Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
New York Magazine: Donald Trump is running for President again. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
MAC_32
Footballguy
I'm thinking about it for the first time in my adult life. With the advantage of hind sight I should have done it in 08. Not voting for McCain (Palin aside), Romney, and Kasich is a big reason why we ended up here. There's still a part of me that thinks the only path out is to let the republican party sink under the weight of this oaf's massive ego though.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Not really. Try answering the question. Without mentioning Biden or Kamala or even democrats or liberals.
sho nuff
Footballguy
My head is clearly out of the sand asking how in the world it’s patriotic to support Donald Trump and you seem unwilling to actually give an answer. Not surprising that you try to then taken personal shots rather than answer a pretty basic question.
I can't help you if you don't understand my answer. Biden is an embarrassment to the United States.
knowledge dropper
Footballguy
Trump puts America first, the person he would be running against puts his family’s personal financial gain first. It’s pretty simple.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
sho nuff
Footballguy
FairWarning
Footballguy
Hmmm, this may be a hard sell. I am thinking In order Trump, US, others unless it affects him.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
How is Trump a threat to this country? Give real reasons, not those based on social justice warrior stuff.
Godsbrother
Footballguy
He lied, cheated and attempted to steal the last election. If you don't think that a sitting president circumventing the will of the people isn't a threat, I don't know what to tell you
He is the antithesis of what this country is about.
Last edited by a moderator:
Grace Under Pressure
Footballguy
Yeah, I’ve seen this take in several places. I’ll believe it when I see it.This is exactly what's going to happen.
Anyone who thinks Trump has a shot at the White House is delusional.
I know a bunch of hard core SuperTrumpers in Florida. These guys have the "SUPERMAGA" hats and fly "TRUMP" and "LETS GO BRANDON" flags from their boats.... they go to Trump Rallies.
Even THOSE guys, to the man, said Trump has no shot and can't serious run or he'll hurt the right. They all seem to want Desantis and talked about Candace Owens as a running mate. But they said Trump isn't the guy... and they're superfans.
Also, not to conflate points here. I haven’t seen anyone say that he has a shot to legitimately win. What people seem to be saying is that he’s definitely running, it will be divisive for the country, and the Trump loving super fans will definitely vote for him, further enabling this ####show. Despite the fact he’s a traitor.
Since you seem to have a pretty sure take on how it will go, would be interested to hear what you think Trump will do, who will end up being the GOP nominee, and how will they approach going up against Trump and his super fans and somehow winning that nomination. The super fans are going to vote against Trump? Sure.
To the point of it’s it’s a grift, well obviously, pretty much everyone knows that. Unfortunately your Trump super fan friends and others who have been duped like them have been more than happy to part with their money to this traitor. I do feel bad for your friends and the others getting conned like that.
joffer
Footballguy
Toby2ElectricBugaloo
Footballguy
If you're serious about this question I would be happy to provide you with a detailed answer. I promise it will not mention any social justice issues. I won't mention race, gender, sexual orientation, immigration or abortion.
If you're somewhat curious but don't wanna hear about it from me, I recommend the opening statement to the J6 Committee from Judge Michael Luttig.
Luttig is a conservative Republican through and through. He clerked for Scalia, worked for DOJ under Bush I, guided Thomas's nomination through the Senate, was nominated for the bench by the same prez, was on the short list for the Supreme Court nominations of Bush II, and had Ted Cruz as a law clerk. I hope he's a credible source for you here. He has spoken and written elsewhere on this topic too.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
It appears that several people are willing to answer this question, far more eloquently than I can.
However, in the post that you were responding to, I was not referring to the threat that Trump poses, serious as it is. If Trump chooses to run again, I was referring to the threat posed to this nation by YOU, and all those like you- voters who place their economic well being (or so they think) over central questions of democracy.
massraider
Footballguy
9/11 Families Call on Trump to Cancel Saudi-Backed Golf Event
I might use this against Trump if I was DeSantis
I might use this against Trump if I was DeSantis
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
Those of us on the right who were sympathetic to this argument are updating our priors after watching how your side (collectively, but also you personally) responded to the Dobbs ruling. You can't really talk about packing the court, stripping the court of its jurisdiction, placing sanctions on various US states, and so on and then expect people to take you seriously when you play the "we must save our democracy" card. Come on now.
Rich Conway
Footballguy
This doesn't seem at all responsive to the post you quoted. I could be wrong, but I don't think timschochet advocated for either of the items I bolded above. As for "sanctions", timschochet certainly didn't advocate for the federal government to place sanctions on individual states. He encouraged individuals and corporations not to do business with states whose practices they find objectionable. That's perfectly legal and common, even if you personally don't care for it, and wildly different than literally attempting to overthrow the federal government (or supporting someone who attempted it). He also advocated for states/cities to stop spending money / doing business with other states, which is slightly closer to "sanctions", but still not the same thing. I suspect that such moves aren't particularly effective and likely have negative effects on the states/cities/locales enacting the boycotts, such that they aren't good policy, but they still aren't "sanctions".
timschochet
Footballguy
I’m not in favor of any of the things you listed. I MIGHT be in favor of corporate sanctions, at least in theory, but these would be voluntary like boycotts, never government imposed. Far from being a threat to democracy these types of measures are a fundamental part of our democracy. So once again I have to take issue with your interpretation.
But I am not in favor of packing the court or stripping the court of its jurisdiction (though I’m not even sure what that means.)
timschochet
Footballguy
massraider
Footballguy
https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1548749265765277699?s=20&t=ejdHT23uMorVdPo1gU9zRQ
Fox News with a 'random' sample of GOP voters.
Fox News with a 'random' sample of GOP voters.
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
You've argued elsewhere that you support your state -- California -- imposing sanctions on other states that adopt anti-abortion legislation. Did you change on that one?
timschochet
Footballguy
I think so yeah.
ETA but whether they do so or not, I really don’t believe it’s a reasonable comparison to what Trump attempted. I think it’s rather absurd of you to bring it up.
Last edited by a moderator:
Herb
Footballguy
Yes... and no. Rolling Stone the magazine failed miserably to properly vet a story it published that was made up by a writer allegedly trying to win romantic attention from another student at UVA. Journalistic failure for sure, but the magazine itself did not make it up. Distinction without a difference? Perhaps. But they did fully retract the story and paid a 7-figure settlement to the fraternity that was falsely accused, like any legitimate news organization would do after such a colossal screw-up.Maurile Tremblay said:
Godsbrother
Footballguy
massraider said:
The disappointing take from that is that most of them said they if Trump were the nominee, they would vote for him.
They just don't care about the fact that this guy did everything he could to cheat his way into overturning an American presidential election. It is crazy.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Its not all that surprising...as I have seen here and in my personal life...conservatives seem more apt to say they will not vote for a democrat no matter what than liberals the other way. We see it on this board where those of us seen as liberal have said we would easily vote for several Republicans (and many of us have for years).
I have no doubt that if he is the nominee...many will vote for him just from that...to keep any democrat out of office. Does not even matter the nominee from the Democrats.
Toby2ElectricBugaloo
Footballguy
IvanKaramazov said:
1. No Dem politician or national office is seriously proposing these things as far as I've seen, and even if they were there's very little support among the rank and file. Compare this to the GOP, where it's hard to find a politician who doesn't want to cause obvious and lasting harm to democracy by validating The Big Lie or undermining the investigations into January 6.
2. How exactly is stripping the court of jurisdiction or "packing it," (whatever that might mean to people) "undemocratic"? It's taking the power from the current slate of unelected officials with lifelong appointments and zero accountability to the public, and placing it back in the hands of the voters.
You might oppose these ideas, but they are not undemocratic. If anything they're the opposite.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
[icon]
Insoxicated
Okay.Gilroy34 said:
Let's say Biden and Kamara say tomorrow they are off the ticket.
Now explain why it's Patriotic to vote for Trump?
I'm not even a Liberal/Democrat... but you're coming off realllllly badly in here when you run away from questions like this. You pretend you're not... but deep down you, and everyone in here, knows you are.
timschochet
Footballguy
Of course I’m hoping you’re right but I won’t be convinced that you are until conservative voters actually reject Trump in the voting booth.
[icon]
Insoxicated
Toby2ElectricBugaloo
Footballguy
A lot of people here seem to have forgotten that Fox News was aggressively anti-Trump in late 2015 and early 2016. Remember when he attacked Megyn Kelly with some sort of crude menstruation joke? Good times! That was followed by this hilarious headline in January 2016:
Donald Trump, in Feud With Fox News, Shuns Debate
And on a related subject, who can forget the consistent and well-intentioned keepers of highbrow conservative thought at the National Review, who gave us this gem.
If Trump stays in the race and campaigns hard, he wins easily.
Donald Trump, in Feud With Fox News, Shuns Debate
And on a related subject, who can forget the consistent and well-intentioned keepers of highbrow conservative thought at the National Review, who gave us this gem.
If Trump stays in the race and campaigns hard, he wins easily.
Grace Under Pressure
Footballguy
Ok, I'll subscribe to this. You have a proven track record and are admittedly closer to the source. Thinking the whole country benefits if this is the case, so maybe I'm even slightly hopeful.
Stoneworker
Footballguy
So I guess until then we will unfortunately have to endure new lib-initiated Trump threads like this one...started every other week whenever they need cover for Biden's latest ineptitude.
The logic that is being left out of the conversation is that Trump only needs to win the general to be the gop candidate.
He's got what - a rock solid 33% of the gop base? It's not like Desantis is going to get the other 67% and game over. I expect trump, Christie, Desantis, Cruz, Hogan and others to carve up that 67%. Trumps 33% lead may be too much for any of those guys to overcome - and it may end up Trump.
He's got what - a rock solid 33% of the gop base? It's not like Desantis is going to get the other 67% and game over. I expect trump, Christie, Desantis, Cruz, Hogan and others to carve up that 67%. Trumps 33% lead may be too much for any of those guys to overcome - and it may end up Trump.
dkp993
Footballguy
From your lips to Gods ears. But my anecdotal experience runs counter to this. Almost everyone I know who if typically vote R, if it came down to it says they will still vote for him even if they despise it.
massraider
Footballguy
Stoneworker
Footballguy
Pray tell what actual news was contained in the OP that required a new thread...other than libs getting their Trump fix of course.
massraider
Footballguy
That's a conversation you can have with some other sucker. After 7 years of Trump defense in here, I personally think it's a bit quick for the entire "Every conservative has moved on from Trump, why won't the libs?" theme that I am picking up in this forum.
I am not going to defend posting about Trump in here because, first, well: LOL.
But 2nd, I completely get why every conservative wants him to not be a thing. Wanting isn't the same thing as it being so.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
Gotta hand it to the National Review. Their crystal ball was spot on. RE the bolded, seems Trump is the real RINO. I wonder why he ran as a Republican, his views seem more aligned with the Dems. Unless he was just being an opportunist.
[H]e is not deserving of conservative support in the caucuses and primaries. Trump is a philosophically unmoored political opportunist who would trash the broad conservative ideological consensus within the GOP in favor of a free-floating populism with strong-man overtones.
Trump’s political opinions have wobbled all over the lot. The real-estate mogul and reality-TV star has supported abortion, gun control, single-payer health care à la Canada, and punitive taxes on the wealthy.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
He never would have gotten the nomination - I think he saw his chance and took it.
Amused to Death
Footballguy
Yup, the real RINO. Ironic how everyone who doesn't kiss his ring is seen as "RINOs".
CletiusMaximus
Footballguy
It seems kind of obvious to me that most republican voters will vote for whichever candidate wins the party's nomination, whether the winner is their preferred candidate or not. That's pretty much how its suppose to happen and has always been the case - with the last election on the democrat side being a prime example. I would guess a significant percentage of Biden voters in '20 were not Biden supporters.
I've been predicting for a long time now that Trump will win the nomination and the election. Of course I'm not claiming any special knowledge - its just a guess and alot could happen in the next 2 years, but I'm going with it. I think there's a decent chance that by the next inauguration, Trump will be president and there will be a filibuster-proof GOP majority in congress.
dkp993
Footballguy
FairWarning
Footballguy
TBH, I can’t remember the last D presidential candidate that campaigned in my area. My parents went to see R candidates back to Reagan.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
For the folks who are knowledgeable in political history - has there ever been a candidate who ran for POTUS and won the nomination twice but lost the general and then ran a third time? If so, how often does that person not win the nomination the 3rd time? To me, Trump is like the GOP incumbent and it will be really hard for Desantis to unseat him.
Before he was leading in the primary polls, yes.
Also, Fox News and everybody else was anti-Trump for a while after the "Grab 'em by the [privates]" tape surfaced.
And once again, on January 6-7, 2021, Fox News and everybody else was anti-Trump for a little while.
But it never lasts. (At least so far.)
Last edited by a moderator:
FairWarning
Footballguy
Grover Cleveland won, lost, then won again in the late 1800’a. I don’t know about the popular vote.
Last edited by a moderator:
Similar threads
