I do find it funny however that the same people who consistently share their disgust concerning President Trump are the same ones who scream bloody murder when someone disses their Parties views. You can't have it both ways.
Nobody is screaming bloody murder over politics you big drama queen, calm down. If you can’t understand the difference between attacking political views, and attacking one’s behavior, I suggest you go back to school.
No wait, I find it much more satirically entertaining to laugh at the views posted by the left/democrats who still can not deal with the everyday reality that they lost the WH, and continue to whine about it.
In other words, if you don't like what the President does you should shut up, because there is no valid criticism of him, just whining.
Interesting perspective.
Not at all, this is a Forum. I do find it funny however that the same people who consistently share their disgust concerning President Trump are the same ones who scream bloody murder when someone disses their Parties views. You can't have it both ways.
Again. The only reason to take that position is that you think that Trump is infallible, or, that any time he could be criticized is meaningless because you don't believe he is to be criticized on any one particular merit.
And for the 30th time I prefer the actions of President Trump over any thoughts or views of most Hillary supporters.
Hillary Clinton is not and never will be the President. Trump is. Any American citizen and taxpayer is free to think however they wish about his performance.
But, this statement of yours is quite profound.
Literally: "I don't care what Trump does. Could stab and eat a baby on the podium. It's still better than any thought a liberal has."
At least you are honest about it, I'll give you that.
Again. The only reason to take that position is that you think that Trump is infallible
I think you have it wrong. His demented point is that a liberal has no right to criticize.
But, this statement of yours is quite profound.
Literally: "I don't care what Trump does. Could stab and eat a baby on the podium. It's still better than any thought a liberal has."
At least you are honest about it, I'll give you that.
His extremist views are nonsensical and beyond creepy. He can’t tell the difference between criticism of one’s behavior versus extremist bigotry.
No wait, I find it much more satirically entertaining to laugh at the views posted by the left/democrats who still can not deal with the everyday reality that they lost the WH, and continue to whine about it.
In other words, if you don't like what the President does you should shut up, because there is no valid criticism of him, just whining.
Interesting perspective.
Not at all, this is a Forum. I do find it funny however that the same people who consistently share their disgust concerning President Trump are the same ones who scream bloody murder when someone disses their Parties views. You can't have it both ways.
Again. The only reason to take that position is that you think that Trump is infallible, or, that any time he could be criticized is meaningless because you don't believe he is to be criticized on any one particular merit.
And for the 30th time I prefer the actions of President Trump over any thoughts or views of most Hillary supporters.
Hillary Clinton is not and never will be the President. Trump is. Any American citizen and taxpayer is free to think however they wish about his performance.
Of course they are, absolutely. But once again I sit in front of this computer and laugh myself to sleep over those who state their opinions about President Trump in the most unflattering of ways and then w/o drawing breath are extremely critical of those who laugh at Democratic policy. If you can dish it out you better be able to take it, especially when it is nowhere near being personal
But, this statement of yours is quite profound.
Literally: "I don't care what Trump does. Could stab and eat a baby on the podium. It's still better than any thought a liberal has."
At least you are honest about it, I'll give you that.
Haha....Thank You
Again. The only reason to take that position is that you think that Trump is infallible, or, that any time he could be criticized is meaningless because you don't believe he is to be criticized on any one particular merit.
The day I find President Trump "Infallible" Haha!...I will clearly state that. Until that time any inference made by anyone here even hinting that is on you.....
But once again I sit in front of this computer and laugh myself to sleep over those who state their opinions about President Trump in the most unflattering of ways and then w/o drawing breath are extremely critical of those who laugh at Democratic policy.
Why not just say “critical of me” instead of pretending it’s about “Those who laugh at Democratic policy”. You are referring to yourself, just admit it. So strange.
If you can dish it out you better be able to take it, especially when it is nowhere near being personal
I have no issue with his wall or any of his policies really, but there’s no need to call the migrants “animals”, or mock a disabled person, or countless other horrific comments. It’s completely uncalled for and as low as it gets for the President of the United States to say to the world. There’s no need to be making daily threats and tantrums on Twitter like a fool. Reagan and Bush had good economies and conservative judges without lowering themselves into the gutter like that. There’s no reason for any decent conservative to accept such low standards for their leader.
But if a Democrat dares to call Trump out for his cruel behavior, you are going to insult decent Americans because it’s “their party” and we had “better be able to take it”? That making fun of someone strictly because they are Democrat, is the same as a Democrat calling out Trump for his cruelty?
That’s who you are as a person?
