Trump runs for POTUS / Trumped Up! Part V

[CapelDodger]

From 16 years ago?

People do get things stuck in their heads.

Your opinion of someone ever change in 16 years?

Have you ever wondered which of you did the changing? Which do you think it was it in this case, Trump or the other guy?

 

[Regnad Kcin]

...Plenty of people who are great republicans are backing Trump. Did you not notice them? Never mind I forgot about your narrative.

Your tired, one-note shtick continues to bore. But by all means, amuse yourself.

Just know, as you no doubt do in spite of your bluster, there is not a "great" person, Republican or otherwise, who supports Trump. Not one.

 

[logger]

Your tired, one-note shtick continues to bore. But by all means, amuse yourself.

Thanks, I will.

Just know, as you no doubt do in spite of your bluster, there is not a "great" person, Republican or otherwise, who supports Trump. Not one.

Actually, you're in denial as usual. But I seriously doubt you think any republicans are great. You've become quite the partisan.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

Just know, as you no doubt do in spite of your bluster, there is not a "great" person, Republican or otherwise, who supports Trump. Not one.

Nor any true Scotsmen, I'll bet!

 

[Tero]

But but, Ted Cruz...and God!

 

[BobTheCoward]

From 16 years ago?

Your opinion of someone ever change in 16 years?

My judgement of others is terrible.

 

[quadraginta]

There's another way to look at this though, the Tea Party and the hard core right Republicans. That making room for them within the Republican Party does exert a bit of a moderating influence over them.

I'm not sure that the evidence bears that out,

If anything the opposite seems to be true. The hard core right has been overwhelming any interest in moderation by the Republican party.

At least it keeps them in a mainstream party. If moderate Republicans tried to silence them or ignore their views the result would probably be an attempt to form an extreme party that could really damage the democratic process. I'd rather keep them in the Republican Party.

<snip>

I think that the result of them forming a party of their own would be to marginalize their influence, instead of allowing them to drag a largely unwilling Republican base who can't bring themselves to vote out of party along with them.

 

[quadraginta]

The folks with those signs want Trump to abuse the power of the justice department to accomplish it. And he just might try.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

We have it on good authority that yard signs are nothing but 'virtue signalling'.

So you don't have to worry.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

Economical power worldwide would react to a "president Trump" like physicians would react to Dr. Oz becoming the head of the FDA and Perez Hilton the head of "Homeland Security".

I agree that the idea of an FDA run by Dr. Oz would be anathema, but I'm not as sure that a Homeland Security run by Perez Hilton would (or even could) be noticeably worse than what we have seen so far.

 

[Puppycow]

Posted this in another thread. Probably meant to post it here:

Just one of thousands of lies told by Trump during this campaign, but there's proof for this one:

Donald Trump Either Lied to the Republicans or Broke the Law (Exclusive)

Remember back when Jeb! was still in the race and there was a debate (this was the 2nd Republican debate over a year ago now) where there was an exchange between Bush and Trump. Here's that exchange:

"The one guy that had some special interests that I know of that tried to get me to change my views on something—that was generous and gave me money—was Donald Trump,” Bush said. “He wanted casino gambling in Florida."

Trump interrupted Bush:

Trump: I didn’t—

Bush: Yes, you did.

Trump: Totally false.

Bush: You wanted it, and you didn’t get it, because I was opposed to—

Trump: I would have gotten it.

Bush: Casino gambling before—

Trump: I promise, I would have gotten it.

Bush: During and after. I’m not going to be bought by anybody.

Trump: I promise, if I wanted it, I would have gotten it.

Bush: No way. Believe me.

Trump: I know my people.

Bush: Not even possible.

Trump: I know my people.

So Trump says that allegation that he tried to get Bush to soften up his opposition to gambling was "totally false". So Newsweek found this deposition Trump gave back in 2007 in connection with a lawsuit Trump filed against someone else. Here's what he said in that deposition:

A lawyer asked Trump, “Did you yourself do anything to obtain any of the details with respect to the Florida gaming environment, what approvals were needed and so forth?”

Trump: A little bit.

Lawyer: What did you do?

Trump: I actually spoke with Governor-elect Bush; I had a big fundraiser for Governor-elect Bush…and I think it was his most successful fundraiser, the most successful that he had had up until that point, that was in Trump Tower in New York on Fifth Avenue.

Lawyer: When was that?

Trump: Sometime prior to his election.

Lawyer: You knew that Governor Bush, Jeb Bush at that time, was opposed to expansion of gaming in Florida, didn't you?

Trump: I thought that he could be convinced otherwise.

Lawyer: But you didn't change his mind about his anti-gaming stance, did you?

Trump: Well, I never really had that much of an opportunity because Fields resigned, telling me you could never get what we wanted done, only to do it for another company.

Well it's too late for Jeb! but here we have incontrovertible proof that Trump straight-up lied in that debate (or committed perjury, but Occam's razor is that he lied at the debate).

I'm sure this story will have no effect whatsoever on the race, and his supporters will care not one whit, but it should be noted for the record.

 

[quadraginta]

Cuban has been trolling Trump for quite a while. He said something about the only way Trump would have $10 billion is if he [Cuban] paid Trump to wash his [Cuban's] balls.
<snip>

Is there any reason in particular that you chose to leave out the important part of what he said?

That the only way Trump would have $10 billion is if he [or anyone] paid Trump $9 and a half billion to [do something insignificant].

You excised the content which comprised the entire point of the statement. Can you guess what that point was? Or are you too preoccupied with distortions?

 

[Ladewig]

If Trump loses, I hope he feels so complelled to tell his side of the story that he makes a movie about the election. I would be fascinated to see how he views these events?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Posted this in another thread. Probably meant to post it here:

It's an interesting addition but it's by no means the only evidence of Trump outright lying. More evidence of outright lying pretty much is found everyday.

 

[Puppycow]

It's an interesting addition but it's by no means the only evidence of Trump outright lying. More evidence of outright lying pretty much is found everyday.

Yeah, like I said, one of thousands. He says whatever seems to be convenient to say, actual truth of it be damned. But here we have him on tape saying the opposite under oath.

 

[Darat]

If Trump loses, I hope he feels so complelled to tell his side of the story that he makes a movie about the election. I would be fascinated to see how he views these events?

You mean how his ghost writer would view these events?

 

[quadraginta]

If Trump loses, I hope he feels so complelled to tell his side of the story that he makes a movie about the election. I would be fascinated to see how he views these events?

I expect you'd be hard-pressed to avoid it.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I expect you'd be hard-pressed to avoid it.

It will be about how the liberals rigged the election.

 

[quadraginta]

Yeah, like I said, one of thousands. He says whatever seems to be convenient to say, actual truth of it be damned. But here we have him on tape saying the opposite under oath.

That just proves what a great businessman he is.

Or something.

 

[SezMe]

And what do you think about the Clinton campaign's decision to use Mark Cuban to troll Trump during the debate?

Huh? Some guy just sitting there (remember, there's no audience participation) is going to troll Trump? In that case, he really is unable to function as prez if he's that delicate.

Yes, he did. His answer was also disingenuous. Everybody knows why Cuban is going to be in the front row. It's to try to get under Trump's skin, which strikes me as unbalancing the debate. Adding Gennifer Flowers to the mix evens the playing field.

Every time you post about this you make Drumpf sound more and more delicate and easily flustered. You're doing your guy no favor with all these excuses.

 

[Sabrina]

If Trump loses, I hope he feels so complelled to tell his side of the story that he makes a movie about the election. I would be fascinated to see how he views these events?

I expect you'd be hard-pressed to avoid it.

It will be about how the liberals rigged the election.

I expect Oliver Stone would be tapped to direct.