Fearing an election loss, Trump allies push him to be less polarizing

[simple1]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Finally said something I can agree with

 

Do you not understand that Trump was elected not for his character, but because something has gone seriously wrong, IMO, with the US government and the populace rejected yet another swampy politician despite Trump not being a great candidate? Faced with a choice between bad and IMO really, really bad it's no wonder that people voted for the less bad candidate.

So long as swampy Biden remains the candidate, it's likely IMO that Trump wins again, despite everything against him. If the Dems want to win, IMO all they have to do is put a half way decent candidate in instead of Biden. Unfortunately they didn't clone Jack Kennedy and they are a bit short of non swampy decent candidates. Biden has to be Trump's opponent of choice since Warren saw the light, though HRC trying for a comeback would be even more ideal.

( Of course Kennedy would be crucified nowadays for being a womanizer )

trump is 'swampier' that all the others just for appointing people who are loyal to him, rather than their Oath of Office. trump has called out people as traitors and scum who act according to their Oath. trump has even gone so far to pardon a convicted war criminal for self interested political purposes against the wishes of his senior military commanders. trump had created enormous damage to US domestic and international institutions. trump is completely unworthy for a second term

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, simple1 said:

trump is 'swampier' that all the others just for appointing people who are loyal to him, rather than their Oath of Office. trump has called out people as traitors and scum who act according to their Oath. trump has even gone so far to pardon a convicted war criminal for self interested political purposes against the wishes of his senior military commanders. trump had created enormous damage to US domestic and international institutions. trump is completely unworthy for a second term

I don't disagree with your post. I'm just happy that she didn't win. He's miles and miles and miles better than she would have been IN MY OPINION.

Edited July 12, 2020 by thaibeachlovers

[Phoenix Rising]

33 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

After he is re elected I wouldn't blame him if he just went and played golf all day and left congress to do their job without him around to hate.

In other words keep on doing what he's been doing for the last 3.5 years.

[riclag]

14 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Finally said something I can agree with

 

Do you not understand that Trump was elected not for his character, but because something has gone seriously wrong, IMO, with the US government and the populace rejected yet another swampy politician despite Trump not being a great candidate? Faced with a choice between bad and IMO really, really bad it's no wonder that people voted for the less bad candidate.

So long as swampy Biden remains the candidate, it's likely IMO that Trump wins again, despite everything against him. If the Dems want to win, IMO all they have to do is put a half way decent candidate in instead of Biden. Unfortunately they didn't clone Jack Kennedy and they are a bit short of non swampy decent candidates. Biden has to be Trump's opponent of choice since Warren saw the light, though HRC trying for a comeback would be even more ideal.

( Of course Kennedy would be crucified nowadays for being a womanizer )

And yet Keeping America Great it seems is  ignored by some recent  haters  and politicians like mad dog and romney !

How can one even think (the above detractors) of letting marxism and socialism's foot in the door ! The President  could be the liar and most corrupt according to the far left sickies  , and still he and mostly his agenda  would cry for support!

[Morch]

22 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

That is but a mere sample of what the crazies can come up with. You're being naïve if you don't take these extremists serious. 

 

May I suggest that in real terms, as well as actual numbers, this doesn't represent even a 1/10 of the bogeyman you make it to be? Daft, extreme or futile legislation offers are a dime a dozen. How many of the so-called "squad"'s legislation initiatives were actually carried through, nevermind implemented?

 

Why take them more seriously than others? Why take them seriously?

 

 

[Morch]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Given all the obstruction put up by the courts, the continuous attacks by the Dems in congress, and all the hatred piled on him it's a wonder that he has done as much as he has, of which there is much eg TWO more conservative judges in SCOTUS.

IMO none of the haters would survive a day if subject to such antipathy.

After he is re elected I wouldn't blame him if he just went and played golf all day and left congress to do their job without him around to hate. Then the country could see what a swampy bunch they are.

 

Them pesky courts, laws and constitution undermining Trump again? Oh noes. Attacks by Dems in Congress? You mean the stuff oppositions are supposed to be doing? Or perhaps it's totally different than how Trump's predecessor was treated by Republicans (and Trump himself)? That too - could Trump's style and way of dealing with things and people had anything to do with that "hatred piled" bit? Nah.

 

IMO, you're pretending to forget the whole "birther" thing.

 

Also, IMO, you closing remark indicates your priorities, as well of your grasp of how USA government works are leave something to be desired.

