What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Official Donald Trump for President thread (2 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.
There's not an election in the Union which can be won with 40%. Graham has won elections and is a US Senator.
Hey, Lincoln won in 1860 with only 39% of the vote! So all Trump needs is to replicate the conditions that led to Lincoln's victory....and, errrrr......

 
If this election cycle holds true, I don't think any state is a lock for any candidate.

The Dems are running such a divisive and unlikable candidate, that what should be a cakewalk against Trump, has now become a coin flip.

I agree with you on Michigan. It would be an uphill battle for Trump to win, but man, after Obama's little stunt yesterday in Flint, there are some angry Democrats there. Some of the interviews last night from Flint residents and their comments about Obama and "I need a glass of water" were scathing.

For Trump to win any percentage of the minority vote, he needs to hammer home the point that things are not getting better for them. Maybe some people are going back to work, but where are the jobs for African Americans in Michigan. Where are your opportunities in Pennsylvania? If he keeps this about jobs and the economy, he can make some hay--now if that will be enough, none of us can pretend to know.  
Michigan is going to be a massive undertaking for Trump given the demographics here. I just don't see how he can flip the minority votes to him and he will never win Michigan without significantly doing that. I don't think the economy is enough to overcome the minority unfavorables...and that doesn't even factor in the women vote. 

Whether it's true or not, blacks here (as a rule) don't believe Republicans care about them and pretty much never have. With Trump's 90% or so unfavorables in that group compared to Hillary's 13%, that mountain is steep (those were the last numbers I saw).

In my adult life (I'm in my mid 50s), Reagan is really the only Republican that stopped the Democrats here (and Bush 41 after Reagan), but he was wildly popular here across almost all demographics. That is where Trump will have problems and I don't think the economy can change the narrative because of the reasons minorities and women don't like him.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
When he gets in the oval office, someone will let him in on the fact that the national debt is meaningless.
What is his mentality and capability, that of a 5 year old?  What are you (a voter) to consider electing that, worse.

The only reason anyone would punch that ticket is to say "fcck you and everyone -- I hope the world burns".  Terrific.

 
What is his mentality and capability, that of a 5 year old?  What are you (a voter) to consider electing that, worse.

The only reason anyone would punch that ticket is to say "fcck you and everyone -- I hope the world burns".  Terrific.
Go get back in line with the establishment and get back to goose stepping, buddy.....

....while they keep pounding you in the ###.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Go get back in line with the establishment are get back to goose stepping, buddy.....

....while they keep pounding you in the ###.
Yes, you showed your mentality and capability.  With that answer you agreed with and confirmed everything I wrote.

Well played lod.  :thumbup: .

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Time to panic: Trump is about to receive national security briefings!:

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/about-those-intelligence-briefings-donald-trump

This opens the door to some interesting possibilities.

 
TPM’s Josh Marshall noted, for example, that Trump will be receiving classified CIA briefings while his campaign chief “works for pro-Putin Russian oligarchs.” Won’t that be interesting.
 
But we can keep going with related questions. What would Trump do, for example, if the CIA told him that his anti-Muslim rhetoric was creating a national security threat?
 
Or more broadly, has anyone started a pool as to when Trump might blurt out sensitive information he’s not supposed to share publicly?
 
Remember, senators – and to a lesser extent, governors – receive intelligence briefings with some regularity, but Trump has literally no background in public service. This will be a fascinating experiment.
 
 
Time to panic: Trump is about to receive national security briefings!:

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/about-those-intelligence-briefings-donald-trump

This opens the door to some interesting possibilities.
 
 
TPM’s Josh Marshall noted, for example, that Trump will be receiving classified CIA briefings while his campaign chief “works for pro-Putin Russian oligarchs.” Won’t that be interesting.
 
But we can keep going with related questions. What would Trump do, for example, if the CIA told him that his anti-Muslim rhetoric was creating a national security threat?
 
Or more broadly, has anyone started a pool as to when Trump might blurt out sensitive information he’s not supposed to share publicly?
 
Remember, senators – and to a lesser extent, governors – receive intelligence briefings with some regularity, but Trump has literally no background in public service. This will be a fascinating experiment.
 
The CIA and Secret Service are about to be all up in Trumps booty.  They will dig deep and hard into his backside.  They do it with congressional and gubernatorial would-be's as well. 

He has gotten this far and he has to become part of the bigger conversation. He has earned it. He will, however, have to take responsibility for what he says.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Any day now, I hear he's keeping his secret intel reports on an unsecured computer in his bathroom closet
The point is, the people who handle this stuff trust Hillary way more than they trust this buffoon. That's the difference between the reality and the anti-Clinton bubble. 

 
Republicans, including a billionaire Cuban, former presidents, conservatives from S Carolina, Texas who don't support Trump

The voice of an up and coming Cuban from Miami in Congress, Carlos Curbelo: "I have already said I will not support Mr. Trump, that is not a political decision that is a moral decision.” We already know that Puerto Ricans, Colombians and Mexicans in Florida won't support Trump in November, but if Cubans join the never-Trump crowd, Florida will difficult for Trump.      

 
Republicans, including a billionaire Cuban, former presidents, conservatives from S Carolina, Texas who don't support Trump

The voice of an up and coming Cuban from Miami in Congress, Carlos Curbelo: "I have already said I will not support Mr. Trump, that is not a political decision that is a moral decision.” We already know that Puerto Ricans, Colombians and Mexicans in Florida won't support Trump in November, but if Cubans join the never-Trump crowd, Florida will difficult for Trump.      
Women of all ethnicities can't stand him.  His problems run much deeper than Florida.  He's goona get crushed no matter what happens from now through November.

 
Has anyone suggested Hulk Hogan for VP?  He loves the blacks, has black friends and is definitely not racist.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Republicans, including a billionaire Cuban, former presidents, conservatives from S Carolina, Texas who don't support Trump

The voice of an up and coming Cuban from Miami in Congress, Carlos Curbelo: "I have already said I will not support Mr. Trump, that is not a political decision that is a moral decision.” We already know that Puerto Ricans, Colombians and Mexicans in Florida won't support Trump in November, but if Cubans join the never-Trump crowd, Florida will difficult for Trump.      
What a #####. 

 
Trump has to regret scamming those people out of a couple grand right now, looks like he will have to testify next year: LINK

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Graham and Romney probably will but Ryan didn't say he would never vote for Trump. He will support him eventually.
Ryan is laying down the foundation for his own ambitions of the presidency. He may eventually cave and give a non-enthusiastic vow to vote for Trump, but it will be stated that it's only for the overall good of the party. He doesn't want a future run hindered by someone bringing up that he was a Trump guy. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Honest question for Trump supporters with any money in any financial market - when you hear him say things like he said Thursday about his plans for negotiating with US bond holders as if they were the creditors of one of his bankrupt casinos, or blowing up our trade agreements, his deficit exploding tax and spend plans, etc. - is your thought:

a) He's just talking out of his ### and doesn't mean any of this stuff and I'm not concerned for my financial well-being

b) I care more about sending a message with my vote than my financial well-being

c) I will move to cash / get short if it actually looks like this may happen

 
Honest question for Trump supporters with any money in any financial market - when you hear him say things like he said Thursday about his plans for negotiating with US bond holders as if they were the creditors of one of his bankrupt casinos, or blowing up our trade agreements, his deficit exploding tax and spend plans, etc. - is your thought:

a) He's just talking out of his ### and doesn't mean any of this stuff and I'm not concerned for my financial well-being

b) I care more about sending a message with my vote than my financial well-being

c) I will move to cash / get short if it actually looks like this may happen
To anyone who wants to manage their personal finances, action item # 1is to reduce and get rid of debt.

 
Ryan is laying down the foundation for his own ambitions of the presidency. He may eventually cave and give a non-enthusiastic vow to vote for Trump, but it will be stated that it's only for the overall good of the party. He doesn't want a future run hindered by someone bringing up that he was a Trump guy. 
I think it's incorrect to think that Ryan's motivations here are tied to his own ambitions. I don't always agree with Paul Ryan, but I believe him to be honest, a patriot, and I'm betting he regards many of Trump's ideas as dangerous to America. Certainly Ryan's conservative principles as he has expressed them over the years are quite the opposite of Trump. 

 
I think it's incorrect to think that Ryan's motivations here are tied to his own ambitions. I don't always agree with Paul Ryan, but I believe him to be honest, a patriot, and I'm betting he regards many of Trump's ideas as dangerous to America. Certainly Ryan's conservative principles as he has expressed them over the years are quite the opposite of Trump. 
Of course this is about Ryan's own ambitions. He didn't show any conservative principles with the latest budget deal as well.

 
To anyone who wants to manage their personal finances, action item # 1is to reduce and get rid of debt.
I'm not sure what that means in this context.  Is that a pro-Trump statement with an assumption that he is the right person to reduce the national debt?  If so, what is his plan to do so?  Everything I've seen predicts everything he has said will do the exact opposite.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/03/07/donald-trumps-impossible-fiscal-plan/

http://fortune.com/2016/03/08/donald-trumps-tax-plan-primary/

 
Honest question for Trump supporters with any money in any financial market - when you hear him say things like he said Thursday about his plans for negotiating with US bond holders as if they were the creditors of one of his bankrupt casinos, or blowing up our trade agreements, his deficit exploding tax and spend plans, etc. - is your thought:

a) He's just talking out of his ### and doesn't mean any of this stuff and I'm not concerned for my financial well-being

b) I care more about sending a message with my vote than my financial well-being

c) I will move to cash / get short if it actually looks like this may happen
I care more about the well being of the country, than I do about my own personal finances.  I'll be fine.

Unfortunately the vast majority of the country doesn't do the same.  Wealthy people want to protect their wealth and other people want free handouts...it's the way it has always been and it is borderline pathetic.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it's incorrect to think that Ryan's motivations here are tied to his own ambitions. I don't always agree with Paul Ryan, but I believe him to be honest, a patriot, and I'm betting he regards many of Trump's ideas as dangerous to America. Certainly Ryan's conservative principles as he has expressed them over the years are quite the opposite of Trump. 
While that is true, Ryan had every right to run on his own if he wanted to push all of his own political beliefs. He would back a republican candidate even if he didn't have the exact same agenda. Ryan can't stand Trump on a personal level and is childish personal attacks. He made a lot of references to wanting to know how the party was going to be represented going forward. He knows that Trump is an embarrassment the Republican Party and to American politics in general. That's why he said he's not there yet. He knows that Trump isn't going to suddenly believe in all of Ryan's politics. But he's hoping he will grow up and at least represent the party and a decent way. Ryan does not want his name associated with Trump in the future in his own political endeavors.

 
Of course this is about Ryan's own ambitions. He didn't show any conservative principles with the latest budget deal as well.
Your comment reflects a belief which currently seems to be prevalent among the Republican base: that one can only prove one's principles by refusing to compromise with the other side in all circumstances. I think this attitude has been very damaging to this country in recent years. 

 
Your comment reflects a belief which currently seems to be prevalent among the Republican base: that one can only prove one's principles by refusing to compromise with the other side in all circumstances. I think this attitude has been very damaging to this country in recent years. 
My comment is that Ryan is doing this because of his ambitions to seek the presidency one day.

 
My comment is that Ryan is doing this because of his ambitions to seek the presidency one day.
I used to believe that but I think the 2012 election had a major impact on him. Just listening to him suggests he wants no part of it. That is just my gut feeling about it. I don't agree with Ryan politically but he seems like a decent patriotic person. I just don't see him wanting to be President. 

 
Ok the Liz Warren thing:

- on an unserious note, I find it odd that Donald never used the "@" in his flame tweets, he doesn't directl tweet "at" anyone he criticizes, perhaps to avoid flame wars, maybe to avoid actually getting the direct attention of the subjects of his attacks, but it seems to me big bad Twitter Donald isn't too interested in directly confronting people.

- On a serious note - here we have a progressive leader who has almost entirely stayed on the sidelines in the Dem primary, which is a feat. She clearly doesn't like Hillary and prefers Sanders. Disaffected Sanders progressives are supposedly a group which Donald himself is pursuing and they typically also like Warren. So what does he do? Why he attacks Warren who proceeds to finally get in the game and lash Donald. Again, dumb politics.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok the Liz Warren thing:

- on an unserious note, I find it odd that Donald never used the "@" in his flame tweets, he doesn't directl tweet "at" anyone he criticizes, perhaps to avoid flame wars, maybe to avoid actually getting the direct attention of the subjects of his attacks, but it seems to me big bad Twitter Donald isn't too interested in directly confronting people.

- On a serious note - here we have a progressive leader who has almost entirely stayed on the sidelines in the Dem primary, which is a feat. She clearly doesn't like Hillary and prefers Sanders. Disaffected Sanders progressives are supposedly a group which Donald himself is pursuing and they typically also like Warren. So what does he do? Why he attacks Warren who proceeds to finally get in the game and lash Donald. Again, dumb politics.
Speaking of Warren. If nothing else this will be the most entertaining general election we have seen:

Sopan Deb@SopanDeb 12h12 hours ago

In Eugene, Oregon, Trump called Elizabeth Warren a "goofus." Not a doofus. Goofus.
 
Speaking of Warren. If nothing else this will be the most entertaining general election we have seen:

Sopan Deb@SopanDeb 12h12 hours ago

In Eugene, Oregon, Trump called Elizabeth Warren a "goofus." Not a doofus. Goofus.
Great stuff, Donald is great, he's a funny eccentric character. If it was the tv show it pretends to be I'd be glued to the set.

This is every network tv sitcom and Hollywood screwball comedy, bumbling eccentric who finds himself blessed with scads of money lays waste to all the pompous squares and suits who stand in his way. It's Al Cervik and Jed Clampett, I'm buying this ticket. I'm laughing until someone tells me he will maybe be the leader of the free world.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Speaking of Warren. If nothing else this will be the most entertaining general election we have seen:

Sopan Deb@SopanDeb 12h12 hours ago

In Eugene, Oregon, Trump called Elizabeth Warren a "goofus." Not a doofus. Goofus.
The word "goofus" has been around since at least 1918. "doofus" did not start appearing until the '60s and was most likely a variant of "goofus".

Also, if you've ever spent time in a pediatrician's waiting room, then you must surely remember the adventures of Goofus And Gallant.

I'm sure Trump sees himself as Gallant. But if you go back and analyze some of the 1950s depictions of the Gallant character, you actually see hints of creepy sociopathic behavior in the way that Gallant seemingly manipulates people to get what he wants. Instead of striving to actually be more like Gallant, Trump simply decided to copy Gallant's behavior whenever it suited his desires.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok the Liz Warren thing:

- on an unserious note, I find it odd that Donald never used the "@" in his flame tweets, he doesn't directl tweet "at" anyone he criticizes, perhaps to avoid flame wars, maybe to avoid actually getting the direct attention of the subjects of his attacks, but it seems to me big bad Twitter Donald isn't too interested in directly confronting people.
That's always been his tweet style. Personally I believe it reflect his desire to have people following him and not the other person - but that may be giving him too much twitter credit.

But his confrontational approach should be pretty clear to even the most casual observer. In debates he's gone after his opponents, the moderators, even the audience. On the stump he's gone after individuals as well as entire groups of people. 

Looking forward to him going after Hillary full time  :popcorn:

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top