ex-President Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at low-info Boomers like my religions aunts. I have two questions:
a) Is anyone here who supports Trump bothered by lies like this?
b) Does anyone know what he's even talking about here? Like is there some grain of truth that he's embellishing on bigly?
Incorrect once again. There was a legal process whereby objections to election results could be heard and voted on. That would involve a delay in certification.
I'm way smarter than Mike Pence by the way, and you for that matter.
You very well could be much much smarter than pence. Doesn’t mean you’re right
We are discussing JRE comment that Russia Trump stuff was made up. I thought a bunch of trump guys went to jail over it like manafort and papadapalous?
The deficit shrunk from Obama's first year as president to his last year. You can't just pretend the opposite when these numbers are freely available:
https://www.thebalancemoney.com/deficit-...
FY 2016: $585 billion
FY 2015: $442 billion
FY 2014: $485 billion
FY 2013: $680 billion
FY 2012: $1.077 trillion
FY 2011: $1.300 trillion
FY 2010: $1.5 trillion.
FY 2009: $1.16 trillion.
Of course they can pretend. That’s all they do. I don’t mean that facetiously. Look at what this dude thinks. It’s literally just made up. Check his posts in a year , he will still tell people Obama increased the debt each year
How can you claim this with a straight face?
The left wasn't even in favour of homosexual marriage 20 years ago ffs.
It was a group of Republican appointed judges that first began to strike down anti gay marriage laws. Learn your history.
And both parties have factions that want the govt to mind its own ****ing business and not have any say in what happens in a bedroom of two consenting adults.
So the fake elector ploy and Pence recognizing them, which Trump wanted to do was illegal? Glad you’re slowly figuring things out.
Sheesh, you can't be that thick surely. Either that or you are being deliberately obtuse. Once again I am not talking about fake electors.
There's no point continuing the conversation if you don't understand what's being discussed.
It's tough to keep track of Ll the lies in order to make your "story" plausible, right Blowie?
Sheesh, you can't be that thick surely. Either that or you are being deliberately obtuse. Once again I am not talking about fake electors.
There's no point continuing the conversation if you don't understand what's being discussed.
I just wanted to see if you would admit anything was illegal. The delay itself was illegal and Eastman, who came up with it, admitted in emails it was illegal
Again, Eastman is as dumb as Pence and he was able to see this. Things aren’t looking good for your claim.
And to give his life as a ransom for many.
He is no fool who gives away what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot lose.
There’s profound stuff in the Koran, Iliad and Bhagavad Gita also. The conclusion most people draw is humans are capable of writing down profound ideas. If you want to claim the Bible is special, go ahead.
I can dig it. I'm down for wherever it's found, the profound.
Pro fundus means before the bottom... like before, regarding the the bottom of an issue. Got to the bottom of it? lol
That goes for all the righties in the forum, too, just generally.
Spoiler
And try weed
Try a fast lmao I need to. Do something challenging
"Famously, he laid down perhaps his most famous composition, For the Love of God, while on the fourth day of a 10-day fast. "
https://www.guitarplayer.com/news/steve-...
Because it was all about trying to persuade Pence to legally delay the certification until voting irregularities were sorted out, via peacefully protesting outside the capitol. Hence "stop the steal". Trump didn't tell them to go inside. So, to say he instigated an insurrection is just ridiculous nonsense.
Was Pence supposed to be able to hear them through the capitol walls?
Of course they can pretend. That’s all they do. I don’t mean that facetiously. Look at what this dude thinks. It’s literally just made up. Check his posts in a year , he will still tell people Obama increased the debt each year
It's disingenuous, but the Bolded is true. Any year with a deficit increases the debt. They're saying two different things.
can we try to limit this to one reaction gif per user per day in the thread?
thanks
I said deficit, not debt. But anyway, yes, the only president to have had a surplus in my lifetime was a Democrat. Each Republican moved further from a surplus than they started.
The US economy is a battleship and can’t turn on a dime. Acting like a President can change policy that will take immediately effect and will stop right when his term is over is complete nonsense.
One of the best examples of this in our lifetimes was Clinton’s policy that pressured banks into loosening lending standards. Everyone knew that there was a 0% chance this could cause a bubble in the housing market and have it pop within 12 months of passing. However, it was fairly easy to see that this would lead to an increase in demand for housing and there was a lot of potential for a bubble to burst many years down the road - which of course we saw in 2008. It sounds like you think we should give Clinton credit for increasing the amount of people who owned homes during his years a President but he shouldn’t be blamed for the bubble bursting in 2008 that he caused because he wasn’t the president at the time.
Another great example is tax cuts/increases. Anyone that evaluates how a tax cut/increase will affect an economy for only the next 2 or 5 years should be completely ignored.
The US economy is a battleship and can’t turn on a dime. Acting like a President can change policy that will immediately effect only the 4 or 8 years he’s President is complete nonsense.
One of the best examples of this in our lifetimes was Clinton’s policy that pressured banks into loosening lending standards. Everyone knew that there was a 0% chance this could cause a bubble in the housing market and have it pop within 12 months of passin
So when there's a republican president, we should give him credit, and when there is a democratic president, we should give the next succeeding republican president credit. Got it.
So when there's a republican president, we should give him credit, and when there is a democratic president, we should give the next succeeding republican president credit. Got it.
No, please read my post. Specifically where I said we don’t feel all of the effects of a presidents policies immediately and they don’t stop when he leaves office. Judging a presidents economic policy by how the economy performs during his term is incredible stupid.