[Edited on 4/9/2019 by BoytonBrother]
Repeatedly, I have stated on this board that I voted for Gary Johnson. Perhaps, to further clarify that point, I could start defending the positions Mr. Johnson and the Libertarian Party take . . .
Ok, defend this, Gary Johnson is against deportation of undocumented workers and says Trumps wall is "asinine" :
from Fox Business Insider:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/gary-johnson-speaks-out-on-trumps-asinine-wall
Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson took on Donald Trump over his immigration policy and plans to build a wall along the border between the U.S. and Mexico.
"He [Donald Trump] talks about deporting 11 million undocumented workers. That has a basis in complete misunderstanding of the situation,” Johnson told the FOX Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo.
According to Johnson, America should not be opposed to immigration but rather have a more welcoming, supportive policy.
“Immigrants are not taking jobs that U.S. citizens want. We should be embracing immigration. We should make it as easy as possible for somebody that wants to come into the country and work to be able to get a work visa. And a work visa should entail a background check and a social security card so that taxes get paid.”
Johnson also spoke out against Trump’s calls to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.
“Look, building a wall is just crazy. I can just see the Mexican president [saying], ‘Donald Trump, take this wall down.’ And you know what, he is going to be on the right side of history. At some point, if Trump is elected and if he does this wall, which is really asinine, we will take it down at some point.”
Repeatedly, I have stated on this board that I voted for Gary Johnson. Perhaps, to further clarify that point, I could start defending the positions Mr. Johnson and the Libertarian Party take . . .
Ok, defend this, Gary Johnson is against deportation of undocumented workers and says Trumps wall is "asinine" :
from Fox Business Insider:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/gary-johnson-speaks-out-on-trumps-asinine-wall
Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson took on Donald Trump over his immigration policy and plans to build a wall along the border between the U.S. and Mexico.
"He [Donald Trump] talks about deporting 11 million undocumented workers. That has a basis in complete misunderstanding of the situation,” Johnson told the FOX Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo.
According to Johnson, America should not be opposed to immigration but rather have a more welcoming, supportive policy.
“Immigrants are not taking jobs that U.S. citizens want. We should be embracing immigration. We should make it as easy as possible for somebody that wants to come into the country and work to be able to get a work visa. And a work visa should entail a background check and a social security card so that taxes get paid.”
Johnson also spoke out against Trump’s calls to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.
“Look, building a wall is just crazy. I can just see the Mexican president [saying], ‘Donald Trump, take this wall down.’ And you know what, he is going to be on the right side of history. At some point, if Trump is elected and if he does this wall, which is really asinine, we will take it down at some point.”
I can not.
NO Party and its beliefs are a perfect fit.
I stand with President Trump on the border issue.
If only Democrats had someone they could tattle to when Trump name calls them.
When Trump berates people, it’s funny and admirable. When it happens to BIGV, he tattles to get me banned. John Wayne he is not.
Eric Swalwell (announced 4/8/19)
- 38, current member of US House from California, former CA county deputy DA
https://swalwell.house.gov/
Forgot to update Mayor Pete!
Pete Buttigieg (announced 4/14/19)
- 37, Rhodes Scholar, Naval Reservist deployed in Afghanistan, two-term Mayor of South Bend IN
https://peteforamerica.com/meet-pete/
It's already started.
“Welcome to the race Sleepy Joe,” President Donald Trump tweeted shortly after former Veep Joe Biden officially announced his 2020 White House race.
“I only hope you have the intelligence, long in doubt, to wage a successful primary campaign. It will be nasty – you will be dealing with people who truly have some very sick & demented ideas. But if you make it, I will see you at the Starting Gate!”
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/donald-trump-makes-joe-biden-130340726.html
Remarks: I think Hillary just is too incensed to go thru it again with Donald, though she has the experience, knowledge and even respect of foreign leaders to effectively manage foreign policy and affairs, she just does not want to go thru another campaign facing off with Trump. She has her dignity and would like to keep that.
Gina, you post about Joe Biden, but then comment on Hillary?
Joe Biden (announced 4/25/19)
- 76, 2009-2017 Vice President, US Senator from Delaware 1973-2009, two-time POTUS candidate in 1988 and 2008.
https://joebiden.com/
Other house cleaning updates:
Wayne Messam (announced 3/28/19)
- 44, three-term Mayor of Miramar, FL, city commissioner 2011-2015, businessman
https://wayneforusa.com/
Mike Gravel (announced 4/2/19)
- 88, US Senator from Alaska 1969-1981, 2008 POTUS candidate, has stated he is not seeking party nomination instead running to appear in the debates (atleast he is honest)
https://www.mikegravel.org/
Seth Moulton (announced 4/22/19)
- 40, current member of US House from Massachusetts, Marine Corp Captain serving 4 tours in Iraq, Green New Deal co-sponsor
https://sethmoulton.com/
Kamala Harris (announced 1/21/19)
-54 years old, current US Senator from California, former District Attorney and Attorney General of California
A true champion when it comes to avoiding the question asked, her favorite response?..."I think this is something we should have a conversation about". She just pulled this very same rabbit out of her hat again when asked by CNN's head clown Don Lemon about Bernie Saunders position on allowing incarcerated Felons to Vote...
