Jump to content

Donald Trump 2020

Francisco 2.0

By Francisco 2.0
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

RomaVicta

RomaVicta 29907

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

He's got nothing else. Biden has absolutely in the past and during last night's debate stated he supports law enforcement. He stated he doesn't want to defund the police but give them more money. 

Trump is making things up per usual. 

It got lost in the flood of sewage, but Trump both condemned Biden for his too-tough crime bill then shouted Biden was too soft on crime. All in the same utterance. 

Quote

TRUMP: You did a crime bill, 1994, when you call them super predators, African-Americans, super predators, and they've never forgotten it. They've never forgotten it, Joe.

BIDEN: I never sir...

WALLACE: No, sir; it's his two minutes.

TRUMP: So you did that and they called you a super predator and I'm letting people out of jail now that you have treated the African-American population, community, you have treated the black community about as bad as anybody in this country. You did the -- and that's why if you look at the polls, I'm doing better than any Republican has done in a long time because they saw what you did.

You call them super predators and you've called them worse than that because you look back at your testimony over the years, you've called them a lot worse than that. As far as the church is concerned and as far as the generals are concerned, we just got the support of 250 military leaders and generals, total support. Law enforcement, almost every law enforcement group in the United States. I have Florida, I have Texas, I have Ohio, I have everybody.

Excuse me, Portland, the sheriff just came out today and he said I support President Trump. I don't think you have any law enforcement. You can't even say the word law enforcement because if you say those words, you're going to lose all of your radical left supporters. And why aren't you saying those words, Joe? Why don't you say the words law enforcement?

Because you know what, if they called us in Portland, we would put out that fire in half an hour but they won't do it because they're run by radical left Democrats. If you look at Chicago, if you look at every place you want to look, Seattle. They heard we were coming in the following day and they put up their hands and we got back Seattle. Minneapolis, we got it back, Joe, because we believe in law and order but you don't.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 43.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mrs Whiggins

    1391

  • Biff Tannen

    1374

  • 4th&Five

    1222

  • WhatTheBuck

    910

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Thatguy
Thatguy

Let me be candid and honest here my man. I cannot be sympathetic to your comments because this is how adult life has always been. From the moment I stepped out of my home and headed off to college I h

Francisco 2.0
Francisco 2.0
henrygandorf
henrygandorf

it won't matter if his taxes ever come out.  it won't matter if his taxes don't ever come out.  you wanna know why?  because we already know what's in them. since early 2017 when people starting

Posted Images

Prepuce of Doom

Prepuce of Doom 21073

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, StassneyHorn said:

Some of you guys need to light your parents up with some real talk.

I propose that all you people with shitty delusional relatives form a pool where you each take responsibility for talking sense into someone else's family members.

That way there's no permanent baggage, resentment, etc., but the poobutts still get their cages rattled. 

Think of it like a sort of Strangers on a Train arrangement, but different - Shitheads on a Website. How great would it be to have a randomly selected Shaggot badger your stubborn relatives about their foolish political beliefs? 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29191

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

It got lost in the flood of sewage, but Trump both condemned Biden for his too-tough crime bill then shouted Biden was too soft on crime. All in the same utterance. 

i also noticed about 10 minutes in, trump said if biden was in charge of covid, he wouldn't have done anything and 2 million+ would've died.  then a few minutes later, he said that biden wanted to shut down the whole country.  i guess if you take both sides, you can never be wrong.  you just sound like a fucking idiot.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Royalfan5

Royalfan5 2354

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

Why is there so much focus on the music he uses?  Although I do like it because the bands generally get pissed and ban him from using their art to promote his hate agenda. 

Because it hard to be so consistently tone deaf with choices on his level

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Under a Bad Sign

Horn Under a Bad Sign 20400

Posted
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Mo Horn said:

If you don't vote for me, I won't call you great again. Oh, the horrors. I'm changing my vote immediately. 



One wonders whether the collective psyche of Minnesota will be shattered if Trump never calls them great again.  The psychic toll could be enormous.

Edited by Horn Under a Bad Sign
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27668

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Why is there so much focus on the music he uses?  Although I do like it because the bands generally get pissed and ban him from using their art to promote his hate agenda. 

