Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VIII (threadbanned users listed in OP)

Options
1…247248250252253…326

Comments

  • Options
    #7472
    Frank Bullitt
    Registered Users Posts: 11,301 ✭✭✭✭Frank Bullitt


    https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1335302936000307200

    He is really really convinced he has won, or can still win. Pathetic.


  • Options
    #7473
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,031 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    He's doing what he has done all his life, grifting poor unfortunate people out of their money to line his own pockets.

    He isn't the problem anymore, it's the rest of them that will still be there when he's gone and fades into obscurity.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Options
    #7474
    aloyisious
    Registered Users Posts: 11,551 ✭✭✭✭aloyisious


    StringerBell wrote: »
    He's doing what he has done all his life, grifting poor unfortunate people out of their money to line his own pockets.

    He isn't the problem anymore, it's the rest of them that will still be there when he's gone and fades into obscurity.

    As of this morning $US 207 Million donated according to figures given by Trump's people to US federal body all donations must be reported to.


  • Options
    #7475
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,149 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    aloyisious wrote: »
    As of this morning $US 207 Million donated according to figures given by Trump's people to US federal body all donations must be reported to.

    His 2024 run will be just a grift, like the 2016


  • Options
    #7476
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,762 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    aloyisious wrote: »
    As of this morning $US 207 Million donated according to figures given by Trump's people to US federal body all donations must be reported to.
    Will he make it to $400m in time ?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7477
    Leroy42
    Registered Users Posts: 15,485 ✭✭✭✭Leroy42


    Gintonious wrote: »
    https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1335302936000307200

    He is really really convinced he has won, or can still win. Pathetic.

    Or, he is trying to abuse the power of his office to overturn a legimate election.

    When are people going to call this what it is? He is trying to delegimise an election result because he didn't win. I am sure there is a name for people in power that do that sort of thing, that try to corrupt local officials, using party apparatus to ensure they win the elections, calling out results so that their supporters believe that only 1 result can ever be legitimate.

    People asked in 2016 just how much problems Trump could cause as POTUS. Well, it looks like it is the end of democracy as the US previously understood it.


  • Options
    #7478
    beggars_bush
    Registered Users Posts: 4,361 ✭✭✭beggars_bush


    Who will the Democrats have in 2024 to take on Trump?


  • Options
    #7479
    Nody
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 18,265 CMod ✭✭✭✭Nody


    beggars_bush wrote: »
    Who will the Democrats have in 2024 to take on Trump?
    Harris is the most likely candidate atm but there could be someone else as well ala Obama coming out of the blue. Harris would have the benefit however of having been VP (possibly President), female and African American which help with keep the left wing of the party to accept her even if her policies might not be left enough.


  • Options
    #7480
    EltonJohn69
    Registered Users Posts: 4,163 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    Nody wrote: »
    Harris is the most likely candidate atm but there could be someone else as well ala Obama coming out of the blue. Harris would have the benefit however of having been VP (possibly President), female and African American which help with keep the left wing of the party to accept her even if her policies might not be left enough.

    Harris seems to be generating Hillary Cmckinton levels of hate... I wonder what the connection is ?


  • Options
    #7481
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,045 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    beggars_bush wrote: »
    Who will the Democrats have in 2024 to take on Trump?

    An inanimate carbon rod won in 2020

    So it doesn't really matter who they put up against him, Trump won't win.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7482
    sydthebeat
    Subscribers Posts: 41,045 ✭✭✭✭sydthebeat


    EltonJohn69 wrote: »
    Harris seems to be generating Hillary Cmckinton levels of hate... I wonder what the connection is ?

    Only among racists


  • Options
    #7483
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    sydthebeat wrote: »
    Only among racists

    Did the racists hate Clinton too? Or was it the sexists that time?

    Surely it was some sort of "ists" group.


  • Options
    #7484
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,031 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    beggars_bush wrote: »
    Who will the Democrats have in 2024 to take on Trump?

    Bookmark this post for future reference. Donald trump will not be the republican nominee for president in 2024, he will not run for anything ever again. Ever. He may run from things like the law, but he is vastly experienced in that but he will never run for anything again.

    He may drag the train out, hell he may even set up and exploratory committee and have some of his lovely rally's saying he's going to come back and save all his adoring cult members again if he can outrun the law, but he will not be a candidate in 2024.

    If he is I will eat my hat and video it for you.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Options
    #7485
    StringerBell
    Registered Users Posts: 14,031 ✭✭✭✭StringerBell


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    Did the racists hate Clinton too? Or was it the sexists that time?

    Surely it was some sort of "ists" group.

