Jump to content

Donald Trump Appreciation Thread


Saints Web Official US election  

44 members have voted

  1. 1. Who would you vote for?

    • Biden
      36
    • Trump
      8


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, badgerx16 said:

Rudy Guliani, Trump's lawyer, on being caught up in the new Borat film; "This is an effort to blunt my relentless exposure of the criminality and depravity of Joe Biden and his entire family."

I don't think Sacha Baron Cohen is working undercover for the Democrats.

I met him once when he was in London at the same time as Bill Clinton. Absolute frickin w*nker. His staff hated him

Clinton was just out of office as the US President and Giuliani was just finished as NYC Mayor. Clinton stayed in a room at the Ritz and had a car and a modest two vehicle security detail. Giuliani was obsessed with outdoing him and took over an entire private hotel with 26 rooms and had a cavalcade of 14 cars with flying pennants and crests - more than serving President would have. Absolutely bizarre.     

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

Rudy Guliani, Trump's lawyer, on being caught up in the new Borat film; "This is an effort to blunt my relentless exposure of the criminality and depravity of Joe Biden and his entire family."

I don't think Sacha Baron Cohen is working undercover for the Democrats.

When it comes to anti-Trumpers you don't need to go undercover. #MeToobin

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Picard said:

 

If you say so Joe.

That's refreshing to hear that the Democrats admit that they have enabled voter fraud in their Presidential elections. No doubt we will soon see the evidence of it when evidence surfaces regarding interference in the record number of postal votes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anybody got the full video or transcript of what Biden said ? That is so obviously a slight verbal slip taken completely out of context, but the Internet has been so swamped with Trump social media bots and NRA loons that search engines just list out endless links to that clip.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Slight verbal slip....lol.

 

Thats what happens when you’re losing your marbles, you come out with inappropriate stuff, but true stuff that you’d have kept to yourself previously.The only verbal slip he made was admitting it, it didn’t come from nowhere.
 

The only thing I’d question about it  is his contention that it’s the greatest voter fraud operation in US history, The Mafia would probably argue that their JFK one was a lot better. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Has anybody got the full video or transcript of what Biden said ? That is so obviously a slight verbal slip taken completely out of context, but the Internet has been so swamped with Trump social media bots and NRA loons that search engines just list out endless links to that clip.

It's all one way traffic, isn't it? All against Biden, nothing against Trump at all. Nothing Trump says is taken out of context and broadcast by the media to his detriment, is it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

It's all one way traffic, isn't it? All against Biden, nothing against Trump at all. Nothing Trump says is taken out of context and broadcast by the media to his detriment, is it?

Did I say so ? I am interested in seeing the whole context, it's not as if I'm a swing voter open to influece by this sort of thing.

Edited by badgerx16
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:
 

The only thing I’d question about it  is his contention that it’s the greatest voter fraud operation in US history, The Mafia would probably argue that their JFK one was a lot better. 

You get your views on American history from watching the Irishman? Ffs
 

In all probability JFK was assassinated exactly because he was cracking down on corruption, the mob intimidation and corruption led by his brother Bobby as Attorney General. JFKs opponent Nixon was the proven liar, cheat and scumbag 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, buctootim said:
 

In all probability JFK was assassinated exactly because he was cracking down on corruption, the mob intimidation and corruption led by his brother Bobby as Attorney General. JFKs opponent Nixon was the proven liar, cheat and scumbag 

 

The is absolutely no doubt The Mafia rigged the election, try reading some books on the subject or researching testimony from Mafia affiliates. Fleet Cooper’s podcast Mafia is also a great source of information. IF, and it’s a fucking big if, the Mafia did kill hum (personally, I’m in the lone loon camp) it wasn’t because he cracked down on them, but because he betrayed them, by cracking down on them. His old man was their go to guy, and certain promises were broken. Tough shit, you’ll rightly point out, but that wasn’t the point. Neither was whether Nixon was a liar, or scumbag. The point was they rigged the election, and as Biden kindly pointed out they’re doing the same now (although god only knows why as theyre Winning a clean one hands down). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

 

The is absolutely no doubt The Mafia rigged the election, try reading some books on the subject or researching testimony from Mafia affiliates. Fleet Cooper’s podcast Mafia is also a great source of information. IF, and it’s a fucking big if, the Mafia did kill hum (personally, I’m in the lone loon camp) it wasn’t because he cracked down on them, but because he betrayed them, by cracking down on them. His old man was their go to guy, and certain promises were broken. Tough shit, you’ll rightly point out, but that wasn’t the point. Neither was whether Nixon was a liar, or scumbag. The point was they rigged the election, and as Biden kindly pointed out they’re doing the same now (although god only knows why as theyre Winning a clean one hands down). 

