Many Prefer Being Nuked - If it means Trump Fails?
What I have witnessed from the media over the past few weeks is that some show the attitude they hope president Trump will fail next week at the Singapore summit with the North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Yes, it is apparent that many dislike our president., and would like to see him fail at anything he undertakes. It is very clear people that dislike president Trump becoming are becoming increasingly frustrated with his good job performance. However, it appears their pure hate for Trump has made them void of even a smidge of common sense?
My question - So are you on the side that is hoping Trump fails in Singapore and North Korea remains a threat or are you hoping he once again solves a "HUGE' problem?Sadly, I think that for far too many the costs of failure don't matter - the only thing that is of interest is the failure of the President in all that he attempts.
Isn't that what Mitch McConnell and his cronies wanted for Obama? And they did keep him from nominating a Supreme Court judge as was his right. Shoe? Other foot?
No Randy, it was not his, (Pres. Obama), Right, it was his prerogative, albeit a prerogative qualified by the need of consent.
The "shoe" is right where it belongs - on the foot of the vengeful. I think being an "obstructionist" can have multiple inferences -- some of which might even be rationalized as patriotic, but being "vengeful" has only one, and it is not flattering, and, it is far from being patriotic.
GABut you do realize the dems are plotting their vengeance as we speak, GA. A dem POTUS pulling the same stunts Spanky tries wouldn't be tolerated by the right.
And round and round the circle goes, with no one ever willing to cooperate or compromise...because they didn't so I won't either!
That's right, not what I want to happen but there it is, Dan.
If you don't want it to happen, why the contribution to it?
I have as much to do with the contribution as you do, Dan.
Ah geez Sharlee01, what the hell kind of thread title was that - relative to the point of your OP? I find it hard to believe you actually think that - or else I wouldn't have even bothered to comment here.
Surely something like; "Many would like to see Pres. Trump fail than succeed at reducing the N. Korean Threat" would have been much more credible.
Unless of course you can support that ant-Trump folks really would rather be nuked.
GAI believe she's simply "Trumping" it, GA.
It does seem over the top but the quest for the 'I told you so' moment is a very powerful motivator.
Does anyone want to be personally nuked? Of course not. Would some mind throwing blame around if someone else was? I can name a few I'd think guilty of such if the unthinkable happened.
But, I'm impressed with Trump on this one. If it were a Democrat in office heading into this the right would be screaming as hard as they did in Iran (whether justified then, or not). So we need to let the opposition speak,fantasize an 'I told you so' scenario and pray it never comes. This is a dangerous course, fraught with fears of what Un's true goals are. I didn't think Trump was up to the task.Thank you for your comment. And I hope it did not offend. The comment was meant to motivate, but for my perspective not to say I told you so. Just wanted to bring two things to light. One that we have a serious division going on in the country, and that the media may well be part of the cause. It's very clear we all have our own reasons for "digging in". But when it comes to the important things like world peace, time to come together.
Yes. Any step toward world peace should be universally celebrated, by all of good faith.
Thank you for your comment, I realize my title is alarming, it was meant to be. I wanted to provoke true thought on the subject. It's clear there is a "great divide" in the country that resulted in the election of Trump. The divide has become much worse over the past year and a half. My title was to make one think. Ask themselves the question - " Has my dislike for this president gone too far, and perhaps my dislike for this man is disrupting my thought prosses?"
I have noted that no one has really addressed my leadoff opinion on how the media has reported on the presidents Singapore summit. It's clear much of what is being reported had been negative, and for lack of a better word "glib".
No, I do not believe anyone hopes to be nuked if it meant a Trump failure. My question was to hit at the heart of a problem. Which appears to be a strong displeasure for our president. A displeasure that has become so depleting that "some" have lost their ability to think clearly. I also wanted to point out media has the ability to creep in and impede ones thought process.
I am pleased my question provoke thought and comments. It's apparent some went deeply into their protective shell, others became defensive and somewhat insulted. However, it's also clear some faced the problem head-on.That's a fair explanation Sharlee01, and a fair point. Perhaps I am just suffering from hyperbole overload. :-)
GAWith Spanky as POTUS, what do you expect, GA? I mean seriously? He's hyperbole personified!
You are right Randy, and I think a lot of folks here -- beyond this single example by Sharlee01 -- have followed in his footsteps.
GA
"A displeasure that has become so depleting that "some" have lost their ability to think clearly."
See, I have a problem with this, but maybe I'm not thinking clearly. Would you be so kind as to provide a specific example of someone displaying that they "have lost their ability to think clearly" as a result of their displeasure with Trump?I could write a book. Do you find it normal for a comedian to call a perfect stranger a Cun-? Then go on to insinuate incest between a father and daughter? How about you, are you getting it on with your daddy? I could say that if I want too. Do you get my point?
Let's not forget Kathy Griffen, holding a severed head with the likeness of Trump or Robert Deniro claiming he would like to punch Trump in the face?
And then there is "Jake" he posts on this forum daily, feeling he has the right to post any vile though he can think up about Trump.
It is very clear to me many are displeased with Trump and have in some case lost the ability to think clearly. If you don't find this a problem, that's your prerogative.
Have you not noticed that many on the left exhibit their displeasure with vile insults, and socially unacceptable actions? Oh well, Not here to convince you of anything, but I think I have answered your question. My initial question was to cause controversy, to make people think about a very divisive politics that has divided the country. I appreciate your question.Yeah, that's not normal.
Remember this?
"I love the old days. You know what they used to do to guys like that when they were in a place like this? They’d be carried out in a stretcher, folks. It’s true....I’d like to punch him in the face, I’ll tell you.”
https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politi … ester.html
Definitively, not normal.Did I in any respect state that this kind of behavior was normal for anyone? It is apparent you did not read my statement. Was I replying to a question? In no way was I defending any person that insults another. Do you realize what you just did? Guess I have well made my point.
Hmm, so you apparently define engaging in insults as displaying an inability to think clearly.
Mika Brzezinski
CO-HOST, “MORNING JOE”
“dumb as a rock” “Crazy” “low I.Q.” “was bleeding badly from a face-lift” “had a mental breakdown while talking about me” “crazy and very dumb” “clown” “very insecure”“off the wall” “mess!” “not very bright” “neurotic” “has gone wild with hate”
Maureen Dowd
COLUMNIST, THE NEW YORK TIMES
“Crazy” “wacky” “A neurotic dope!”