    Clinton was a deeply unpopular candidate, she had decades, literally of right wing smear campaigns against her. In fact I remember saying at the time that I couldn't believe she had managed to be running against the only candidate the GOP could have ever found that she could beat, and she still couldn't beat him incredibly.

    Nothing wrong with Clinton, I've no strong feelings toward her either way but she was a poor candidate. She's have been a fine president I'd say, but when your starting from the position that a large percentage of voters have been conditioned to believe you are genuinely evil incarnate you are not gonna sway many, as was evidenced.

    "People say ‘go with the flow’ but do you know what goes with the flow? Dead fish."



  • Options
    #7486
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    Did the racists hate Clinton too? Or was it the sexists that time?

    Surely it was some sort of "ists" group.

    I would say the most prominently opposed to Harris are Trump supporters. Can clearly remember claims for them that her being chosen by Biden was a win for Trump.

    Clinton was mired with decades of baggage and much of the time conspiracy theories. For the average voter she wasn't hugely likable on top of that. Harris in general does not have the same issues as Clinton. She's a potential candidate in 2024 but far from definite.


  • Options
    #7487
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    EltonJohn69 wrote: »
    Harris seems to be generating Hillary Cmckinton levels of hate... I wonder what the connection is ?

    Haven't seen any mutterings myself, but America isn't so progressive that a "strident" career female politician doesn't rub some up the wrong way on a consistent basis. Especially in red states, women in charge is still a freakish occurrence (not that we're a total utopia, women leaders isn't so freakish either)


  • Options
    #7488
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    pixelburp wrote: »
    Haven't seen any mutterings myself, but America isn't so progressive that a "strident" career female politician doesn't rub some up the wrong way on a consistent basis. Especially in red states, women in charge is still a freakish occurrence (not that we're a total utopia, women leaders isn't so freakish either)

    You are solely basing people on liking Clinton because of her gender.

    Wokeism is creeping.

    She managed to become secretary of state and a presidential candidate all on her own merit but if she doesn't win its because of her gender. Doesn't add up.
    She wasnt likeable. People preferred Trump.
    End of


  • Options
    #7489
    Brussels Sprout
    Registered Users Posts: 6,555 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    At last night's Georgia rally, not only did Trump ask for a list of all of the federal politicians who had recognised Joe Biden as the president-elect but he also called out individual state politicians in front of his jeering crowd.

    https://twitter.com/sarahcpr/status/1335384171024408576



    The rally was ostensibly for Senate runoff candidates Loeffler and Perdue but the crowd definitely hadn't come to hear them as evidenced by the less than enthusiastic reaction that they got when they spoke:

    https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1335396015277568000


    My prediction is that after Biden becomes president this is what Trump will attempt to continue to do. The only question is how long can he sustain the level of interest to fill arenas with crowds when he is no longer President. 2024 is a long way away.


  • Options
    #7490
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,941 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    You are solely basing people on liking Clinton because of her gender.

    Wokeism is creeping.

    She managed to become secretary of state and a presidential candidate all on her own merit but if she doesn't win its because of her gender. Doesn't add up.
    She wasnt likeable. People preferred Trump.
    End of

    I never claimed those things. You said "solely" not me. I've posted here plenty of times about how abysmally unlikeable a candidate Clinton was in 2016, so you can park the superiority for one as I don't intend defending some straw version of me you've invented. However, America, especially conservative America, tends to be culturally more aligned to what can be best called "traditional family values". Especially the further from urban centre you go. I recall vox pops with red staters plainly saying they think women shouldn't be in charge. Maternity leave ain't great, women's health availability equally so and the winner of 2016 mocked women for "bleeding out of her whatever". It has representation issues, and Clinton being held up as her genders Great White Hope didn't help things. Christ it probably set the cause back.


  • Options
    #7491
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    pixelburp wrote: »
    I never claimed those things. You said "solely" not me. I've posted here plenty of times about how abysmally unlikeable a candidate Clinton was in 2016, so you can park the superiority for one as I don't intend defending some straw version of me you've invented. However, America, especially conservative America, tends to be culturally more aligned to what can be best called "traditional family values". Especially the further from urban centre you go. I recall vox pops with red staters plainly saying they think women shouldn't be in charge. Maternity leave ain't great, women's health availability equally so and the winner of 2016 mocked women for "bleeding out of her whatever". It has issues, and Clinton being held up as her genders Great White Hope didn't help things. Christ it probably set the cause back.

    Fair enough.

    But yes traditional family values should be resigned to the dustbin of history. We are entering a bright new age and if recent events seen in America are anything to go by I'm excited for the future.

    Traditional family values? What a waste of time.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7492
    Carfacemandog
    Registered Users Posts: 2,042 ✭✭✭Carfacemandog


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    Did the racists hate Clinton too? Or was it the sexists that time?

