Analysis The chance of Trump winning another term is very real

[Yellowtail]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

In any case, it's obvious now that he's running for president to stay out of prison, not to be of service to the American people. 

It's only obvious to the left, people claiming to be centrists and whatnot. 

[Jingthing]

2 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

It's only obvious to the left, people claiming to be centrists and whatnot. 

Wrong.

Trump hits back at GOP candidate who said he’s running to ‘stay out of jail’ - POLITICO

 

[candide]

20 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

"In 2016, Trump was worth $3.7 billion, according to Forbes. That dropped to $3.1 billion in 2017 and held there for 2018 and 2019. 

 

Was that not before the pandemic? In any event, I think the idea that he was using the Presidency to enrich himself is a little suspect. You don't, you think he's hitler, I get it. 

Trump's worth is mainly determined by the value of his assets, which may vary over time for whatever reason.

 

If I remember well, the initial claim was not that he enriched himself 'in general', which is irrelevant, but that he took advantage of his position to generate revenues for his hotels. This is fact, and is independent from how the value of his assets may have varied over time.

[Jingthing]

Hopefully this is true:

 

Fox News Analyst Pronounces Trump's 2024 Campaign Dead (mediaite.com)

 

‘He Can’t Win’: Fox News Legal Analyst Andy McCarthy Predicts Trump Will ‘Get Drubbed’ in 2024

 

A prominent conservative voice is warning Republicans that “Trump Can’t Win” in a new article for National Review.

Andrew McCarthy, National Review contributing editor and Fox News legal analyst,  has come out strongly against Donald Trump‘s chances at the presidency in 2024, writing, “I persist in the conviction that Trump doesn’t have a prayer of being elected president again.”

McCarthy’s reasoning? There’s nothing redeeming about the former president and voters have already made up their minds about him.

[heybruce]

10 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

You do not think CNN fact-checked it?

 

In any event, I just sent you PM with a way to get through the paywall that placeholder sent me. It works great.

I think CNN reported what Forbes reported, and Forbes reported figures without access to Trump's financial records other than the ones Trump selectively released.  The estimate is based on estimates of the value of Trump's properties and what knowledge Forbes was able to obtain about loans using these properties as collateral. 

 

I don't think that is the whole picture; in particular I suspect there are undeclared loans and obligations that no one will know about until Trump makes his finances public.  That's what honest politicians do.

[TimeMachine]

Sure,  a chance.  He's done it already,  can do it again,  and everyone I speak to wants it to happen. 

 

In reality a best choice won't be made,  otherwise a super smart, energetic, young,  vibrant etc man would be chosen. 

[ozimoron]

I persist in the conviction that Trump doesn’t have a prayer of being elected president again. Democrats have drawn the same conclusion, based on a lot of sensible data — Trump’s past performances (i.e., his 46 percent high-water mark, even as an incumbent, before the stop-the-steal nonsense, the Capitol riot, and the string of indictments and civil complaints), the 2018 midterms, Trump’s costing Republicans control of the Senate in 2020, and the 2022 “red wave” that never happened thanks to Trump-supported candidates.

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/trump-cant-win/

[candide]

JUST IN: Grand jury investigating 2020 election interference hands up indictment 

https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-2020-election-probe-08-01-23/index.html

[bendejo]

1 hour ago, candide said:

JUST IN: Grand jury investigating 2020 election interference hands up indictment 

https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-2020-election-probe-08-01-23/index.html

He's really winning now!    Even Fox is covering it.

Waiting to hear the names in the gang of six.

 

[kwonitoy]

1 hour ago, candide said:

JUST IN: Grand jury investigating 2020 election interference hands up indictment 

https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-2020-election-probe-08-01-23/index.html

Wow, Just read the indictment, Mr Smith pulls no punches, very well done.

Defendant 1 constantly lying, who could imagine

[kwonitoy]

15 minutes ago, bendejo said:

He's really winning now!    Even Fox is covering it.

Waiting to hear the names in the gang of six.

 

I would imagine John Eastman and Andy Biggs would be two of them, 

[sirineou]

2 hours ago, ozimoron said:

I persist in the conviction that Trump doesn’t have a prayer of being elected president again. Democrats have drawn the same conclusion, based on a lot of sensible data — Trump’s past performances (i.e., his 46 percent high-water mark, even as an incumbent, before the stop-the-steal nonsense, the Capitol riot, and the string of indictments and civil complaints), the 2018 midterms, Trump’s costing Republicans control of the Senate in 2020, and the 2022 “red wave” that never happened thanks to Trump-supported candidates.

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/trump-cant-win/

I agree

If he could not be re-elected while he was president, Why would he be able now? What has changed since then? 

Of course we all know what has changed. 

Everything that has changed makes it even harder. Though in a way I don't want to see tramp get the Republican nomination because I am tired of listening to his whining voice, and wish he would die. In another way I wish he would get the nomination because it would be entertaining to see the Republicans implode.   

[jerrymahoney]

9 minutes ago, kwonitoy said:

I would imagine John Eastman and Andy Biggs would be two of them, 

A key element of the investigation is determining to what degree Republican operatives, activists and elected officials — including Trump — understood that their claims of massive voter fraud were false at the time they were making them.

 

Each track raises tricky questions about where the line should be drawn between political activity, legal advocacy and criminal conspiracy.

 

A key area of interest for Smith has been the conduct of a handful of lawyers who sought to turn Trump’s defeat into victory by trying to convince state, local, federal and judicial authorities that Biden’s 2020 election win was illegitimate or tainted by fraud.

 

Investigators have sought to determine to what degree these lawyers — particularly Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, John Eastman, Kurt Olsen and Kenneth Chesebro, as well as then-Justice Department lawyer Jeffrey Clark — were following specific instructions from Trump or others, and what those instructions were, according to the people familiar with the matter, who like others interviewed spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe an ongoing investigation.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/08/01/trump-indictment-jan-6-2020-election/

 

https://archive.is/DXhkj#selection-1519.0-1529.73

[Tug]

Oh gawd they are after our precious baby boy Donnie let the blubbering sobs begin the greatest victim ever Not!!it’s about time hopefully it’s televised so it’s truly exposed for what it was the attempted destruction of American democracy force the FACTS into the dullards so they understand what Trump really is 

 

[Neeranam]

9 hours ago, Jingthing said:

In any case, it's obvious now that he's running for president to stay out of prison, not to be of service to the American people. 

Oh dear, you couldn't be farther from the truth. 

[Neeranam]

30 minutes ago, Tug said:

precious baby boy

Why do you call him that? 

[bendejo]

56 minutes ago, kwonitoy said:

I would imagine John Eastman and Andy Biggs would be two of them, 

There is still an unassumed one (re Miz Maddow, on TV presently) and could not say who, my guess is Bannon, he's the one who has fostered these electoral disruption strategies.

 

[sirineou]

6 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

Why do you call him that? 

after the infamous Access Hollywood wasn't the excuse your side used 

"Boys will be boys" ??

[Bday Prang]

On 7/31/2023 at 3:02 PM, GroveHillWanderer said:

 

On 7/31/2023 at 10:11 AM, SunnyinBangrak said:

I'd vote for him solely because he will negotiate peace rather than continue the insane democrats foreign wars. The only winners in the left's war with Russia are the weapons manufacturers and other parasitical companies that thrive on the left's foreign military adventures.

 

 Plus he's incredible with the economy, and favors free speech over govt/social media collaboration to censor content that is inconvenient to the narrative(such as the biden corruption & crime laptop). Oh, and he is a fan of rewarding everyone for their own efforts rather than making everything about the color of one's skin.

 

Go Trump!! Humankind's survival depends on you winning in 2024. 

I am all for him . But I wonder what the hysterical lefties who oppose him are really scared of,   What do they think will happen if he wins? I don't remember him being responsible for any global disasters last time he won,  Anyway whatever it is , it's probably the best reason to vote for him

[Bday Prang]

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

Oh dear, you couldn't be farther from the truth. 

As with all lefty theories, the truth does not come into it,

[earlinclaifornia]

11 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

I am all for him . But I wonder what the hysterical lefties who oppose him are really scared of,   What do they think will happen if he wins? I don't remember him being responsible for any global disasters last time he won,  Anyway whatever it is , it's probably the best reason to vote for him

I do give Trump supporters credit for never wandering from hating anyone not a supporter.

