Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Proud Democrat wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Your criticisms of Hillary and the Democratic Party are valid, and I agree with them. Doesn't mean though that all the fake advertising the Russians did to prop up Trump and rip Hillary didn't have an effect, and it was FAR more than a "couple fake news stories posted on Facebook"...more than 10 million people in swing states saw those fake ads, and that's just Facebook. Trump news outlets (Fox, Breitbart, etc., INCLUDING THE BIGGEST AM RADIO STATION IN CENTRAL OHIO and for sure others) then spread that stuff on the airwaves. After it was debunked as a fake news story, 610 AM radio in Columbus, OH broadcast that Obama set it up so that his girls' grandmother would get $160,000 a year for life from tax payers. Callers then called in and said stuff like, "that's Obama and Democrats for you!" Was a bunch of crap. That's just one that I personally heard happen (and I contacted the station to rip them for it). For sure it happened more on that station and on tons of others across the country. Morning drive DJs don't check sources.

We can't really get into the effectiveness of those ads though...if it was determined that Trump colluded (conspired) with the Russians, then that is cheating and undermining our election process and is anti-American.

The Democrats definitely need some new blood and a clear vision...but, in times of turmoil, you always need to focus on the bear in the kitchen. In our case it's an orange one. He is so crooked that we have never seen anything remotely close.

You can be a Democrat who wants to see a clear vision for the party and ALSO recognize that Trump is a clear and present danger. You should have strong opinions on both.

Trump is done.

Do you support the Bernie wing of the Party? From my point of view we are way more divided than the republicans at the moment.

its_baddude wrote:

So you liberals claim to deal in facts. I'm still waiting.

"You have very fine people...on both sides" - Donald J. Trump

You are taking this out of context. He did not say the violent racist are fine people. He said there were non racist protesting among the racist.

To see if you are smart, explain this.

"Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans,"

what difference – at this point, what difference does it make?" - Hillary explaining the Benghazi attack

Called black kids superpredators

“We need to take these people on, they are often connected to big drug cartels, they are not just gangs of kids anymore. They are often the kinds of kids that are called superpredators. No conscience. No empathy."

If you want, we can a real discussion.

He is racist against Mexicans, black people, Muslims, and I'm sure anyone who isn't white, and probably even many of those. From ripping on a judge from Indiana who has Mexican ancestry to wanting a "Muslim ban" and on and on and on. Obama wasn't born in the US, a view he still supposedly holds. If he isn't racist, then racism isn't a thing...dude, he's clearly racist.

Prove it. You saying so it not proof.

Flagpole wrote:

its_baddude wrote:

So you liberals claim to deal in facts. I'm still waiting.

You are taking this out of context. He did not say the violent racist are fine people. He said there were non racist protesting among the racist.

To see if you are smart, explain this.

"Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans,"

what difference – at this point, what difference does it make?" - Hillary explaining the Benghazi attack

Called black kids superpredators

“We need to take these people on, they are often connected to big drug cartels, they are not just gangs of kids anymore. They are often the kinds of kids that are called superpredators. No conscience. No empathy."

If you want, we can a real discussion.

Prove it. You saying so it not proof.

You are defending a clear racist, and I have neither the time nor the interest in explaining to someone who believes he isn't racist. I've already given you two examples. I could list them all day long and you will deny. Dude, if you support a racist, you are also one. Find a mirror.

Rigged for Trump wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

You are defending a clear racist, and I have neither the time nor the interest in explaining to someone who believes he isn't racist. I've already given you two examples. I could list them all day long and you will deny. Dude, if you support a racist, you are also one. Find a mirror.

I was a Republican all along and was just seeing the other side of the coin. It's called being objective.

Like you supported and defended Hillary Clinton, a clear racist. Build a wall and voted for illegal immigration, her words. You aren't even close to being sharp on politics except for the suckers who are even dumber. You should always know both sides and be prepared to accept and admit facts or your own side (and the other) will lose confidence in anything you say. In your case, it's a lost cause. You just repeat and rinse, repeat and rinse, repeat and rinse. A broken record. Look at your posts. You repeat everything in hopes that it will suddenly become truth.

Trump won and is here for the term, he's going nowhere.

Democratic indictments are already in order. Good luck to your gal as she's put in the slammer.

Piedpiper99 wrote:

People post proving how much Hillary lied with facts, but you call it fake news and say it wasn't criminal.

You wanted her as president, so you ignore the massive amount of lies that your top candidate accumulated as a Senator, Candidate and First Lady claiming nobody proved anything, implying that even if she lied, she wasn't convicted...so then it's okay to lie.

Another posters lists all Flagpole's false guarantees, Flagpole doesn't like it.

Unfortunately he's not intelligent enough to realize that actual indictments are coming soon and hard against many top politicians on the Left, and they already know it, but he's still talking about Trump.

baitedclicker wrote:

Piedpiper99 wrote:

People post proving how much Hillary lied with facts, but you call it fake news and say it wasn't criminal.

You wanted her as president, so you ignore the massive amount of lies that your top candidate accumulated as a Senator, Candidate and First Lady claiming nobody proved anything, implying that even if she lied, she wasn't convicted...so then it's okay to lie.

I think you're having a hard time understanding the nature of proof (linking to breitbart or youtube conspiracy videos isn't proof) and distinguishing between criminal lies, political white lies and compulsive lies.

All politicians lie.

Clinton and Trump's political lies and empty promises don't mean squat.

Trump's compulsive lying also doesn't amount to much in the scheme if things but it is weirding most people out and creating diplomatic problems.

Obviously what matters is whether they've told any criminal lies, obstruction of justice etc. and whether it can be proved in a court of law (and no, breitbart and youtube won't hold up)

Another posters lists all Flagpole's false guarantees, Flagpole doesn't like it.

Unfortunately he's not intelligent enough to realize that actual indictments are coming soon and hard against many top politicians on the Left, and they already know it, but he's still talking about Trump.

As Flagpole has said repeatedly if indictments are coming for democrats then good. They can all hang. The difference seems to be that republicans see lawbreaking as a left-right thing. At this point you could prove me wrong by saying that you believe in the rule of law and if Trump or Moore turn out to be guilty you would accept it. Doesn't mean you have to change your political viewpoint.

Do you believe in the rule of law? Cause that's really all that's at stake here. [hint] You can't answer 'no' and expect anyone to respect your opinion. Don't bother deflecting either.