Hate Trump - Love Trump - Don't Hate Trump

John Walker said:
That depends on what you mean by "great again", whether you mean by making the billionaires richer at the expense
of everyone else who pays for food, utilities, taxes and insurance etc in this country, which is what's been happening recently,
or whether you mean for the rich to provide their fair share, and for the government to thus allow for prosperity for all of the citizens.
Click to expand...
Great agenda
 
John Walker said:
That depends on what you mean by "great again", whether you mean by making the billionaires richer at the expense
of everyone else who pays for food, utilities, taxes and insurance etc in this country, which is what's been happening recently,
or whether you mean for the rich to provide their fair share, and for the government to thus allow for prosperity for all of the citizens.
Click to expand...
Prosperity is available for everyone, its called having a job, and not living above your means. Sitting on your butt ( not pointing finger at anyone here) at home and expecting everyone else to pay your way, is not the responsibility of those who have money that they worked for. If someone worked 50+ years to have what they have they shouldn't have to give to to people who didn't. That doesn't include handicapped people, they are entitled to help from their families and others.
 
I agree with some of what President Trump does, and I disagree with others, but in either case, I have to be aware that I don't have all the facts. I doubt that anyone here does. I disagreed with way more of what was going on during President Biden's administration, but I don't think he knew what went on under his name. He didn't know what was going on beyond deciding which flavor of ice cream he wanted. Whoever was truly in charge during that time did a great deal of harm to the country, and I hope we never again elect a vegetable to the highest levels of office in our country. I haven't seen anything to suggest that Joe Biden would have done a good job in his younger years, but he had little or nothing to do with his presidency.

I don't buy into the idea that Donald Trump ran for office solely to save the country. He is an exceedingly egotistical man, so it makes sense that he'd be interested in being elevated to the level of president. Then again, you would have to have a large ego to run for president, wouldn't you? I don't think that it necessarily follows that his ego would prevent him from being a good president. He wants to be known as a president who accomplished important things, and this can be good, assuming that we all want important things to be accomplished.

I am sure that he has made some mistakes in his own right, but I think that his biggest problems have come from accepting bad advice from people who might have agendas contrary to his own. That makes sense because, though he's a smart guy, he came into office in his first term as an outsider without political or governmental expertise, so of course, he turned to others whom he may have viewed as being more knowledgeable about one thing or another. A lot of these people steered him wrong. This is his responsibility, but the fault is not entirely his.

I agree that he means well, and that whoever was actually in charge between 2020 and 2024 did not mean well.
 
Greg Karakas said:
I agree with some of what President Trump does, and I disagree with others, but in either case, I have to be aware that I don't have all the facts. I doubt that anyone here does. I disagreed with way more of what was going on during President Biden's administration, but I don't think he knew what went on under his name. He didn't know what was going on beyond deciding which flavor of ice cream he wanted. Whoever was truly in charge during that time did a great deal of harm to the country, and I hope we never again elect a vegetable to the highest levels of office in our country. I haven't seen anything to suggest that Joe Biden would have done a good job in his younger years, but he had little or nothing to do with his presidency.

I don't buy into the idea that Donald Trump ran for office to save the country. He is an exceedingly egotistical man, so it makes sense that he'd be interested in being elevated to the level of president. Then again, you would have to have a large ego to run for president, wouldn't you? I don't think that it necessarily follows that his ego would prevent him from being a good president. He wants to be known as a president who accomplished important things, and this can be good, assuming that we all want important things to be accomplished.

I am sure that he has made some mistakes in his own right, but I think that his biggest problems have come from accepting bad advice from people who might have agendas contrary to his own. That makes sense because, though he's a smart guy, he came into office in his first term as an outsider without political or governmental expertise, so of course, he turned to others whom he may have viewed as being more knowledgeable about one thing or another. A lot of these people steered him wrong. This is his responsibility, but the fault is not entirely his.

I agree that he means well, and that whoever was actually in charge between 2020 and 2024 did not mean well.
Click to expand...
Long ago, Trump was being interviewed by Oprah Winfrey. They were both big tv personalities. She asked him if he would ever consider running for president and he said NO. But then he back tracked and said the only reason he would run was if he saw the country definitely needed him to do it. (not a direct quote).
He had no need for the headaches or stress of being president. He definitely saw that we were heading in the wrong direction. He knew how things happened in the world and in the US. His disruption of the plan of those that were working on controlling the world is why everyone is fighting him in every way possible.
A very long video explaining some things he saw:
 
If you were the mother, or father, the aunt, or a close friend, of a person merely doing their job, would you step in their defense from being publicly humiliated by anyone, including the POTUS?
Which would you choose ? No, If's and or but's. What and who would hold more importance?
 
