nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

alchemist33

I've seen two main options put forward on this forum, (1) that he'll remain a political force until the 2024 primaries start up and the Republicans have to take him seriously or (2) that he'll be so mired in litigation that he'll have no time for politics.

There are of course other options for the next 4 years - prison, exile, death or ill-health (he isn't young and he's been under stress), no politics but a business success, emperor. But it'd be an interesting exercise for people to lay their cards on the table now and make their predictions.

Personally I think his political influence will die quickly after the Capitol fiasco but someone else will emerge in 2 years, once the memories have waned, to be the standard-bearer for the QAnon wing.

Threadbanned:
Real Donald Trump
12gauge dave
Sweetemotion
Timberrrrrrrr
Cognitive Dissident
arthursway
Wojtek the Bear
BornTobyWilde
Tonesjones
BruteStock
tooka
brenbrady
naughtyboy
DubInMeath
extra gravy
Briabnwilldoit
Yurt2
Notnattynate
SnakePliskin
lizzyjane
erlichbachman
Tony EH
RobbieV
Kermit.de.frog
Enter Name here
Piskin
Applehunter

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Tell me how

notobtuse wrote: »

I guess it depends on the election. As I recall Democrats were claiming the 2016 and 2000 elections were stolen.

2016 - Nope. HC conceded on the night of the election and that was pretty much it.

2000 - Yep. Jeb Bush's Florida made questionable decisions on holding a recount in a case that was judged on by the Supreme Court before Jeb's brother was announced the winner

Compare that with the 60 cases brought by Trump which were thrown out one by one. These 2 situations are not remotely similar.

Cody montana

notobtuse wrote: »

I guess it depends on the election. As I recall Democrats were claiming the 2016 and 2000 elections were stolen.

Really, Hillary was claiming the election was stolen?

Necro

notobtuse wrote: »

Help me out here, as I haven't read everything... Did people here have an issue with the Michigan election? I know I didn't as there weren't reports of major issues and irregularities as there were in other states.

You have been told already to drop the election discussion - it's been done to death and can now be discussed in Conspiracy Theories. Don't bring it up again or you will be threadbanned

extra gravy

notobtuse wrote: »

Sure...

From the article I quoted:

"Alina Chan is one of 18 experts who signed a letter in May calling for a thorough exploration into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic. Although Chan voiced her support for an investigation into the possibility of a lab leak early in the pandemic, she told NBC that experts were careful not to lean too close to views linked to the former president."

"At the time, it was scarier to be associated with Trump and to become a tool for racists, so people didn't want to publicly call for an investigation into lab origins"

Also from NBC:

"Chan said there had been trepidation among some scientists about publicly discussing the lab leak hypothesis for fear that their words could be misconstrued or used to support racist rhetoric about how the coronavirus emerged. Trump fueled accusations that the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a research lab in the city where the first Covid-19 cases were reported, was connected to the outbreak, and on numerous occasions he called the pathogen the "Wuhan virus" or "kung flu."

"At the time, it was scarier to be associated with Trump and to become a tool for racists, so people didn't want to publicly call for an investigation into lab origins," she said."

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/lab-leak-theory-science-scientists-rcna1191

If that isn't enough for you to consider her statements as fact then you would probably have to ignore 90% or more of all reporting from everywhere.... and probably 100% of reporting on Trump

You claimed media outlets were reporting "it" as fact. What was "it"? Assuming you meant the lab leak theory then they reported the fact that some scientists have called for an investigation and they have reported the fact that some scientists didn't want to speculate on the theory in case they were associated with the former guy. They have NOT reported a lab leak itself as fact as it is still a theory. Do you get it now?

Yeah_Right

notobtuse wrote: »

Sure...

From the article I quoted:

"Alina Chan is one of 18 experts who signed a letter in May calling for a thorough exploration into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic. Although Chan voiced her support for an investigation into the possibility of a lab leak early in the pandemic, she told NBC that experts were careful not to lean too close to views linked to the former president."