Erick Erickson
CONSERVATIVE COMMENTATOR
“total low life” “a major sleaze and buffoon”
Of course, I could sit here all night copying and pasting insults thrown by just one man, a man you think is a great President, but who obviously is not thinking clearly by your own definition. Maybe you think he should be held to a lower standard than a comedian or actor? Or, maybe you need to rethink this notion that his detractors aren't thinking clearly?
Me, I wonder if a person who believes Robert De Niro should be held to a higher standard than our president is thinking clearly. But, hey, maybe I'm just blinded by hate to think it should be the other way around."chirp, chirp, chirp, chirp……. just for those who don't know,,,it's a gosh dang cricket!!
This is what we're down to , while the entire left here cries about name calling tactics by Trump , every decent being in the world listens to the absolute garbage talk of media left . From Hollywood left , from comedy central ?
Yet ,you stand silently by while Trumps entire family is denigrated by your own people and you want what , an explanation , here's a question , are you all as "feckless" as what's her name , the unfunny one ?
On the left you have ALL so truly embraced hypocrisy as to give every other human frailty the equivalence of a mosquito bite. If I were of the left at this point I might start a national movement for "Hug a Hurt Liberal ".
Try getting over yourselves .Hmmm,
Comedian. President.
Actor. President.
Forum dweller. President
Who should be held to a higher standard of behavior?
And on this thread, it is Sharlee who is complaining about name calling. I'm just pointing out that her hero Prez is not meeting her own standards of "thinking clearly."What do you mean like , after Obama and his narrow understanding of patriotic decency , A president should be held to a higher standard ?
Oh , I get it of course.
Not !Never complained about name calling until you opened the ugly door with your question... Did you even read the original question? Did you bring up the subject of name calling? Would I think you would at least read a bit before just coming out swinging? It is very clear you have to lead this conversation into a "hateful" rant. As I said I made my point. let me repeat in no way was I defending anyone that used insults as a way to communicate. read this thread from start to finish, and you will clearly see of me insulting anyone. But lots of insults directed at me... LOL
Sharlee, you insulted people who dislike Trump by claiming they would prefer he fail, and you did it in an incendiary way by stating they would rather be nuked than see him succeed, and now you're upset that you received a strong reaction. You could take responsibility for it, or you can play victim.
"Never complained about name calling until you opened the ugly door with your question... Did you even read the original question? " yes: https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/339 … ost4009027
"Did you bring up the subject of name calling?" No, you did, as an explanation of how Trump detractors are not "thinking clearly."
"Would I think you would at least read a bit before just coming out swinging? It is very clear you have to lead this conversation into a "hateful" rant. " If you are going to accuse Trump detractors of preferring nuclear annihilation over Trump 's success, I'm thinking you might look inward and examine the term "hateful" in relation to your post.
"Read this thread from start to finish, and you will clearly see of me insulting anyone. But lots of insults directed at me... LOL" You accused Trump detractors of not "thinking clearly" and used their insults as evidence. I merely pointed out that you support a man who insults people on a regular basis from the office of the presidency so perhaps you are not "thinking clearly ." How is that worse than what you said? At least I didn't accuse you of wanting to be incinerated by a nuclear flash.Is it very clear you did not read the opening post as well as the question? I was addressing the media for their very negative coverage as to the outcome of the Singapore summit, and it's effect on some. I hoped to point out to anyone that hope he fails, maybe it was time to stop and think? I did realize the using the word "some", would hit home as a possible insult to some. But I used the mildest word I could use to make my point.
"Here is how you hold the president to a lower standard. If you voted for him, you explicitly stated, with your vote that his behavior is acceptable enough to be President. If you didn't vote for him but think he's doing a wonderful job as President and hope he wins another term, you are explicitly stating his behavior is acceptable for a president. If it wasn't, you wouldn't endorse him for another term."
As I have stated I do not approve of his insults or his lack of candor. It's certainly not as simple as your above statement. This train of thought may satisfy you as to why I voted for Trump. However, it could not be further from the truth.
I voted for an agenda. and consider this more important his way of addressing people that get under his skin. I consider job performance. So far so good. My common provided me the ability to consider the very fact that we have had many presidents that were well spoken and very polished. However, were not in any respect qualified to run a country. I felt the country was headed down the wrong path for many years, and I was willing to try something new instead of continuing down that scary path. Just my opinion. At this point, it is very clear we will have to agree to disagree... We are miles apart, and I am not willing to make any attempt to try to defend my way of thinking or compare it to yours. You see we all have a right to our opinion.Yes, you have a right to your opinion and we can agree to disagree. I notice you completely ignored my suggestion that you bear responsibility for the tone of this thread, and you have received no greater insults than you dished out.
This is what happens, you see. That is why I would never in a million years support a man as disgusting as Trump to lead this country, even if I agreed 100 percent with his policies. He is a low man, far beneath the dignity of this great country. I wouldn't trust him with my dog.
Not sure if you read my original question or any of my comments on this thread?
Pretty Panther -"See, I have a problem with this, but maybe I'm not thinking clearly. Would you be so kind as to provide a specific example of someone displaying that they "have lost their ability to think clearly" as a result of their displeasure with Trump?'
I do find resorting to insults as an inability to think clearly. Whether it be the President of the United States or anyone else. Please read my posts I did not state or insinuate the president has the right to insult anyone. Your counterattack is baseless. It shows a lack of understanding of my statement. I would not have given incidence if not asked too... Here is my comment in response to your asking me a question. It is apparent you have skewed the conversation by insulting me? You assume too much. For one thing, I in no way defended Trump's insulting anyone. I have never insinuated I agree with his name calling. I have clearly and will continue to comment on his accomplishments, and job performance. You can continue to lash out and insult me and others. But that won't in anyway take away from our president's job performance. You see we have a different way of looking at a president. I voted for an agenda, as I always have. I then consider is who I voted for keeping to his agenda, working on profiling it.
My comment -- "I could write a book. Do you find it normal for a comedian to call a perfect stranger a Cun-? Then go on to insinuate incest between a father and daughter? How about you, are you getting it on with your daddy? I could say that if I want too. Do you get my point?
Let's not forget Kathy Griffen, holding a severed head with the likeness of Trump or Robert Deniro claiming he would like to punch Trump in the face?
And then there is "Jake" he posts on this forum daily, feeling he has the right to post any vile though he can think up about Trump.
It is very clear to me many are displeased with Trump and have in some case lost the ability to think clearly. If you don't find this a problem, that's your prerogative.
