(05-27-2018 02:45 PM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(05-26-2018 11:28 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  Sure, California, New York, and a handful of other NE states should decide the presidental election each year. Certainly what our founding fathers had in mind.

The people of the U.S. should decide the presidential election each year. That's what HRC rightly points out is not happening.

Then, who did decide the election? The ROOOSKIES!!!?

Lol

(05-28-2018 10:16 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(05-27-2018 02:12 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Without the electoral college liberals could win every Presidential election just by get out the vote efforts in the 10 largest metro areas. The rural parts of the country would be all but ignored. Yes Hillary won the popular vote but that margin was provided mostly by the LA and San Francisco metro's with a little extra help from NYC. All those years ago the founding fathers knew what they were doing by making the government a representative republic using the electoral college to be certain the presidential election was a nation wide event.

Well put.

Yep, the Electoral College performed EXACTLY as it was designed. Trouble this time is the D's lost and continue to throw a hissy fit simply because they didn't get their way. Had the results been opposite they'd have no issue with the EC. It all boils down to sour grapes.

Hey liberals - go study history and see how the large City-States ruled over the rest of Rome and get back to me.

(05-27-2018 02:45 PM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(05-26-2018 11:28 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  Sure, California, New York, and a handful of other NE states should decide the presidental election each year. Certainly what our founding fathers had in mind.

The people of the U.S. should decide the presidential election each year. That's what HRC rightly points out is not happening.

So explain how super delegates during the primary is ok?

(05-27-2018 12:44 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(05-27-2018 11:57 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  [quote='TechRocks' pid='15316969' dateline='1527432406']
[quote='AdoptedMonarch' pid='15316955' dateline='1527431232']
[quote='EverRespect' pid='15316899' dateline='1527426947']
Every time she puts herself in the news, Trump gets a 5-point bump in the polls.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Sometimes I honestly wonder whether we're not all being played like puppets, being torn between a masterfully choreographed Clinton-Trump nightmare. It ultimately did not much matter as between the two of them which one prevailed, so long as they could continue to present themselves as an awful choice between two bad choices.

Since I personally find Hillary's screeching so much worse than Trump's incoherence, I guess the lesser evil prevailed.

I refer you to the second-from-bottom quote in your signature. When President Trump stops acting as a dipshite, I'll stop considering him one.

We as a nation are unquestionably better off today than we were 16 months ago. Is that due to the self-proclaimed brilliance of DJT, or just a natural outcome of our nation finally being able to economically breathe now that we are free of the bureaucratic and economic idiocy of the Obama administration?

President Trump certainly gets credit for erasing the Godawful Obama legacy. But I will not wear the MAGA hat until he shows us something more than merely arrogant and random discord.

I saw this the other day and I think it's a big reason why Trump was elected...

The mayor of Livermore California explains Trump’s popularity and success. This is perhaps the best explanation for Trump's popularity ....

Marshall Kamena is a registered Democrat and was elected mayor of Livermore, CA.. He ran on the democratic ticket as he knew a Bay Area city would never vote for a Republican. He is as conservative as they come. He wrote the following:

Trump’s 'lack of decorum, dignity, and statesmanship' By Marshall Kamena, Mayor of Livermore, CA.

My Leftist friends (as well as many ardent #NeverTrumpers) constantly ask me if I’m not bothered by Donald Trump’s lack of decorum. They ask if I don’t think his tweets are “beneath the dignity of the office.”

Here’s my answer: We Right-thinking people have tried dignity. There could not have been a man of more quiet dignity than George W. Bush as he suffered the outrageous lies and politically motivated hatreds that undermined his presidency.

We tried statesmanship.

Could there be another human being on this earth who so desperately prized “collegiality” as John McCain?

We tried propriety – has there been a nicer human being ever than Mitt Romney?

And the results were always the same. This is because, while we were playing by the rules of dignity, collegiality and propriety, the Left has been, for the past 60 years, engaged in a knife fight where the only rules are those of Saul Alinsky and the Chicago mob.