"At the time, it was scarier to be associated with Trump and to become a tool for racists, so people didn't want to publicly call for an investigation into lab origins"

Also from NBC:

"Chan said there had been trepidation among some scientists about publicly discussing the lab leak hypothesis for fear that their words could be misconstrued or used to support racist rhetoric about how the coronavirus emerged. Trump fueled accusations that the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a research lab in the city where the first Covid-19 cases were reported, was connected to the outbreak, and on numerous occasions he called the pathogen the "Wuhan virus" or "kung flu."

"At the time, it was scarier to be associated with Trump and to become a tool for racists, so people didn't want to publicly call for an investigation into lab origins," she said."

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/lab-leak-theory-science-scientists-rcna1191

If that isn't enough for you to consider her statements as fact then you would probably have to ignore 90% or more of all reporting from everywhere.... and probably 100% of reporting on Trump

It really is amazing. So many nutjobs, crazies and racists support Trump that when he throws out a theory that might have some merit, intelligent, rational experts in that field are hesitant to look into the theory. His supporters scare experts away.

francois

Billy Mays wrote: »

Guess who???

Well played sir, have a recommend

briany

Cody montana wrote: »

Really, Hillary was claiming the election was stolen?

Yeah, I remember well that time she led a mob down to the Capitol building to 'encourage' those inside not to rubber stamp the results.

No, wait....

Tippex

With All due respect you seem to be struggling with the term fact in all of this. You have said

notobtuse wrote: »

News outlets are reporting it as fact and no other scientist refutted it. Certainly light years more credible than the Russian collusion hoax everyone here was reporting as gospel, wouldn't you say?

notobtuse wrote: »

Sure...

From the article I quoted:

"Alina Chan is one of 18 experts who signed a letter in May calling for a thorough exploration into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic. Although Chan voiced her support for an investigation into the possibility of a lab leak early in the pandemic, she told NBC that experts were careful not to lean too close to views linked to the former president."

"At the time, it was scarier to be associated with Trump and to become a tool for racists, so people didn't want to publicly call for an investigation into lab origins"

COLOR=#2A2A2A]
[/COLOR]

However in the same article "A Canadian scientist and Harvard postdoctoral associate said colleagues might have feared vocalizing support for the Wuhan lab leak hypothesis out of concern that it would be viewed as showing support for potentially inflammatory views espoused by former President Trump. "

The term Might is not a fact along with "Chan cautioned, however, that despite emerging calls for fresh investigations, there is not a singular piece of evidence that definitely proves the lab leak theory. "

Please stop grasping at straws picking and choosing elements from the article to suit your narrative when the same article counters your narrative.

Livvie

WhomadeGod wrote: »

By all means post your evidence then.

I'd be here all day. And you still wouldn't believe any of it. It's not actually normal in itself, to think that Trump's behaviour is normal.

notobtuse

So VP Kamala Harris, who Joe Biden anointed to fix the southern border crisis (and fail in the process because he really doesn’t want it fixed IMO) is finally going to the US southern border to take a look for herself. Why you might ask?

The answer is really quite simple. Donald Trump apparently isn’t going to spend his retirement golfing, and has announced plans to visit the border with Texas Governor Abbott to “shine a spotlight” on Biden’s “crimes against our nation.” And he had something to say about Harris that was both EPIC and Hammer-Meet-Nail worthy.

“After months of ignoring the crisis at the Southern Border, it is great that we got Kamala Harris to finally go and see the tremendous destruction and death that they’ve created—a direct result of Biden ending my very tough but fair Border policies,” Trump said in a statement. “Harris and Biden were given the strongest Border in American history. And now, it is by far the worst in American history.”

“If Governor Abbott and I weren’t going there next week, she would have never gone!” Trump added.

Democrats new motto should be “Lead From Behind.” Luckily for us Trump will continue to provide voice to the destruction Biden and democrats are inflicting on our nation.

ohnonotgmail

notobtuse wrote: »

So VP Kamala Harris, who Joe Biden anointed to fix the southern border crisis (and fail in the process because he really doesn’t want it fixed IMO) is finally going to the US southern border to take a look for herself. Why you might ask?