Have you not noticed that many on the left exhibit their displeasure with vile insults, and socially unacceptable actions? Oh well, Not here to convince you of anything, but I think I have answered your question. My initial question was to cause controversy, to make people think about a very divisive politics that has divided the country. I appreciate your question."
Please tell me where in my statement did I hold the president to a "lower standard"? This kind of statement is confrontational.
Pretty panther - "Me, I wonder if a person who believes Robert De Niro should be held to a higher standard than our president is thinking clearly. But, hey, maybe I'm just blinded by hate to think it should be the other way around."
I assume you feel you have the right to assume I hold Robert De Niro to a higher standard than the president? Which none of my comments have implied? You know what, I have made my point. IT is clear from your comments that I have well proved my point. I was nothing but polite in my response, I received nothing but underlying glib insults back. One only has to follow the progression of our posts to see our individual actions."Please tell me where in my statement did I hold the president to a "lower standard"? This kind of statement is confrontational."
Before I answer, let me point out that stating Trump detractors would prefer to be nuked than see Trump succeed is confrontational. You set the tone for your own thread.
Here is how you hold the president to a lower standard. If you voted for him, you explicitly stated, with your vote that his behavior is acceptable enough to be President. If you didn't vote for him but think he's doing a wonderful job as President and hope he wins another term, you are explicitly stating his behavior is acceptable for a president. If it wasn't, you wouldn't endorse him for another term.
So simple.
I voted for Sanders, but if he behaved like Trump I would have dropped him in a hot minute, no matter how much I liked his policies.
That's certainly does sound crazy Sharlee01. I for one would love to know exactly who in the media would rather be nuked that see Trump succeed. Can you share some links to where you've witnessed this attitude?
"What I have witnessed from the media over the past few weeks is that some show the attitude they hope president Trump will fail next week at the Singapore summit with the North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Yes, it is apparent that many dislike our president., and would like to see him fail at anything he undertakes"
Will I not supply links? My opinion was derived from the talk jocks - Rachel Maddow, Dom Lemmon, Joy Reid, Shepard Smith, Morning Joe... Last week one could literally not hear anything positive in regards to how Trump was handling not only preparation for the summit but also his lack of mental stability to handle the summit. So, I suggest if you have a bit of time locating any videos of the above mentioned and watch a few. Or better yet just tune in today, to CNN or MSNBC
Here is a clip from yesterday, that is so negative it's laughable to anyone on the right. It leaves me to wonder how much eggs "Ben" will wear on his face if Trump makes a positive deal. ENJOY.
https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/trump … 2491843638Thanks for the link and the references. I watched the MSNBC interview you linked to, and I'm a bit puzzled.
While I think it's fair to characterize the interview as critical of Donald Trump, the questions asked by the interviewer were questions that I think any reasonable person might ask.
Here are all the questions (edited for brevity) the host asked in the 7 minute segment:
As I say, I think it's fair to characterize the interview as critical of Trump, but I'm struggling to see something that suggests "they hope president Trump will fail next week".
I know you're talking about an overall feeling you get from watching a number of different things, but I assume you linked to this interview because it's representative of what you're talking about.
I see a commentator expressing the opinion that: the administration and the president are under prepared for these meetings; alienating G7 allies just before the N. Korea meeting was a bad idea; inviting Russia back to the G8 doesn't make any sense; and suggesting the Republican party is hypocritical.
Whether you agree with those views or not, it's standard political commentary isn't it?
Can you help me out by explaining exactly which aspect of the interview gives you the impression that the interviewer and commentator would rather be killed in a thermonuclear blast so long as Trump fails?Thought it might be wise to post my original statement in regard to what I said about the media.
"What I have witnessed from the media over the past few weeks is that some show the attitude they hope president Trump will fail next week at the Singapore summit with the North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Yes, it is apparent that many dislike our president., and would like to see him fail at anything he undertakes."
To answer your question, I was referring to the medias attitude. I will be honest. It was very evident that CNN and MSNBC had none stop interviews with people just like the link I provided. One after another
Government retired pundit giving their own special view of why the summit could fail due to Trump's attitude, demeanor, and even mental statues. The link provided was one that I had just viewed a day or so ago. My statement was meant to be a bit hyperbolic, to get the reader to stop and think. I can see it has caused a stir.
A quick question. If something positive comes from the summit. Will the pundits that weighed in reevaluate their opinion of how the President handled the "deal"? Does all the negativity really help to gap the "great divide"?Sharlee , I have watched enough media in the three to four years of campaign and presidency to know that a large part of our media is not only promoting , planning and demonstrably hoping for Trump failure BUT are igniting something in the conservative party that they will never be able to extinguish , a hatred of this news media .
From out right phoniness , AND phoniness is there whether anyone from the left admits it or not , to outright Trump resistance , They are planning and profitizing resistance , obstruction ,and even impeachment . One day with the likes of JIm Acosta from CNN and I want all of this media forever out of the white house .
How little the younger alt-left truly understands about a phony media constant spewing lies that is somehow their adoring equivalent of "free speech " , I'd rather we had NO news media than the morons behind acrylic tables with corporate labeled coffee cups spewing forth cronyism , plagiaristic and hateful party B.S. .WE have to ask ourselves as Americans which is more destructive ? A majority fake news or none at all ?Conservatives would love no newsmedia, and Trump will revel in it, as President for Life and who cannot be held accountable for anything he does.
Democracy dies in the darkness.....
-------
"No President should fear public scrutiny of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed.
I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers — I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them."
John F. Kennedy, 1962
Addressing the 4th Estate
-------
Another example of an appropriate attitude taken toward the press by a REAL leader who did not need to make excuses.
How does that compare with
"I just love the uneducated"
Donald J. Trump, 2016"I just love the uneducated" Donald Trump speech night he won Nevada GOP caucuses. Feb 24, 2016
How does Trump's statement "I love the uneducated" compare to Kennedy's statement? Both statements reached the ears that they were meant to reach. His words were spoken in a joyous tone, a ton that was welcoming to all. Actually, he was telling the entire crowd how "they" were victorious. Yes, he did say he loves the uneducated. He openly addressed a segment of our American citizens that no other politician has addressed. Do you realize we have a population of ill-educated? Well, Trump does. It was maybe the first time any politician considered them... Compare Trump's statement to Hillary's famous statement that will be remembered long after she is gone.
A true democracy is where the voice of the people is heard. All of the people, even the "basket of deplorable's"...Hillary Clinton - Gala in New York City on Sept. 9, 2016
Her words reached many ears from a lofty pedestal looking down. Condemning, belittling... Just the tone of her voice was proof of her disdain.
Hint, one more reason why he won. He promised to be a voice for all the people, he made promises to fix things that no other politician considered needed fixing. But the middle class and poor knew just what he was talking about.
Hint, one more reason why he won. He promised to be a voice for all the people, he made promises to fix things that no other politician considered needed fixing. But the middle class and poor knew just what he was talking about.
A true democracy is where the voice of the people is heard. All of the people.Sharlee
Yes, there is such a population. After living through the Kennedy years during a period in America where we all believed that anything was possible, the example of his advocacy or arts and sciences and the pursuit of excellence motivated each of us to raise the bar for ourselves, not lower it. The example from the Chief Executive should be to promote a intelligent, informed and educated citizenry. I never got the impression that Kennedy was elitist in leading the American people in this direction. Hillary Clinton's statement about "deplorables" was ill-advised, and revealed some elitism that may have cost her votes.
I am solidly middle class and I never got the impression from Trump or his policies that he was either capable or desiring of making things better for those that are not wealthy and otherwise 'well fixed'. But, he still has time to convince more of us that this is the direction he truly wants to take us toward.I appreciate your words. But in reality, Trump has accomplished much for the middle class and poor. I have few words on the subject. If you have not recognized his accomplishments to date. There is no chance you will ever recognize them. Please do not ask me to list them. I don't play that game...
From the perspective of a progressive, what credit and praise Trump receives will be grudgingly, at best. But I will give credit where it is due.
Just the very fact that Trump made any contact at all with the North Korean leader is enough to reduce tensions substantially between us. As for what practical mutual concessions were actually agreed on between the parties, I have a 'wait and see' attitude. This was just an ice breaker, but a good beginning regardless.
This is ONE time that he may have done something right. Can lightening strike in the same place twice?
It was funny I look at Trump wearing those worker's hard hats and coal helmets the same way the Right use to ridicule Democratic Candidate Dukakis when he was running around in a tank in the 1988 Presidential Campaign that was supposed to be making a statement about his commitment to a strong defense. The Right saw that as ridiculous. Just as I see as ridiculous some multi billionaire trying to relate to working people thinking that they will be impressed by his eating at McDonalds or wearing equipment and accouterments associated with true working people and to expect him really to relate and be concerned.
Red and Blue are simply different animals that can and do look at the same things yet each sees something different. There has been very little common ground betwixt and between.I respect all of what you put into this comment and very much agree with much of your view. You see we may be Red and blue, but somewhere in the middle is purple...
"Purple " happens when a real political leader meets in person , Treaties on paper are never worth much but the ink used . I put way more faith in a handshake between to leaders , a meeting or slew of meetings between these leaders actual bread and butter people .
Trump wins in the North Korean summit way ahead of what the rhetoric of an extremely questionable media integrity allows . Still the left would just as soon watch reruns of the overall political failure , like all the "others "than have faith in the act itself.
Leftist resisters have to consider just what it is that Kim Jong Un not only wants but is begging for , he wants what he has kept so well from his own people , economic success ! McDonalds , Pizza hut ,Burger King , Disney , tourism , Verizon stores , cash ,cash and more cash .............Why ? How long do resistors think a nation of potentially revolutionary people can be kept in the dark ,sometimes literally ? Even countries like China are reaping rewards of capitalisms promises . Un and his people are just about last in linetoo,although now "cutting in line "way ahead of many other nations .Horse, I am so pleased with last nights summit, and I also put more stock in a handshake then signatures. Yes, it's unfortunate there are many on the left that just will not or ever will except president Trump as our president. Many could care less about the country. If they cared about the county they would be enjoying last nights victory. I think Trump could give every citizen a million dollars. and some would complain they had to pay taxes on it.
President Trump has offered Kim a way to benefit himself as well as his country. To come out of isolation, and become part of the world. Trump has shown him pretty quickly how he could be literally starved out. Hit with a big stick, and offered a huge carrot. Trump did not toss a bit of cash at him. He tossed Kim a way to stay in power, and if he is smart to do something for his people. President Trump's plan appears so simple. It makes me disgusted that no one before him saw it as a solution. That's one of the things I like about Trump, he is a problem solver.Trump IS first a problem solver , you're right ! No , the left will fight this like fighting the plague , they will drag and drag and drag at Trump's every success . That is their only choice and Why ? Because almost all on the left are incapable of independent thought . One thought , one resistance , one obstruction . One chant.
Yet, Trump wins .....again.Horse in regard to the denuke of NK. I don't think president Trump will let grass grow under anyone's feet with this NK deal. Mike Pompeo headed for South Korea right after the summit.to meet South Korea’s Foreign Minister Kang Kyung and Japan’s Foreign Minister Taro Kono in Seoul today. he is then heading to Beijing on Thursday for meetings with senior officials from China. It will be very interesting to witness how the Trump administration will go about the huge task of denuclearization NK. IT has been reported they have 60 Nuclear "bomb's".
How the hell did this happen? It seems absolutely crazy, and worse no one is asking that question. Between me and you, LOL I am so pleased to have Trump in the WH at this given time in history... Oh YeahHow did it happen? Appeasement. Appeasement and tiptoeing around the problem rather than confronting it head on.
I guess I disagree, some months ago the left where bemoaning how the president was going overboard and was going to cause a war. If you listen to any of Trump's recent week's announcements he said if he felt the deal was not moving forward he would walk out. He canceled the meeting, and then reconsidered after Kim requested to go ahead with the June 12, deadline. He said on several occasions " the meeting might go nowhere".
I did not recognize any form of tiptoeing around? After the meeting, he answered some questions that put Kim in a positive light. Which could cause one to pause? But, that is Trump being Trump. Hannity asked him what was Kim like in the meeting. One can see Trump takes a question literally, and answers at the moment.
He gave nothing up. If you read the simple document they signed, Trump gave no assurance of doing anything. Today he reaffirmed that none of the sanctions would be removed until Kim complied with complete denuclearization, and the Military Drills would continue as scheduled if he saw any problems occurred with Kim's noncompliance.
Plus I like the fact Mike Pompeo will be the one working on the treaty. He is an accomplished man. I have good faith in him.
So to use the word appeasement? Not sure where Trump gave up anything? No cash, no troops withdraw planned, only held out as a carrot. It seems a good plan. So far so good. Although I am cautious, after all, we are dealing with NK, and all previous agreements with NK fell through.No, you won't find appeasement or tiptoeing from Donald Trump.
But past presidents, ambassadors and congressional parties? That's all they've been doing for years, which is why NK was able to create the bombs they have.So true, and I will not be surprised if our present day Congress holds up, messes up any treaty that is presented. All the cronies that we call our representatives have one thing in common. They president Trump out. Although they have to be careful. They don't realize they will be right behind him. Trump has shown most of us that we have been 'had" by Washington. That problem solving is not all that hard.
70 nukes, can you imagine in the past 30 years, not one of the presidents stopped NK from getting to this point? Well, hopefully, this huge problem is not made political and stymied in Congress. I am never surprised when our lawmakers cut off their noses to spite their faces. They have gotten away with this for many years.
"I'd rather we had NO news media than the morons behind acrylic tables with corporate labeled coffee cups spewing forth cronyism , plagiaristic and hateful party B.S."
You're not amusing today; you're scary. You would live in a place where Trump is worshiped and fawned over and dissent is absent. Where he can lie, attack, bully, and cheat from his place of power and no media could challenge him. You think you know what patriotism is; you don't. You think you understand the constitution; you don't. You and certain other Trump supporters are ignorant of what it takes to keep power in check.Prettypanther , How naive you are to the media reality , While I understand your elation in that the media bias lies in a bed with the ideology of the left , your party ; I also realize that the ideology of an increasingly liberal and obstructive , socialist media is fighting for the destruction of this Trump administration .
THAT is treasonous and if it weren't FOR the absolutes of the first amendment rights , our media could actually be in legal trouble . Question for you ; Do you think the right in America enjoyed eight years of Obama ripping and tearing at the constitution , eliminating the orchestrated legislative process by executive ordering , rebuilding the media to an alt-liberal friendly rag - a -media , ?
I'm Scary ? What should scare the hell out of you is a media more powerful than the actual government WITH an anti-American agenda , with an anti-Trump agenda ! Yes Prettypanther you should be scared , but not of traditional patriotism , you should be intellectually scared of the direction a fake media is taking you , But hey , going along willingly is your choice , enjoy the ride .Now you're back to being amusing. If the media were more powerful than the government, then the media could get whoever they want elected. Yet, you say they didn't want Trump and guess who sits in the Oval Office despite your scary all-powerful media.
Carry on.
Thanks for the clarification.
Most of the criticism I've seen has been, as you say, about whether Trump's is capable of representing the country's best interests in these talks, due to concerns about his capabilities.
My personal view is that he is not in the least bit capable of adequately representing the best interests of the country in these talks. I think his egotism and greed for wealth are vulnerabilities which the N. Koreans are already exploiting with the help of the ever-resourceful China.
But that doesn't mean I would want something terrible to happen just so I can say "told ya so". I think this is one area many people would gladly be proven wrong about Trump, but I do think that's unlikely to happen.
Instead I think even the most modest outcome from these talks will be spun into some kind of significant agreement. In reality I think the outcome will be of little substance. Perhaps some minor concessions on either side. Maybe an agreement to play nice in the future. That type of thing. N. Korea has already made clear in recent weeks it won't entertain the idea of unilateral denuclearization, so I think something of that magnitude is unlikely, and the country has entered into (and broken) agreements before.
So my prediction is: some minor agreement just to show they've done something, and statements about playing nice in the future. Trump and his cheerleaders will treat it as some massively significant deal. Others will look at the details and see little real substance compared to what has been done in the past.
As I said, I'd be happy to be proven wrong.To cut to the chase. I predict NK will denuclearize, and an end to the Korean War. Will the left recognize it when it happens? Not sure, they tend to be able to rationalize and deflect very easily from reality. When they don't want to give the president credit, they defer and claim the problem was resolved in some other manner. Just my opinion.
Last night Kim signed an agreement to continue working on denuclearize. This morning little is being said about Kim's commitment. Will he keep to his commitment? Who knows, as a rule, NK backs out on their commitments... But Trump can be trusted to keep his commitment to denuclearization NK. He is committed to continue the harsh sanction, and apply more if necessary. Trump has claimed all along he would walk away if he saw the deal was going no where. One thing about Trump, he does what he says. If you're interested in seeing the document that was signed I have provided a link. I guess we will have to wait a bit to see if Trump comes through with his "Huge" promise. However, I don't think it will be long before we see results.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/read … the-summitThanks for the link.
Pretty much consists of what I expected: broad comments about playing nice together in the future, commitment to peace etc, some concessions on both sides that don't seem to cost too much politically.
To be fair I wasn't expecting much more at this stage. The most I was hoping for is that Trump doesn't give away too much. Doesn't look like he has, which is a relief, but not exactly a cause for celebration.
And of course, as predicted, Trump is hailing it as a major breakthrough, which I don't think it is.
All in all what I expected. I remain unconvinced that this will lead to a long term resolution though, as I don't believe Trump or Jong-un are personally capable of sustaining long-term cordial diplomatic relations. I suspect they'll be threatening each other with nuclear war again relatively soon. Time will tell.
Again, though I am very skeptical about the whole thing, I'd be delighted to be proven wrong.I hope you are wrong. But I will take a wait and see attitude. It's not being reported today but last night on Shannon Bream it was announced Mike Pompeo would be traveling to NK on Thursday to follow up on the when and hows of the denuclearization. I will predict Trump will not let any "grass grow under his feet" on this deal. I actually liked what I read in the short document. Simple to the point. If the deal falls through we will have signed nothing away. It's been reported by media that Trump said e would stop Military drills if all progress smoothly. I did not note anything of that sort in the agreement.
I did like that Trump took the peninsula's peace into consideration, and offered Kim a path to a better economy. Not just tossing some cash at him, but a solution that would help him change paths. A possible solution that would bring his country out of seclusion so to say.
Wilderness, I appreciate your comment. It is very obvious by lack of comments. Some do not want to consider the question. It comes a bit close to dealing with the reality the president is doing well, and working to make things better for all of us.
- PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago
0Wow, ya got my number. I'd rather die in a nuclear flash than see Trump succeed. Uh-huh. That's it. Brilliant analysis of Trump's detractors. You ought to be on talk radio.
Huh. I wouldn't have put you in that crowd, but if you really think that's where you belong...
I'm not. I also think very few people are in that crowd, so few that for her to even make the statement is ridiculous.
I'm not so sure. A couple of the people in our own forum approach that level, and I have spoken to a man that advocates assassination. The last was forced (by his wife) to give up Facebook because he was alienating his loved ones, and he did...for a few weeks until he cranked right back up. Forced to quit again one does not dare mention anything political at all, for he immediately degenerates into a hate filled rant about Trump.
I don't think it's that uncommon at all - I'd have to guess that there are more of them than there are white supremacists, and they are MUCH more vocal.Ridiculous thread to begin with, Dan. I've read no comments even close to such a claim from anyone on the left. Perhaps you'd share those you claim exist? No? Didn't thinks so.....
No I will not. Nor would it be possible for me to care any less whether you believe me or not.
Did you hear Spanky's latest "joke"? He said the Coast Guard had to rescue thousands of people who were out in their boats watching Hurricane Harvey. He didn't crack a smile and no one in Texas knows anything about such an event. Spin that for me, Dan.
Oh, there's a video but this just came out. I can wait till it comes online or you many be able see it on the news. Probably not Fox though...Hmm... Folks want to see Pres. Trump fail in the N. Korean arena, and Pres. Trump and Hurricane Harvey ....
Can you tie those two together for me Randy, or is your comment just another anti-Trump rant on any thread that mentions Pres. Trump?
You are like Colbert, a one-trick pony. Warts? Pres. Trump! Speeding ticket? Pres. Trump! Wife left you Pres. Trump!
Colbert would be #3 without Pres. Trump, where would you be?
GA
Randy, If you read my analysis I was referring to the media's handling of the upcoming Singapore meeting, and yes I did make mention of those in general that dislike or Hate president Trump. Did was make mention of people that frequent this forum? I was seeking their opinion on the subject.
Not sure why you feel this question should not be asked or why or why you ask for examples of comments from this forum? I had hoped to get opinions. I will accept yours as feeling the question is ridiculous.
To be fair this is true of both sides. There’s a guy who runs in one of my friend circles who has wished cancer on Trudeau multiple times. But I don’t believe that type of person to be the majority on either side.
If I thought it was a majority I'd be looking for somewhere else to live. I'd hate to think I have to live the rest of my life next door to someone harboring that much hatred.
- ahorsebackposted 6 years ago0
Do we get honest political debate against Trump diplomatic policies , No . Does the left offer alternative debate based even on ideological differences to Trump domestic policy ? No. Can the left explain its delirium against anything at all Trump ? No..............
The left is so openly hateful of Trump as to sacrifice their own sense of political and personal sense of reason , TDS is a relatively new medical determination that aptly describes what's happening with the entire left . Apparently TDS IS the new left . - PrettyPantherposted 6 years ago0
I don't like President Trump. If he succeeds in disarming North Korea, I will be pleased for his success. Duh.
This thread is simplistic and insulting, but what's new? Certain Trump supporters on these forums refuse to acknowledge that most criticism of Trump is legitimate. Instead of acknowledging his obvious faults, they whine and cry "TDS." Yes, some are over the top in their criticism. If they are factually incorrect, address it. If they are simply hyperbolic, well, that's nothing new and works both ways.
Sorry, Sharlee, but constantly blaming disagreement with Trump"s policies, lies, and behavior on hatred for Trump, or crying TDS at every turn, is just lazy.Of course the whining about Trump is legitimate.
He has orange hair
He has a toupee
He has big hands
He isn't PC
He isn't a statesman
He talks as a person rather than a faux aristocrat
He is a racist because he banned travel from terrorist ridden countries
He is a racist because he wants to control our borders as required by law
He is best buds with Putin and conspired with him to fix the election
Meanwhile, the best employment picture in decades is ignored
Kim to the negotiating table is ignored
Returning states rights to them is ignored
China talking on trade is ignored
Huge stock increases are ignored
So...pretend real advances aren't happening and concentrate on surface cosmetics and rough talk for that's what a President needs to exhibit and what we look at when voting.
Actually not sure where you have derived that the question elicited anything that could be considered a disparaging insulting tone? Everyone was respectful, gave their opinions without insulting or deflecting to another subject. Pretty Panther, I do not want to be argumentive. However, you were the only one to deflect, to insult, and become defensive. No, I will not even consider your suggestion to "bear responsibility for the tone of this thread". And please let me also point out no one saw fit to insult me but you... It is apparent you have been the only one "dishing it out". Have I made an attempt to be sensible and to agree to disagree?
Let me remind you, I made no request for you to support anyone or anything. Actually, it well appears you alone have proved my point and answered my question... With your statement - " That is why I would never in a million years support a man as disgusting as Trump to lead this country, even if I agreed 100 percent with his policies. " "BOOM"Aw, Sharlee, you specifically mentioned three people in your explanation of why you think some people are not "thinking clearly": Samantha Bee (by inference), Kathy Griffin, and Jake, none of whom are media. If that is not insulting them. then why did you feel insulted when I turned it back on you?
As for my last statement, you seem to be misinterpreting. As I previously stated, if Trump achieves denuclearization of North Korea, I will give credit where it is due. That does not mean I would suddenly support a lying self-admitted sexual assaulting, bullying cheat for president. It would simply mean I'm glad he achieved something. It doesn't make him any less of a sleaze.I would not waste any more time trying to explain myself if I were you, PP. Cause that's all your doing with this person.....wasting time. You've heard of the Queen of Denial? Well, you've met her......
Perhaps she has heard of Mr. Glib. Say a few meaningless words, and call it a day. You know Randy, one can prove my statement just by reading your comments.
I see what you mean. It will be interesting to see what happens if Trump is found to have obstructed justice, or colluded with Russians, or laundered money, or accepted pay for play. Will the twisting and turning finally stop? For some here, I am sure it will continue. Just like a few people still claim there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Probably the same people.
Yep the very same people that became iterate over:
"You can keep your doctor"; " Syria do not cross that red line"; And we were so people that became devastated when the line was crossed, and he did nothing. Let me correct myself, he made us sit by and witness pure genocide of over 500,000 men women and children, and millions of refugees made to flee their country. How about this gem? Making a ridiculous deal with Iran supplying them with billions of dollars to support terrorism.? No, I never turned my head, I never denied what a mistake I made voting for a man that had no skill in running a country. I moved on, I opted for needed change. So far so good. I don't know what the future will bring, but I certainly won't live or defend past mistakes. Just don't like to look foolish or ill-educated on the truth. It' odd you would claim I am in denial? The facts show Trump is doing a good job? I have never denied there are things I find abhorrent about the Trump. Have I never denied the need for the Mueller investigation? I guess the only thing I have denied is innuendo in any form. Let me repeat, I respect facts, it's that simple.
How do you like the facts I presented you with in regards to Obama? Not pretty, but all facts that truly affected me, made me open my eyes to the need for change. It is clear all of it went right over your head...
Once again you asked me a direct question. I answered it. I explained why I used the word "some". Do you really think I could not have listed a few talk jocks insults of the president? Just turn on your TV, and tune into CNN or MSNBC. Ge some fresh stuff...
Your comment - " A displeasure that has become so depleting that "some" have lost their ability to think clearly.
See, I have a problem with this, but maybe I'm not thinking clearly. Would you be so kind as to provide a specific example of someone displaying that they "have lost their ability to think clearly" as a result of their displeasure with Trump?"
I gave you three clear examples.
"Aw, Sharlee, you specifically mentioned three people in your explanation of why you think some people are not "thinking clearly": Samantha Bee (by inference), Kathy Griffin, and Jake, none of whom are media. If that is not insulting them. then why did you feel insulted when I turned it back on you?"
I in no way was insulted by your question, I just answered it. Did I insult them by using their statements as examples? You're laughable... You asked for examples. What were you expecting?
"As for my last statement, you seem to be misinterpreting. As I previously stated, if Trump achieves denuclearization of North Korea, I will give credit where it is due. That does not mean I would suddenly support a lying self-admitted sexual assaulting, bullying cheat for president. It would simply mean I'm glad he achieved something. It doesn't make him any less of a sleaze".
Again I did not in any way try to push my opinion on you. I gave a lengthy explanation of my own opinion just as you have done below. We certainly have different views in regards to Trump. I appreciate his job performance, and just not interested in his personal personality or private life. I explained my views very clearly. Once again we have opposite views. Not sure I can say much more without being unkind. I am not going to go there. Just don't play that game.I am just grateful I do not have to explain once again how and why this conversation got so out of contexts. I thought it would take forever for you to deflect once again... Nice one, you went all the way back to Bush. You did not have to go that far in the past to deflect on presidential mistakes.
You could have used this sad example: "you can keep your doctor" or this is a classic:: " Syria do not cross that red line": And then when the line was crossed, he did nothing. Let me correct myself, he made us sit by and witness pure genocide over 500,000 men women and children killed, and millions of refugees. How about this gem? Making a ridiculous deal with Iran supplying them with billions of dollars to support terrorism. Were you outraged over any of these examples? You see why job performance is important? So far Trump has a great job performance. If he makes major mistakes as the above mentioned, I will be furious, I will be incensed. I will not defend his job performance. I will not vote for him a second term. It's called common sense, yet so many looked past Obama's poor job performance, make excuses for huge mistakes. It's hypocritical, it's nonsensical.
I have nothing more to convey to you. You see I don't waste time arguing with anyone that deflects off subject. I have no problem with being argumentive but stay on subject. IRAQ? Weapons of mass destruction?Sharlee , Are you seriously trying to demand reason of the unreasonable hatred from these naked Trump haters ? You post a well reasoned response and get a "one liner " , they can't debate when they know they're simply wrong . They never can nor do .
Lol, I stopped talking to her out of courtesy. My comment about Iraq was to Randy. She just keeps going....and going....
You stopped conversing because you had too. You made a fool of yourself. And I am sure it won't be the last time? One good thing, You can't delete your ramblings. Anyone can follow the thread and see the how it progressed I made every attempt to discourage you from continuing. Courtesy, you started an argument and lost it. You were cornered and made no sense. Nice try, but you made a fool of yourself. Put your fingers in your ears and hum... Or better yet read the thread, and face the fact you were argumentive, deflective, and glib, and in the end tried to deflect all your shortcomings on to me. My comments where appropriate to the conversation.
Randy, it took me awhile to figure out "toljaso" and yes you did. Wow.
Not sure what that means. However, if it works for you have at it. I wonder Randy if you ever read your comments? They read poorly and show lack of intellect. You never seem to be able to put together a thought that has any real substance, meaning? Anyone that looks closely and follows your posts have or will see my point.
Horse, It's a bit fun to be able to make ones point, and make it well. You certainly know the feeling. You are very articulate and well-versed with your comments.
- ahorsebackposted 6 years ago0
Sharlee , it's only one sided ;
That is the liberal understanding of all politics , one sided , it's not so much only one sided since Trump was elected as it is one mindset . Ask them a neutral question , its going to be a one sided response , hate . Trump Hate . All else is politically forgotten , they know nothing but Trump hate now .
They could be handed heaven and the response will be "Thanks but I hate Trump ".Horse, For me it is so difficult to comprehend this kind of stupidity. Sorry, no other word will suffice. I guess I am not accustomed to dealing with this type. It's like a horse (no pun intended) with blinders, they run like hell, but don't have any idea what is going on behind and beside them. Just keep to one end, winning, running blindly. My god is this what we have to put with up for the next 6 plus years?
And I m not sure if it hit the left yet, we that like the path the country is on are not ever going to put up with same old BS again. Or maybe they do realize it, this might be one of the reasons they just can't move on.Sharlee , This is the how the left sees every political , diplomatic or economic victory America see's from the Trump administration .
And Yes ! It is this simple .They see only through the red of anger .But Sheri lee, that "path" can change with next election. Are you going to be satisfied if the people speak during mid terms and 2020 and say that they want a change of course?
You lost that game , why do you suppose America chose to change the senate and other seats DURING Obama's reign by ---a thousand combined US seats ---, governors , the house , liberal state legislatures ?
Your blue wave is already DOA and soon to be more so ?Better get out your sandbags, the blue wave will come and wash all the repugnant red algae away. Why is McConnell canceling shore leave for the members of the senate?
Because they will partially buy November wins by doing a DACA deal ,I bet , Your party did absolutely zip about it when you could have and had all the votes and the white house , why not buy those votes if we can ?
See your hypocrisy alive and well in Nov.
I will not be pleased, I would be disappointed to return to same old same old. It would confirm my belief that we have become a society of idiots. As it stands today the country is striving underTrump. Not about to count all the ways... However, it should be visible to anyone that has common sense. So, not saying I would be surprised that many would cut off their nose to get even with their face. Did you note what the subject of this thread was? Guess it would prove my point that hate for the president has taken over some ability to have a clear thought process. Although at my age such change would not affect me. I came from I period where many made sure to provide for their future, went with the flow. Never cared for a what can you give me Government. Always like the challenge of what could I do to be successful on my own. So I hope I have answered your question.
How will you feel if all returns to status quo?Kudos to you, we just have differing understanding of what " change" means and its benefits. That is why you are Right and I am Left. Midterms have historically given the advantage to the party currently out of power.
I'll be very surprised if Dumb and Dumber comes to any sort of agreement at the meeting. Either they'll both suck up to each other, or Spanky will storm away from Singapore in a huff as he did at the G7 Summit. I'm still pissed he acted as Putin's minion in begging for Putin's mob to be allowed back in. What a wuss!!
Want to experience Dumb and dumber , listen to Robert De Niro's latest B.S Rant ,he's coming unhinged , much like the rest of you ?
Not sure about the "sucking up"? Feb 2018 - President Trump added to already harsh sanctions a set of new sanctions against North Korea. Signaling that he returned to his aggressive attempt to put pressure on the government of Kim Jong-un. The sanctions, target 28 ships registered in China, and seven other countries, are intended to close a stubborn loophole to cut off North Korea’s imports of oil, and exports of coal. He also has worked with Cina to comply with these sanctions. NK is feeling the pain of a very quickly collapsing economy.
And if you actually watched any of the goings on at the 7, you would have seen some sucking up to Trump. He appeared to conduct himself as the strong competent leader of our nation.
Very true none of us know what will come from the summit. But one thing we do know no other president stepped up to the plate with anything that stopped NK from developing nukes. I am hoping he solves this problem once and for all.
Russia has a seat at the UN? A bit hypocritical to feel they should not be heard at the G7? Now my opinion they should not be allowed at either until they start acting civil.
I see you continue to call names? Do you think Trump got to be president by being dumb? Did he just fall into a multi-million dollar business? It appears he has accomplished much in his life through his intelligence.
- ahorsebackposted 6 years ago0
Trumps North Korea policy polls at 72 % approval , even if it fails he wins ,Trump himself 52 % approval , what doesn't the obstruction party get about that ? You are behind the eight ball and standing proud , while the cue ball nails the eight ball , keep up the obstruction though , you're winning ..................Next , what Twilight Zone liberal resistance comes next ?
More jobs ? Better economy ? Lower illegal immigration rates ? ICE destroying MS 13 ? Infrastructure jobs ?
AS you resist , his polls rise . Nice work ! "While advisers say Trump has been reviewing briefing materials, the president insists his gut instincts will matter most when he gets in the room with Kim. He told reporters he thinks he will know almost immediately whether a deal can be made, saying: "I will know, just my touch, my feel. That's what I do."
Gut instincts, huh? That is exactly what has me worried and concerned.
What is he hiding behind all the bravado?So right! President Trump went over to North Korea and solved a problem no president before him has even attempted. Now, as President Trump said, North Korea is no longer a threat. All it took was a little talking.
People do not fully appreciate this amazing President.So true, we really don't appreciate his knack for breaking the law. Now the NY AG is suing him and his family with a 41 page listing of the wrongs committed under Spanky's leadership of the Trump Foundation.
That's right! All he had to do was acquiesce to NK''s long-standing desire to be an equal player on the world stage with no pre-conditions and with glowing words of flattery! And Kim agreed to talk more about a possible future agreement of some kind! Wow, I wonder why no previous president thought of this. He truly is amazing!
I wonder if Kim showed Spanky the video of him shooting his family members and political foes with a antiaircraft gun and burning them with a flame thrower? A strong leader, Spanky says...
North Korea gives up their nukes they should be a world player , maybe then their people can actually do things like , Oh, eat , have indoor plumbing ,go to grade school , maybe listen to CNN like you do , send their kids to college in California .......I know , what a sin to allow these things for North Korean kids ?
After all , those slots are all taken for illegal immigrants at present .":no pre-conditions " Not sure if you have been awake for a week or so? Over, and over, and over the president as well as his Secretary of State has repeated on several occasions the condition is COMPLETE DENUCLEARIZATION OF NORTH KOREA. Perhaps you have a mental block?
And by the way, it is disgusting none of the previous presidents did not think of this. If they did we would not have a NK sitting with 70 nukes, and the capability to blow us to holy hell?
Do you ever deal in facts or do you keep yourself in a constant state of unawareness?
- ahorsebackposted 6 years ago0
You minor Obstructionists should be asking why the Intellectual giant Obama could get it going with KIm Jung Un ? Couldn't get it right with Assad , with Libya , Iraq , Afghanistan , couldn't keep Putin out of conspiring with Face Book against Trump , couldn't even BUY the Hillary coronation with Haitian relief funds ?
Kim Jung Un worked Obama like a circus act .So well said... But, Horse you forgot one thing. They have their fingers in their ears humming. LOL
Doesn't it just, though!? 
Related Discussions
- 88
The Dumbest President in the History of America
by Allen Donald 5 years ago
Here's a map President Trump held up last night to justify his claim that Hurricane Dorian was going to hit Alabama.Has any American President in the history of the United States ever tried to do something this dumb? I mean, this is something a 7-year-old would do after he was caught lying....
- 17
Trump Attorney: The President Is Not Under Investigation
by Susie Lehto 7 years ago
“Let me be clear here. The president is not and has not been under investigation for obstruction." said Jay Sekulow, a member of the president’s legal team. I'm not sure everyone in the US or in these forums realizes that President Trump is not under investigation and never has been...
- 158
When will liberals give up?
by Jack Lee 7 years ago
Trump latest poll is 48% approval. His highest since election.At what point will liberals give up their protests and obstruction and enjoy the rise?The economy is finally kicking into high gear.I noticed gas prices rose by 10 cents in one day near my neighborhood...A clear sign of increased...
- 129
Is President Trump Turning Out to an Existential Threat to America?
by Scott Belford 6 years ago
This is really two part question. The first part is the above question. The other is a slight twist, to wit: "Is President Trump Turning Out to an Existential Threat to Ideals Which America Represents?"The reason I ask is because consequences are becoming evident from his nine...
- 93
I've had a change of heart - don't think Trump's supporters ignorant
by Tessa Schlesinger 7 years ago
I've known for quite a while that Trump supporters weren't uneducated. In reality, 55% of college voters went for Trump, most men did, and the average income of Trump voters was/is $72,000 per year. Hardly poor. They were generally business owners.http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 …...
- 166
Coronavirus Update: Everything is Under Control
by Allen Donald 4 years ago
Don't worry, President Trump just announced that the Coronavirus is under control.Here's his exact quote:"It's a very contagious virus. It's incredible. But it's something we have tremendous control of"So, no problems. Yay!