    Surely it was some sort of "ists" group.
    Someone conveniently forgot to ask about the atheist Kenyan Muslim Communazi agent whose goal was to destroy America,and who didn't have a birth cert except for the oenhe did which clearly had to be a fake.

    Definitely had nothing to do with him being black and having a name like Barack though. Nooo no no, not at all.

    And who was louder than just about anyone else with these racist dogwhistles? The same Donald J. Trump that would go on to retweet and praise people declaring "white power!" while in office, and that would refuse to remove outed white supremacists from influential advisory positions directly to him.

    This is what you chose to stick to so loyally. There's no other conclusion to draw than you either do not care about racism, or that actively support it.


  • Options
    #7493
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,002 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    You are solely basing people on liking Clinton because of her gender.

    Wokeism is creeping.

    She managed to become secretary of state and a presidential candidate all on her own merit but if she doesn't win its because of her gender. Doesn't add up.
    She wasnt likeable. People preferred Trump.
    End of

    2016 is over. HRC won the popular vote. Like Biden just did. Millions more people like his opponents. A minority of voters concentrated in some states preferred the =#IMPOTUS.


  • Options
    #7494
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    Fair enough.

    But yes traditional family values should be resigned to the dustbin of history. We are entering a bright new age and if recent events seen in America are anything to go by I'm excited for the future.

    Traditional family values? What a waste of time.

    Traditional family values are vague as hell though. They're often used as a jab at everything from same sex parents to single parents. It's not exactly if Trump was ever an example of a person with traditional family values but all those professing it were happy to vote for him in spite of that..


  • Options
    #7495
    duploelabs
    Registered Users Posts: 11,149 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    You are solely basing people on liking Clinton because of her gender.

    Wokeism is creeping.

    She managed to become secretary of state and a presidential candidate all on her own merit but if she doesn't win its because of her gender. Doesn't add up.
    She wasnt likeable. People preferred Trump.
    End of
    Actually more people liked Clinton than Trump in 2016 as per the popular vote. And she was deeply unpopular on both sides


  • Options
    #7496
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    duploelabs wrote: »
    Actually more people liked Clinton than Trump in 2016 as per the popular vote. And she was deeply unpopular on both sides

    Just not enough people in the right places.
    That's the electoral college for ya.

    Hopefully the Democrats get rid of it. They will win every election. Great for America.


  • Options
    #7497
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    Just not enough people in the right places.
    That's the electoral college for ya.

    Hopefully the Democrats get rid of it. They will win every election. Great for America.

    We do know for a fact that the various political positions the GOP take don't remotely match the views of the US public as a whole. I would say the Democrats represent it a bit better but the far right shift of the GOP is basically an attempt to regress. In a normal system they would need to drastically reform.


  • Options
    #7498
    paul71
    Registered Users Posts: 3,112 ✭✭✭paul71


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    Just not enough people in the right places.
    That's the electoral college for ya.

    Hopefully the Democrats get rid of it. They will win every election. Great for America.

    No they wouldn't a change in the electoral college that reflects voters opinions would force the Republicans to change their policies to reflect the wishes of more Americans, and then win elections again. That is how democracy works.


  • Options
    #7499
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    paul71 wrote: »
    No they wouldn't a change in the electoral college that reflects voters opinions would force the Republicans to change their policies to reflect the wishes of more Americans, and then win elections again. That is how democracy works.

    If the electoral college had been replaced by the popular vote how many of the past 10 elections would the Democrats have won?


  • Options
    #7500
    paul71
    Registered Users Posts: 3,112 ✭✭✭paul71


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    If the electoral college had been replaced by the popular vote how many of the past 10 elections would the Democrats won?

    I do not know nor do I really care. I know that Gore and Clinton would have won based on the votes they got, but I suspect if the republicans had run Bush vs Gore offering a real policy on climate change Bush may have won the popular vote. If Trump had promised to protect Obama care and bring in gun control he would have got more Democrat votes.

    Do you have an issue with political parties having policies that reflect the wishes of the electorate?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7501
    salmocab
    Registered Users Posts: 11,288 ✭✭✭✭salmocab


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    If the electoral college had been replaced by the popular vote how many of the past 10 elections would the Democrats have won?

    The thing is plenty don’t vote as say a Conservative in California is wasting his time as his vote is worthless but in a normal democracy where every vote counts equal then his vote is worth the same as the conservative in Texas.
    Also politicians would be forced to go after every possible vote so wouldn’t be doing rally’s in small towns they would be forced to go after large swathes of votes by trying to please the electorate with policies not slogans.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement