What's new

Trump has a plan

The right likes to claim that Barrack Obama is a divider. But if you put Johnson in the white house I'm pretty sure even Bill O'Reilly will sing Obama praises.

750 vetoes as governor
0 effort to work with the people's voted representatives
Claims to have balanced budget whilst doubling his states debt
In 2012 he flip flopped from R to L mid run
Still has $2M outstanding debt from 2012 run(while running on balanced budget ticket, mind you)

I'm pretty sure Ugli would be a better candidate than Johnson.
I did say "or something"
So what other option we got?

Isn't johnson better than the other two *** dumpsters?
 
Quote what I said about his willingness to work.

I said something like, "If Trump gets elected he might quit once he realizes there's work involved."

It has given you so much fuel.

Did I say "Trump is a lazy guy who has never worked hard."? No, no I didn't, so stop mentioning it several times a day as if that's what I said.

Trump is in charge of his business. Trump is in control of his schedule. Trump can decide to do business or not do business with whomever he wants. Trump works on his own terms.

The President of the United States has NONE of that control. They have to "work" with congress and the senate. They have to "work" to achieve a compromise. That's "work" I don't see Trump being very good at. It's not about hours or effort, it's about his personality and that I don't think it's a good fit for a President.

But I'm sorry... I made a comment that required nuance to fully understand and all you need is good old common sense. It really wasn't very nice of me.
Lol. If I misunderstood your comment you should have just said so.

Your last barb brings a question to my mind, though. Do I need any nuance to understand this comment, or can I just use common sense?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otwtskUhopo
 
Lol. If I misunderstood your comment you should have just said so.

Your last barb brings a question to my mind, though. Do I need any nuance to understand this comment, or can I just use common sense?

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


I wouldn't have responded except that for days you've been bringing up what I said to prove a point about Trump negativity. I have been doing my best to stay out of the political discussion and I'm going to go back to staying out of it.
 
I wouldn't have responded except that for days you've been bringing up what I said to prove a point about Trump negativity. I have been doing my best to stay out of the political discussion and I'm going to go back to staying out of it.
For days people have been accusing me of being a Trump shill on the basis of that conversation. Frankly, I find the whole thing stupid too.
 
At least you provided a microscopic shred of evidence this time. Still seems like an extremely low blow.

I don't quite get why you think it's an extremely low blow. You just mentioned your 3rd person knowledge of Johnson being unimpressive. If Trump is President his children will have a ton of influence, so I think they are fair game. Plus they are adults not children.
 
I don't quite get why you think it's an extremely low blow. You just mentioned your 3rd person knowledge of Johnson being unimpressive. If Trump is President his children will have a ton of influence, so I think they are fair game. Plus they are adults not children.
Go ahead and provide your evidence.

Regarding Johnson, I didn't call him a douchebag (or any other name) out of the blue with no evidence. All I did was relate a comment that was to me. I made that clear.
 
Why? This is the first time I have heard anything like this. What turns you off?

You haven't heard anything like this because no one around you bothered looking. Anything more than a cursory glance tells a much different story.

1. My way or the highway - As much as I like Obama, he has been pretty damned divisive. Johnson's professional record as governor of New Mexico makes Obama look like Ghandi.
2. Do as I say, not as I do - While expecting a state to balance their budget, he can't even balance his own campaigns budget.
3. Creative Fiscal Verbiage - He didn't balance the budget for crap in New Mexico, yet said he did. I can not see how you claim a $1B surplus whilst more than doubling your states debt level instead of reducing it. I understand the mechanics, I don't understand being able to say it without blushing.
4. Debating - Not even marginally effective until his team takes over for him and spins all the questions on youtube 48 hours later.
5. Cheap votes - His campaign, largely, is selling him as "the other option". Guys, suicide is another option; Just because it's another option doesn't mean I'm gonna take it.
 
You haven't heard anything like this because no one around you bothered looking. Anything more than a cursory glance tells a much different story.