I don’t find anything “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper” about Barack Obama’s lying about what went down on the streets of Ferguson in order to ramp up racial hatreds because racial hatreds serve the Democratic Party.

I don’t see anything “dignified” in lying about the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi and imprisoning an innocent filmmaker to cover your tracks.

I don’t see anything “statesman-like” in weaponizing the IRS to be used to destroy your political opponents and any dissent.

Yes, Obama was “articulate” and “polished” but in no way was he in the least bit “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper.”

The Left has been engaged in a war against America since the rise of the Children of the ‘60s. To them, it has been an all-out war where nothing is held sacred and nothing is seen as beyond the pale.. It has been a war they’ve fought with violence, the threat of violence, demagoguery and lies from day one – the violent take-over of the universities – till today.

The problem is that, through these years, the Left has been the only side fighting this war. While the Left has been taking a knife to anyone who stands in their way, the Right has continued to act with dignity, collegiality and propriety.

With Donald Trump, this all has come to an end. Donald Trump is America ’s first wartime president in the Culture War.

During wartime, things like “dignity” and “collegiality” simply aren’t the most essential qualities one looks for in their warriors. Ulysses Grant was a drunk whose behavior in peacetime might well have seen him drummed out of the Army for conduct unbecoming.

Had Abraham Lincoln applied the peacetime rules of propriety and booted Grant, the Democrats might well still be holding their slaves today.

Lincoln rightly recognized that, “I cannot spare this man. He fights.”

General George Patton was a vulgar-talking.. In peacetime, this might have seen him stripped of rank. But, had Franklin Roosevelt applied the normal rules of decorum then, Hitler and the Socialists would barely be five decades into their thousand-year Reich.

Trump is fighting. And what’s particularly delicious is that, like Patton standing over the battlefield as his tanks obliterated Rommel’s, he’s shouting, “You magnificent bastards, I read your book!”

That is just the icing on the cake, but it’s wonderful to see that not only is Trump fighting, he’s defeating the Left using their own tactics. That book is Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals – a book so essential to the Liberals’ war against America that it is and was the playbook for the entire Obama administration and the subject of Hillary Clinton’s senior thesis.

It is a book of such pure evil, that, just as the rest of us would dedicate our book to those we most love or those to whom we are most indebted, Alinsky dedicated his book to Lucifer.

Trump’s tweets may seem rash and unconsidered but, in reality, he is doing exactly what Alinsky suggested his followers do. First, instead of going after “the fake media” — and they are so fake that they have literally gotten every single significant story of the past 60 years not just wrong, but diametrically opposed to the truth, from the Tet Offensive to Benghazi, to what really happened on the streets of Ferguson, Missouri — Trump isolated CNN.. He made it personal.

Then, just as Alinsky suggests, he employs ridicule which Alinsky described as “the most powerful weapon of all.”... Most importantly, Trump’s tweets have put CNN in an untenable and unwinnable position. ... They need to respond.

This leaves them with only two choices. They can either “go high” (as Hillary would disingenuously declare of herself and the fake news would disingenuously report as the truth) and begin to honestly and accurately report the news or they can double-down on their usual tactics and hope to defeat Trump with twice their usual hysteria and demagoguery. The problem for CNN (et al.) with the former is that, if they were to start honestly reporting the news, that would be the end of the Democratic Party they serve. It is nothing but the incessant use of fake news (read: propaganda) that keeps the Left alive.

Imagine, for example, if CNN had honestly and accurately reported then-candidate Barack Obama’s close ties to foreign terrorists (Rashid Khalidi), domestic terrorists (William Ayers & Bernardine Dohrn), the mafia (Tony Rezko) or the true evils of his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright’s church.

Imagine if they had honestly and accurately conveyed the evils of the Obama administration’s weaponizing of the IRS to be used against their political opponents or his running of guns to the Mexican cartels or the truth about the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the Obama administration’s cover-up.

So, to my friends on the Left — and the #NeverTrumpers as well — do I wish we lived in a time when our president could be “collegial” and “dignified” and “proper”? Of course I do.

These aren’t those times. This is war. And it’s a war that the Left has been fighting without opposition for the past 50 years.