Because he has been getting cease and desist letter pretty frequently after he uses a song

Link to comment
Share on other sites
troph

troph 24798

Posted
Posted
Interestingly enough, my old man was a lifelong republican who soured on the party during George W's reign. He thought W was a complete fucking moron and  could not  stand that stupid sob, used to rant about him and what the republican party had become constantly in his last few months. He passed away on hospice care at home the evening of Nov 4 which was election night for Obama's 1st term. He went downhill fast in the last 48 hours, so he wasnt "with us" but he passed away with the TV on in the background, its like he just wanted to see Obama make it.
It was surreal sitting there with my immediate family around my dad watching the election results come in as he passed away. Will be hard to forget that evening.  Looking back on it, if he thought W was a fucking dipshit, the entire concept of Trump would have probably killed him months earlier from an aneurysm.

This is a great story about how age should bring priceless wisdom. I hope to have this kind of mental acuity and flexibility when I’m old. That’s a memory you have that you should cherish. It would make me proud to call him dad.

Mine is a one man echo chamber of fake news Trump sound bites. Pretty sure he’s teetering on the precipice of the Q rabbit hole if he’s not already slidden down it. Doesn’t matter, I have no interest in putting up with that garbage.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13512

Posted
Posted

I want to know why every time trump or his spokespeople say that he will release his taxes when his audit is over, no one ever pushes back that the audit means nothing in the discussion.  The audit does not create some magical situation where the irs is preventing you from acting.

There is also something very suspicious that the audit is from 2010. My guess is that there is an agreement that the audit won’t move forward until he isn’t president. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13050

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, troph said:


This is a great story about how age should bring priceless wisdom. I hope to have this kind of mental acuity and flexibility when I’m old. That’s a memory you have that you should cherish. It would make me proud to call him dad.

Mine is a one man echo chamber of fake news Trump sound bites. Pretty sure he’s teetering on the precipice of the Q rabbit hole if he’s not already slidden down it. Doesn’t matter, I have no interest in putting up with that garbage.

It's hard, I mean really hard. I miss my parents, and my in-laws too. All of them, save my mother, passed away prior to the 2016 election so I can't say for sure how it would have gone but I can see how the elderly can get 'fear' radicalized via television and the internet. Seems that it is a little less likely with print media--but a lot of the older folks have gotten, not what I would call savvy, but at least able to use electronic media enough to abandon the print. --which is a shame, I love reading a paper in the morning. Especially since our local paper has an op-ed by that hack Marc Thiessen every week. So satisfying to dump coffee grounds on his face.

The obstacle for me (and my spouse) was distance. That social media/tv is there all the time, a constant companion whispering in their ear, sending them alerts on their phone, tweeting them or targeting them on Facebook. You could see that with my in laws back when the email chains would come and come and come. You all know the FW:FW jokes. And for adult children living where the closest relative is over 8 hours away it's a challenge to combat the isolation bubble and loneliness that older parents live in. After my dad passed and my mom was staying for a visit, her phone kept going off with alerts from her local tv station. Almost every one was crime-related and I started noticing how she would fret. So, we talked about changing the habit/phone so that instead of her receiving a notification, she would just check her phone in the morning like you would read the newspaper at breakfast. And then I began covert operations. Sounds sneaky, but I hated the thought of her feeling so afraid and isolated and vulnerable even though the chances of her being a crime victim were low. An elder scam, maybe, but a gas station robbery twenty miles away from her neighborhood less so.

We were already texting/talking almost daily anyway, we had for years; but I began 'happy distractions'-- finding twitter accounts with videos of positive things that were in her interests. She loved the animal cams that the National Zoo has, the videos that "Tasty' has, the Great British Bake-Off, things like that. And my mom liked a good challenge, thus I began to notice she was spending more and more time searching for things to send in return or actually trying some of the recipes. This was especially fortunate as her health began to keep her inside more. It kept the conversation going and her spirit a little lighter. The kids helped too--they could find the most hilarious stuff. I imagine we were fortunate. Not every family is going to mend the scars, but I have hope that families can find some kind of workable peace or create relationships outside of family to get them through this.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Snake Diggity

Snake Diggity 4624

Posted
Posted (edited)

Most encouraging thing over the last 72 hours is Trumps more frequent acknowledgement of the possibility that he might lose.  The “y’all are gonna miss me” tweet, the “if we lose I won’t call you great” rally cry.  Great sign.  IF (big IF) he plans to allow the election to be fair and is willing to leave without finishing destroying the country on his way out, I think we will see more and more of this rhetoric.  He may even pivot to hyping his post president plans (news network, etc) while he still has the limelight.