Either you are a Nay or a Yay, the conversation was started, the question asked and she danced
The usuals continue to display their scapegoats. How silly.
A true champion when it comes to avoiding the question asked, her favorite response?..."I think this is something we should have a conversation about". She just pulled this very same rabbit out of her hat again when asked by CNN's head clown Don Lemon about Bernie Saunders position on allowing incarcerated Felons to Vote...
I've noticed this as well. I didn't appreciate her response on that question. I am accustomed and prepared for Democrats to restore the right to vote for prior felons who have served their time and been released. If I were looking to a candidate on this issue I would've rather they took the position that when one is incarcerated they lose several of rights, the right to vote being just one. I personally don't feel this is something "we need to have a conversation about", but rather something that shouldn't be looked into at all. Now maybe Kamala has never thought of such a thing and therefore could offer nothing better than her vague answer. Sometimes that works and sometimes it is better for the candidates to show their depth on topics and be prepared to take a position. Seemed to me she wanted to leave it open ended for the appearance of supporting it, but in reality she doesn't want to turn off any would-be voters if she in fact has reservations about it. Politicians. That is what they do.
A true champion when it comes to avoiding the question asked, her favorite response?..."I think this is something we should have a conversation about". She just pulled this very same rabbit out of her hat again when asked by CNN's head clown Don Lemon about Bernie Saunders position on allowing incarcerated Felons to Vote.
So you're telling me, that you hate political correctness, you hate those who get offended so easily, but because someone said "we should have a discussion about it", you get offended and angry? How do you explain that?
I personally don't feel this is something "we need to have a conversation about", but rather something that shouldn't be looked into at all.
Why not? I won't lose sleep over it either way, and certain prisoners surely don't deserve the right, but if we restore the right to felons once released, what does the actual incarceration have to do with the right? I think it should be about the crime and conviction, not whether they are behind bars or not.
I've noticed this as well. I didn't appreciate her response on that question.
Now maybe Kamala has never thought of such a thing and therefore could offer nothing better than her vague answer. Sometimes that works and sometimes it is better for the candidates to show their depth on topics and be prepared to take a position. Seemed to me she wanted to leave it open ended for the appearance of supporting it, but in reality she doesn't want to turn off any would-be voters if she in fact has reservations about it.
I don't get the issue. I don't expect a candidate to have a direct answer for every single issue right on the spot, especially complicated ones. I find it refreshing that a candidate recognizes and respects that it's a complex issue that deserves time and thought. I don't see why an answer like that, especially this early in the game, is being viewed negatively.
You don't see it because you're a Democrat and she's a democrat and you tow the party line as hard as anyone.
You don't see it because you're a Democrat and she's a democrat and you tow the party line as hard as anyone.
That's silly. I admire Reagan and the Bush family as much as anyone, and I pray to God every night that Trump would demonsrate that type of thoughtfulness when asked questions. Sorry man, but it's you that openly admits to towing the party line because of the nauseating liberal mindset. I respond to character and morals when picking a leader, not their political idealogy.
You don't see it because you're a Democrat and she's a democrat and you tow the party line as hard as anyone.
That's silly. I admire Reagan and the Bush family as much as anyone, and I pray to God every night that Trump would demonsrate that type of thoughtfulness when asked questions. Sorry man, but it's you that openly admits to towing the party line because of the nauseating liberal mindset. I respond to character and morals when picking a leader, not their political idealogy.
As a Christian, no one casts their vote based on morals and character more than me. No one. And yes, some of the liberal agenda nauseates me, is that OK?
You don't see it because you're a Democrat and she's a democrat and you tow the party line as hard as anyone.
That's silly. I admire Reagan and the Bush family as much as anyone, and I pray to God every night that Trump would demonsrate that type of thoughtfulness when asked questions. Sorry man, but it's you that openly admits to towing the party line because of the nauseating liberal mindset. I respond to character and morals when picking a leader, not their political idealogy.