The answer is really quite simple. Donald Trump apparently isn’t going to spend his retirement golfing, and has announced plans to visit the border with Texas Governor Abbott to “shine a spotlight” on Biden’s “crimes against our nation.” And he had something to say about Harris that was both EPIC and Hammer-Meet-Nail worthy.

“After months of ignoring the crisis at the Southern Border, it is great that we got Kamala Harris to finally go and see the tremendous destruction and death that they’ve created—a direct result of Biden ending my very tough but fair Border policies,” Trump said in a statement. “Harris and Biden were given the strongest Border in American history. And now, it is by far the worst in American history.”

“If Governor Abbott and I weren’t going there next week, she would have never gone!” Trump added.

Democrats new motto should be “Lead From Behind.” Luckily for us Trump will continue to provide voice to the destruction Biden and democrats are inflicting on our nation.

where did you copy and paste that from?

jamule

notobtuse wrote: »

So VP Kamala Harris, who Joe Biden anointed to fix the southern border crisis (and fail in the process because he really doesn’t want it fixed IMO) is finally going to the US southern border to take a look for herself. Why you might ask?

The answer is really quite simple. Donald Trump apparently isn’t going to spend his retirement golfing, and has announced plans to visit the border with Texas Governor Abbott to “shine a spotlight” on Biden’s “crimes against our nation.” And he had something to say about Harris that was both EPIC and Hammer-Meet-Nail worthy.

“After months of ignoring the crisis at the Southern Border, it is great that we got Kamala Harris to finally go and see the tremendous destruction and death that they’ve created—a direct result of Biden ending my very tough but fair Border policies,” Trump said in a statement. “Harris and Biden were given the strongest Border in American history. And now, it is by far the worst in American history.”

“If Governor Abbott and I weren’t going there next week, she would have never gone!” Trump added.

Democrats new motto should be “Lead From Behind.” Luckily for us Trump will continue to provide voice to the destruction Biden and democrats are inflicting on our nation.

She's gong down to check the wall the last lad promised he would build.

dogbert27

jamule wrote: »

She's gong down to check the wall the last lad promised he would build.

And on the children who he had taken away from their parents

Leroy42

By what metric is Trump declaring he had created the strongest Border in American history? And in addition, why is it now the worst?

Given Trump never even came close to completing his signature, and by his thinking an integral part of any strategy, wall, surely we can all agree that Trump failed miserably in his signature policy.

As I recall, Trump paid a number of visits to the border, but surprisingly that in of itself doesn't seem to have solved any of the problems. So maybe a politician, who has access to experts, doesn't actually need to go to the border to understand the issues.

[Deleted User]

notobtuse wrote: »

The answer is really quite simple. Donald Trump apparently isn’t going to spend his retirement golfing

He's probably bored of it since he spent all of his presidency playing it.

notobtuse

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

where did you copy and paste that from?

Trumps quotes are all over the news.

Patrick2010

If it was the strongest border in American history why did he want to build a wall?.

Leroy42

notobtuse wrote: »

Trumps quotes are all over the news.

And what made you think that the quotes from a habitual liar, a sore loser and one that is trying to paint Biden in as bad a light as possible, were to be taken at face value rather than checking them first?

Christy42

notobtuse wrote: »

Trumps quotes are all over the news.

I mean Trump quotes should generally be assumed to be lies. Largely due to the fact that most of his statements are lies are only intended to make him feel good about himself and still relevant.

I am curious if Trump's own photo op down by the border will look any better than Ted Cruz's attempt at blaming everything on it a few months ago. Wonder if it is the migrants that mean the Texas power grid keeps failing as well!

In any case the US would be better off if he stuck to golf. Would probably be a pity for golf though.

everlast75

Leroy42 wrote: »

And what made you think that the quotes from a habitual liar, a sore loser and one that is trying to paint Biden in as bad a light as possible, were to be taken at face value rather than checking them first?

