Trump 2024 — The second term

[Ingomike]

@BugI02 will love this.

“Perfect Is the Enemy of Good”​

“Perfect candidate? Please. No such thing. We are a complicated people, all of us, and our preferences are equally complex.“

But you guys keep looking for it…

Republicans Must Accept The Reality Of The Imperfect Candidate

Are voters blind to Trump’s flaws? His legal situation? Nope. It’s that they have decided perfection isn't the goal.

thefederalist.com

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

@BugI02 will love this.

“Perfect Is the Enemy of Good”​

“Perfect candidate? Please. No such thing. We are a complicated people, all of us, and our preferences are equally complex.“

But you guys keep looking for it…

Republicans Must Accept The Reality Of The Imperfect Candidate

Are voters blind to Trump’s flaws? His legal situation? Nope. It’s that they have decided perfection isn't the goal.

thefederalist.com

Trump supporters believe they have the perfect candidate. They can find no faults in him...at least any they will admit to or any they can't excuse away.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I find this topic fascinating, let’s just go to the outlier, what if the President murders someone? Does it matter who? Did obummer not order the murder of Bin Laden?

In looking at this, it is hard. There is a line to define between the explicit and implied in the constitution. Any weakening of constitutional autonomy results in the means for political enemies to take a president down.

I find few who have spent even a few brain cells studying this and mostly a lot of bluster that even pondering this is stupid because they were taught that no one is above the law but that is not clear.

What does the law say?

 

[jamil]

What are examples of ”blatantly illegal

“?

Pretty much everything we complain about Biden. Or Obama. Hey. Biden was just performing his duties when he weaponized the DOJ.

 

[Ingomike]

You're take is that the President can murder someone and there is no recourse? I would certainly hope if it was proven while he was in office, that he would be impeached and found guilty. Then he would be tried in a court.

If it was proven after he was out of office, skip to the trial.

Was obummer ordering Bin Laden killed murder? His family thinks so. If the president was banging BL wife does that change the circumstances?

My take is that, as you indicated, impeachment conviction is first step, what then? The founders wanted to vest enough power the President could run the country but not be a permanent monarch…

 

[Ingomike]

Trump supporters believe they have the perfect candidate. They can find no faults in him...at least any they will admit to or any they can't excuse away.

Not playing the ****ing ******* game where people try to make me say things does not mean what you said…

 

[Ingomike]

Pretty much everything we complain about Biden. Or Obama. Hey. Biden was just performing his duties when he weaponized the DOJ.

Then what are the constitutional ramifications for this?

 

[red_zr24x4]

Trump supporters believe they have the perfect candidate. They can find no faults in him...at least any they will admit to or any they can't excuse away.

Again your feelings
I support Trump
Trumps an Ass, a blow hard, stupid tweeting Ass, Im voting for him just the same

 

[Ingomike]

What does the law say?

What laws supersede the constitutional authority of the President?

 

[KG1]

No one that I know of is seeking perfection. Trump says he's perfect. Should we not be able to point out that he's not perfect?

 

[jamil]

@BugI02 will love this.

“Perfect Is the Enemy of Good”​

“Perfect candidate? Please. No such thing. We are a complicated people, all of us, and our preferences are equally complex.“

But you guys keep looking for it…

Republicans Must Accept The Reality Of The Imperfect Candidate

Are voters blind to Trump’s flaws? His legal situation? Nope. It’s that they have decided perfection isn't the goal.

thefederalist.com

Nonsense. No one has asked for perfection. No one expects it. I’d rather not have a narcissistic fool who demands worship, for POTUS. I’d rather not have an insecure fool who thinks a half inch lift will make him more popular, for POTUS. Unless I want an even worse outcome with Joe Biden, I’m stuck with the two fools.

I’ll be voting for one or the other of those two fools. So your “perfection” interpretation is just plain nonsense. My criteria is, reasonably puts America First. Is better than biden. Has a reasonable chance to beat biden. If you interpret that as seeking perfection, that’s not my problem. Or any other phantom “perfectionists”.

 

[Ingomike]

Nonsense. No one has asked for perfection. No one expects it. I’d rather not have a narcissistic fool who demands worship, for POTUS. I’d rather not have an insecure fool who thinks a half inch lift will make him more popular, for POTUS. Unless I want an even worse outcome with Joe Biden, I’m stuck with the two fools.

I’ll be voting for one or the other of those two fools. So your “perfection” interpretation is just plain nonsense. My criteria is, reasonably puts America First. Is better than biden. Has a reasonable chance to beat biden. If you interpret that as seeking perfection, that’s not my problem. Or any other phantom “perfectionists”.

Too funny. I bet if we ran all your posts through AI we would find that not being “a narcissistic fool who demands worship” was not even on your list of concerns…

 

[jamil]

I find this topic fascinating, let’s just go to the outlier, what if the President murders someone? Does it matter who? Did obummer not order the murder of Bin Laden?

In looking at this, it is hard. There is a line to define between the explicit and implied in the constitution. Any weakening of constitutional autonomy results in the means for political enemies to take a president down.

I find few who have spent even a few brain cells studying this and mostly a lot of bluster that even pondering this is stupid because they were taught that no one is above the law but that is not clear.

This autonomy is a figment of your imagination. The POTUS is not sovereign. He’s the head of the executive branch. But congress has the right of oversight. And may impeach him if they think he’s committed crimes. The Judicial branch has the purview to rule on whether the President’s actions are constitutional or not. Finally, the people are the ultimate source of the President’s power as the head of state.

The president does not have unlimited powers, not even over the executive branch.

 

[jamil]

Too funny. I bet if we ran all your posts through AI we would find that not being “a narcissistic fool who demands worship” was not even on your list of concerns…

So because you can’t argue against the point, you pick that to complain about? Lol.

Why don’t you use AI to figure out if I’m a perfectionist. At least that would be relevant.

BTW. I have probably called Trump a fool several times. I’ve probably called him a narcissist in many posts. I’m not sure I’ve ever used the exact phrasing, “narcissistic fool”. But if you think that’s the best way to rebut my point about perfectionism, knock yourself out. You shouldn’t even need AI.

 

[KG1]

Nonsense. No one has asked for perfection. No one expects it. I’d rather not have a narcissistic fool who demands worship, for POTUS. I’d rather not have an insecure fool who thinks a half inch lift will make him more popular, for POTUS. Unless I want an even worse outcome with Joe Biden, I’m stuck with the two fools.

I’ll be voting for one or the other of those two fools. So your “perfection” interpretation is just plain nonsense. My criteria is, reasonably puts America First. Is better than biden. Has a reasonable chance to beat biden. If you interpret that as seeking perfection, that’s not my problem. Or any other phantom “perfectionists”.

How can it be seeking perfection when one is able to point out the flaws as well as saying they will still vote for Trump in the general election even though he is not the "perfect" candidate.

 

[jamil]

Was obummer ordering Bin Laden killed murder? His family thinks so. If the president was banging BL wife does that change the circumstances?

Bin Ladin is not a US citizen and entitled to the same rights as a US citizen. The US owed Bin Ladin, an enemy of the US, no due process.

Obama killed US citizens with no due process. It’s not clear how much due process was owed them having renounced loyalty to the US. But at least such that it should be adjudicated. Otherwise, Obama could just kill people he doesn’t like and claim they’re enemy combatants.

The people need legal protections from the president claiming to be operating within his duties. I don’t want the president to have the authority to take too secret documents home when he leaves the White House and be able to sell them to the highest bidder. Which you’ve pretty much argued he could do.

My take is that, as you indicated, impeachment conviction is first step, what then? The founders wanted to vest enough power the President could run the country but not be a permanent monarch…

Impeachment is a way to remove the president from office for whatever. I think it should take a criminal trial to determine if he should be convicted of committing actual crimes, and then sentenced.

 

[jamil]

Then what are the constitutional ramifications for this?

Can a President claim he’s following his presidential duties if he’s getting paid by foreign countries for the influence he sells? The remedy is impeachment. And then once expelled from office he should stand trial for taking bribes while in office. Of course if congress is run by people sympathetic to the president. He’ll get away with everything while in office. But should be charged with whatever crimes he committed while in office.

 

[Ingomike]

This autonomy is a figment of your imagination.

Really? Do you have any court cases that have ruled this? The cases I posted here all went in the presidents favor.

The POTUS is not sovereign.

Right, he is subject to everything listed below…

He’s the head of the executive branch. But congress has the right of oversight. And may impeach him if they think he’s committed crimes. The Judicial branch has the purview to rule on whether the President’s actions are constitutional or not. Finally, the people are the ultimate source of the President’s power as the head of state.

The president does not have unlimited powers, not even over the executive branch.

What beyond those listed above apply to a sitting president?

 

[Ingomike]

So because you can’t argue against the point, you pick that to complain about? Lol.

Why don’t you use AI to figure out if I’m a perfectionist. At least that would be relevant.

BTW. I have probably called Trump a fool several times. I’ve probably called him a narcissist in many posts. I’m not sure I’ve ever used the exact phrasing, “narcissistic fool”. But if you think that’s the best way to rebut my point about perfectionism, knock yourself out. You shouldn’t even need AI.

You missed the point, the hit you over the head version is that Trump‘s governing is most likely what you were wanting before Trump came along but that isn’t good enough. Like a starving man complaining about the color of the plate…

 

[Ingomike]

The people need legal protections from the president claiming to be operating within his duties.

They have it, the constitution prescribed impeachment and treason.

Maybe if the people understood the power of the presidency better they might just work to get better candidates…