The ad at the bottom of the page right now is...
Voter Opinion Poll
Should Hillary still be indicted?
Vote Now!
(Sound Money Defense League)
I get a lot of 2nd amendment stuff, some things about Trump and the MSM, and Hillary indicted too.
The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
I get a lot of 2nd amendment stuff, some things about Trump and the MSM, and Hillary indicted too.
Not really. They just need someone personable and popular. Obama filled that criteria. Biden would've probably worked. Even Hilary losing was a bit of a freak accident.
I'm all for them going for someone a bit more left in the vein of Sanders but I don't think it's a necessity. Trump's current numbers are really, really shit for a President in his honeymoon period, so someone mildly personable who manages to get under his skin, connect with voters and nail him on key policy issues and his potential failures should do the trick.
Obama ran as a populist though that was not how he governed.
I agree Trump's win was a freak incident. Whoever runs must carry the mid west.
For Democrats, the voters have moved significantly left. The nominee has to embrace what they want.
IIRC, Manafort has written a book (bio? Don't know.) in which he writes about it. IIRC, he lists many / all the positions and collaboration he has had with 45 over the years. That's another reason why Spicey's attempts to portray the relationship between 45 and Manafort as somewhat distant is laughable.
If collaboration or collusion with Russia happened, it can be taken for granted that Twitler knew and approved of it. I can envision him giving the blessing but saying 'What I don't know ...', so he knew and approved of but didn't want to get directly involved.
If he was not aware as Cuban suggests, at the very, very latest it would have been a MUST to vet everyone after he fired Manafort - but he didn't.
Last edited:
Apart from the ridiculous adoption of the moronic multi tweet bullshit people are piling in with.
Hundred odd characters. Make them count.
If you want to write an article, write an article.
Someone as successful and rich as Mark Cuban doesn't need to click bait his twitter feed.
It might actually be more dangerous. Infowars in particular are a group of conspiracy nuts who flood their viewers/readers with a constant stream of crap about evil government and intelligence agency plots. How do you think those crazies are going to react to an investigation of their heroes?
It was all a marketing ploy. Its hard work and at 70, I dont he is willing to put the effort in to learn.
He also has an axe to grind with the establishment since he built Trump Towers. He dad was a big shot but in Queens and he thought by going big in Manhattan with Trump Towers, he would be accepted by the polite society of Manhattan. But they just saw him as nouveau riche and brash. the more he tried by making big splashes in investments, the more they saw him as an upstart and the more he came to hate them. Bush is the sort -- old blue blood families which doesnt judge people just because of how much $$ they have. He have never gotten that. So Bannon's idea of blowing then establishment appeals to him.
Not really anything you can do about that. I think it's definitely better to expose them for the lying mentalists they are before hand and make it entirely transparent just where their funding comes from and the agendas behind their conspiracy pushing.
At least that way when they bring the house of cards down they have already been fully exposed as part of the plot that has been brought down so their reporting on it (if they are even in a position to still do that) is viewed with the bias it should be.
Remembering that a lot of their followers just love conspiracies, I think a lot of them would latch onto and run with the ultimate conspiracy - that the main "truthers" have been exposed as agents of a foreign government. It's exactly the plot they have been trying to convince people of for years.
Hopefully. It'd certainly be a nice way to complete the circle of crazy and get things back on a more stable footing. I think it's pretty unavoidable though that some of this mess is going to get (more) violent at some point. The right wing militia groups have been growing in power for years, and Trump has supposedly been trying to turn investigation assets away from them.
Nah I think he really wanted to and has for years. He talked about it on Opera going back 25 years. It's the ultimate status symbol and massages his narcist ego more than anything else. He just could never be bothered to go the traditional route of actually working through the political spectrum, which is exactly why he's taken this route and taken so long about it.
These aren't new political positions either, ie protectionism, he's been harping on about them for years. Racially villifying people isn't a new thing either, he put an advert in the NY Times in the 80s villifying a group of black men who were proven to have not raped/murdered a white woman.
True but the majority are only interested in that kind of genuine conspiracy if the culprits are those outside their political preferences. Besides (ironically, in the context of conspiracy theorism) I suspect that Jones and co are 'controlled opposition' with a sideline in selling stuff to those they seduce with conspiracy rhetoric.
This is why I'm baffled when people claim Trump was a liberal Democrat for years. No, he just donated to whichever power party controlled an area he had/he coveted business interests within. He told Larry King in 1999 that he was a registered Republican and was fairly conservative overall but "somewhat liberal on social issues, healthcare, etc." Astonishingly, despite claiming both parties were too far left/right in 1999, he ran to the extreme right some 17 years later. He also gushed over Giuliani throughout the interview and trashed Buchanan (over his Hitler infatuation).
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/10/08/trump.transcript/
TRUMP: I'm a registered Republican. I'm a pretty conservative guy. I'm somewhat liberal on social issues, especially health care, et cetera, but I'd be leaving another party, and I've been close to that party.
KING: Why would you leave the Republican Party?
