President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[Moliere]

This thread is killing me. Anyone who doesn't think Trump is the Anti-Christ is a Trumpologist, and everything bad in the world is his fault... or maybe Bush's. Was Bush the one who broke down and allowed North Korea to create a nuclear program? How about Iran? Also, Trump must be the first POTUS to go after the media. No other president would have been so small as to call out networks by name - I wouldn't be surprised if he actually called on the justice department to investigate individual journalists, which would be a totally unprecedented assault on the 1st Amendment.

^^Trumpologist^^


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[frank ryan]

^^Trumpologist^^


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Moli, those who have rolled their eyes at the board members who are disturbed by Trump and minimized his shortcomings have consistently been wrong. Trump is an unmitigated disaster. He is incompetent, corrupt and unpredictable. It's not business as usual.

[cowboy]

Moli, those who have rolled their eyes at the board members who are disturbed by Trump and minimized his shortcomings have consistently been wrong. Trump is an unmitigated disaster. He is incompetent, corrupt and unpredictable. It's not business as usual.

Frank, you understand that half the country disagrees with you and is as convinced they are right as you? Can you at least admit that it was the corruption and incompetence of his predecessor and his opposition that got Trump elected? If not, will you at the very least concede that the corruption of the DNC pitted Trump against the only politician in the country that he could defeat?

[frank ryan]

Frank, you understand that half the country disagrees with you and is as convinced they are right as you? Can you at least admit that it was the corruption and incompetence of his predecessor and his opposition that got Trump elected? If not, will you at the very least concede that the corruption of the DNC pitted Trump against the only politician in the country that he could defeat?

I don't think Obama was particularly corrupt, he was certainly incompetent and weak on Russia, but he's not responsible for Trump's rise. Hillary was going to win regardless of allegations surrounding the DNC. I wanted Bernie and I even donated money to his campaign but he didn't have a chance. Hillary was the only politician Trump had a prayer of beating. More than half the country disapprove of/are concerned about Trump. More people voted for Hillary than him in the election.

What do you do to stay on top of current events/consume news?

[frank ryan]

There are two of the people in Trump's administration I have some confidence in. I'm not shocked they worked out a way to babysit him.


http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...o-keep-tabs-on

[Topper]

Look, McCain with his wanting to get the US involved in skirmishes all over the planet is annoying as hell. But saying he wants nuclear war with Russia makes it really easy to not take you seriously on anything.

McCain and Shumer are naive as hell, if they believe the constant Russia bashing without a Realpolitik could push the US into needless conflicts with Russia. Moreover, by constant haranguing Trump about it, they could cause 45 to do something stupid to prove he is not in Russia's back pocket.

You don't need to take me seriously, but the Dems and McCain are naive and plain stupid with this constant Russia bashing. There was a time to stand up to certain activities of Russia during the Obama administration and none of that was done. Now that Putin has tasted the freedom, putting that back in the bottle is difficult. We need somebody more skillful than Trump, McCain, Shumer, Warren or Pelosi involved, but instead have a bunch of foreign policy village idiots. So "wanting" nuclear war is hyperbole, my specialty, but creating it is everybody's to blame.

And I wager Shumer wants to defeat the GOP so much he is willing to risk potential conflicts that could mature into full-fledged war with Russia. He is simply stupid and naive in terms of foreign policy.

[PaloAltoCougar]

Frank, you understand that half the country disagrees with you and is as convinced they are right as you? Can you at least admit that it was the corruption and incompetence of his predecessor and his opposition that got Trump elected? If not, will you at the very least concede that the corruption of the DNC pitted Trump against the only politician in the country that he could defeat?

You didn't ask me but my answers would be: (1) Well, not exactly half, since Trump's favorite (and thus we can conclude the most Trump-favorable) poll, the Rasmussen, reported today that Trump has a 61% disapproval rating, apparently a record for any President's first six months [note, Trump was right that he could shoot someone in the face on Fifth Avenue and he wouldn't lose many supporters--the fact that that bloc remains supportive isn't very compelling to me]; (2) If the corruption reference is only to Hillary, then I agree--I have seen nothing to make me think Obama was/is corrupt; and (3) Agree!

You and Shaka are reasonable men, and I understand that your resistance to the anti-Trumpers is not born of Trump-love. But do you disagree with the premise that Trump is doing serious damage to the nation by, for example, undermining faith in our institutions, raising unnecessary alarm among our allies, unwittingly assisting Putin in his goal to destabilize the Transatlantic partnership, wasting time tweeting and focusing on the Russia probe instead of more serious issues, etc. [I could add several more items but I lost my readership somewhere around "Trump-love"]?

[New Mexican Disaster]

You didn't ask me but my answers would be: (1) Well, not exactly half, since Trump's favorite (and thus we can conclude the most Trump-favorable) poll, the Rasmussen, reported today that Trump has a 61% disapproval rating, apparently a record for any President's first six months [note, Trump was right that he could shoot someone in the face on Fifth Avenue and he wouldn't lose many supporters--the fact that that bloc remains supportive isn't very compelling to me]; (2) If the corruption reference is only to Hillary, then I agree--I have seen nothing to make me think Obama was/is corrupt; and (3) Agree!

You and Shaka are reasonable men, and I understand that your resistance to the anti-Trumpers is not born of Trump-love. But do you disagree with the premise that Trump is doing serious damage to the nation by, for example, undermining faith in our institutions, raising unnecessary alarm among our allies, unwittingly assisting Putin in his goal to destabilize the Transatlantic partnership, wasting time tweeting and focusing on the Russia probe instead of more serious issues, etc. [I could add several more items but I lost my readership somewhere around "Trump-love"]?

Pics?

[cowboy]

You didn't ask me but my answers would be: (1) Well, not exactly half, since Trump's favorite (and thus we can conclude the most Trump-favorable) poll, the Rasmussen, reported today that Trump has a 61% disapproval rating, apparently a record for any President's first six months [note, Trump was right that he could shoot someone in the face on Fifth Avenue and he wouldn't lose many supporters--the fact that that bloc remains supportive isn't very compelling to me]; (2) If the corruption reference is only to Hillary, then I agree--I have seen nothing to make me think Obama was/is corrupt; and (3) Agree!

You and Shaka are reasonable men, and I understand that your resistance to the anti-Trumpers is not born of Trump-love. But do you disagree with the premise that Trump is doing serious damage to the nation by, for example, undermining faith in our institutions, raising unnecessary alarm among our allies, unwittingly assisting Putin in his goal to destabilize the Transatlantic partnership, wasting time tweeting and focusing on the Russia probe instead of more serious issues, etc. [I could add several more items but I lost my readership somewhere around "Trump-love"]?

1) I said half disagreed with frank, not approved of Trump; there's a distinction. The posts in this thread of frank and one or two others here suggest Trump is akin to the anti-christ. Since Trump had an approval rating (via Rasmussen, as that's about the only poll I use) at or near 50% for most of the spring, we can assume that the 11% who have tipped the other direction are folks who disapprove of his decidedly unpresidential behavior, but would still prefer him to Hillary. I should have known people would argue about the number and not the point, but I wish it hadn't been you. You're still my favorite, if only for coining the phrase 'Trump-love'.

2) Corruption, like most things, isn't black and white. There are degree's, and while Obama isn't nearly as corrupt as the Clinton machine, he isn't lily white. He repeatedly lied to the public - "my administration has increased spending at a lower rate than any other" - and clearly made decisions that rewarded his donors rather than the economy, eg ND pipeline and Warren Buffet's rail transport. In his defense, I don't think you become president without being somewhat corrupt, but his was the straw that broke the red states' back and helped tip the scales to Trump, imo. It was likely a small thing compared to the train wreck that was Hillary, but people were tired of crony loving politicians, and Obama did nothing to change that image.

I'm not going to defend Trump's behavior, but I think most of the "serious damage" you talk of is hand-wringing at this point. I'm not sure what institutions he's undermining our faith in, but I'd like you to elaborate. To be sure, though, his behavior is concerning I really wish someone would take away his twitter privileges.

[PaloAltoCougar]

...I'm not sure what institutions he's undermining our faith in, but I'd like you to elaborate. To be sure, though, his behavior is concerning I really wish someone would take away his twitter privileges.

I'll may try to provide a lengthier response later, but bullet points would include faith in the validity of elections, the value of a free and active investigative press, the value of constitutional checks and balances, the importance of never wearing see-through shorts when one is obese, etc.

