Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

agip wrote:

Right now I'm thinking the ticket should be Biden/Harris. That would tic all the identity politics items, and would get the black vote.

Any Democratic nominee is assured of the "black vote." Upwards of 95% of blacks will support whoever is the Democratic nominee.

agip wrote:

Agree wrote:

It’s Adam and Eve. Not Adam and Steve.

The perfect Republican moment. A Christian leader condemns a faithful married man because he is gay but embraces a fornicating, unfaithful, lying, cheating, stealing, coveting man because he is a Republican.

Amurica.

Yep. Asinine. Franklin Graham is lucky there isn't a hell, because he would be going there.

Sally Vix wrote:

agip wrote:

Right now I'm thinking the ticket should be Biden/Harris. That would tic all the identity politics items, and would get the black vote.

Any Democratic nominee is assured of the "black vote." Upwards of 95% of blacks will support whoever is the Democratic nominee.

well yes, but turnout is the key.

One reason HRC lost is that the black vote didn't turn out in Milwaukee and Phila.

Flagpole wrote:

urbane dictionary wrote:

Do try to keep up.

shoe in — person, place, or thing that is obvious.

PS. The converse of shoo-in is shoo away. Shoo-in was originally used in horse racing.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=shoe%20in

The word that Alan meant to use is "shoo-in". Don't go to urban dictionary to know what real words and their meanings are.

He's a shoo-in to win. "Shoo-in" is the word, not "shoe-in."

Are YOU Alan?

Shoo-in, as Sally showed, is a misappropriated term. The original meaning has been redefined to mean something else. It went from meaning something illegal, to meaning something entirely different.

So, stop being ignorant, and stop using a "recently redefined" term as correct English. It is nothing of the sort.

Sally Vix wrote:

agip wrote:

Right now I'm thinking the ticket should be Biden/Harris. That would tic all the identity politics items, and would get the black vote.

Any Democratic nominee is assured of the "black vote." Upwards of 95% of blacks will support whoever is the Democratic nominee.

This is true. But there is a difference between black vote and black turnout. Black turnout was 5-10% higher during Obama’s elections.

Alan

Sally Vix wrote:

agip wrote:

Right now I'm thinking the ticket should be Biden/Harris. That would tic all the identity politics items, and would get the black vote.

Any Democratic nominee is assured of the "black vote." Upwards of 95% of blacks will support whoever is the Democratic nominee.

What a racists post, Sally. "Black vote" really? African-American, grammar-girl. But Harris is NOT African-American. She is Jamaican and Indian. She is not African American. (Oh . . . and Indian means from India, and not Native-American.)

Sally Vix wrote:

I am all for fiscal conservatism. Gay marriage? I don't think anyone on the right cares any more about what you do in the bedroom. We are way past that. There may be exceptions but not many.

According to a Gallup poll taken last year, 56% of Republicans still oppose gay marriage.

Sally Vix wrote:

agip wrote:

Spanks lost another right wing media guy. One by one, even they are disgusted by the president.

Here's right wing Fox judicial commentatory Napolitano laying out why Trump obstructed justice.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1121552006785716224

HOLD ON A SECOND! How did Lewandowski get Trump to fire Mueller? Lewandowski was fired in June of 2016. Mueller was not even hired until May of 2017. So how the heck did Corey get Trump to fire Mueller when he had not even been fired yet?

It is all explained in the Mueller report. Or, you can just Google it and get a summary.

You also need to read the tweet again. You apparently misread it the first time.

Sally Vix wrote:

agip wrote:

Spanks lost another right wing media guy. One by one, even they are disgusted by the president.

Here's right wing Fox judicial commentatory Napolitano laying out why Trump obstructed justice.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1121552006785716224

HOLD ON A SECOND! How did Lewandowski get Trump to fire Mueller? Lewandowski was fired in June of 2016. Mueller was not even hired until May of 2017. So how the heck did Corey get Trump to fire Mueller when he had not even been fired yet?

You should not comment again until you read the Mueller Report. I know how ignorant you are because I read it. Most here don't know the depth of your ignorance...but at least half of them suspect.

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

Kamala Harris supports putting a 3rd gender option on federal ID cards

Bernie Sanders supports allowing terrorists like the Boston Bomber the right to vote

Elizabeth Warren supports abolishing the electoral college

These people are INSANE. Keep going down that path, Dems.

KAG2020

There is nothing that's even unusual about abolishing the electoral college. That one has been bandied about since the beginning of the constitution. Andrew Jackson even railed against the electoral college in his first address to congress in 1825. This (very good and obvious) idea has always been part of our politics.