1. My way or the highway - As much as I like Obama, he has been pretty damned divisive. Johnson's professional record as governor of New Mexico makes Obama look like Ghandi.
2. Do as I say, not as I do - While expecting a state to balance their budget, he can't even balance his own campaigns budget.
3. Creative Fiscal Verbiage - He didn't balance the budget for crap in New Mexico, yet said he did. I can not see how you claim a $1B surplus whilst more than doubling your states debt level instead of reducing it. I understand the mechanics, I don't understand being able to say it without blushing.
4. Debating - Not even marginally effective until his team takes over for him and spins all the questions on youtube 48 hours later.
5. Cheap votes - His campaign, largely, is selling him as "the other option". Guys, suicide is another option; Just because it's another option doesn't mean I'm gonna take it.

1. So? No other option provides any better option. Even worse IMO
2. lol, who cares
3. He's still a politician so you have to keep your eye on him
4. Really?
5. Double really?

The only ones on this list that means anything to me is #s 1 & 3. Good complaints. But that really makes you dislike him more than the R nominee? Really? Maybe I haven't heard anything like this because there's no real comparison.

If you'd rather vote for someone that openly advocates violating our freedoms have at it. You get your vote just like I get mine. But this is no where even in the ball park of what I see wrong with the A & B option the media presents.

Edit" I realize you are not voting for the R nominee
 
1. So? No other option provides any better option. Even worse IMO
2. lol, who cares
3. He's still a politician so you have to keep your eye on him
4. Really?
5. Double really?

The only ones on this list that means anything to me is #s 1 & 3. Good complaints. But that really makes you dislike him more than the R nominee? Really? Maybe I haven't heard anything like this because there's no real comparison.

If you'd rather vote for someone that openly advocates violating our freedoms have at it. You get your vote just like I get mine. But this is no where even in the ball park of what I see wrong with the A & B option the media presents.

My vote comes at a far higher price than "I'm the other guy, I like weed, and I 'balanced a budget'". If yours is cheaper, then they should probably buy yours.

Here's my path of thinking:

Will I be voting for Trump? No. I can not. .. .... duh.
Will I be voting for Hillary? No. I can not. And shame on DNC for trying to call what they think is my bluff.
Will I be voting for Johnson? I'd like to, let's do some homework. Huh... turns out he's a b**** too. And from a party I can't trust any more than RNC or DNC.

What am I left with.. I'm not sure. But I will not vote for a liar, a schemer, or Donald Trump.
 
Why? This is the first time I have heard anything like this. What turns you off?
This is why me thinks
The right likes to claim that Barrack Obama is a divider. But if you put Johnson in the white house I'm pretty sure even Bill O'Reilly will sing Obama praises.

750 vetoes as governor
0 effort to work with the people's voted representatives
Claims to have balanced budget whilst doubling his states debt
In 2012 he flip flopped from R to L mid run
Still has $2M outstanding debt from 2012 run(while running on balanced budget ticket, mind you)

I'm pretty sure Ugli would be a better candidate than Johnson.
 
For those on the right, I'm curious, just how was Obama a divider? What made him particularly worse than his predecessors such that you call him out on it but not, say, Bush or others?

I am not comparing him to other presidents. But I do not think he has been a unifier. For comments like "clinging to guns and religion". The way he says things offends, often intentionally, those on the other side of the political spectrum. He does a lot of political shaming.

I also think the President gets full blame for the divide unfairly. The Rs have been slinging mud every chance they get and they share a heavy load of the blame as well. But they play political games and blame it all on him (more political shaming). I am not sure there is anyone capable of truly uniting this country again short of a major catastrophe.

That's my take on the whole issue.
 
I am not comparing him to other presidents. But I do not think he has been a unifier. For comments like "clinging to guns and religion". The way he says things offends, often intentionally, those on the other side of the political spectrum. He does a lot of political shaming.