It's a sad state of affairs when we are reduced to arguing with someone who hasn't the slightest interest in constructive dialogue on this thread.

There is no longer anyone who actually supports Trump willing to post here.

everlast75

Everything Trump touches dies

https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1408084595610947585?s=19

Tippex

everlast75 wrote: »

Everything Trump touches dies

https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1408084595610947585?s=19

and the hits just keep on coming.

Cody montana

everlast75 wrote: »

Everything Trump touches dies

https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1408084595610947585?s=19

What a shame.
He he.

A month ago he liked one of my retweets and then blocked me.

Larbre34

everlast75 wrote: »

It's a sad state of affairs when we are reduced to arguing with someone who hasn't the slightest interest in constructive dialogue on this thread.

There is no longer anyone who actually supports Trump willing to post here.

Could that be because its an indefensible position to take, unless you're a Candace Owens type, ie a lunatic zealot who would say night was day.

There are simply no positives to articulate about Trump, his administration, his advisors, his family or his Presidency.

Try doing it yourself, even as an exercise in devil's advocacy and see how foolish you would feel.

Igotadose

everlast75 wrote: »

Everything Trump touches dies

https://twitter.com/nycsouthpaw/status/1408084595610947585?s=19

Lots of very strong language in that ruling by the NYS Supreme Court. Good luck, Rudy. You'll probably end up working at Michael Cohen's law firm.

If there. He won't be able to bring suits in other states, they reciprocate on these things.

By the way, reading through the decision is, well, pretty damned entertaining. It's not short - 33 pages. Here's just one gem from one of the many examples of Rudy's lawyerly malfeasance, in an attempt to discredit voting in Philadelphia (nasty racist undertones in Rudy's statement IMHO):

"Respondent repeatedly stated that dead people “voted” in Philadelphia in order
to discredit the results of the vote in that city. He quantified the amount of dead people
who voted at various times as 8,021; while also reporting the number as 30,000. As the
anecdotal poster child to prove this point, he repeatedly stated that famous heavyweight
boxer Joe Frazier continued to vote years after he was dead and stated on November 7,
2020 “he is still voting here.” The public records submitted on this motion
unequivocally show that respondent’s statement is false. Public records show that
Pennsylvania formally cancelled Mr. Frazier’s eligibility to vote on February 8, 2012,
three months after he died"

notobtuse

everlast75 wrote: »

It's a sad state of affairs when we are reduced to arguing with someone who hasn't the slightest interest in constructive dialogue on this thread.

There is no longer anyone who actually supports Trump willing to post here.

I would be more than happy to discuss reasoned constructive dialogue regarding Trump's future after the election. What I have no interest in is discussing mere hateful comments about Trump, the questions asking me to defend things divergent from my comments, or the personal abuse directed at me that goes unnoticed.

Cody montana

Also, isn't it the 20th anniversary of 9/11 this year?
Wonder will he be arrested by then?

[Deleted User]

notobtuse wrote: »

I would be more than happy to discuss reasoned constructive dialogue regarding Trump's future after the election. What I have no interest in is discussing mere hateful comments about Trump, the questions asking me to defend things divergent from my comments, or the personal abuse directed at me that goes unnoticed.

I believe I asked you earlier to list some of Trump's policies that you disagreed with. Would you like to try that now?

everlast75

notobtuse wrote: »

I would be more than happy to discuss reasoned constructive dialogue regarding Trump's future after the election.

Your posts say otherwise

Tell me how

notobtuse wrote: »

I would be more than happy to discuss reasoned constructive dialogue regarding Trump's future after the election. What I have no interest in is discussing mere hateful comments about Trump, the questions asking me to defend things divergent from my comments, or the personal abuse directed at me that goes unnoticed.

This reads like Lindsey Graham or Mitch McConnell saying after Jan 6th that the causes for what happened were false and needed to stop, and then they went 100% in the other direction.