Meh. Kennedy won by 303 electoral college votes to Nixon's 219 and was a whisker away from winning California which would have made it 335 to 187. The only surprise in the election was that it was closer than the polls had predicted. JFK was consistently 2-4% ahead in the months before the election but in the end only won the popular vote by less than 0.5%.  

The only states where even a credible suggestion of possible irregularities exists are Illinois and West Virginia and they had only 27 and 8  electoral college votes respectively - not even close to being enough to change the result of the election. JFK won because appointing LBJ as his running mate meant he did much better in the Southern states. LBJ delivered his home state of Texas. Black votes were the other critical factor - the Civil Rights movement galvanised black Americans to vote, many for the first time, and they voted very largely for Kennedy.   

Not only is there no evidence of mob involvement, no-one is able to say how they could have delivered on rigging anyhow. Everybody voted in person then - you'd have to not only force people to vote but stand over them to see which box they crossed.

 

  

Edited by buctootim
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, buctootim said:

Not only is there no evidence of mob involvement, no-one is able to say how they could have delivered on rigging anyhow. Everybody voted in person then - you'd have to not only force people to vote but stand over them to see which box they crossed.

  

They're pretty good at making things (and people) 'disappear', maybe they had someone on the inside who tampered with the ballot boxes and made some votes disappear.

I doubt that would have been beyond the wit of man, especially in the 60's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Weston Super Saint said:

They're pretty good at making things (and people) 'disappear', maybe they had someone on the inside who tampered with the ballot boxes and made some votes disappear.

I doubt that would have been beyond the wit of man, especially in the 60's.

“Maybe they could have done it” Pretty low level of conclusive proof there. :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, aintforever said:

“Maybe they could have done it” Pretty low level of conclusive proof there. :lol:

I do apologise for not carrying out a full investigation 60 years ago!

Still, since it was in answer to a question asking how they "could have" done it, I wasn't expecting to have to provide absolute proof.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Weston Super Saint said:

I do apologise for not carrying out a full investigation 60 years ago!

Still, since it was in answer to a question asking how they "could have" done it, I wasn't expecting to have to provide absolute proof.

Not absolute proof but at least cite some incident of it happening in one location. Since the fraud was supposedly so widespread and since there were over 100,000 polling stations and since there has been over 50 years for the secret to leak out, I would have thought you might have something.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

I do apologise for not carrying out a full investigation 60 years ago!

Still, since it was in answer to a question asking how they "could have" done it, I wasn't expecting to have to provide absolute proof.

Fuck me, everyone knows how easy it is to prove what The Chicago mob did or didn’t do 60 years ago. Unless you have absolute proof, you’re not allowed to contradict a leftie. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Fuck me, everyone knows how easy it is to prove what The Chicago mob did or didn’t do 60 years ago. Unless you have absolute proof, you’re not allowed to contradict a leftie. 

Chicago may have actually happened - but it was the Mayor not the mob; it made no difference to the outcome of the election; and I didn't contradict you about that. Apart from that, carry on with conspiracy.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, buctootim said:

Not absolute proof but at least cite some incident of it happening in one location. Since the fraud was supposedly so widespread and since there were over 100,000 polling stations and since there has been over 50 years for the secret to leak out, I would have thought you might have something.    

How about election officials going to gaol, is that proof enough. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, buctootim said:

Chicago may have actually happened - but it was the Mayor not the mob; 

Lol. Daley couldn’t  take a shite without asking the mob.
 

What next, The Mob didn’t avoid taxes, it was Al Capone. 

Edited by Lord Duckhunter
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

How about election officials going to gaol, is that proof enough. 

