Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Sally Vix wrote:

No Money Down wrote:

Flagpole would wipe the floor with you. You're a big talker. All hat, no cowboy.

I can run close to his PR at 58. Let him respond.

I take that back. I can run about a minute and plus of his PR at 58.

Racket wrote:

Runningart2004 wrote:

Flagpole, I’m not old enough to remember Nixon, there are few here who are, but the parallels in presidential behavior are astonishing.

I for one would think AG Sessions quitting/being fired would have been a bigger deal. I would think all of these temporary unconfirmed cabinet appointments would be troubling. It’s a slippery slope.

All we have is Comey’s word. We don’t have what Nixon had, a tape confirming obstruction. Nixon would have remained without that.

Alan

Everyone knew Nixon was a crook and he had no chance of staying in office.

For some reason, a huge chunk of the population thinks Trump is actually a great guy doing good things!

Nixon won in a landslide in ‘72. He was not going to be impeached without the tapes. His approval was still high before the tapes came out. Without the tapes you’re basically taking someone’s word. Kind of like we have now. We are left to take the word of Cohen or Comey because there is no “smoking gun”.

Trump is currently running an authoritarian regime. Putting his people in power without confirmation. Telling the Fed what to do. Calling out the DOJ. Calling out his intel agencies, etc. That’s ok for his supporters though. They want an authorization regime. The same can be said by parts of the left. They too want ultimate power to simply push through every leftist idea they have.

A constitutional two party republic is effectively run through compromise between both sides. Instead we get obstructionist actions by both sides. That compromise has been eroded as each side has changed congressional rules.

I’m a fan of the 60% rule and would be in more favor of a 75% rule. Decisions need to be made through super majorities, not party line decisions.

Alan

Trumpers remind me of those old guys that used to hang out in bus stations in the 70s, proselytizing teens with mimeographed sheets detailing the international Jewish conspiracy, and saying, “...Hitler was a great leader, until he went too far...”

Sally Vix wrote:

What do you mean about "allowing immigration?" We are all for legal immigration. It is you Liberals who don't want follow legal immigration. You want to throw the legal immigration laws out the window.

Tiny has consistently attacked legal immigration. He has done so both rhetorically and with policies that make it harder to legally come here. He has even created a "denaturalization task force" to try to take away the citizenship of naturalized US citizens.

You may be all for legal immigration, but Tiny is all against it. Do try to keep up.

Fat hurts wrote:

Tiny has consistently attacked legal immigration. He has done so both rhetorically and with policies that make it harder to legally come here. He has even created a "denaturalization task force" to try to take away the citizenship of naturalized US citizens.

Yeah for those who cheated on their citizenship applications. So he's against illegal immigrants and "legal" immigrants who illegally cheated.

agip wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

Trump is not my leader. How has he violated the Constitution? Offer up examples and allow me to rebut or refute.

See this is what makes me less than charitable with you. You say things without knowing anything. You say what you really, really want to be true but you aren't.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/25/politics/sanctuary-cities-injunction/index.htmlhttps://www.aclu.org/blog/immigrants-rights/appeals-court-declares-third-muslim-ban-unconstitutional

I could list more times our leader's actions have been ended because of unconstitutionality.

Then there are all the ways he has broken constitutional norms. By having so many acting people, to skirt embarrassing reviews by the senate. By accepting emoluments. On and on.

You. don't. care. about.the. Constitution. if. a. republican. is. president.

Sally, you are no match for agip. He (and Fat Hurts and I) is well-educated on all these matters, and you are not. There is no shame in that necessarily, but when you spew as if you know something, we don't have any other choice but to show you how you are wrong and make you look the fool. That is not a goal of any of us. I said this very early on in your posting history in this thread, and that is that you should refrain from posting unless it is to ask questions. You just don't know enough to appropriately add to any discussion.

Sally Vix wrote:

No Money Down wrote:

Flagpole would wipe the floor with you. You're a big talker. All hat, no cowboy.

I can run close to his PR at 58. Let him respond.

Isn't Flagpole's lifetime 5k PR something like 15 flat?

So you gonna race him for 20K or what?

Caller of bullshit wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

I can run close to his PR at 58. Let him respond.

Isn't Flagpole's lifetime 5k PR something like 15 flat?

flagpole said he ran 14 low.

This whole thread is an education in how many voters need an education. They’ll happily make donny pharaoh, and they’re sure it would be an improvement. Constitution is just a word with too many syllables (their slogans max out at 3).

Runningart2004 wrote:

Christians have killed more non-believers than any other religion. Me thinks you need a history lesson. You should look up the crusades.

2 Chronicles 15:12-13 ESV

And they entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and with all their soul, but that whoever would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, should be put to death, whether young or old, man or woman.

That’s pretty clear right?

It’s pretty common in the religions of Abraham (Judaism, Christian, and Islam) to promote the death of non-believers. Modern interpretations of these passages tend to lean towards more of a “spiritual death” or use this more as a metaphor versus actually stoning nonbelievers.

Alan

Your point about the crusades is well taken.

But no, your point concerning the ancient Jews in 2 Chronicles is not very clear at all. You left out verse 14-15, which says, "They took an oath to the Lord with loud acclamation, with shouting and with trumpets and horns. All Judah rejoiced about the oath because they had sworn it wholeheartedly. They sought God eagerly, and he was found by them. So the Lord gave them rest on every side."

King Asa was reforming the people of Judah. So they entered into a covenant that they would all agree to seek the Lord. They were merely saying that any one of us who do not follow through with this promise deserves death. It was part of the oath and not part of a national policy.

Also, there is no record of a purge of unbelievers during Asa's reign. Had this been a time for terrorizing unbelievers, it would not be a time of "rest on every side".

DownWithCheats wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Tiny has consistently attacked legal immigration. He has done so both rhetorically and with policies that make it harder to legally come here. He has even created a "denaturalization task force" to try to take away the citizenship of naturalized US citizens.

Yeah for those who cheated on their citizenship applications. So he's against illegal immigrants and "legal" immigrants who illegally cheated.

Once you are a US citizen that should never be taken away. If you did something illegal then the US courts can deal with it and you can be punished under US law.

It's a slippery slope to start yanking US citizenship. If allowed then it can be easily abused.

Again, the point is that Tiny constantly attacks legal immigration. The "denaturalization task force" is just another way to terrorize brown people. And in this case, he is terrorizing US citizens who are afraid of having their citizenship ripped away on a bogus charge.

I’m guessing Sally wants to run against Flagpole because it would be a distraction from the race to hold onto the presidency, which they’re losing.

DownWithCheats wrote:

Fat hurts wrote:

Tiny has consistently attacked legal immigration. He has done so both rhetorically and with policies that make it harder to legally come here. He has even created a "denaturalization task force" to try to take away the citizenship of naturalized US citizens.

Yeah for those who cheated on their citizenship applications. So he's against illegal immigrants and "legal" immigrants who illegally cheated.

Those who cheated on application like MELANIA TRUMP?

your leader, trump, probably had no idea there were Muslim's in Indonesia... and that is not to be meant as a joke.

Trump can’t tell the difference between Indonesia & amnesia.

didn't know... wrote:

your leader, trump, probably had no idea there were Muslim's in Indonesia... and that is not to be meant as a joke.

What is not a joke is your using an apostrophe to make "Muslim" plural. Instead of calling Trump an idiot maybe you should go back to school.

Even the most fervent Trumpster must find this indefensible.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-47968745

She declined because the job didn’t actually include all the money in the world ?! Ripoff! Not worth it!