2020 US Presidential Election (aka: The Trump Coronation)

Guy:Incognito

Deleted User wrote: »

Hahaha... Point proven.

It's a 2 horse race. He only needs to be not as ****ty as trump to be worthy of the job. The position is devalued now, any idiot is worthy of it.

And the fact remains, proven that in the multiple times I've said it on the thread, no one has taken the challenge. If trump was still a Democrat, everyone defending him on here would be hammering him for all the **** he does. That should tell them all they need to know about him and the worthiness of their own opinions.

Brian?

Deleted User wrote: »

I doubt that Biden tweets for himself.

Why?

Guy:Incognito

And as if to prove my point that theres no comeback for the **** he does beyond whataboutery, Tasfasdf comes back with " and everyone on here attacking him would be loving him for what he does" and then deletes it.

Guy:Incognito

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

It's a 2 horse race. He only needs to be not as ****ty as trump to be worthy of the job. The position is devalued now, any idiot is worthy of it.

And the fact remains, proven that in the multiple times I've said it on the thread, no one has taken the challenge. If trump was still a Democrat, everyone defending him on here would be hammering him for all the **** he does. That should tell them all they need to know about him and the worthiness of their own opinions.

The two horse race analogy is accurate. I think that's why he gained office in the first place.

As ****ty as trump is, I can't see Biden being electable. I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see him being usurped by an absurd ticket of Clinton with Michelle Obama as VP or something as crazy as that.

Clinton would lose again but with Michelle or someone of that I'll (popular rather than qualified) she might stand a chance

Brian?

Brian? wrote: »

Why?

He doesn't come across as someone who would know how to use Twitter. He couldn't even remember the number to text to support his campaign. I again am open to being wrong. It is purely based on the impression he gives.

DrumSteve

Deleted User wrote: »

The two horse race analogy is accurate. I think that's why he gained office in the first place.

As ****ty as trump is, I can't see Biden being electable. I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see him being usurped by an absurd ticket of Clinton with Michelle Obama as VP or something as crazy as that.

Clinton would lose again but with Michelle or someone of that I'll (popular rather than qualified) she might stand a chance

Clinton definitely wouldn't beat Trump at this stage.

Also, she would be his absolute dream to run against.

osarusan

I don't think he's a great candidate, but (unless they engineer an illness) replacing him somehow would be a farce that would disenfranchise loads of Democrats and give Trump loads of ammunition.

nthclare

DrumSteve wrote: »

Clinton definitely wouldn't beat Trump at this stage.

Also, she would be his absolute dream to run against.

Didn't he tell her she's going to jail or something, I'm not really well read in American politics.

But isn't it suggested that Clinton isn't the nicest person and there's more to Hillary than meets the eye.

I for one would prefer Trump in office rather than her.

osarusan

osarusan wrote: »

I don't think he's a great candidate, but (unless they engineer an illness) replacing him somehow would be a farce that would disenfranchise loads of Democrats and give Trump loads of ammunition.

They are between a rock and a hard place.

If Biden runs, he stands a good chance of losing. If Biden gets sick (or god forbid) does, it will be claimed he got "clinton-ed".

Interesting times ahead come November

Professor Moriarty

nthclare wrote: »

Didn't he tell her she's going to jail or something, I'm not really well read in American politics.

But isn't it suggested that Clinton isn't the nicest person and there's more to Hillary than meets the eye.

I for one would prefer Trump in office rather than her.

Why Trump and not Clinton?

ohnonotgmail

nthclare wrote: »

Didn't he tell her she's going to jail or something, I'm not really well read in American politics.

But isn't it suggested that Clinton isn't the nicest person and there's more to Hillary than meets the eye.

I for one would prefer Trump in office rather than her.

and trump is?

Guy:Incognito

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

And as if to prove my point that theres no comeback for the **** he does beyond whataboutery, Tasfasdf comes back with " and everyone on here attacking him would be loving him for what he does" and then deletes it.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

and trump is?

Indeed

nthclare

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

and trump is?

I don't identify with answering others posts, but I suggest if you're a grown up you can draw your own conclusion...

nthclare

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Why Trump and not Clinton?

Because I think he's the person for the job, principles before personalities and all that Jazz

ohnonotgmail

nthclare wrote: »

I don't identify with answering others posts, but I suggest if you're a grown up you can draw your own conclusion...

thank you for the mature response.

osarusan

Deleted User wrote: »

If Biden runs, he stands a good chance of losing.

Obviously, some Democratic candidates will energise their voters more than others, but I think no matter who the candidate ended up being, the message would be the same...some variation of 'We must remove Trump.'

I actually don't think the real issue is who the Democrat is, as much as how much of Trump's 2016 vote will come out again. There are obviously a large number who will vote for him (or just vote Republican) no matter what, just as there are those who will vote Democrat no matter who it is.

But there will be a cohort of people who voted for Trump last time who are not dyed in the wool Republicans, and of that cohort, there will be some who will not vote for him again, either because of his record on policy, or because of how he comes across (on Twitter and so on).

I think that's as crucial a group of voters as any other.

duploelabs

nthclare wrote: »

Because I think he's the person for the job, principles before personalities and all that Jazz

What Principles of Trump do you empathise with?