Flagpole wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

HOLD ON A SECOND! How did Lewandowski get Trump to fire Mueller? Lewandowski was fired in June of 2016. Mueller was not even hired until May of 2017. So how the heck did Corey get Trump to fire Mueller when he had not even been fired yet?

You should not comment again until you read the Mueller Report. I know how ignorant you are because I read it. Most here don't know the depth of your ignorance...but at least half of them suspect.

To be fair, you did ask some questions as I have said you need to, but you also made statements, and the questions weren't REALLY questions.

Questions was a start...now, remove the statements and be sincere with the questions, and then we'd be getting somewhere.

Sally Vix wrote:

agip wrote:

Right now I'm thinking the ticket should be Biden/Harris. That would tic all the identity politics items, and would get the black vote.

Any Democratic nominee is assured of the "black vote." Upwards of 95% of blacks will support whoever is the Democratic nominee.

The question is how many will vote. When the black vote is strong, Democrats win.

Flagpole wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

HOLD ON A SECOND! How did Lewandowski get Trump to fire Mueller? Lewandowski was fired in June of 2016. Mueller was not even hired until May of 2017. So how the heck did Corey get Trump to fire Mueller when he had not even been fired yet?

You should not comment again until you read the Mueller Report. I know how ignorant you are because I read it. Most here don't know the depth of your ignorance...but at least half of them suspect.

I am sure you read all 488 pages. You pretended to read it and instead rely on your information from the far-left mainstream media. There was NO criminal collusion and no criminal obstruction. To suggest otherwise would make you an idiot.

Fat hurts wrote:

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

Kamala Harris supports putting a 3rd gender option on federal ID cards

Bernie Sanders supports allowing terrorists like the Boston Bomber the right to vote

Elizabeth Warren supports abolishing the electoral college

These people are INSANE. Keep going down that path, Dems.

KAG2020

There is nothing that's even unusual about abolishing the electoral college. That one has been bandied about since the beginning of the constitution. Andrew Jackson even railed against the electoral college in his first address to congress in 1825. This (very good and obvious) idea has always been part of our politics.

Abolishing the EC is ridiculous idea and will lead to presidential candidates ignoring most states and focusing on NY and CA only. Thankfully, we have a Constitutional Republic to prevent that.

You libs only hate it because Cankles and Algore lost.

Sally Vix wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

You should not comment again until you read the Mueller Report.

I am sure you read all 488 pages.

And everyone here is certain you, Sally, read all of 0 pages of the Mueller Report.

Shoe-in wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

The word that Alan meant to use is "shoo-in". Don't go to urban dictionary to know what real words and their meanings are.

He's a shoo-in to win. "Shoo-in" is the word, not "shoe-in."

Are YOU Alan?

Shoo-in, as Sally showed, is a misappropriated term. The original meaning has been redefined to mean something else. It went from meaning something illegal, to meaning something entirely different.

So, stop being ignorant, and stop using a "recently redefined" term as correct English. It is nothing of the sort.

Nope. Go look it up (not Urban Dictionary). "Shoo-in" is correct.

did y'all read it? wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

I am sure you read all 488 pages.

And everyone here is certain you, Sally, read all of 0 pages of the Mueller Report.

Hey, at least I am honest. You are correct. I read 0 pages of it. The Barr summary sufficed (I am kidding).

Flagpole wrote:

Shoe-in wrote:

So, stop being ignorant, and stop using a "recently redefined" term as correct English. It is nothing of the sort.

Nope. Go look it up (not Urban Dictionary). "Shoo-in" is correct.

You are incapable of understanding what I said. The "dictionary" is incorrect. The original meaning has been entirely changing by misuse of the original term. So, stop being an idiot.

Sally Vix wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

You should not comment again until you read the Mueller Report. I know how ignorant you are because I read it. Most here don't know the depth of your ignorance...but at least half of them suspect.

There was NO criminal collusion and no criminal obstruction. To suggest otherwise would make you an idiot.

FFS.

Sally, sally, sally.

This is why trump wins.

Is your thesis that Mueller, a DOJ employee, should have ignored DOJ guidelines and indicted a sitting president? Because that seems to be what you are saying.

Mueller went with the guidelines, did not indict, but very clearly laid out the circa 10 times Trump was guilty of obstructing justice. So congress or prosecutors can take action now, or after he leaves office.

There is no way in this world that you can say there was not criminal obstruction, and cite the Mueller report as your evidence.