[Morch]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't disagree with your post. I'm just happy that she didn't win. He's miles and miles and miles better than she would have been IN MY OPINION.

 

Stating you disagree with facts doesn't amount to much. It's not even a matter of opinion. As for Clinton, she ain't running.

[Morch]

7 hours ago, riclag said:

And yet Keeping America Great it seems is  ignored by some recent  haters  and politicians like mad dog and romney !

How can one even think (the above detractors) of letting marxism and socialism's foot in the door ! The President  could be the liar and most corrupt according to the far left sickies  , and still he and mostly his agenda  would cry for support!

 

I would venture that many of Trump's supporters (including self proclaimed independent/swing voters) could not clearly describe what slogans such as "keeping America Great" or "Making America Great Again" actually represent. Or for that matter, how Trump contributed to these notions.

 

Far as I know neither Marxism nor Socialism are outlawed in the USA. Neither managed to achieve much of a significant following, other than in the minds of certain posters.

 

And "sickies"? Low even by your own standards, such as they are.

[EVENKEEL]

19 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

May I suggest that in real terms, as well as actual numbers, this doesn't represent even a 1/10 of the bogeyman you make it to be? Daft, extreme or futile legislation offers are a dime a dozen. How many of the so-called "squad"'s legislation initiatives were actually carried through, nevermind implemented?

 

Why take them more seriously than others? Why take them seriously?

 

 

The leftists are destroying our country with a GOP president, would hate to see the rapid spread of radicalization with biden. He wouldn't stand up to them. 

[simple1]

11 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

The leftists are destroying our country with a GOP president, would hate to see the rapid spread of radicalization with biden. He wouldn't stand up to them. 

According to the OP, trump allies are pushing him to be less polarising - do you agree, if not, why not?

 

An opportunity to factually back up your claims. Exactly what have the 'leftists' managed to destroy in the US that represent a realistic threat to the GOP / Presidency - no hyperbole - thanks. Please describe your criteria for 'radicalisation' under Biden. I suggest at most Biden is Centre Left, yet a candidate articulating  more balanced policies for the less fortunate are viewed by some in the US (the minority) as 'radical left' - rather strange don't you think?

[TopDeadSenter]

11 hours ago, Morch said:

As for Clinton, she ain't running.

Not so fast. Sky News Australia just ran an excellent piece on Hillary preparing to enter the race thanks to what they say is Joe Biden's senility. Do you have any concrete and credible evidence to back up your questionable statement that she is not running, or just guesswork and assumption?

 

Hillary Clinton is ‘plotting a comeback’ to usurp ‘senile Joe Biden’

 

[stevenl]

28 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Not so fast. Sky News Australia just ran an excellent piece on Hillary preparing to enter the race thanks to what they say is Joe Biden's senility. Do you have any concrete and credible evidence to back up your questionable statement that she is not running, or just guesswork and assumption?

 

Hillary Clinton is ‘plotting a comeback’ to usurp ‘senile Joe Biden’

 

An excellent piece? ROFL. Pure gossip not based on any facts, only on baseless gossip.

Edited July 13, 2020 by stevenl

[DoctorG]

5 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Lol - a speculative hit piece from 'conservative' Sky News Australia who also push right wing conspiracy nonsense.

Sky AU is indeed right-wing [thankfully] and, yes, they sometimes go OTT, but it is the only outlet to counter the rest of the left-wing news outlets. CH7 and 9 get most of their US news clips from CNN and their US reporters are based in LA and NY, so it is no surprise that we need an alternate viewpoint. It is not mandatory to believe everything Sky says. Some of us can think for ourselves.

[metisdead]

Some troll posts and replies have been removed.  As this is in the World News forum, it does not matter what nationality a responding member is from. 

[johnnybangkok]

23 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't disagree with your post. I'm just happy that she didn't win. He's miles and miles and miles better than she would have been IN MY OPINION.

I think you Trump fans need to give this a rest now. We get it you 'only voted for Trump' because he was the lesser of two evils (in your opinion), but that surely cannot hold true now.

Firstly, despite gossip from right wing Australian 'news', Clinton is well and truly out of the running in any capacity close to the White House and its been 3 1/2 years under Trump so surely his own record in office must now stand as testament to his abilities as POTUS? 

