• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Donald Trump For President?

Well Sarah Palin in 08' was thrust into a spot light...for her is better kept dim and not staying governor is a huge misstep politically.

Anyone at this point is no longer a contender...IMHO.
 
As for Barry...as it turns out, what with the debacles over the stimulus and health care...he didn't have such a mandate...after all.
You mean those things he got passed?

Either that...or our current President didn't carry out the platform he promised. Take your pick.
You mean those things he got passed?

I mean those things he got passed.

The Federal Election Commission.
2008 Election Results
2004 Election Results

So, basic logic would tell you that. Voter turnout was higher in 2008 and Obama got a higher percentage of the vote.

Good boy.

For proving you wrong? Yes he is.

It is hard to present a credible case with falsehoods. Even when you do make a good point or bring up something interesting for discussion, you are going to have a hard time finding traction when people dismiss you based on past falsehoods.

Questioning sources is not engaging in falsehoods, past or present. It is keeping him honest. Saying otherwise won't make it so.

I am not, nor have I ever been, looking for "traction" with the Toad. Again, saying otherwise won't make it so.
 
Oh now Roger Wilco, don't be a big silly. Of course all mid term election are a referendums on the President of the United States job performance. Just as the 2012 election will be the President's big job review, that where the President will find out if his employers are going to be "letting him go."

If that's the case then what do the USA have states for at all? Strict proportional representation with federal party lists would be a much more accurate picture of the will of the people if that were true.

Questioning sources is not engaging in falsehoods, past or present. It is keeping him honest. Saying otherwise won't make it so.

:lol: nice backtracking. It takes at most three seconds of googling to find out the results of US presidential election. Clearly you didn't know the answer, otherwise the whole exchange makes even less than it did before.
 
Of course it would have bothered us. That means that she would have been a stone's throw away from the presidency. That's a horrifying prospect.
 
Oh please. Palin could skin and eat a human baby on live television and the fanboys would still cheer for her.
 
Questioning sources is not engaging in falsehoods, past or present. It is keeping him honest. Saying otherwise won't make it so.

:lol: nice backtracking. It takes at most three seconds of googling to find out the results of US presidential election. Clearly you didn't know the answer, otherwise the whole exchange makes even less than it did before.

I know. :) But hey--lack of citations, regardless of internet access, isn't exactly a good way to conduct a written debate.

Of course it would have bothered us. That means that she would have been a stone's throw away from the presidency. That's a horrifying prospect.

As it stands, we have Joe Biden now a stone's throw away for the presidency. I find it amusing you're perfectly fine with Mr. Blunder-a-minute, and don't consider him a "horrifying prospect". :rolleyes:

Just imagine him making a speech before the UN...and you'll know exactly what I mean.
 
As it stands, we have Joe Biden now a stone's throw away for the presidency. I find it amusing you're perfectly fine with Mr. Blunder-a-minute, and don't consider him a "horrifying prospect". :rolleyes:

:: prays HARD for 2 more years of continued good health for the sitting president :: :beer:
 
Questioning sources is not engaging in falsehoods, past or present. It is keeping him honest. Saying otherwise won't make it so.

:lol: nice backtracking. It takes at most three seconds of googling to find out the results of US presidential election. Clearly you didn't know the answer, otherwise the whole exchange makes even less than it did before.

I know. :) But hey--lack of citations, regardless of internet access, isn't exactly a good way to conduct a written debate.

Of course it would have bothered us. That means that she would have been a stone's throw away from the presidency. That's a horrifying prospect.

As it stands, we have Joe Biden now a stone's throw away for the presidency. I find it amusing you're perfectly fine with Mr. Blunder-a-minute, and don't consider him a "horrifying prospect". :rolleyes:

Just imagine him making a speech before the UN...and you'll know exactly what I mean.

For 8 years we had the next best thing to the Antichrist holding the VP slot. Biden is a blessing by comparison. :lol:
 
^:lol: Well, say what you will about Dick Cheney--but, love him or hate his :censored:-ing GUTS...he's still a total bad--s!

He knew what he was doing. Biden don't know squat.
 
Back to Donald Trump, I have seen him asked about his multiple bankruptcies in interviews and he is always slippery enough to talk around the issue without ever addressing this relevant question, but all the while never letting you forget that he has always made money in his dealings. He is a showman, like P.T. Barnum.

I am not taken in by his bravado. He is good at making money at the expense of those in business with him. Good for his bank account, bad for his partners, and very bad for this country.

Some of my family members worked for a company where a new owner squeezed everything they could out of the company and then closed it down, putting hundreds of people out of jobs that they had held for decades. It seems like Trump is the same type of business person. He makes money, while he leaves other investors, subcontractors, employees, etc. holding the bag.

Like so many others in the news these days, the actual facts about the guy and the actual facts about his dealings are ignored- in favor of a more intriguing fake, embellished story and false aura created around the guy.

I question the judgement of anyone who would want to put our country in the hands of someone who clearly always looks out for #1, and #1 (as Frank Zappa would remind us) "ain't you!"

I wish people would stop being drawn to candidates who they would like to have a beer with or would want to watch on some lame "reality"/competition show. I want a statesman to vote for, not a lame third rate semi-celebrity (Sorry, Donald, but IMO, for all your fame, you rank only as a semi-celebrity).

I am sure that a "The Situation/Snooki" ticket would garner more votes than I would like to think about.
 
Last edited:
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top