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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

2020 US Presidential Election (aka: The Trump Coronation)

13567…331

Comments

  • #62
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    It's the new normal, hope they enjoy it.

    Brought to you by the party of law and order.

    :)
    Nine years (which is not within the DOJ guidelines) for Roger Stone and corrupt FBI folks who have been caught lying get book deals and CNN contracts? Good thing those prosecutors resigned before they were investigated for abuse of power. I hear that’s a thing nowadays.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #63
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Donald Trump won the Republican New Hampshire primary. No surprise given his lack of any real competition. But to put things into prospective Trump received 124,000 votes. In 2012 Barack Obama who was running for reelection received just 49,000 votes. And Trump only lost New Hampshire by 3,000 votes in 2016.

    Think Democrats might be a bit worried?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #64
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,507 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Nine years (which is not within the DOJ guidelines) for Roger Stone and corrupt FBI folks who have been caught lying get book deals and CNN contracts? Good thing those prosecutors resigned before they were investigated for abuse of power. I hear that’s a thing nowadays.

    So what you are saying is Trump got the DOJ to involve themselves in a criminal case involving his buddy.

    Party of Law and Order.

    4 more years, 4 more years!


  • #65
    Earthhorse
    Registered Users Posts: 14,715 ✭✭✭✭Earthhorse


    I know I'm in a minority here but I think if Sanders gets the Democratic nomination he will beat Trump.

    Trump got in by the skin of his teeth first time around against probably one of the least likeable candidates to ever stand. Sanders is far more dynamic and likeable than Hillary, a totally different prospect that Trump will have far more difficult campaigning against.


  • #66
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Earthhorse wrote: »
    I know I'm in a minority here but I think if Sanders gets the Democratic nomination he will beat Trump.

    Trump got in by the skin of his teeth first time around against probably one of the least likeable candidates to ever stand. Sanders is far more dynamic and likeable than Hillary, a totally different prospect that Trump will have far more difficult campaigning against.
    I don’t think the DNC will ever let Sanders become the nominee. The DNC is starting to panic because they believe his nomination would be suicidal for the party and guarantee Donald Trump’s re-election. Since the heart of the primaries haven’t gotten underway watch for a major change in the DNC’s attitude towards Sanders in the coming weeks as there will be some brutal assaults by the DNC against him. And if all else fails look for a brokered convention where the superdelegates hand the nomination to someone else.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Earthhorse
    Registered Users Posts: 14,715 ✭✭✭✭Earthhorse


    Like I said; if.


  • #68
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,507 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    Earthhorse wrote: »
    I know I'm in a minority here but I think if Sanders gets the Democratic nomination he will beat Trump.

    Trump got in by the skin of his teeth first time around against probably one of the least likeable candidates to ever stand. Sanders is far more dynamic and likeable than Hillary, a totally different prospect that Trump will have far more difficult campaigning against.

    If Trump starts rage tweeting Bernie, you know it's on.


  • #69
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    I see Pete Buttigieg is on the campaign trail touting the idea of expanding the supreme court to as many as 15 justices. This is something many other democrats are considering since Trump picks have been confirmed. But I’m sure they would never go for it until the democrats take back control of the Senate, as it only take a majority now to confirm a judge. Trump should jump on Buttigieg’s idea and get the supreme court immediately expanded to 15 justices and nominate another 6 right away. He could push for it as a bi-partisan idea. If nothing else it would exposed democrat's blind political ambitions at the cost of the nation.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #70
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    If Trump starts rage tweeting Bernie, you know it's on.
    Trump's got bigger problems at the moment. He hasn't found a good nickname for Mayor Pete yet. :p

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #71
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    A really good read from a 20 year Democrat who experienced a Trump rally. No, she’s not going to switch from Democrat to Republican (but she is becoming an Independent), and she won’t be voting for Trump. But she does dispel some of the myths the left has of the right here in the US. She also gives an insight to the election.

    https://gen.medium.com/ive-been-a-democrat-for-20-years-here-s-what-i-experienced-at-trump-s-rally-in-new-hampshire-c69ddaaf6d07

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Joe_ Public
    Registered Users Posts: 13,023 ✭✭✭✭Joe_ Public


    notobtuse wrote: »
    A really good read from a 20 year Democrat who experienced a Trump rally. No, she’s not going to switch from Democrat to Republican (but she is becoming an Independent), and she won’t be voting for Trump. But she does dispel some of the myths the left has of the right here in the US. She also gives an insight to the election.

    https://gen.medium.com/ive-been-a-democrat-for-20-years-here-s-what-i-experienced-at-trump-s-rally-in-new-hampshire-c69ddaaf6d07

    Took the time to read it. Many of her arguments are familiar from the brexit divide in the uk where many brexit voters felt they too were being painted as narrow minded, xenophobic bigots. But even if they werent, should that change my mind on the utter disaster that was brexit itself? Same with trump. So what if only a minority or maybe none of his supporters are racists. The point is they are voting for one, thats all that counts.

    And if she really sees Bernie Sanders message as simply spreading "doom and gloom", then i can only surmise she just hasn't been listening.


  • #73
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Elizabeth Warren campaign is in serious trouble...

    "I need to level with you: Our movement needs to raise critical funds so I can remain competitive in this race through Super Tuesday."