Secondly, you deride Biden with childish name calling and association to 'far left socialism' when neither his demeanor suggest his 'sleepy' moniker and his policies do not suggest far left socialism at all. It's like you are trying everything to find a reason to still back Trump even when time and time again he does the inexcusable (appointing/working with half a dozen now convicted felons; commuting Stones sentence; ignoring Russian payments to the Taliban; defrauding his own charity; stoking racial tensions; mishandling a continuing pandemic) and are now just simply running out of ideas and excuses, so keep having to resort to 'He's miles and miles and miles better than she would have been'.

That ship has well and truly sailed so you are now left with a simple choice; if your truly believe that Trump has done a fantastic job with the US economy, the pandemic, uniting a country, foreign affairs, choosing the best people to help him run the country, not financially benefitting out of being POTUS and 'draining the swamp', then by all means vote for him come November. But if you, like many, think he has done a terrible job with all of these things, then in the immortal words of a rather cheesy reality TV star, he must be fired. 

 

      

[thaibeachlovers]

On 7/12/2020 at 11:43 PM, Morch said:

 

May I suggest that in real terms, as well as actual numbers, this doesn't represent even a 1/10 of the bogeyman you make it to be? Daft, extreme or futile legislation offers are a dime a dozen. How many of the so-called "squad"'s legislation initiatives were actually carried through, nevermind implemented?

 

Why take them more seriously than others? Why take them seriously?

 

 

Because in a sane world they wouldn't see light of day.

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

Secondly, you deride Biden with childish name calling and association to 'far left socialism' when neither his demeanor suggest his 'sleepy' moniker and his policies do not suggest far left socialism at all.

Don't quote me and then use "you" when talking about things others have said.

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

I think you Trump fans need to give this a rest now. We get it you 'only voted for Trump' because he was the lesser of two evils (in your opinion), but that surely cannot hold true now.

Not up to you to tell us what to do on here.

As long as Biden is the Dems candidate it certainly holds true now.

Seems the haters are, IMO, blinded to how bad Biden is as long as he defeats Trump. A vote for Biden isn't, IMO, even a vote for him- it's a vote for the VP that will take over when Biden is forced to retire for health reasons.

I've said it many times that if the Dems want to defeat Trump all they have to do is get a decent candidate.

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

That ship has well and truly sailed so you are now left with a simple choice; if your truly believe that Trump has done a fantastic job with the US economy, the pandemic, uniting a country, foreign affairs, choosing the best people to help him run the country, not financially benefitting out of being POTUS and 'draining the swamp', then by all means vote for him come November. But if you, like many, think he has done a terrible job with all of these things, then in the immortal words of a rather cheesy reality TV star, he must be fired. 

Not a question of whether Trump has done a fantastic job or not. It's about whether Biden is elected or not. It is a repeat of the last election- a choice between two bad candidates, but which is worse than the other? No contest IMO, but we'll see what the populace thinks come November.

[johnnybangkok]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Don't quote me and then use "you" when talking about things others have said.

You may not have called him 'sleepy' but you have certainly called him 'swampy Biden'? (post 241)

[johnnybangkok]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not up to you to tell us what to do on here.

As long as Biden is the Dems candidate it certainly holds true now.

Seems the haters are, IMO, blinded to how bad Biden is as long as he defeats Trump. A vote for Biden isn't, IMO, even a vote for him- it's a vote for the VP that will take over when Biden is forced to retire for health reasons.

I've said it many times that if the Dems want to defeat Trump all they have to do is get a decent candidate.

Do you really want to talk about who is 'blinded'? 

You think Biden is going to be forced into retirement for 'health reasons' (can I borrow that crystal ball of yours please) despite the fact he is only 3 years older than Trump, who in turn is a morbidly obese man who lives on McDonalds and KFC. You are doing exactly what my original post stated and just jumping on the 'old man' band wagon as a means and reason to justify your devotion to Trump.

Your definition of what a 'decent' democratic candidate would have been would have been subject to exactly the same process as is being done to Biden - Saunders would have been branded a commie, Warren, a shrill 'Indian' wannabee; Buttigieg, gay; Gabbard, a hormonial woman etc etc 

It didn't matter who the Dems put up, Trump fans would have found some fault after their beloved leader penned yet another bully nickname. Your infer that a 'brilliant' candidate would have swayed your vote but that doesn't bear scrutiny as it's not about Bidens experience or even his policies (which you have NEVER mentioned) but it is about finding some petty fault (swampy Biden) to feed into your echo chamber. 

And no one is trying to tell you 'what to do on here'. It's a forum for expressing thoughts and ideas on particular subjects and if I offer a suggestion I don't think anyone reads it as a dictate. So please, try to not take it so personal.  

 

  

[Bluespunk]

Yet more reasons to show why trumps behaviour is, in all probability, going to result in his defeat in November. 
 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/13/can-trump-win-swing-state-wisconsin-again?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Edited July 14, 2020 by Bluespunk

[johnnybangkok]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not a question of whether Trump has done a fantastic job or not. It's about whether Biden is elected or not. It is a repeat of the last election- a choice between two bad candidates, but which is worse than the other? No contest IMO, but we'll see what the populace thinks come November.

It's 'Not a question of whether Trump has done a fantastic job or not'? Really? Really?

I'm sure even Trump himself would argue that point, what with him having dismissed contestant after contestant on his reality show for NOT doing a good job.

And again, I'll go back to my original post. You are rejecting Biden off-hand for THINKING he might do a bad job, when you absolutely know for sure that Trump has done a terrible job of being POTUS.

You gave Trump a chance 3 1/2 years ago because you thought Hilary was going to be awful but now you have actually seen how awful Trump has been, yet you're still willing to give him your vote because of what? Bidens a bit older? He's too 'swampy'? He stutters sometimes when talking?

Just admit it. You're a Trump fan trying desperately to pass yourself off as an 'undecided' whilst knowing all along you remain a Trump fan because..................well, I don't know.

But I do know it's not because it's 'a choice between two bad candidates' as currently it's a choice between a really bad candidate and one that is yet to prove himself bad or not.  

[Sujo]

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Not up to you to tell us what to do on here.

As long as Biden is the Dems candidate it certainly holds true now.

Seems the haters are, IMO, blinded to how bad Biden is as long as he defeats Trump. A vote for Biden isn't, IMO, even a vote for him- it's a vote for the VP that will take over when Biden is forced to retire for health reasons.

I've said it many times that if the Dems want to defeat Trump all they have to do is get a decent candidate.

Why. Is trump a decent president? Whats he done?

 

Feel free to compare what both have done.

Edited July 14, 2020 by Sujo

[metisdead]

Some off topic posts, inflammatory posts, troll posts and the replies have been removed. 

 

Some more troll posts and the replies have been removed. 

Edited July 15, 2020 by metisdead

[thaibeachlovers]

On 7/14/2020 at 7:43 PM, johnnybangkok said:

Your definition of what a 'decent' democratic candidate would have been would have been subject to exactly the same process as is being done to Biden

Jack Kennedy was pretty decent, Carter likewise. Sadly those are the only good ones I can remember.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 7/14/2020 at 8:09 PM, Sujo said:

Why. Is trump a decent president? Whats he done?

 

Feel free to compare what both have done.

You guys and your made up <deleted>. I've never said Trump is a decent president and often said he is a bad choice, just less bad than the opposition.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 7/14/2020 at 7:55 PM, johnnybangkok said:

It's 'Not a question of whether Trump has done a fantastic job or not'? Really? Really?

I'm sure even Trump himself would argue that point, what with him having dismissed contestant after contestant on his reality show for NOT doing a good job.

And again, I'll go back to my original post. You are rejecting Biden off-hand for THINKING he might do a bad job, when you absolutely know for sure that Trump has done a terrible job of being POTUS.

You gave Trump a chance 3 1/2 years ago because you thought Hilary was going to be awful but now you have actually seen how awful Trump has been, yet you're still willing to give him your vote because of what? Bidens a bit older? He's too 'swampy'? He stutters sometimes when talking?

Just admit it. You're a Trump fan trying desperately to pass yourself off as an 'undecided' whilst knowing all along you remain a Trump fan because..................well, I don't know.

But I do know it's not because it's 'a choice between two bad candidates' as currently it's a choice between a really bad candidate and one that is yet to prove himself bad or not.  

Yes I still think he's better than what she would have been.

 

Biden is just, IMO, HRC version 2, ergo, IMO as bad as she.

 

Who's "undecided"? I'm decidedly against Biden.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 7/14/2020 at 7:54 PM, Bluespunk said:

Yet more reasons to show why trumps behaviour is, in all probability, going to result in his defeat in November. 
 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/13/can-trump-win-swing-state-wisconsin-again?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Well, we'll both know in November, won't we?

[Bluespunk]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Well, we'll both know in November, won't we?

I’ve got the fizzy water on ice (would be champagne, but I don’t drink). 

Edited July 15, 2020 by Bluespunk