Is Trump's re-election inevitable? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 01:17:20 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2020 U.S. Presidential Election (Moderators: Likely Voter, YE)
  Is Trump's re-election inevitable? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: skip
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 110

Author Topic: Is Trump's re-election inevitable?  (Read 3837 times)
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


« on: December 01, 2016, 05:53:36 PM »

Yes, especially if his opponent is the Goofy Loon elizabeth warren.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


« Reply #1 on: December 01, 2016, 06:26:24 PM »

Yes, especially if his opponent is the Goofy Loon elizabeth warren.


She's a very popular politician. So no.

If the opponent is Kanye West or someone boring like Martin O'Malley then he'll get a 2nd term.

You know she only beat Scotty doesn't know Brown by a few points, right? Who is the nasty woman popular with outside of her Massachusetts and California base?
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


« Reply #2 on: December 02, 2016, 12:10:32 AM »

Yes, especially if his opponent is the Goofy Loon elizabeth warren.


She's a very popular politician. So no.

If the opponent is Kanye West or someone boring like Martin O'Malley then he'll get a 2nd term.

You know she only beat Scotty doesn't know Brown by a few points, right? Who is the nasty woman popular with outside of her Massachusetts and California base?

I distinctly remember you insisting in 2012 that Brown would win reelection.

That might very well be true. I know I learned from my mistake in believing in any such failures of 2012. Now we have the Greatness of Trump to take the fight to the enemy.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


« Reply #3 on: December 02, 2016, 12:30:40 PM »

Unless this is ironic, the Personality Cult has begun to emerge before President Obama is inaugurated. Anyone who opposes or even falls short of the requisite enthusiasm of support will be a damnable enemy.

We have not had a President like Obama  when the government had anything near the assets and power that the Presidency now has. I have no cause to believe that he has the temperament or training to be adequate in foreign policy, economic stewardship, or political advocacy. He has shown himself competent only in appealing to the greediest and least learned but angry segments of the electorate. One satisfies the greediest with mass suffering in economics for everyone else and the  angry buffoons with pulling others down to their levels of economic failure.

We have over 200 years of heritage of resistance to any baby steps toward despotism.  To be sure, democracy can die anywhere, but there will be much resistance.

This would be interesting except for the fact that it is Hillary Clinton who claimed Republicans are the Enemy, and it was Barry who created those pen and phone powers.

Live and die by the sword.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


« Reply #4 on: December 03, 2016, 03:55:44 PM »


All Presidents are unique, and so are their times. But like most others,  Barack Obama had a voting record and a record of public service. He got frequently-harsh scrutiny from the media. His temperament was obvious to all of us, and it was tame enough.

I'm not going to make too much of his ethnicity as a difference. He was a very conventional choice. He had an agenda, and what you saw was a reasonable indication of what you were going to get.

A more conventional conservative, let us say Jeb Bush, wouldn't be so troublesome.

I expect that once people start demonstrating against his policies he will start faulting those people for disloyalty to America. After all, loyalty to the Leader is the definitive loyalty to the nation, is it not?

Sure -- in a dictatorship. We Americans are familiar with dictatorships -- but elsewhere.

I clipped the tantrum.

For the record, though, this is what you used to say about, uh, conventional conservatives.

5. Mitt Romney was a poor candidate for President -- and such was not known to begin with. He ran on his business success, but that implies that what he does to succeed is relevant. His business success was heavily the raiding of assets from cash-rich but troubled companies. The cash disappeared, and the companies stripped of cash became quick failures. People who might have seen him as a possible solution to a fiscal mess found his managerial style inappropriate for government. Businesses can fire at will, but governments cannot 'fire' voters. He showed himself a flagrant narcissist. Even the "dog on the roof" had to scare some people. If he could take a dog across country on the roof of a car, what could he do to people?


If the white liberals had voted for Romney instead of calling him a flagrant narcissist, they would not have Trump.

If the white liberals had not taunted and encouraged Trump into running,  they would not have Trump.

If the white liberals had not removed the filibuster, they might have it now to use against Trump. Someone tell that to Chris Coons!

Everyone gets what they deserve, right?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 14 queries.