So, say anything you want about this president - I get it - he can be vulgar, he can be crude, he can be undignified at times. I don’t care. I can’t spare this man. He fights for America!

(05-28-2018 12:11 PM)DFWMINER Wrote:  So, to my friends on the Left — and the #NeverTrumpers as well — do I wish we lived in a time when our president could be “collegial” and “dignified” and “proper”? Of course I do.

These aren’t those times. This is war. And it’s a war that the Left has been fighting without opposition for the past 50 years.

So, say anything you want about this president - I get it - he can be vulgar, he can be crude, he can be undignified at times. I don’t care. I can’t spare this man. He fights for America!

DFW, I've quoted only your last three paragraphs for reasons of length only. These three quoted paragraphs provide the executive summary of your position. But I urge everyone to go back and read your entire post. It is excellent.

TechRocks and Stinkfist have already taken me to the woodshed on this thread, and I may be asking for it again. But I feel like I am doing a very poor job making my point. (Or perhaps it's that no one wants to hear my point, which is kind of off topic for this thread. My apologies, if so.)

My dismay with President Trump is not that he fought ruthlessly against Hillary Clinton and the Democrats in the 2016 election. I applaud him for that. It is instead that the fighting attitude that he deployed so successfully during the campaign appears to be the ONLY skill that he's got. President Grant, according to the history books, was a ruthless general who was willing to do what was needed to win. But he also knew when to maneuver and not just attack.

Trump is now our president. He would be a much more effective president if he had the ability and maturity to communicate on better than a middle-school level. During the campaign, candidate Trump said on several occasions that he understood that he would need to act "more presidential" when/if he won. I've seen no evidence that he is capable of doing this.

I also disagree -- although I acknowledge that I cannot prove -- that President Trump was the ONLY Republican candidate who would have won. I think that deplorable America was entirely fed up with the crap that had been fed to us by the Obama administration over the preceding 8 years. Hillary was also an awful candidate and is an awful person. It did not require Donald Trump to point any of that out to us.

(05-28-2018 12:48 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  Trump is now our president. He would be a much more effective president if he had the ability and maturity to communicate on better than a middle-school level. During the campaign, candidate Trump said on several occasions that he understood that he would need to act "more presidential" when/if he won. I've seen no evidence that he is capable of doing this.

Exactly what is it you would like to see this president doing to be "more presidential"? Examples please.

(05-28-2018 01:42 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(05-28-2018 12:48 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  Trump is now our president. He would be a much more effective president if he had the ability and maturity to communicate on better than a middle-school level. During the campaign, candidate Trump said on several occasions that he understood that he would need to act "more presidential" when/if he won. I've seen no evidence that he is capable of doing this.

Exactly what is it you would like to see this president doing to be "more presidential"? Examples please.

Is this an honest question? Where to start?

How 'bout keeping his mouth shut (or his Twitter finger down) when he's clearly winning an argument? The Congressional investigators (Nunes and Gowdy in particular) are doing just fine in trickling out very damning details about the Brennan-Clapper-Yates-Comey-McCabe cabal. Theiseefforts are undercut when Trump then comes lumbering in, like a toddler, just to cry about it in a fact-free tweet.

Want more? You'll have to wait. My wife has got some pre-Memorial Day chores for me.

(05-28-2018 02:10 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(05-28-2018 01:42 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(05-28-2018 12:48 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  Trump is now our president. He would be a much more effective president if he had the ability and maturity to communicate on better than a middle-school level. During the campaign, candidate Trump said on several occasions that he understood that he would need to act "more presidential" when/if he won. I've seen no evidence that he is capable of doing this.

Exactly what is it you would like to see this president doing to be "more presidential"? Examples please.

Is this an honest question? Where to start?

How 'bout keeping his mouth shut (or his Twitter finger down) when he's clearly winning an argument? The Congressional investigators (Nunes and Gowdy in particular) are doing just fine in trickling out very damning details about the Brennan-Clapper-Yates-Comey-McCabe cabal. Theiseefforts are undercut when Trump then comes lumbering in, like a toddler, just to cry about it in a fact-free tweet.

Want more? You'll have to wait. My wife has got some pre-Memorial Day chores for me.

The highlighted part is merely your opinion as I suspect that you have no evidence that he's undercut any efforts with his tweets. And more along that line of thinking, how do you know he's not cut way back on what he'd otherwise have to say about certain issues? Well, you don't.

You just don't like his style, I understand that, but that's his style and it's not going to change so perhaps your time would be more productive pounding sand?

Obama had lots of style, Quite the strking man he was, no? With a functioning teleprompter, he could give one hell of a speech, right? Phuck all that. I want results, and I want results that I believe will move the country forward. With Trump I believe we're getting that, despite his outbursts at 3 AM on twitter. BTW, I don't do twitter. Sounds too damned gay to me.

And yes, I want more examples of how the president could be more presidential in your view. Please be specific.

(05-28-2018 12:48 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(05-28-2018 12:11 PM)DFWMINER Wrote:  So, to my friends on the Left — and the #NeverTrumpers as well — do I wish we lived in a time when our president could be “collegial” and “dignified” and “proper”? Of course I do.

These aren’t those times. This is war. And it’s a war that the Left has been fighting without opposition for the past 50 years.

So, say anything you want about this president - I get it - he can be vulgar, he can be crude, he can be undignified at times. I don’t care. I can’t spare this man. He fights for America!

DFW, I've quoted only your last three paragraphs for reasons of length only. These three quoted paragraphs provide the executive summary of your position. But I urge everyone to go back and read your entire post. It is excellent.

TechRocks and Stinkfist have already taken me to the woodshed on this thread, and I may be asking for it again. But I feel like I am doing a very poor job making my point. (Or perhaps it's that no one wants to hear my point, which is kind of off topic for this thread. My apologies, if so.)

My dismay with President Trump is not that he fought ruthlessly against Hillary Clinton and the Democrats in the 2016 election. I applaud him for that. It is instead that the fighting attitude that he deployed so successfully during the campaign appears to be the ONLY skill that he's got. President Grant, according to the history books, was a ruthless general who was willing to do what was needed to win. But he also knew when to maneuver and not just attack.

Trump is now our president. He would be a much more effective president if he had the ability and maturity to communicate on better than a middle-school level. During the campaign, candidate Trump said on several occasions that he understood that he would need to act "more presidential" when/if he won. I've seen no evidence that he is capable of doing this.

I also disagree -- although I acknowledge that I cannot prove -- that President Trump was the ONLY Republican candidate who would have won. I think that deplorable America was entirely fed up with the crap that had been fed to us by the Obama administration over the preceding 8 years. Hillary was also an awful candidate and is an awful person. It did not require Donald Trump to point any of that out to us.

I think he goes overboard sometimes. Much further than I would have gone however he is effective and it works. If I'm in his shoes and don't go as far as he does I'm guessing I'd be less successful.

The fake news theme is the perfect example. These MSM folks just can't help themselves now. The 2014 immigration photos should be a huge embarrassment for them and just furthers the message Trump has been tweeting about when mentioning fake news. Had he stopped, he potentially loses the momentum and point he tries to make of them.

People are converting to supporting him the more these examples are given. He hammers it home and I believe it is the best course of direction at this point in time.

(05-28-2018 02:23 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(05-28-2018 02:10 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(05-28-2018 01:42 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(05-28-2018 12:48 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  Trump is now our president. He would be a much more effective president if he had the ability and maturity to communicate on better than a middle-school level. During the campaign, candidate Trump said on several occasions that he understood that he would need to act "more presidential" when/if he won. I've seen no evidence that he is capable of doing this.

Exactly what is it you would like to see this president doing to be "more presidential"? Examples please.

Is this an honest question? Where to start?

How 'bout keeping his mouth shut (or his Twitter finger down) when he's clearly winning an argument? The Congressional investigators (Nunes and Gowdy in particular) are doing just fine in trickling out very damning details about the Brennan-Clapper-Yates-Comey-McCabe cabal. Theiseefforts are undercut when Trump then comes lumbering in, like a toddler, just to cry about it in a fact-free tweet.

Want more? You'll have to wait. My wife has got some pre-Memorial Day chores for me.

The highlighted part is merely your opinion as I suspect that you have no evidence that he's undercut any efforts with his tweets. And more along that line of thinking, how do you know he's not cut way back on what he'd otherwise have to say about certain issues? Well, you don't.

You just don't like his style, I understand that, but that's his style and it's not going to change so perhaps your time would be more productive pounding sand?

Obama had lots of style, Quite the strking man he was, no? With a functioning teleprompter, he could give one hell of a speech, right? Phuck all that. I want results, and I want results that I believe will move the country forward. With Trump I believe we're getting that, despite his outbursts at 3 AM on twitter. BTW, I don't do twitter. Sounds too damned gay to me.

And yes, I want more examples of how the president could be more presidential in your view. Please be specific.

Okay, I'm back.

I didn't realize that opinions are off limits on this thread. That's going to make my homework assignment more difficult since (unlike apparently you) I don't have first-hand knowledge of what goes on day-to-day in the Trump playpen. But here are a few more (mostly fact-based) examples, in no particular order:

==> Appointing the "Mooch". That reckless decision was proved foolish in nearly record-breaking time.

==> Making the buffoon Joe Scarborough look sympathetic, by baselessly accusing him of being responsible for the death of a girl.

==> Smearing Ted Cruz's father with involvement in the Kennedy assassination. Trump may have cost himself a much better attorney general in doing so.

==> "Look at that face. Would anyone vote for that?" Donald Trump on Carly Fiorina.

==> Accusing a federal judge of bias, based only on his Mexican heritage. It may actually be true. But you'd better have a solid basis before saying something like that. Otherwise, you are no different than the progressives who like to cry "racist" at every opportunity.

That's all the homework that I am doing for you TechRocks. I get it. You have matching DJT sheets and pillow case. And that's fine. He's so far done a remarkable job. I just happen to think (yes, I know, another opinion) that he's positioned to do so much better. And that he's going to let us down -- because that's who he is.

(05-28-2018 03:34 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  Okay, I'm back.

I didn't realize that opinions are off limits on this thread. That's going to make my homework assignment more difficult since (unlike apparently you) I don't have first-hand knowledge of what goes on day-to-day in the Trump playpen. But here are a few more (mostly fact-based) examples, in no particular order:

==> Appointing the "Mooch". That reckless decision was proved foolish in nearly record-breaking time.

==> Making the buffoon Joe Scarborough look sympathetic, by baselessly accusing him of being responsible for the death of a girl.

==> Smearing Ted Cruz's father with involvement in the Kennedy assassination. Trump may have cost himself a much better attorney general in doing so.

==> "Look at that face. Would anyone vote for that?" Donald Trump on Carly Fiorina.

==> Accusing a federal judge of bias, based only on his Mexican heritage. It may actually be true. But you'd better have a solid basis before saying something like that. Otherwise, you are no different than the progressives who like to cry "racist" at every opportunity.

That's all the homework that I am doing for you TechRocks. I get it. You have matching DJT sheets and pillow case. And that's fine. He's so far done a remarkable job. I just happen to think (yes, I know, another opinion) that he's positioned to do so much better. And that he's going to let us down -- because that's who he is.

Where did I say opinions are off-limits? No where, right. So stop putting words in my mouth AGAIN.

We're all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. For the record, I do my best to separate my opinions from facts when making a point here and NEVER use an opinion to back up an assertion. If I don't provide a link to back up my assertion, usually done because I believe the assertion's validity is self-evident, then I have one at the ready in case someone challenges me. I hate being proved wrong, especially when it's so simple to do a bit of research before making an assertion.

Quote:The Congressional investigators (Nunes and Gowdy in particular) are doing just fine in trickling out very damning details about the Brennan-Clapper-Yates-Comey-McCabe cabal. Theiseefforts are undercut when Trump then comes lumbering in, like a toddler, just to cry about it in a fact-free tweet.

In that quoted paragraph above, you make an assertion that congressional investigators are doing just fine in how they're trickling out details about the opposition, then make the assertion that Trump is undermining their work by tweeting about it.

Do you realize that some would argue that what Trump does is enhance their work? Some would argue that every one of his tweets infuriates the MSM, who then repeat them as they blast him, making the story even bigger than it was before. How many liberals would never hear what Nunes and Gowdy have to say but become aware of it because CNN is whining about Trump tweets on the subject? DFMiner alludes to just that sort of thing in his posts.

The rest of your comments above are a reflection of what you see as character flaws on the part of Trump. That's fine that you feel that way. He makes me cringe sometimes too, but in the overall scheme of things, as I've said here repeatedly, I want results, not show. Everyone who voted for Trump knew what they were getting and probably had pretty-well figured out that at 70 years of age he wasn't going to change which is why I suggest that you expend emotional energy pounding sand instead of wishing Trump would be someone who he's not.

During the campaign, someone said of Trump, and I paraphrase: His opponents take him literally, but never take him seriously while his supporters take him seriously, but never take him literally.

That was a spot-on observation and one that I suggest your embrace if you'd like to continue supporting him but not be driven crazy by his off-the-cuff antics.

(05-28-2018 04:55 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(05-28-2018 03:34 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  Okay, I'm back.

I didn't realize that opinions are off limits on this thread. That's going to make my homework assignment more difficult since (unlike apparently you) I don't have first-hand knowledge of what goes on day-to-day in the Trump playpen. But here are a few more (mostly fact-based) examples, in no particular order:

==> Appointing the "Mooch". That reckless decision was proved foolish in nearly record-breaking time.

==> Making the buffoon Joe Scarborough look sympathetic, by baselessly accusing him of being responsible for the death of a girl.

==> Smearing Ted Cruz's father with involvement in the Kennedy assassination. Trump may have cost himself a much better attorney general in doing so.

==> "Look at that face. Would anyone vote for that?" Donald Trump on Carly Fiorina.

==> Accusing a federal judge of bias, based only on his Mexican heritage. It may actually be true. But you'd better have a solid basis before saying something like that. Otherwise, you are no different than the progressives who like to cry "racist" at every opportunity.

That's all the homework that I am doing for you TechRocks. I get it. You have matching DJT sheets and pillow case. And that's fine. He's so far done a remarkable job. I just happen to think (yes, I know, another opinion) that he's positioned to do so much better. And that he's going to let us down -- because that's who he is.

Where did I say opinions are off-limits? No where, right. So stop putting words in my mouth AGAIN.

We're all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. For the record, I do my best to separate my opinions from facts when making a point here and NEVER use an opinion to back up an assertion. If I don't provide a link to back up my assertion, usually done because I believe the assertion's validity is self-evident, then I have one at the ready in case someone challenges me. I hate being proved wrong, especially when it's so simple to do a bit of research before making an assertion.

Quote:The Congressional investigators (Nunes and Gowdy in particular) are doing just fine in trickling out very damning details about the Brennan-Clapper-Yates-Comey-McCabe cabal. Theiseefforts are undercut when Trump then comes lumbering in, like a toddler, just to cry about it in a fact-free tweet.

In that quoted paragraph above, you make an assertion that congressional investigators are doing just fine in how they're trickling out details about the opposition, then make the assertion that Trump is undermining their work by tweeting about it.

Do you realize that some would argue that what Trump does is enhance their work? Some would argue that every one of his tweets infuriates the MSM, who then repeat them as they blast him, making the story even bigger than it was before. How many liberals would never hear what Nunes and Gowdy have to say but become aware of it because CNN is whining about Trump tweets on the subject? DFMiner alludes to just that sort of thing in his posts.

The rest of your comments above are a reflection of what you see as character flaws on the part of Trump. That's fine that you feel that way. He makes me cringe sometimes too, but in the overall scheme of things, as I've said here repeatedly, I want results, not show. Everyone who voted for Trump knew what they were getting and probably had pretty-well figured out that at 70 years of age he wasn't going to change which is why I suggest that you expend emotional energy pounding sand instead of wishing Trump would be someone who he's not.

During the campaign, someone said of Trump, and I paraphrase: His opponents take him literally, but never take him seriously while his supporters take him seriously, but never take him literally.

That was a spot-on observation and one that I suggest your embrace if you'd like to continue supporting him but not be driven crazy by his off-the-cuff antics.

Trump is who he is.

He actually has toned things down from the campaign. But he's not going to suddenly turn into George W. Bush.

(05-28-2018 12:11 PM)DFWMINER Wrote:  

(05-27-2018 12:44 PM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  

(05-27-2018 11:57 AM)stinkfist Wrote:  [quote='TechRocks' pid='15316969' dateline='1527432406']
[quote='AdoptedMonarch' pid='15316955' dateline='1527431232']
[quote='EverRespect' pid='15316899' dateline='1527426947']
Every time she puts herself in the news, Trump gets a 5-point bump in the polls.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Sometimes I honestly wonder whether we're not all being played like puppets, being torn between a masterfully choreographed Clinton-Trump nightmare. It ultimately did not much matter as between the two of them which one prevailed, so long as they could continue to present themselves as an awful choice between two bad choices.

Since I personally find Hillary's screeching so much worse than Trump's incoherence, I guess the lesser evil prevailed.

I refer you to the second-from-bottom quote in your signature. When President Trump stops acting as a dipshite, I'll stop considering him one.

We as a nation are unquestionably better off today than we were 16 months ago. Is that due to the self-proclaimed brilliance of DJT, or just a natural outcome of our nation finally being able to economically breathe now that we are free of the bureaucratic and economic idiocy of the Obama administration?

President Trump certainly gets credit for erasing the Godawful Obama legacy. But I will not wear the MAGA hat until he shows us something more than merely arrogant and random discord.

I saw this the other day and I think it's a big reason why Trump was elected...

The mayor of Livermore California explains Trump’s popularity and success. This is perhaps the best explanation for Trump's popularity ....

Marshall Kamena is a registered Democrat and was elected mayor of Livermore, CA.. He ran on the democratic ticket as he knew a Bay Area city would never vote for a Republican. He is as conservative as they come. He wrote the following:

Trump’s 'lack of decorum, dignity, and statesmanship' By Marshall Kamena, Mayor of Livermore, CA.

My Leftist friends (as well as many ardent #NeverTrumpers) constantly ask me if I’m not bothered by Donald Trump’s lack of decorum. They ask if I don’t think his tweets are “beneath the dignity of the office.”

Here’s my answer: We Right-thinking people have tried dignity. There could not have been a man of more quiet dignity than George W. Bush as he suffered the outrageous lies and politically motivated hatreds that undermined his presidency.

We tried statesmanship.

Could there be another human being on this earth who so desperately prized “collegiality” as John McCain?

We tried propriety – has there been a nicer human being ever than Mitt Romney?

And the results were always the same. This is because, while we were playing by the rules of dignity, collegiality and propriety, the Left has been, for the past 60 years, engaged in a knife fight where the only rules are those of Saul Alinsky and the Chicago mob.

I don’t find anything “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper” about Barack Obama’s lying about what went down on the streets of Ferguson in order to ramp up racial hatreds because racial hatreds serve the Democratic Party.

I don’t see anything “dignified” in lying about the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi and imprisoning an innocent filmmaker to cover your tracks.

I don’t see anything “statesman-like” in weaponizing the IRS to be used to destroy your political opponents and any dissent.

Yes, Obama was “articulate” and “polished” but in no way was he in the least bit “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper.”

The Left has been engaged in a war against America since the rise of the Children of the ‘60s. To them, it has been an all-out war where nothing is held sacred and nothing is seen as beyond the pale.. It has been a war they’ve fought with violence, the threat of violence, demagoguery and lies from day one – the violent take-over of the universities – till today.

The problem is that, through these years, the Left has been the only side fighting this war. While the Left has been taking a knife to anyone who stands in their way, the Right has continued to act with dignity, collegiality and propriety.

With Donald Trump, this all has come to an end. Donald Trump is America ’s first wartime president in the Culture War.