[Shaka]

You didn't ask me but my answers would be: (1) Well, not exactly half, since Trump's favorite (and thus we can conclude the most Trump-favorable) poll, the Rasmussen, reported today that Trump has a 61% disapproval rating, apparently a record for any President's first six months [note, Trump was right that he could shoot someone in the face on Fifth Avenue and he wouldn't lose many supporters--the fact that that bloc remains supportive isn't very compelling to me]; (2) If the corruption reference is only to Hillary, then I agree--I have seen nothing to make me think Obama was/is corrupt; and (3) Agree!

You and Shaka are reasonable men, and I understand that your resistance to the anti-Trumpers is not born of Trump-love. But do you disagree with the premise that Trump is doing serious damage to the nation by, for example, undermining faith in our institutions, raising unnecessary alarm among our allies, unwittingly assisting Putin in his goal to destabilize the Transatlantic partnership, wasting time tweeting and focusing on the Russia probe instead of more serious issues, etc. [I could add several more items but I lost my readership somewhere around "Trump-love"]?

I'm not convinced Trump is doing serious damage.....yet. I personally think many of our allies take us for granted and needed a bit of a shake-up. I'd rather have this shake-up done in a more presidential way but the outcome will probably be the same. As far as the Russian probe I think that is getting drug out by the press and by alarmists like a couple of our cohorts who nitpick EVERY.....SINGLE.....ISSUE.... regardless of its importance. When Frank said it wasn't hyperbole that The Donald could get us in a nuclear war I almost spit up on my screen. I wanted to take a time machine back to the sixties and seventies and crawl into my fallout shelter. Trump is at times a dope who could stand to act more presidential. I think other times he's got a method to his madness. What I'd like to see happen is for the press and the alarmists to back off for a bit and actually give him a chance to see what happens when he can govern without the constant hounding about trivial matters.

I've already got what I wanted out of the guy, which was a conservative leaning Supreme Court Justice. There's a chance that I'm going to get another. I'm willing to let the rest play out a little bit before I start making up my mind about The Donald's presidency.

[Topper]

I'll may try to provide a lengthier response later, but bullet points would include faith in the validity of elections, the value of a free and active investigative press, the value of constitutional checks and balances, the importance of never wearing see-through shorts when one is obese, etc.

We are still awaiting the mod decision on your penalty for imposing upon us naive viewers of the spectacle you rained down upon us. Shame on you for reminding us of such an abomination.

[Copelius]

I'll may try to provide a lengthier response later, but bullet points would include faith in the validity of elections, the value of a free and active investigative press, the value of constitutional checks and balances, the importance of never wearing see-through shorts when one is obese, etc.

Now I have to rethink my wardobe for this weekend.

[frank ryan]

I'll may try to provide a lengthier response later, but bullet points would include faith in the validity of elections, the value of a free and active investigative press, the value of constitutional checks and balances, the importance of never wearing see-through shorts when one is obese, etc.

Faith in the intelligence community.

[Commando]

I think other times he's got a method to his madness.

This is where I strongly, vehemently disagree. He's no genius. He spends his weekends golfing at his resorts. He has no patience for reading-- even regarding matters of urgent national security, of which he is in charge. He is a thin-skinned baby who has no problem throwing anybody under the bus who disrupts his illusion. He is the Naked Emperor. He is pushing an agenda all of our racist white grandparents would be proud of (calling the White House 'a real dump,' taking billions from educational programs and throwing them toward building a wall to keep the invading foreigners out even though it objectively will have a very very sparse effect on illegal immigration; investigating universities for discrimination against whites , publicly encouraging police brutality to wild applause and then trying to say it was a joke after heavy public backlash even after his heavy public backlash for encouraging violence at his rallies, etc etc etc). Whether he's playing to the base or really believes these things is of little consequence. He doesn't 'at times' act like a dope who could stand to act more presidential; he's a dope who puts on a presidential face once in a while but can't stop his inner dope from dominating the room. Good for him for nominating Gorsuch- any moderate president, including Jeb, would have made the same call. There's a reason people point out his daily f*k-ups-- because so many people are acting like this is normal. It's time for this charade to end and for people to demand our Executive stop embarrassing the whole country by acting like a buffoon and advocating for the agenda of the idiotic, bigoted minority.

Why, take this article from Mesa, Arizona's own Senator Jeff Flake, for example-- just in case you thought you were on crazy pills:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...d-trump-215442