Which part of Mayor and not the mob didn't you get? Yes the were some issues in Chicago with the mayor. The three officials were complicit with him. They were prosecuted, sent to jail and their actions made zero difference to JFK being elected. Nixon chose not to contest the result.  Sounds like the system working well to me.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, buctootim said:

Which part of Mayor and not the mob didn't you get? Yes the were some issues in Chicago with the mayor. The three officials were complicit with him. They were prosecuted, sent to jail and their actions made zero difference to JFK being elected. Nixon chose not to contest the result.  Sounds like the system working well to me.  

Lol. i think it’s you that doesn’t get “the mayor and not the mob”. I guess in your world Hoffa stole The Teamsters pension fund, not the mob. 
 

You seem to think that voter fraud is ok provided the wronged party doesn’t contest the result, interesting. You even think that it means the system is “working well”. 
 

A book by  Edmund Kallina looked at this and concluded “There’s no doubt that there was plenty of corruption within Chicago’s Democratic establishment”. He also looked at the papers of the time, stating “Over the last two weeks in that November the papers sometimes ran six to eight stories a day on the alleged  election fraud”, somewhat different than your claim that nobody brought it up.
 

Finally the question of Nixon not challenging the result. His theory was “Nixon probably didn’t  think he could change the election results. Instead, he may have figured that making a fuss about vote fraud would hurt the reputation of the Democrats in the longer term” (ironically). He then states “This position of Nixon’s was critical in aborting what might have turned into a much more serious assault on the validity of Kennedy’s victory.” 


So there you have it. A bloke who researched this & wrote a book about the very subject, or a bloke who doesn’t seem to think Mayor Daley was controlled by the mob. 

Edited by Lord Duckhunter
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Lol. i think it’s you that doesn’t get “the mayor and not the mob”. I guess in your world Hoffa stole The Teamsters pension fund, not the mob. 
 

You seem to think that voter fraud is ok provided the wronged party doesn’t contest the result, interesting. You even think that it means the system is “working well”. 
 

A book by  Edmund Kallina looked at this and concluded “There’s no doubt that there was plenty of corruption within Chicago’s Democratic establishment”. He also looked at the papers of the time, stating “Over the last two weeks in that November the papers sometimes ran six to eight stories a day on the alleged  election fraud”, somewhat different than your claim that nobody brought it up.
 

Finally the question of Nixon not challenging the result. His theory was “Nixon probably didn’t  think he could change the election results. Instead, he may have figured that making a fuss about vote fraud would hurt the reputation of the Democrats in the longer term” (ironically). He then states “This position of Nixon’s was critical in aborting what might have turned into a much more serious assault on the validity of Kennedy’s victory.” 


So there you have it. A bloke who researched this & wrote a book about the very subject, or a bloke who doesn’t seem to think Mayor Daley was controlled by the mob. 

It's desperate stuff. There were irregularities in one county in one state nearly 60 years ago which had no effect on the outcome - and on the basis of that you want to justify Trump's attempt to stay in power after losing the election.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, buctootim said:

It's desperate stuff. There were irregularities in one county in one state nearly 60 years ago which had no effect on the outcome - and on the basis of that you want to justify Trump's attempt to stay in power after losing the election.   

I didn’t even mention Trump. Just disagreed with Biden’s claim that they had the best ballot rigging operation in electoral history. Of course you jumped in with your size 10’s, and are now desperately back tracking. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, buctootim said:

So your idea of the best vote rigging operation in electoral history is one which tampered with voting in one county out of 3,100 and made no difference to who won. I guess my size 10s fit 

So you think Biden is running a bigger voter fraud operation than the Mafia did. Maybe you’re right. I guess we’ll see on  election night, although I doubt you’ll be so forthcoming about it then. I bet you change your tune again. 

Edited by Lord Duckhunter
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, buctootim said:

So your idea of the best vote rigging operation in electoral history is one which tampered with voting in one county out of 3,100 and made no difference to who won. I guess my size 10s fit 

Pretty effective if they only found evidence of tampering in one out of 3,100 counties ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're doing a Trump v Biden poll on LBC. Seems a sizeable proportion of people in this country would be prepared to gloss over Trump's shortcomings  (corrupt, racist, misogynist etc) and would vote for him if given the chance. Their main fear is the rise of the left. I suspect that this isn't necessarily a comment on the US more a backhanded reference closer to home.