Ken Anderson said:
Along the same lines, Beth, Trump has often done this against other people, as well. As long as they agree with him on everything, they're fine, but the first time they disagree on whatever his issue of the moment is, they become the scum of the earth, and we're all supposed to view them as being "liberal" or "anti-MAGA." It's like he attacks one issue at a time without continuity. The way I see it, that understandably drives whoever his target of the day is further away from him, and often, the bulk of things with which they were formerly in agreement. If there's a strategy there, I don't get it. Anyone who agrees with another person on absolutely everything doesn't have an opinion that's worth listening to.
Click to expand...

He did this to John Cornyn, Texas senator whom I admire greatly. Trump pronounced him "RINO" because he didn't kiss the ring, so Cornyn lost his primary. Now look at the mess in Texas... the republican candidate is a crook and the democrat is a retard. Another "choice between 2 evils" election for Texas.
 
Beth Gallagher said:
He did this to John Cornyn, Texas senator whom I admire greatly. Trump pronounced him "RINO" because he didn't kiss the ring, so Cornyn lost his primary. Now look at the mess in Texas... the republican candidate is a crook and the democrat is a retard. Another "choice between 2 evils" election for Texas.
Click to expand...
That's what our choices are like in Maine. For the U.S. Senate race, I am going to have to vote for Susan Collins for the first time in my life because the Democrat running against her may as well just give his proxy to AOC and stay home, while the U.S. House race pits former governor and Republican Paul LePage against former Secretary of State Matt Dunlap. LePage is a pompous ass, but he'll probably vote right most of the time, while Dunlap seems to be genuinely a nice guy who formerly held views that were relatively reasonable for a Democrat, but he is sticking to the Democratic Socialist line during his run for a House seat. I think both votes will be close, but I predict that Collins will win reelection while LePage will lose. His angry conservative stance played well for him when he was younger, but now it suggests more of a "Get off my lawn!" vibe. Frankly, Bobby Charles, the Republican running for governor, is the only candidate we have this year who is campaigning on his or her own merits, with nearly all of the advertising (on both sides) for other candidates consisting of angry attacks against the other side. Rather than "vote for me and I will do this," what we get is "vote for me because the other guy will do that," and I'll be glad when it's over.

Oddly, both sides are depending heavily on attack ads depicting angry old people in women's clothing who could be either a man or a woman complaining about the terrible things the other party's candidate has done or will do. The spokesperson for an often-run ad against Susan Collins complains about how she used to be a Susan Collins supporter, but she voted for Cavenaugh who (apparently single-handedly) overturned Roe versus Wade, and I'm thinking, "You're 80 years old, and I strongly suspect you're a guy, so I don't know why your right to an abortion is an issue for you."
 
Last edited:
Ken Anderson said:
That's what our choices are like in Maine. For the U.S. Senate race, I am going to have to vote for Susan Collins for the first time in my life because the Democrat running against her may as well just give his proxy to AOC and stay home, while the U.S. House race pits former governor and Republican Paul LePage against former Secretary of State Matt Dunlap. LePage is a pompous ass, but he'll probably vote right most of the time, while Dunlap seems to be genuinely a nice guy who formerly held views that were relatively reasonable for a Democrat, but he is sticking to the Democratic Socialist line during his run for a House seat. I think both votes will be close, but I predict that Collins will win reelection while LePage will lose. His angry conservative stance played well for him when he was younger, but now it suggests more of a "Get off my lawn!" vibe. Frankly, Bobby Charles, the Republican running for governor, is the only candidate we have this year who is campaigning on his or her own merits, with nearly all of the advertising (on both sides) consisting of angry attacks against the other side. Rather than "vote for me and I will do this," what we get is "vote for me because the other guy will do that," and I'll be glad when it's over.

Oddly, both sides are depending heavily on attack ads depicting angry old people in women's clothing who could be either a man or a woman complaining about the terrible things the other party's candidate has done or will do. The spokesperson for an often-run ad against Susan Collins complains about how she used to be a Susan Collins supporter, but she voted for Cavenaugh who (apparently single-handedly) overturned Roe versus Wade, and I'm thinking, "You're 80 years old, and I strongly suspect you're a guy, so I don't know why your right to an abortion is an issue for you."
Click to expand...


If Tallarico (this cycle's "Beto") wins in Texas, I will never vote again. I figure that if the young voters want that imbecile then I am stepping back to let them steer their own future. Sensible people are swimming against the current and this country is actively circling the drain.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top