Edited by Snake Diggity
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mrs Whiggins

Mrs Whiggins 13050

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Snake Diggity said:

Most encouraging thing over the last 72 hours is Trumps more frequent acknowledgement of the possibility that he might lose.  The “y’all are gonna miss me” tweet, the “if we lose I won’t call you great” rally cry.  Great sign.  IF (big IF) he plans to allow the election to be fair and is willing to leave without finishing destroying the country on his way out, I think we will see more and more of this rhetoric.  He may even pivot to hyping his post president plans (news network, etc) while he still has the limelight.

Yeah, no, I don't share that optimism anymore. He's priming the pump for the "If you don't vote for me, I'm unleashing the hounds of hell upon you." aka the militias and their play pals. That isn't for his base as much as the warning that the chaos that he's going to unleash will have all of America wanting that Law and Order he screams about all the time. I mean, Biden wins and antifa is out of a job in a sense(since the fascist lost) but none of that matters because QAnon and the hardcore supporters that WANT violence will bring it. The police will stand back and stand down and Trump will lob tweets from the cheap seats as the days between Nov. 3 and January 21 pass. He has planned for this. This is their plan. Barr supports it, as does every other person in that Administration and the GOP.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13512

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, seven said:

Trump pushing the "we won't know the election results for MONTHS" screams to me that they are going to go to court over literally every vote. 

I don't know why Trump thinks that an extended period to verify the votes somehow allows him to stay in office. I don't recall the Constitution stating that the tie goes to the runner (incumbent.)

On a side note, I think there will be enough pressure this week for Trump to condemn white supremacists, that he will. However I think he will only condemn the idea and not any particular group. I would even guess that most white supremacists don't consider themselves as such so they won't take offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 29354

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't know why Trump thinks that an extended period to verify the votes somehow allows him to stay in office. I don't recall the Constitution stating that the tie goes to the runner (incumbent.)

On a side note, I think there will be enough pressure this week for Trump to condemn white supremacists, that he will. However I think he will only condemn the idea and not any particular group. I would even guess that most white supremacists don't consider themselves as such so they won't take offense.

Naw. He pretty explicitly said at his rally last night that minorities are destroying suburbs. He's going to ratchet up the racism, not pull it back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Neonmoon

Neonmoon 38129

Posted
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, seven said:

Trump pushing the "we won't know the election results for MONTHS" screams to me that they are going to go to court over literally every vote. 

He literally said during the debate he will challenge the mail-in ballots in court. And that's why he needs to fill the supreme court seat. He says the bad parts out loud. 

He is hurrying to fill the seat so they can decide in favor of him in this election. We live in Russia.

The question is what will the courts decide? What is the process? Does he need to prove injury? Does he need to prove fraud? If the FBI director says there has never been widespread voter fraud in the history of the United States, and no, 6 ballots found in the trash does not count as voter fraud, does he even have standing to challenge them? Would it go to the state courts first? Can they shut down the bullshit challenge somehow? 

The surly laywer mafia would have to weigh in on the steps this will go through 

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/11/what-if-trump-refuses-concede/616424/

This article details it a bit. 

Quote

Election lawyers speak of a “margin of litigation” in close races. The tighter the count in early reports, and the more votes remaining to count, the greater the incentive to fight in court. If there were such a thing as an Election Administrator’s Prayer, as some of them say only half in jest, it would go, “Lord, let there be a landslide.”

Could a landslide spare us conflict in the Interregnum? In theory, yes. But the odds are not promising.

It is hard to imagine a Trump lead so immense on Election Night that it places him out of Biden’s reach. Unless the swing states manage to count most of their mail-in ballots that night, which will be all but impossible for some of them, the expectation of a blue shift will keep Biden fighting on. A really big Biden lead on Election Night, on the other hand, could leave Trump without plausible hope of catching up. If this happens, we may see it first in Florida. But this scenario is awfully optimistic for Biden, considering the GOP advantage among in-person voters, and in any case Trump will not concede defeat. This early in the Interregnum, he will have practical options to keep the contest alive.

Both parties are bracing for a torrent of emergency motions in state and federal courts. They have already been skirmishing from courthouse to courthouse all year in more than 40 states, and Election Day will begin a culminating phase of legal combat.

Mail-in ballots will have plenty of flaws for the Trump lawyers to seize upon. Voting by mail is more complicated than voting in person, and technical errors are common­place at each step. If voters supply a new address, or if they write a different version of their name (for example, by shortening Benjamin to Ben), or if their signature has changed over the years, or if they print their name on the signature line, or if they fail to seal the ballot inside an inner security envelope, their votes may not count. With in-person voting, a poll worker in the precinct can resolve small errors like these, for instance by directing a voter to the correct signature line, but people voting by mail may have no opportunity to address them.