[Bday Prang]

42 minutes ago, earlinclaifornia said:

I do give Trump supporters credit for never wandering from hating anyone not a supporter.

it's not trump supporters who hate anybody,  hate is the sole preserve of the lefties

[TimeMachine]

3 hours ago, sirineou said:

I agree

If he could not be re-elected while he was president, Why would he be able now? What has changed since then? 

Of course we all know what has changed. 

Everything that has changed makes it even harder. Though in a way I don't want to see tramp get the Republican nomination because I am tired of listening to his whining voice, and wish he would die. In another way I wish he would get the nomination because it would be entertaining to see the Republicans implode.   

One possibility is that he was not reelected because voting was rigged.  Nobody can say for sure because it is not a public viewable and checkable system.  To say a rigged system cannot exist is wrong.  To say it most likely is not rigged is fair.  Why are voting systems not made public checkable.  Haha.  Yes you all know. 

[metisdead]

A post with unattributed content that was copy and pasted from a CNN article without a link to the source and a reply has been removed.

[johnnybangkok]

6 minutes ago, TimeMachine said:

One possibility is that he was not reelected because voting was rigged.  Nobody can say for sure because it is not a public viewable and checkable system.  To say a rigged system cannot exist is wrong.  To say it most likely is not rigged is fair.  Why are voting systems not made public checkable.  Haha.  Yes you all know. 

What absolute nonsense. Of course it's viewable and checked. Please educate yourself before posting.

 

https://act.represent.us/sign/how-votes-are-counted

[TimeMachine]

3 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

What absolute nonsense. Of course it's viewable and checked. Please educate yourself before posting.

 

https://act.represent.us/sign/how-votes-are-counted

Im sorry.  I wasnt aware you could request to see your ballot paper after you voted and to see its status amongst other votes in a clear list that shows each person and who they voted for and how the tally is reached vote bye vote. I do apologize. Im glad its not just left to a small group saying we promise to be fair. 

[Yellowtail]

12 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Wrong.

Trump hits back at GOP candidate who said he’s running to ‘stay out of jail’ - POLITICO

 

Well, DeSantis is on record saying he would pardon Trump if he's elected, so it would seem that if Trump were only running to stay out of jail, he would be much better served just backing DeSantis. 

 

And I think it safe to say a lot of people believe the primary reason Trump is being pursued legally is because he is running.  

 

 

 

 

[placeholder]

3 hours ago, Neeranam said:

Why do you call him that? 

Maybe because someone who engages in fits of rage on Twitter/X is engaging in infantile behavior?

[sirineou]

6 minutes ago, TimeMachine said:

One possibility is that he was not reelected because voting was rigged.  Nobody can say for sure because it is not a public viewable and checkable system.  To say a rigged system cannot exist is wrong.  To say it most likely is not rigged is fair.  Why are voting systems not made public checkable.  Haha.  Yes you all know. 

The votes were audited by the appropriate agencies in every states, and no appreciable discrepancies were found that could change the outcome, many of these audits were headed and executed by Republicans.   And in many cases instead of gaining votes , trump lost votes because many of the irregularities were in votes casted for trump. in Fact  Georgia's secretary, of state Raffensperger a Republican in a very red state told trump in the infamous phone call , for which trump could also be edited. 

Here is part of the transcript You can read the whole transcript in the link below. :  

"Raffensperger: Well Mr. President, the challenge that you have is, the data you have is wrong. We talked to the congressmen and they were surprised.

But they — I guess there was a person Mr. Braynard who came to these meetings and presented data and he said that there was dead people, I believe it was upward of 5,000. The actual number were two. Two. Two people that were dead that voted. So that’s wrong. There were two."

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/03/politics/trump-brad-raffensperger-phone-call-transcript/index.html

 

Ohh wait, Haha

[placeholder]

14 minutes ago, TimeMachine said:

Im sorry.  I wasnt aware you could request to see your ballot paper after you voted and to see its status amongst other votes in a clear list that shows each person and who they voted for and how the tally is reached vote bye vote. I do apologize. Im glad its not just left to a small group saying we promise to be fair. 

And why couldn't they whoever "they" are, substitute the ballot someone checked off for a different ballot? The points you are raising are absurd.