TRUMP: I think that nobody is really hitting it right. The Democrats are too far left. I mean, Bill Bradley, this is seriously left; he's trying to come a little more center, but he's seriously left. The Republicans are too far right. And I don't think anybody's hitting the cord, not the cord that I want hear, and not the cord that other people want to hear, and I've seen it.
Plus, I think there's a great lack of spirit in this country. You know, what happened over the last four years is disgusting, and I just think there's a tremendous lack of spirit, and I think the spirit has to be brought back.
----
KING: You've been an activist Republican, haven't you? I mean, you support candidates...
TRUMP: I've actually been an activist Democrat and Republican. I support almost equally -- I really support people. I support people like Senator Torricelli, who's fantastic, from New Jersey. And I support, on the other hand, Rudy Giuliani, who's been the best mayor in the history of the city of New York; or George Pataki, who's been just a terrific governor and a great guy. You know, they -- I just support people...
KING: So it's the person?
TRUMP: I really go for the people rather than the party.
----
KING: Patients' Bill of Rights: You mentioned health care as one of the social issues; you for it?
TRUMP: I think you have to have it, and, again, I said I'm conservative, generally speaking, I'm conservative, and even very conservative. But I'm quite liberal and getting much more liberal on health care and other things. I really say: What's the purpose of a country if you're not going to have defensive and health care?
If you can't take care of your sick in the country, forget it, it's all over. I mean, it's no good. So I'm very liberal when it comes to health care. I believe in universal health care. I believe in whatever it takes to make people well and better.
----
KING: But you can't, as president, run -- I mean, you can't be a liberal then?
TRUMP: No, no. What you can do is you can negotiate fair trade agreements. So that instead of billions and billions of dollars going out, you can reduce your taxes by having it come back in. You know, I know the best negotiators. I would put the right people in charge of negotiation. We've been ripped as a country by virtually every country we do business with.
rinse and repeat.
Right he is. Surveillance by the Russians and leaking from the hoes.
Tbh that seems like someone saying "Never mind the criminals - arrest the police!"
Talking of InfoWars and Brietbart, it's pretty obvious that his current narrative is being constructed by them.
The shock value of Trump's tweets are quickly wearing off and they are increasingly being viewed as a way for him to change the topic, which of course won't work.
I think his core supporters are going to start dwindling through boredom as much as anything. They just won't have the energy or motivation to keep paddling now the crest of the wave has subsided and they're back to their normal lives and he's proven all talk and no action.
"I'm backed into a corner and it looks like there's no escape. What do I do?! Wait, I've got it! Hey, look, something's happening over there! No, seriously, there really is, you should look."
Classic tyrannical behaviour
You're seriously underrating the political polarization in the country. No matter what occurs going forward the Trumpistas will dig deeper into the belief of conspiracies, liberal agenda, etc.
Yeah they're getting kind of boring and tedious.
Now that I can agree with. Still it just illustrates that Trump is probably financially entangled with Russian money.
Cuban is really pushing the "innocent businessman, unfortunately mixed up" narrative isn't he.
Yeah, its the new angle that more seem to be warming to - that Trump didn't do anything nefarious, but rather that he is just a bumbling capitalist who is financially entangled with Russian banks and oligarchs, which explains why he wont release his taxes and why he has been nice to Putin. Even if that's true, its still a massive conflict of interest as he now represents the US and not his own business interests and he would have to admonish and sanction Putin if Vlad invades any more countries. Massive conflict.
Regardless, what was 'America's number one patriot' doing conducting business with Russia?
Can be applied to either Trump, Putin, Erdogan, Orban and that entire ilk....
Maybe this is why Paul Ryan is so afraid he will work with Democrats on healthcare.
Editorial of the LA Times (@langster, you'll like this):
Our Dishonest President
http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-ed-our-dishonest-president/
Our Dishonest President
http://www.latimes.com/projects/la-ed-our-dishonest-president/
Just makes me think of that SNL bit about the movie of the TBA republican who stands up to Trump...
They're not funny anymore. How many times can one laugh at the same thing?
Even for the plebs?
Gradually yes. A lot of his supporters aren't enamoured by his Twitter use. They think he should be more Presidential.
You are dead right, I absolutely loved that. Excellent piece, I can't wait to see parts II, III and IV. Also, this comment in the comments section really made my day and made me proper laugh out loud.
Although this one made me want to punch the screen and made me want to cry
I'm starting to doubt the honesty of online comments like those... Bots? Wums? Idiots? Who knows...
I've spent a while reading through and to be honest an awful lot seem really genuine (unfortunately) Although it's just so difficult to know in this day and age which is extremely unfortunate. You have to credit some as true as look at this forum, people do spend time giving their honest opinion, I guess it's the same as in real life, do you give your trust? or do you become a cynic and recluse?
I'm a notorious cynic... I believe you're right tho, it's just I never have any real conversations with these people. None in my circle, none in my networks it seems.I knew a guy that momentarily thought climate change was a hoax, and there's another guy that believes? in flat earth, but none of them are/were adamant.
- Status