I also think the President gets full blame for the divide unfairly. The Rs have been slinging mud every chance they get and they share a heavy load of the blame as well. But they play political games and blame it all on him (more political shaming). I am not sure there is anyone capable of truly uniting this country again short of a major catastrophe.

That's my take on the whole issue.

Fair enough. (The remainder of my post is not directed at you per se but others who think to label Obama a divider.) That's ONE example, however. Does that mean no other President ever said anything some might take offense to? I don't dispute that Obama may have said or did things that offended some, but whether he did so at a rate that much higher than his predecessors that he should be labeled a 'divider' is, in my view, very much in dispute. (If he's a 'divider' because some took offense at what he said, then so were other Presidents--and by this standard they all would qualify--then the term has no real meaning, other than a partisan knee jerk criticism.)

BTW, and for what it's worth. I believe Obama is on public record saying that he regrets saying this.

I imagine it's very hard in a diverse and politically divided country to manage to be in office 8 years trying to enact a policy agenda without giving offense on occasion.

Again, IF Obama is indeed a divider, to me, the criterion is NOT that he said or did things to give offense but that he did so (legitimately, and not seen to do so simply because he did something something politically objects to) at a higher rate than 'non-dividers' (e.g., past presidents).
 
For those on the right, I'm curious, just how was Obama a divider? What made him particularly worse than his predecessors such that you call him out on it but not, say, Bush or others?
I voted for Obama in '08. I believed that if nothing else, he would help us heal from racism. Unfortunately at virtually every opportunity he's done the opposite. Early in his first term there was an incident where police arrested a Harvard professor in his own home because they responded to a 911 break in call. Before gathering any facts Obama said that the police had acted stupidly. Leaving completely aside whether they did or not, do you believe that is the correct way for the president to become involved in a police/civilian matter?

On every subsequent occasion that I'm aware of where Obama has chosen to become involved in a situation like this he has chosen his side of the argument based on race. The result is that this country feels far more racially divided today than it did 8 years ago. I am not arguing that blacks don't have legitimate complaints in some of these cases, but I sincerely wish the president would go into these situations with a mindset of reducing the tension rather than increasing it. I've been very unimpressed by how Obama has handled these sorts of situations.
 
Fair enough. (The remainder of my post is not directed at you per se but others who think to label Obama a divider.) That's ONE example, however. Does that mean no other President ever said anything some might take offense to? I don't dispute that Obama may have said or did things that offended some, but whether he did so at a rate that much higher than his predecessors that he should be labeled a 'divider' is, in my view, very much in dispute. (If he's a 'divider' because some took offense at what he said, then so were other Presidents--and by this standard they all would qualify--then the term has no real meaning, other than a partisan knee jerk criticism.)

BTW, and for what it's worth. I believe Obama is on public record saying that he regrets saying this.

I imagine it's very hard in a diverse and politically divided country to manage to be in office 8 years trying to enact a policy agenda without giving offense on occasion.

Again, IF Obama is indeed a divider, to me, the criterion is NOT that he said or did things to give offense but that he did so (legitimately, and not seen to do so simply because he did something something politically objects to) at a higher rate than 'non-dividers' (e.g., past presidents).

And this might be the case. But just because they were dividers does not mean others were not as well. And part of this might be because they were never truly given the chance.

I'd go back to blaming the Rs and Ds. They are pushing hard left and hard right in ways that directly oppose the other. Through media, outreach, speeches... until they stop driving this divide we will never see some semblance of unity. And they will stop when we force them to.

So I do think he pokes the right in the eye often. But so does everyone else and that ultimately lies with us because we keep supporting them. Which is why I say he is a divider when asked but not really something I volunteer as a critique without being prompted.
 
I met a guy who knows him well from years ago. They were ski instructors together in Taos. He wasn't impressed.

Do you even recognize the hypocrisy of posting this hearsay and in the same breath bagging(or bagadonuting; or bagadouching) on me for hearsay?
 
Back
Top