Trump 2024 — The second term

[SheepDog4Life]

Please show your work here. You guys are still living in the past and buying the narrative. Trump posts very little of the kind of stuff he did 5-6 years ago…

One of his last tweets... midnight Central, 1 am DC time:



Interesting THAT is what you took issue with, that somehow late, late night random tweets: weren't a thing

Editted to Add: I would disagree... DeSantis and Abbot are within a gnat *** of Trump on policy... don't shy away from slapping down progs/wokes... and have proven to be much more effective and don't tilt at every windmill... and build governing coalitions to enact policies into legislation. Plus they have proven positive coattails... Trump has failed miserably on this count.

Let alone tweets at 3 am, lol!

 

[Ingomike]

One of his last tweets... midnight Central, 1 am DC time:

View attachment 323262

Interesting THAT is what you took issue with, that somehow late, late night random tweets: weren't a thing

I already explained why no one is Trump and has his capabilities…

 

[Ingomike]

Huuuge!



Note this us a direct Teamsters X, not Trump posting this…

 

[DadSmith]

Without A Unified SCOTUS, More States Will Bar Rivals From Ballots

Maine's secretary of state unilaterally determined that the population should be prevented from voting for Trump.

thefederalist.com

 

[printcraft]

Huuuge!



Note this us a direct Teamsters X, not Trump posting this…

Where's that little socialist fain at? Shim won't be happy about this.

 

[KG1]

Huuuge!



Note this us a direct Teamsters X, not Trump posting this…

 

[SheepDog4Life]

I already explained why no one is Trump and has his capabilities…

Well, I was pointing out those that are competent in certail areas, like getting things done, that are areas he has proven himself incompetent...

But yeah, he doesn't tweet in the middle of the night anymore is the hill you choose out of that list.

 

[Ingomike]

Well, I was pointing out those that are competent in certail areas, like getting things done, that are areas he has proven himself incompetent...

But yeah, he doesn't tweet in the middle of the night anymore is the hill you choose out of that list.

Please list the republican president and their accomplishments that exceed what Trump did?

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Please list the republican president and their accomplishments that exceed what Trump did?

I listed my criticisms... you picked "tweets at 3 am".... so I'll recap, for one, HUUUUGELY negative coattails.

Is there a modern Republican President with worse coattails? I don't think so.

 

[Ziggidy]

do you mean we need to change federal election laws, or do you mean we need to federalize state election laws?

If you mean federal, what is the top change to federal election laws that you would like to see happen?

I have no idea, I openly claim to be ignorant of law; I cannot compete any of y’all. Saying this, I truly do not understand how there is seemingly a wide range of differences for federal elections.

I do understand how the law could be (would be) abused.

 

[BugI02]

I could stop there, but won't because... well OCD, lol!

You also ignore voter population growth and VOTER PARTICIPATION.

In '08 with 146.3M registered voters and 61.6% voter participation, Obama received 69.5M votes.

In '20 with 168.3M registered voters (22.1M more registered voters) and 66.6% voter participation, Biden received 81.3M votes.

Something seems ... odd ... about your numbers

168.3 million registered voters and 66.6% voter participation would seem to indicate there would be a total of 168.3(.666) = 112.1 million total votes cast

Then you say Biden got 81.3 million. That would appear to leave only 30.8 million votes available for anyone else, but we know Trump got 74.2 million

Put another way, Biden's supposed 81.3 million + Trumps 74.2 million = 155.5 million total votes for just those two candidates

That would be 155.5 ÷ 168.3 = 92.4% voter participation for just those two candidates, which doesn't add up

Did you perhaps mean OCDM (Operator Can't Do Math)

 

[foszoe]

https://www.npr.org/2024/01/04/1222896035/foreign-governments-paid-millions-to-trumps-companies-while-he-was-president?ft=nprml&f=1002

 

[BugI02]

You'll be back. We all say that at some point and we always come back. Because someone is always wrong on the internet.

The contest is only so vicious because the rewards are so small

 

[BugI02]

That's pretty much what I was getting at before when I said that we'll see what happens in a court of law if and when both firms are called to testify on their analysis and how it holds up and I do believe they will be called to testify by the prosecution. I also said that if it doen'st hold up and Trump's legal team wins the evidentiary presentation I will accept that.

I've got two points to make and for brevity I'll make them both here because the ideas are sort of related. Only the second is related to your post, KG

Earlier, jamil was nattering about extra due diligence needed for ideological sources. Upon careful, even jamilian consideration, I can't think of ANY sources anymore that are not ideological. Perhaps he could name the one(s) he has in mind

Then IMO, the same caveat somewhat applies to your post. We've seen that there a few, and possibly no, non-ideological courts. I would not automatically accept something as fact just because a 'court of law' in NYC or ATL said so. I believe they have adequately demonstrated that they are after a conviction and not the truth

 

[BugI02]

That you believe there are any sources that are not ideologically based is so quaint...

Scooped by IM

 

[KG1]

I've got two points to make and for brevity I'll make them both here because the ideas are sort of related. Only the second is related to your post, KG

Earlier, jamil was nattering about extra due diligence needed for ideological sources. Upon careful, even jamilian consideration, I can't think of ANY sources anymore that are not ideological. Perhaps he could name the one(s) he has in mind

Then IMO, the same caveat somewhat applies to your post. We've seen that there a few, and possibly no, non-ideological courts. I would not automatically accept something as fact just because a 'court of law' in NYC or ATL said so. I believe they have adequately demonstrated that they are after a conviction and not the truth

I get that Bug and you are correct. If I was privy to the evidentiary testimony from both sides, I would decide honestly speaking for myself who I thought had the more credible testimony and did the better job. But since it won't likely be televised it's hard to get it.

 

[KG1]

Hey @jamil Bugs got another new one for you besides "jamilling" The new one is "jamilian"

 

[KLB]

jama jama jama jama jama jamilian.

I like it.

 

[jamil]

That you believe there are any sources that are not ideologically based is so quaint...

That you would say that's what I said is just what you do. I've posted a lot on media bias and such. I don't think I've ever said there are news outlets are unbiased. Some are more and some are less biased. But I don't think some of you guys accept that because you tend to frame things as black and white.

Here's the thing. Bias is a spectrum of more or less. The hill is much less biased than, say, GWP. Politico is center-left. Mother Jones is far left. They don't have the same magnitude of bias. Also, different outlets have biases about different things. In terms of absolute magnitude of bias, I would say that Fox News, is as far right as CNN is left. But, Fox News' right bias is towards the CoC/Neocon grifter political class. CNN is just plain ClownWorld™.

So, in terms of how trustworthy they are, if you know their bias, if they're reporting on something that's outside their bias, it's probably more likely to be true than if it directly hits their bias. If they report something that is inline with their bias, probably not as reliable. I've said all this before. This is what I actually think. So reflect that instead of what you want me to have thought.

 

[jamil]

I already explained why no one is Trump and has his capabilities…

How does that address the points in his post?