During the primaries this spring, Republican lawyers did dry runs for the November vote at county election offices around the country. An internal memo prepared by an attorney named J. Matthew Wolfe for the Pennsylvania Republican Party in June reported on one such exercise. Wolfe, along with another Republican lawyer and a member of the Trump campaign, watched closely but did not intervene as election commissioners in Philadelphia canvassed mail-in and provisional votes. Wolfe cataloged imperfections, taking note of objections that his party could have raised.

There were missing signatures and partial signatures and signatures placed in the wrong spot. There were names on the inner security envelopes, which are supposed to be unmarked, and ballots without security envelopes at all. Some envelopes arrived “without a postmark or with an illegible postmark,” Wolfe wrote. (Watch for postmarks to become the hanging chads of 2020.) Some voters wrote their birthdate where a signature date belonged, and others put down “an impossible date, like a date after the primary election.”

Some of the commissioners’ decisions “were clear violations of the direction in and language of the election code,” Wolfe wrote. He recommended that “someone connected with the party review each application and each mail ballot envelope” in November. That is exactly the plan.

Legal teams on both sides are planning for simultaneous litigation, on the scale of Florida during the 2000 election, in multiple battleground states. “My money would be on Texas, Georgia, and Florida” to be trouble spots, Myrna Pérez, the director of voting rights and elections at the Brennan Center, told me.

There are endless happenstances in any election for lawyers to exploit. In Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, not far from Wolfe’s Philadelphia experiment, the county Republican committee gathered surveillance-style photographs of purportedly suspicious goings-on at a ballot drop box during the primary. In one sequence, a county employee is described as placing “unsecured ballots” in the trunk of a car. In another, a security guard is said to be “disconnecting the generator which supplies power to the security cameras.” The photos could mean anything—­it’s impossible to tell, out of context—but they are exactly the kind of ersatz evidence that is sure to go viral in the early days of the Interregnum.

Quote

The interregnum allots 35 days for the count and its attendant lawsuits to be resolved. On the 36th day, December 8, an important deadline arrives.

At this stage, the actual tabulation of the vote becomes less salient to the outcome. That sounds as though it can’t be right, but it is: The combatants, especially Trump, will now shift their attention to the appointment of presidential electors.

December 8 is known as the “safe harbor” deadline for appointing the 538 men and women who make up the Electoral College. The electors do not meet until six days later, December 14, but each state must appoint them by the safe-harbor date to guarantee that Congress will accept their credentials. The controlling statute says that if “any controversy or contest” remains after that, then Congress will decide which electors, if any, may cast the state’s ballots for president.

We are accustomed to choosing electors by popular vote, but nothing in the Constitution says it has to be that way. Article II provides that each state shall appoint electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.” Since the late 19th century, every state has ceded the decision to its voters. Even so, the Supreme Court affirmed in Bush v. Gore that a state “can take back the power to appoint electors.” How and when a state might do so has not been tested for well over a century.

 

Edited by Neonmoon
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HornOnTheBayou

HornOnTheBayou 8922

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

On a side note, I think there will be enough pressure this week for Trump to condemn white supremacists, that he will. However I think he will only condemn the idea and not any particular group. I would even guess that most white supremacists don't consider themselves as such so they won't take offense.

He'll condemn the way he always does when he's backed into a corner. "Everyone wants me to condemn white supremacists. 'Condemn white supremacists' they say. 'Why won't Trump condemn white sumpremacists'? Fine, I'll do it. I'll condemn white supremacists. There, I did it. Is everyone happy? Now we need to talk about the real threat to America, antifa and soup cans."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27562

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

I tried using the search feature because I thought Brad had his own thread, but I must say, can't wait to see if anything develops out of this:

 

Looks like Brad has a pretty good chance of completing that suicide after all

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
shakahorn

shakahorn 1645

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Why is there so much focus on the music he uses?  Although I do like it because the bands generally get pissed and ban him from using their art to promote his hate agenda. 

The focus this time is because "Macho Man" was recorded by one of the first openly gay bands, led by a Black man.  To say this runs counter to the 'values' of his base would be the understatement of the year.

The only other song that's gotten significant attention is "Fortunate Son" by Creedence. The antagonist in that song is a...fortunate son. 

It's as if his folks don't do any research or listen to any of the songs before playing them.  Shocking, I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sawbonz

Sawbonz 27562

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Why is there so much focus on the music he uses?  Although I do like it because the bands generally get pissed and ban him from using their art to promote his hate agenda. 

Well he did play “fortunate son” at a rally. Wtf did he just see the title and say wow that’s me let’s play that

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tokamak

tokamak 6430

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, troph said:


This is a great story about how age should bring priceless wisdom. I hope to have this kind of mental acuity and flexibility when I’m old. That’s a memory you have that you should cherish. It would make me proud to call him dad.

Mine is a one man echo chamber of fake news Trump sound bites. Pretty sure he’s teetering on the precipice of the Q rabbit hole if he’s not already slidden down it. Doesn’t matter, I have no interest in putting up with that garbage.

My in-laws are lifelong Republicans, mainly because they're rich as fuck. They cannot stand the idea that one penny of their tax dollars might go toward helping someone else out. If you press them, they'll pretty much admit that they don't give a fuck about culture war issues. They're racists, but more in a "those kind of people tend to be lazy" type way than an overt "we must protect White heritage!!" way. They're what used to be called Country Club Republicans. For the life of me, I can't figure out what they stand to gain from a Donald Trump presidency.

Their only sources of information about the world are Fox News and stuff that they see in emails from their friends and on Facebook. Therefore, DT can do no wrong in their minds. Any mainstream information source like the NYT or network news is laughably biased and not worthy of the slightest attention.

It's sad to watch because my wife has trouble even talking with them right now. For example, last Sunday she was talking to them on the phone and they asked what we were up to. Oh, not much, just watching the Cowboys game. "WELL WE DON'T WATCH THE NFL ANYMORE!". Keep in mind that these are people that loved the Cowboys and had season tickets for years. You can't even have a simple, innocuous conversation with them without it turning into an airing of perceived grievances. It's incredibly tiresome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SydneyCarton

SydneyCarton 48106

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, tokamak said:

My in-laws are lifelong Republicans, mainly because they're rich as fuck. They cannot stand the idea that one penny of their tax dollars might go toward helping someone else out. If you press them, they'll pretty much admit that they don't give a fuck about culture war issues. They're racists, but more in a "those kind of people tend to be lazy" type way than an overt "we must protect White heritage!!" way. They're what used to be called Country Club Republicans. For the life of me, I can't figure out what they stand to gain from a Donald Trump presidency.

Their only sources of information about the world are Fox News and stuff that they see in emails from their friends and on Facebook. Therefore, DT can do no wrong in their minds. Any mainstream information source like the NYT or network news is laughably biased and not worthy of the slightest attention.

It's sad to watch because my wife has trouble even talking with them right now. For example, last Sunday she was talking to them on the phone and they asked what we were up to. Oh, not much, just watching the Cowboys game. "WELL WE DON'T WATCH THE NFL ANYMORE!". Keep in mind that these are people that loved the Cowboys and had season tickets for years. You can't even have a simple, innocuous conversation with them without it turning into an airing of perceived grievances. It's incredibly tiresome.

Play nice. Wait till they're sick and dying, then whisper when no one is around that you're going to donate a huge chunk of their inheritance to BLM. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
Lagunamadre

Lagunamadre 1975

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
8 minutes ago, tokamak said:

My in-laws are lifelong Republicans, mainly because they're rich as fuck. They cannot stand the idea that one penny of their tax dollars might go toward helping someone else out. If you press them, they'll pretty much admit that they don't give a fuck about culture war issues. They're racists, but more in a "those kind of people tend to be lazy" type way than an overt "we must protect White heritage!!" way. They're what used to be called Country Club Republicans. For the life of me, I can't figure out what they stand to gain from a Donald Trump presidency.

Their only sources of information about the world are Fox News and stuff that they see in emails from their friends and on Facebook. Therefore, DT can do no wrong in their minds. Any mainstream information source like the NYT or network news is laughably biased and not worthy of the slightest attention.

It's sad to watch because my wife has trouble even talking with them right now. For example, last Sunday she was talking to them on the phone and they asked what we were up to. Oh, not much, just watching the Cowboys game. "WELL WE DON'T WATCH THE NFL ANYMORE!". Keep in mind that these are people that loved the Cowboys and had season tickets for years. You can't even have a simple, innocuous conversation with them without it turning into an airing of perceived grievances. It's incredibly tiresome.

I find myself in this same situation with my parents, their friends and my in-laws. The best response to the NFL type of comment is just flippantly say "ohhh ya I think I heard about that, that Trump kneeling deal? I don't really follow that stuff and I'm not big into the "cancel culture" thing like y'all are". It works perfectly. Play dumb. Make them think the casual observer thinks they are the cancel culture people, it sends them scrambling. "No, no, no, no, we are not cancel culture, the liberals are the cancel culture, etc. etc." 

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Like 5
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...