Edited by Winnersaint
correction
Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Winnersaint said:

They're doing a Trump v Biden poll on LBC. Seems a sizeable proportion of people in this country would be prepared to gloss over Trump's shortcomings  (corrupt, racist, misogynist etc) and would vote for him if given the chance. Their main fear is the rise of the left. I suspect that this isn't necessarily a comment on the US more a backhanded reference closer to home.

Biden ? The left ? Do us a favour.

I appreciate that things are different in America compared with Europe but the view that Biden is a left winger is just weird. 

Edited by Tamesaint
Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, but the sentiment I was picking up seemed to be that having Kamala Harris as VP was somehow akin to a centre left Labour Party leader having Diane Abbott as deputy leader with the Corbynistas waiting in the wings. As you say weird. What Trump and the other populists, Johnson included have done, is normalised anti-left rhetoric, successfully demonising even centre-left views (relative to the country) and turned 'lefty' into a pejorative term (see it on here all the time from certain posters, references to pinkos, Lib Dumbs etc)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Winnersaint said:

Indeed, but the sentiment I was picking up seemed to be that having Kamala Harris as VP was somehow akin to a centre left Labour Party leader having Diane Abbott as deputy leader with the Corbynistas waiting in the wings. As you say weird. What Trump and the other populists, Johnson included have done, is normalised anti-left rhetoric, successfully demonising even centre-left views (relative to the country) and turned 'lefty' into a pejorative term (see it on here all the time from certain posters, references to pinkos, Lib Dumbs etc)

 

Harris would be centre ground politics in the UK, maybe a tad more Liberal than Tory left, but not much. Biden is to the right of her. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Kamala_Harris

Johnson's strategy is denigrate anybody who might check his progress from amusing buffoon to incompetent aspiring authoritarian. Blame them for when his policies and promises fail - the Judiciary, Parliament, opposition parties, the EU, 'covidiots', hungry kids.  

 

Edited by buctootim
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Winnersaint said:

Indeed, but the sentiment I was picking up seemed to be that having Kamala Harris as VP was somehow akin to a centre left Labour Party leader having Diane Abbott as deputy leader with the Corbynistas waiting in the wings. As you say weird. What Trump and the other populists, Johnson included have done, is normalised anti-left rhetoric, successfully demonising even centre-left views (relative to the country) and turned 'lefty' into a pejorative term (see it on here all the time from certain posters, references to pinkos, Lib Dumbs etc)

I agree, although they have borrowed it from the tabloids who used it through the 1980s against opponents of Maggie and then those in the Labour Party who opposed Kinnock’s reforms. Those were genuinely ‘lefties’ eg GLC and Livingstone, Militant, as were many of Corbyn’s followers. Applying that tag to Heseltine, Clarke, Hammond, Ashdown/Kennedy/Cable or even Starmer, let alone Major or Blair is just weird and demagogic blind following of populism. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, buctootim said:

 

Harris would be centre ground politics in the UK, maybe a tad more Liberal than Tory left, but not much. Biden is to the right of her. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Kamala_Harris

Johnson's strategy is denigrate anybody who might check his progress from amusing buffoon to incompetent aspiring authoritarian. Blame them for when his policies and promises fail - the Judiciary, Parliament, opposition parties, the EU, 'covidiots', hungry kids.  

 

The challenge Boris is in holding together a hugely diverse geographic, social and cultural consortium to keep power. Just a small demonstration is the research Matthew Sinclair commissioned in the lead up to the referendum to bottom out what range of views potential leave voters in target seats held. Amongst the findings were that an overwhelming majority wanted to see the railways and other key industries eg utilities back in public hands. Firmly ‘leftie’ territory. The other side of the equation is that many of the same respondents are culturally more conservative than many Tory MPs on a range of issues including law and order and Labour and the unions movement of travel was seen as going away from white working class issues. The 2019 election was definitely a ‘get Brexit done’ message but hard to keep the old Red Wall and former Thatcherite happy in one camp once basic trade agreement/no deal happens. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, saint1977 said:

The challenge Boris is in holding together a hugely diverse geographic, social and cultural consortium to keep power. Just a small demonstration is the research Matthew Sinclair commissioned in the lead up to the referendum to bottom out what range of views potential leave voters in target seats held. Amongst the findings were that an overwhelming majority wanted to see the railways and other key industries eg utilities back in public hands. Firmly ‘leftie’ territory. The other side of the equation is that many of the same respondents are culturally more conservative than many Tory MPs on a range of issues including law and order and Labour and the unions movement of travel was seen as going away from white working class issues. The 2019 election was definitely a ‘get Brexit done’ message but hard to keep the old Red Wall and former Thatcherite happy in one camp once basic trade agreement/no deal happens. 

I agree with that, the political landscape is much more complex than before. Left v right splits have to some extent been replaced by nationalist v internationalist. The problem is that nationalism is superficially very attractive electorally but mighty hard / impossible to deliver on without a huge economic hit.  It's bred this culture of lying to get elected and then lying about who is to blame when the unicorn promises fail to materialise.      

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, saint1977 said:

The challenge Boris is in holding together a hugely diverse geographic, social and cultural consortium to keep power. Just a small demonstration is the research Matthew Sinclair commissioned in the lead up to the referendum to bottom out what range of views potential leave voters in target seats held. Amongst the findings were that an overwhelming majority wanted to see the railways and other key industries eg utilities back in public hands. Firmly ‘leftie’ territory. The other side of the equation is that many of the same respondents are culturally more conservative than many Tory MPs on a range of issues including law and order and Labour and the unions movement of travel was seen as going away from white working class issues. The 2019 election was definitely a ‘get Brexit done’ message but hard to keep the old Red Wall and former Thatcherite happy in one camp once basic trade agreement/no deal happens. 

Traditional white labour heartlands have always been socially conservative & nationalistic, they just never voted Tory. Brexit gave them the reason to do so. 
 

You think Boris is holding together a delicate coalition, that’s exactly what labour will need to do if they’re going to win again. Without 50 odd sweaty seats to rely on, they’re going to have to win big in England and to do that they need to understand why they lost the working man. At the moment they still just want to keep telling those voters they voted the wrong way, rather than address their issues. Labour is seriously in danger of becoming a middle class, metropolitan party (if it hasn’t done so already). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Traditional white labour heartlands have always been socially conservative & nationalistic, they just never voted Tory. Brexit gave them the reason to do so. 
 

You think Boris is holding together a delicate coalition, that’s exactly what labour will need to do if they’re going to win again. Without 50 odd sweaty seats to rely on, they’re going to have to win big in England and to do that they need to understand why they lost the working man. At the moment they still just want to keep telling those voters they voted the wrong way, rather than address their issues. Labour is seriously in danger of becoming a middle class, metropolitan party (if it hasn’t done so already). 

I agree. I'd also question this nationalist/internationalist position in the light of the Brexit vote. In a narrow perspective, leaving the Federal EU was labeled as appealing to little Englanders, but the Brexiteer policy of wishing to expand our trade around the World and to accept immigration from anywhere subject to certain qualification provisos, rather flies in the face of the little Englander stance, and is more suggestive of an internationalist position. Arguably the remoaner position of wishing to continue suckling on the EU teat as a vassal colony is the little Englander position.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Traditional white labour heartlands have always been socially conservative & nationalistic, they just never voted Tory. Brexit gave them the reason to do so. 
 

You think Boris is holding together a delicate coalition, that’s exactly what labour will need to do if they’re going to win again. Without 50 odd sweaty seats to rely on, they’re going to have to win big in England and to do that they need to understand why they lost the working man. At the moment they still just want to keep telling those voters they voted the wrong way, rather than address their issues. Labour is seriously in danger of becoming a middle class, metropolitan party (if it hasn’t done so already). 

I do agree with much of that analysis - just a different balancing act on the axis - economic compromises vs social and cultural ones. I’m reading an interesting book at the moment by Steve Rayson on the fall of the red wall and how the Labour Party has left many white working class communities feeling up represented. 25% of the way through and very interesting so far

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Wes Tender said:

I agree. I'd also question this nationalist/internationalist position in the light of the Brexit vote. In a narrow perspective, leaving the Federal EU was labeled as appealing to little Englanders, but the Brexiteer policy of wishing to expand our trade around the World and to accept immigration from anywhere subject to certain qualification provisos, rather flies in the face of the little Englander stance, and is more suggestive of an internationalist position. Arguably the remoaner position of wishing to continue suckling on the EU teat as a vassal colony is the little Englander position.

Might take your comments seriously if you could avoid using insulting terms like 'remoaner' and 'Lib Dumbs'. Call it as it is, you are making a serious point and adding to the debate, but the fact you have to resort to downright rudeness and dismissiveness towards those who simply do not agree with you devalues your opinion.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Winnersaint said:

Might take your comments seriously if you could avoid using insulting terms like 'remoaner' and 'Lib Dumbs'. Call it as it is, you are making a serious point and adding to the debate, but the fact you have to resort to downright rudeness and dismissiveness towards those who simply do not agree with you devalues your opinion.

 

Speaking as a muddle-headed, lefty, remoaner, 'pony' spouting, traitor, you get used to it !

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a question for those who dislike Trump. As the Trump presidency likely draws to a close, do you think there have been any positives about his presidency? I'd have to say that one major positive is shunning any extra wars. There were dire predictions about nuclear war and he's done pretty well on that score. I'd be interested to hear from those who really dislike him, is there any policy or political move that you agree with or that you think has been positive? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Here's a question for those who dislike Trump. As the Trump presidency likely draws to a close, do you think there have been any positives about his presidency? I'd have to say that one major positive is shunning any extra wars. There were dire predictions about nuclear war and he's done pretty well on that score. I'd be interested to hear from those who really dislike him, is there any policy or political move that you agree with or that you think has been positive? 

If I was going to give him credit for anything, it'd be tearing up the Iran nuclear deal. I don't think such a fanatical, totalitarian regime which does nothing but destabilise the region should be legitimised in any way and despite their protestations, I doubt the Iranians were paying it anything other than lip service.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Wes Tender said:

I agree. I'd also question this nationalist/internationalist position in the light of the Brexit vote. In a narrow perspective, leaving the Federal EU was labeled as appealing to little Englanders, but the Brexiteer policy of wishing to expand our trade around the World and to accept immigration from anywhere subject to certain qualification provisos, rather flies in the face of the little Englander stance, and is more suggestive of an internationalist position. Arguably the remoaner position of wishing to continue suckling on the EU teat as a vassal colony is the little Englander position.

we understand your zeal for Brexit but read the thread title.

what do you think of Trump?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

Here's a question for those who dislike Trump. As the Trump presidency likely draws to a close, do you think there have been any positives about his presidency? I'd have to say that one major positive is shunning any extra wars. There were dire predictions about nuclear war and he's done pretty well on that score. I'd be interested to hear from those who really dislike him, is there any policy or political move that you agree with or that you think has been positive? 

He got a big wall built and made Mexico pay for it.

He stopped the caravan of ISIS assassins braking through from Guatemala

He rejuvenated the coal industry  

trampled over Cheeena with his unsurpassed ability to make a trade deal.

Showed masterful leadership on Coronavirus uniting the country

Put Putin in his place and showed what a super tough leader he is. No wonder all the tough guy rednecks worship him he’s so strong and brave.

Did make me smile threatening N Korea though.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

If I was going to give him credit for anything, it'd be tearing up the Iran nuclear deal. I don't think such a fanatical, totalitarian regime which does nothing but destabilise the region should be legitimised in any way and despite their protestations, I doubt the Iranians were paying it anything other than lip service.

Interesting. I'm the opposite. The merits of the deal are academic. It was a deal that the USA and others entered into freely with Iran who honoured the deal. 

His arrogance was unbelievable, and created much more instability than the deal itself. 

Iran (like North Korea) would not use a nuke in anger. They'd be blown off the face if the earth if they did. Its understandable that they want the deterrent of a nuke. 

Edited by egg
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, whelk said:

He got a big wall built and made Mexico pay for it.

He stopped the caravan of ISIS assassins braking through from Guatemala

He rejuvenated the coal industry  

trampled over Cheeena with his unsurpassed ability to make a trade deal.

Showed masterful leadership on Coronavirus uniting the country

Put Putin in his place and showed what a super tough leader he is. No wonder all the tough guy rednecks worship him he’s so strong and brave.

Did make me smile threatening N Korea though.

 

 

 

 

 

Still interested to hear if you think he did anything that you thought was positive. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, sadoldgit said:

Apparently Donald Trump has a wife too.

This has gone right over your head, soggy. Kamala Harris has a husband, not a wife. It was just another incident demonstrating that Biden is fast approaching senility.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})