As a Christian, no one casts their vote based on morals and character more than me. No one. And yes, some of the liberal agenda nauseates me, is that OK?
So what would a Christian think about Trump accepting the Saudi position when they murdered a Washington Post journalist and cut up his body into pieces?
Does the Christian position support Trump in his affairs with a porn star and a Playboy Bunny after his child was born? He's certainly a man of morals?
Do you consider Trump a man of character. We do realize he's not one of those with the liberal agenda. He has his own agenda, and I doubt it's a conservative agenda other than appointing judges to appease a certain segment of the base?
What is your position on Trump's speech at Liberty University when he showed his ignorance of the Bible when trying to spew a few lines laced with mispronunciations?
If I were looking to a candidate on this issue I would've rather they took the position that when one is incarcerated they lose several of rights, the right to vote being just one.
If that's the case we should execute anyone who is incarcerated.
As a Christian, no one casts their vote based on morals and character more than me. No one. And yes, some of the liberal agenda nauseates me, is that OK?
You can feel however you want, but would Jesus want you be nauseated by other people's values? And the liberal agenda included providing affordable healthcare for those less fortunate, which is as Christian as it gets. Obamacare is exactly what Jesus would've wanted, and he'd be disappointed at all the fellow right-wing Christians that not only oppose Jesus's main mission, but go even further as to hate the man (Obama) who proposed the idea. Strange times we live in I guess.
I personally don't feel this is something "we need to have a conversation about", but rather something that shouldn't be looked into at all.
Why not? I won't lose sleep over it either way, and certain prisoners surely don't deserve the right, but if we restore the right to felons once released, what does the actual incarceration have to do with the right? I think it should be about the crime and conviction, not whether they are behind bars or not.
I've noticed this as well. I didn't appreciate her response on that question.
Now maybe Kamala has never thought of such a thing and therefore could offer nothing better than her vague answer. Sometimes that works and sometimes it is better for the candidates to show their depth on topics and be prepared to take a position. Seemed to me she wanted to leave it open ended for the appearance of supporting it, but in reality she doesn't want to turn off any would-be voters if she in fact has reservations about it.
I don't get the issue. I don't expect a candidate to have a direct answer for every single issue right on the spot, especially complicated ones. I find it refreshing that a candidate recognizes and respects that it's a complex issue that deserves time and thought. I don't see why an answer like that, especially this early in the game, is being viewed negatively.
I'm not losing any sleep, didn't think about this at all the last 24+ hours. I mean really, I could care or I could not care. At the moment I am choosing to care for the sake of conversation.
My opinion, and other people can have different ones of course, I'm not necessarily right and others aren't necessarily wrong, is that prisoners are not part of a normalized community or society and therefore do not need and should not have any influence on issues that take place outside the prison walls. And prisoners are often moved from facility to facility, county to county, state to state so their potential temporary status anywhere doesn't require them to be counted among a constituent base that local, state or federal representatives should have to answer to or cater to. I do not have any strong objection to allowing them to vote once they rejoin our communities and society upon their release - that is a more reasonable point to me.
For me, it is just a politician being a politician. Although I disagree with the position, I have more respect for Bernie to make his point and bear the consequences that a controversial position might create for him, but he speaks up and says what and why he believes in. Candidates that try and hide behind vague "maybes" on issues do not come across as very confident or knowledgeable to me. Rather they seem to not want to cross would-be supporters to maintain support among a certain base. Kamala expanded upon her thoughts the next day, had she offered that in the moment I wouldn't have given it much thought...other than I disagree with the position.
. . . prisoners are not part of a normalized community or society and therefore do not need and should not have any influence on issues that take place outside the prison walls.
Then it follows that prisoners' income not be subject to taxation.
but if we restore the right to felons once released, what does the actual incarceration have to do with the right? I think it should be about the crime and conviction, not whether they are behind bars or not.
"what does the actual incarceration have to do with the right"? EVERYTHING
Seemed to me she wanted to leave it open ended for the appearance of supporting it, but in reality she doesn't want to turn off any would-be voters if she in fact has reservations about it.
Exactly. Take a stance, stand behind it and defend it. You wish people to follow?...Lead.
I have more respect for Bernie to make his point and bear the consequences that a controversial position might create for him, but he speaks up and says what and why he believes in. Candidates that try and hide behind vague "maybes" on issues do not come across as very confident or knowledgeable to me.
BOOM! and Kamala does this a lot.
I'm happy to have my vote cancelled out by a violent criminal.
I'm happy to have my vote cancelled out by a violent criminal.
"my vote cancelled out" - Mr. Drama Queen playing the victim card. So silly.