    Due to low level of campaign donations she’s had to scale back advertising in Nevada and South Carolina.

    Progressives have declared Sanders to be their man. Moderates have been scared off by her magic math in how to pay for 'Medicare for All' and have moved to the Biden/Buttigieg/Klobuchar, et al, camp. That leaves a rising Bloomberg who appeals to the ‘We Hate Trump’ crowd, and the only crowd Warren currently has a shot at. I’d say look for Warren to go guns-a-blaring after Bloomberg in next Wednesday’s debate as her last stand. If she doesn’t prevail I see donations drying up and she won’t even make it to Super Tuesday.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #74
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Michael Avenatti, recent best hope of our disgraceful media to run on the democratic ticket and become president, has been found guilty in Nike extortion trial.

    Looks like Stormy Daniel will never get her money back from him.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/14/disgraced-lawyer-michael-avenatti-found-guilty-in-nike-extortion-trial.html

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #75
    Bill 2.0
    Registered Users Posts: 105 ✭✭Bill 2.0


    Isn't that the guy that Trump called a "creepy porn lawyer"?


  • #76
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Bill 2.0 wrote: »
    Isn't that the guy that Trump called a "creepy porn lawyer"?
    Yup, I believe so. Now he's a creepy porn extortionist... the lawyer formally know as The Democrats Great White Hype. :P

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #77
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,507 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Michael Avenatti, recent best hope of our disgraceful media to run on the democratic ticket and become president, has been found guilty in Nike extortion trial.

    Looks like Stormy Daniel will never get her money back from him.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/14/disgraced-lawyer-michael-avenatti-found-guilty-in-nike-extortion-trial.html

    Good.

    He was some cretin.

    At least Stormy got some money off mushroom dick.


  • #78
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Reports keep coming out Mike Bloomberg is considering having Hillary Clinton on his ticket as vice president. Neither is denying it. It he does bring her into the ticket Mike better hire himself a couple of food tasters.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #79
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users Posts: 26,283 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Reports keep coming out Mike Bloomberg is considering having Hillary Clinton on his ticket as vice president. Neither is denying it. It he does bring her into the ticket Mike better hire himself a couple of food tasters.

    “Suicide squad”


  • #80
    VicMackey1
    Registered Users Posts: 253 ✭✭VicMackey1


    Amy Klobuchar cant name the Mexican President! It is funny to watch her squirm:D

    Jump to 1min15sec


  • #81
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,507 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    I couldn't tell you who the president of Mexico is.

    But almost everyone knows this guys name. Almost

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXofQ7ga174


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    VicMackey1
    Registered Users Posts: 253 ✭✭VicMackey1


    Boggles wrote: »
    I couldn't tell you who the president of Mexico is.

    But almost everyone knows this guys name. Almost

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXofQ7ga174


    That sounds like a genuine mix up by Trump. Not comparable at all to Amy Klobuchar not having a clue who the Mexican President was. Imagine Leo not knowing the name of the British PM!


  • #83
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    VicMackey1 wrote: »
    That sounds like a genuine mix up by Trump. Not comparable at all to Amy Klobuchar not having a clue who the Mexican President was. Imagine Leo not knowing the name of the British PM!
    The opposition is grasping at straws. Of course it is probably a name mix up. Trump owns between $1.1 million and $2.25 million in stock of Apple. And he’s been calling on Cook to build its Apple products at home.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #84
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,507 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    VicMackey1 wrote: »
    That sounds like a genuine mix up by Trump. Not comparable at all to Amy Klobuchar not having a clue who the Mexican President was. Imagine Leo not knowing the name of the British PM!

    Klobuchar is not the leader of a country. It just goes to show how vast and insular America is.

    She is a Senator from a state that borders Canada. About 2000 miles from Mexico.

    A more apt comparison would be like asking a TD who is the President of Slovkia.

    No one cares.


  • #85
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,507 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    The opposition is grasping at straws. Of course it is probably a name mix up. Trump owns between $1.1 million and $2.25 million in stock of Apple. And he’s been calling on Cook to build its Apple products at home.

    What opposition? :confused:


  • #86
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    What opposition? :confused:
    Trump haters, of course. That would include Democrats and Socialists, Liberals, Progressives, the vast majority of the mainstream media, Hollywood elite, the Deep State, Never-Trumpers, and Grumpy Cat.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #87
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,507 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Trump haters, of course. That would include Democrats and Socialists, Liberals, Progressives, the vast majority of the mainstream media, Hollywood elite, the Deep State, Never-Trumpers, and Grumpy Cat.

    But I posted the video.

    Do you think I am the opposition? :)


  • #88
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    But I posted the video.

    Do you think I am the opposition? :)
    Have you ever had a good word, for anything positive he's done, to say about Trump?

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • #89
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,507 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Have you ever had a good word, for anything positive he's done, to say about Trump?

    If you could be so good as to answer my question first.

    I'll then gladly answer yours.


  • #90
    notobtuse
    Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Boggles wrote: »
    If you could be so good as to answer my question first.

    I'll then gladly answer yours.
    Without answering my question I can only take an educated guess, so... if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Boggles
    Registered Users Posts: 39,507 ✭✭✭✭Boggles


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Without answering my question I can only take an educated guess, so... if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

    Well my question was non fowl related.

    Again.

    Do you think I'm "the opposition"? :)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement