Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Election 2024 & Presidential Race: Demented WannaBe Dictator Trump vs President Biden


88Comrade2000

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Fergasun said:

Koch Network letter out today - Americans for Prosperity going all in on Nikki Haley.  Basically they said the country is ready to move on from Trump and Biden and their polling indicates Haley will be the strongest Republican candidate.  They also pointed to Trump's negative baggage.  DeSantis gets a shout out, but the letter suggests the "move on from Trump folk" condolidate with Haley.  

 

I think there is a GOP debate next week and DeSantis taking on Newsome this week?

 

Doesn't matter as there is no GOP race.  Trump is the nominee, even if convicted and in prison.  Trump will get 50 to 60% of the primary vote.    All the others are running to be the standby candidate; if by chance Trump isn't nominated at the convention.  Only way that happens, is if Trump gets convicted before GOP convention next year and the gop has the balls to  remove him as their nominee.  Then and only then, would the runner up be given the nomination at the convention.  I think their would be violence if that were to happen and the Trump base would stay home.

 

Desantis doesn't matter.  His short and long term career is over.  After he finishes his term in 2026; he will fade into oblivion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cooked Crack

We won't know how it goes until the votes occur.  I am tracking that Haley and DeDantis are working on traditional handshake campaiging and Trump is doing the rock star schtick.  The media is still giving Trump all the attention. 

 

If it is 50-20-20 in Iowa and New Hampshire... yes... its probably over.   But if they can get Trump down to below 45 and Haley up to 35...not in polling, but in results.  It will shock people.  

  • Thumb up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get what the Koch Network are up to. If they want to stop Trump, choosing another candidate is basically a kiss of death for that person who was already never getting the hardcore Cheeto Jesus supporters. Maybe they don't really think Haley will do anything, but their experts say they need to support someone. 

 

I think if it was about simply knocking out the Orange Water Balloon filled with diet coke, I'd spread the money around to PACs who start to build a "He's the Real RINO Here" campaign. Serial adulterer, terrible with finances, despises the religious. Etc. Etc. Don't support anyone. Just attack him.

  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Fergasun said:

@Cooked Crack

We won't know how it goes until the votes occur.  I am tracking that Haley and DeDantis are working on traditional handshake campaiging and Trump is doing the rock star schtick.  The media is still giving Trump all the attention. 

 

If it is 50-20-20 in Iowa and New Hampshire... yes... its probably over.   But if they can get Trump down to below 45 and Haley up to 35...not in polling, but in results.  It will shock people.  

The people that actually come out to vote in primaries/caucuses are mostly the hardcore base.  That base supports Trump.  Trump will have the overwhelming majority of votes.  Haley, Desantis or anyone else will not get as high as 30%.   The gop race will officially end on Super Tuesday, when Trump secures all the delegates he needs.  GOP is winner take all and Trump isn't losing a state.

  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Fergasun said:

@Cooked Crack

We won't know how it goes until the votes occur.  I am tracking that Haley and DeDantis are working on traditional handshake campaiging and Trump is doing the rock star schtick.  The media is still giving Trump all the attention. 

 

If it is 50-20-20 in Iowa and New Hampshire... yes... its probably over.   But if they can get Trump down to below 45 and Haley up to 35...not in polling, but in results.  It will shock people.  

Trump might not perform well in Iowa or NH but he'll win then roll whoever's left in South Carolina. A good chunk of the Republican primary is winner take all so coming a strong second isn't going to do much

  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does feel like it is too little, too late.  But, Romney turning is huge.  Not just never Trump but, "I will vote for Joe Biden over Donald Trump."  Who knows if anyone else will turn... I think Christie is already there, based on him saying that supporting Donald Trump was a mistake.  AFP did not directly make that case.  There are other people fueding and going against Trump as well. 

 

Do I think DeSantis or Haley will go that strongly against Trump on a debate stage?  

 

He's destroying their narrative. But he's also so unpredictable, no one knows what he will do with a second term.  He was one of the weakest Presidents ever and he has taken so much air out of conservative efforts.   

 

People will have so much energy behind really allowing the justice process to play out with Trump. 

 

As much as I think Biden should drop out... Trump also shouldn't run. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Fergasun said:

He's destroying their narrative. But he's also so unpredictable, no one knows what he will do with a second term.  He was one of the weakest Presidents ever and he has taken so much air out of conservative efforts.   

 

As much as I think Biden should drop out... Trump also shouldn't run. 

"Conservative efforts" are now "whatever Trump wants." All voters are so fickle.

 

Neither Biden nor Trump will bow out, and Trump will defeat Joe next November.

 

Trumps second term is going to be unpredictable, but in the end I think he's going to get reigned in from going too far. The GOP will want to keep the WH in 2028 and, despite the fears of a lot on here that we won't have a real election, there will be sufficient fear in the party against taking too extreme measures that will turn off voters heading into the next election.

 

At least that's me being optimistic.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Besides his policy of unpreditability, chaos trolling, and disempathy,  the thing that distinguishes Trump and he has bragged about is him not coming after Social Security and Medicare.  And him not caring about the deficit.  GOP has rode this train hard post Obama. 

 

There are lots of reasons to attack Trump, but Haley, Ron and Christie should have spent all their energy at the debates making the case against Trump and his record.  Instead of trying to ****foot around it.  

