ukraine had nothing to do with 2016. I seriously doubt trump thought either of those things.

    But sure, ok, some legal scholars might see 'bribery' here. seems weak to me tho.

    I can’t tell if you’re serious or trolling right now.

    Either way, I expect the legal scholars know more than you or I.

  • registered

    agip

    Member since 12/12/2010.

    40,907 posts. Last post 5 months ago.
    6 years ago 11/05/2019 2:28pm EST
    re: Ciro

    Ciro wrote:

    agip wrote:

    well ok...you'd have to buy into this whole thing as being 'bribery'

    but it isn't what you generally think of when you think of bribery. This is more like hardball diplomacy. You'd have to prove that trump really knew bidens were innocent, that ukraine had nothing to do with 2016. I seriously doubt trump thought either of those things.

    But sure, ok, some legal scholars might see 'bribery' here. seems weak to me tho.

    I can’t tell if you’re serious or trolling right now.

    Either way, I expect the legal scholars know more than you or I.

    I'm serious.

    We've decided as a country to let the exec branch run foreign policy. hard to pull that back.

    sure, this could go through 5 years of court battles like the emoluments battle . to determine the exact definition of 'bribery' lots of experts.

1 3,737 3,738 3,739 6,337

Jump To A Page

Next Last
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.
New Forum Moderation Information & Rules Search Troubleshooting

This thread has already been deleted.

Note: We review 100% of reports submitted. Visit our moderation dashboard to view statistics on our moderating activity. If you have a question or concern, email us at letsrun@letsrun.com or call us at our toll-free phone number:

1-844-LETSRUN (1-844-538-7786).

Author
Body
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?
What forum rule may this post have broken?

View our Terms Of Service for a complete description of our forum policies.

Provide context for this post report if relevant.

Reply Replying to

Leave the password field blank to post anonymously.

Post Preview
By posting you acknowledge that you have read and abide by our Terms and Conditions.

Message Board