Guy:Incognito

nthclare wrote: »

.

But isn't it suggested that Clinton isn't the nicest person and there's more to Hillary than meets the eye.
.

That throwaway line barely even reaches trumps level of baseless rubbish.


"Some say X done y, who knows?"

ohnonotgmail

duploelabs wrote: »

What Principles of Trump do you empathise with?

trump has principles? well other than enriching himself at every opportunity i mean.

Guy:Incognito

The tactics have changed over the last few hours .

The pretend moderate side are in, just like the anti vaxx threads.

"I don't support either side" then slowly the more pro trump stuff creeps in.

"Principles before personality"

Came in too strong too early there. The man has no principles and proves it, unless the principle is to lie.

His whole thing is personality and it's a ****ty one. He's literally a TV personality that decided the presidency was his next step.

Professor Moriarty

nthclare wrote: »

Because I think he's the person for the job, principles before personalities and all that Jazz

What? Clinton has more principles in her big toe than Trump ever had or will have. I think you're having a laugh.

DrumSteve

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

What? Clinton has more principles in her big toe than Trump ever had or will have. I think you're having a laugh.

...And she is a terrible human being, so what does that say about Trump

Professor Moriarty

DrumSteve wrote: »

...And she is a terrible human being, so what does that say about Trump

Actually, overall I think she's quite a clever and decent person which puts her on another planet as far as Trump goes.

Professor Moriarty

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

What? Clinton has more principles in her big toe than Trump ever had or will have. I think you're having a laugh.

I think that's wrong. I think her reaction to Gaddafi and her dubious foundation, her flip flopping on populist issues along with her vilification of her husband's accusers along with myriad of other things doesn't project an image of someone who is principled.

Trump and some of his actions are indefensible, but Clinton also has multiple skeletons in her and her family's closet.

For clarity before the usual guys accuse me of being a trump supporter, trump is far from clean and equally if not more guilty of similar things, but to say Clinton has more principles in her big toe is patently false or at least disingenuous

nthclare

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

That throwaway line barely even reaches trumps level of baseless rubbish.


"Some say X done y, who knows?"

There's the bin, you're welcome to put a solid foundation underneath and recycle your response rinse and repeat...

Your X y commonology is just letter salad.
Hopefully you'll get a few thanks for your effort.

I never said I like Trump or dislike him, but hey you're entitled to your opinion too,as am I.

It's warm out there isn't it, have you watered the geraniums and put out the slug pellets yet ?

It's now the Hostas are the right shade for slug's and snails etc...

MadYaker

Is Clinton running again? I don’t think she is.

MadYaker

MadYaker wrote: »

Is Clinton running again? I don’t think she is.

You are right. She isn't. So....?

Quin_Dub

nthclare wrote: »

Because I think he's the person for the job, principles before personalities and all that Jazz

I think this is the key thing that Trump has exposed in American society.

The willingness & ability of GOP voters/supporters to ignore absolutely anything so long as "their guy" is in charge.

There appears to be absolutely no behaviour on the part of Trump that would make them stop supporting him so long as he continues to adhere to their political/societal goals.

The ends truly do justify the means for the GOP it would seem.

I have no dog in the fight from a political perspective and if Ted Cruz or Jeb Bush or whatever had won the Election in 2016 I probably wouldn't really have taken a whole lot of notice. They'd probably have done most of what that Trump has done legislatively speaking, and the world would largely not have noticed.

My interest now however is driven by ever increasing incredulity at peoples ability to ignore the day to day actions of a truly repugnant individual, absent even the most basic elements of human decency just because he's "on their side".

notobtuse

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Oh he is not gonna like that

Be ironic if he goes on a Twitter rant about Twitter :pac:

I'm loving it. Twitter’s liberal bias boileth over... And they shot themselves in the foot in the process.

Obviously the fact that Trump uses Twitter to combat the liberal mainstream media advantage against Republicans has caused the collective heads of the executives at Twitter to explode and act without thinking.

Twitter needs to fact-check their fact checks. Pretending there is no connection between voting by mail and fraud is a fairy tale talking point right out of the DNC. Trump was targeting California and mail in voting in his Tweets. If Twitter would have done a rudimentary search they would have discovered California’s Republican party filed a lawsuit against Governor Newsom’s mail in vote order citing worries over voter fraud as there are many experts who have valid concerns about vote by mail.

Twitter probably did know all this but their liberal bias got the better of them. They will now pay the price of their decision as they’ve now opened themselves up to lawsuits.

Up until yesterday Twitter has been protected under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act as Twitter has not been considered “publishers” or “speakers” and therefore have not been held liable for the information they host. That is all over with, now. Since there are experts on both sides regarding vote by mail and it’s correlation to fraud, Twitter has now moved into the realm of a “speaker” or a “publisher” and opened themselves for liable as they’ve taken sides. In one fell swoop they’ve stripped themselves of their special legal status and opened themselves to lawsuits brought about by groups who have worked to end Twitter's liability protections.

Well done, Twitter... Idiots of seismic proportions!

Kermit.de.frog

So Trump is threatening to shut down or regulate social media companies.

Earlier in the day he was celebrating job losses at The Atlantic publication.

This is all tin pot dictator behaviour.

Thankfully he's too stupid to achieve anything in that regard.