 

That being said, it would be completly on brand for Trump to do a GOP cut the deficit plan if elected in 2025.  Even his overtures about repealing and replacing Obamacare... dude... did you mix in some 2016 stump speeches in somewhere?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Cooked Crack said:

None of this matters anyways. The debates are useless if Trump's not there. They're just competing for 2nd hoping some act of God or justice happens to Trump.


if you’re a republican trying to win the nomination this was always your best bet. It doesn’t matter if trump is at the debates or not, he would wipe the floor with them in either case. They are all playing for 2nd and praying he dies or goes to jail. 
 

that’s the only chance they have and they all know it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

It doesn’t matter if trump is at the debates or not, he would wipe the floor with them in either case. They are all playing for 2nd and praying he dies or goes to jail.

I dunno. In 2016 Trump's America First platform had enough appeal as being different to enable him to get a base of voters while the other folks like Cruz and Rubio divided the rest of the vote. And it didn't hurt that Chris Christie demolished any momentum Rubio was gaining in that one debate.

 

Trump is avoiding the debates because he's afraid of being exposed and torn to shreds by Christie, not to mention the others. As a former sitting president, it wouldn't surprise me to see him in a competitive three-way race with DeSantis and Haley. But for him to be commanding 60 percent of the GOP primary vote says a depressing lot about the GOP voting base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Donald Trump Says He Never Swore Oath 'to Support the Constitution'

 

Donald Trump's legal team has argued against an attempt to have him thrown off the presidential ballot in Colorado in 2024 by suggesting the wording of the U.S. Constitution's insurrection clause does not apply to him.

 

The Colorado Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal on a lawsuit filed by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) watchdog group and Republican figures, who argue that Trump's actions on January 6, 2021, violated Section Three of the 14th Amendment and therefore he should be prohibited from running for the White House again.

 

The section states a person who "engaged in insurrection or rebellion" after taking an oath of office to support the Constitution should be barred from running for office again. In a previous ruling, lower court judge Sarah B. Wallace said that Trump had "engaged in insurrection" on January 6, the day of the Capitol riot, but should remain on Colorado's primary ballot as the wording of the 14th Amendment does not specifically mention preventing people from running for the presidency.

 

In their appeal against the Colorado lawsuit, Trump's lawyers reiterated that the wording of Section Three does not apply to people running for president and that Trump technically did not swear an oath to "support" the Constitution. Instead, during his January 2017 inauguration, Trump swore to "preserve, protect and defend" the Constitution during his role as president.

 

"The framers excluded the office of President from Section Three purposefully," Trump's legal team wrote. "Section Three does not apply, because the presidency is not an office 'under the United States,' the president is not an 'officer of the United States,' and President Trump did not take an oath 'to support the Constitution of the United States.'"

 

Click on the link for the full article

  • Haha 1
  • Thumb down 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't that exactly what the judge ruled?  She ruled that the President is not "an officer of the United States" under the 14th Amendment. 

Quote

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

This is absolutely asinine ruling and the fact that the judge dug around the text is crazy.  This would mean that Presidential electors are held to higher standards than the actual office holder.  

 

The plain text is pretty clear. The intent is that this covers Senators, Representatives, the President and the Vice President.  The President is a Civil Office under the United States. The oath may not have the word "support", but there's no way you can't read that and easily say -- "oh yeah, it obviously excludes the Preident and Vice President". 

 

So, Confederates could have been President?  That was the intent of this Amendment? They just couldn't have been every other Federal office?  When it comes to voters, they can vote for anyone to be President.  But they can't vote for anyone to represent them in the House or Senate? 

 

Judges be following the Supreme Court of "twist the law enough tll it fits what I want it to say"

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The president is an executive officer position, among other things. And because "support" isn't explicitly mentioned in the presidential oath, as the highest office in the US government, this person's duty to the Constitution is the most important. George Washington would never recognize such logic as out of that judge's opinion. 

 

Where are we as a country if we can't hold the highest executive officer to preserve, protect, and defend our governing document?

  • Like 3
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Larry said:

Well, I mean, if we're going to play a game where constitutional amendments do not apply unless the exact word is used, . . . 

 

Then the second amendment mentions the right to keep and bear arms. It never mentions guns

 

animals-bear_arms-bears_arms-guns-second

  • Haha 2
  • Thumb up 1
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

About two months ago I made a joke—or what I thought was a joke at the time—about how the presidential oath says “preserve, protect, and defend” the Constitution but doesn’t use the word “support,” and said “Loophole, ****es!!”…

 

Im getting tired of how parody and reality keep merging together lol…

  • Thumb up 2
  • Super Duper Ain't No Party Pooper Two Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, the judge also pulled out parallel sections of other parts of the Constitution (in Article 2 and Article 6) to claim that is are structed in a similar manner to not include the President (I think these are different clauses).  There was also an early draft that specifically called out "President and Vice President" as being covered, but was removed. 

 

This is what judges have to deal with now... and Constitutional nerds/lawyers are able to make persuasive arguments to both sides.  

 

But, I still think it is crazy to to suggest that Jefferson Davis was eligible to hold the the Presidency or Vice Presidency.  And common usage at the time indicated that the President was considered and Officer of the United States. 

 

I interpret what she is reading as this.  "The President and Vice President are the elected officers of the United States.  So even if there are different phrases around the clauses, there is only one set of elected officers." 

 

But just because they are elected officers, doesn't mean they aren't officers.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
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
  • Recently Browsing   1 member

×
×
  • Create New...