During wartime, things like “dignity” and “collegiality” simply aren’t the most essential qualities one looks for in their warriors. Ulysses Grant was a drunk whose behavior in peacetime might well have seen him drummed out of the Army for conduct unbecoming.

Had Abraham Lincoln applied the peacetime rules of propriety and booted Grant, the Democrats might well still be holding their slaves today.

Lincoln rightly recognized that, “I cannot spare this man. He fights.”

General George Patton was a vulgar-talking.. In peacetime, this might have seen him stripped of rank. But, had Franklin Roosevelt applied the normal rules of decorum then, Hitler and the Socialists would barely be five decades into their thousand-year Reich.

Trump is fighting. And what’s particularly delicious is that, like Patton standing over the battlefield as his tanks obliterated Rommel’s, he’s shouting, “You magnificent bastards, I read your book!”

That is just the icing on the cake, but it’s wonderful to see that not only is Trump fighting, he’s defeating the Left using their own tactics. That book is Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals – a book so essential to the Liberals’ war against America that it is and was the playbook for the entire Obama administration and the subject of Hillary Clinton’s senior thesis.

It is a book of such pure evil, that, just as the rest of us would dedicate our book to those we most love or those to whom we are most indebted, Alinsky dedicated his book to Lucifer.

Trump’s tweets may seem rash and unconsidered but, in reality, he is doing exactly what Alinsky suggested his followers do. First, instead of going after “the fake media” — and they are so fake that they have literally gotten every single significant story of the past 60 years not just wrong, but diametrically opposed to the truth, from the Tet Offensive to Benghazi, to what really happened on the streets of Ferguson, Missouri — Trump isolated CNN.. He made it personal.

Then, just as Alinsky suggests, he employs ridicule which Alinsky described as “the most powerful weapon of all.”... Most importantly, Trump’s tweets have put CNN in an untenable and unwinnable position. ... They need to respond.

This leaves them with only two choices. They can either “go high” (as Hillary would disingenuously declare of herself and the fake news would disingenuously report as the truth) and begin to honestly and accurately report the news or they can double-down on their usual tactics and hope to defeat Trump with twice their usual hysteria and demagoguery. The problem for CNN (et al.) with the former is that, if they were to start honestly reporting the news, that would be the end of the Democratic Party they serve. It is nothing but the incessant use of fake news (read: propaganda) that keeps the Left alive.

Imagine, for example, if CNN had honestly and accurately reported then-candidate Barack Obama’s close ties to foreign terrorists (Rashid Khalidi), domestic terrorists (William Ayers & Bernardine Dohrn), the mafia (Tony Rezko) or the true evils of his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright’s church.

Imagine if they had honestly and accurately conveyed the evils of the Obama administration’s weaponizing of the IRS to be used against their political opponents or his running of guns to the Mexican cartels or the truth about the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the Obama administration’s cover-up.

So, to my friends on the Left — and the #NeverTrumpers as well — do I wish we lived in a time when our president could be “collegial” and “dignified” and “proper”? Of course I do.

These aren’t those times. This is war. And it’s a war that the Left has been fighting without opposition for the past 50 years.

So, say anything you want about this president - I get it - he can be vulgar, he can be crude, he can be undignified at times. I don’t care. I can’t spare this man. He fights for America!

That has to be the best explanation of this president I have read yet. Excellent in every aspect.

To get back to the OP. The electoral college is there to protect the rural parts of the country. It is there to make all Americans votes important. Otherwise candidates would only pay attention to the metropolitan areas where voters are stacked on top of each other.
If we did away with it then politicians would only campaign in NYC, Chicago, LA and San Francisco. While that would be great for HRC it would do injustice to 95% of the country.

1. The Constitution would never have been ratified without the Electoral College, or some other parliamentary device that served a similar purpose. It was an absolute, point-blank requirement to get the smaller-population states on board.

2. Getting rid of the Electoral College will require a Constitutional amendment.

3. Such an amendment would require support from at least some of the smaller states that benefit from the Electoral College.

4. There has never been — not once, in 230 years — a credible/serious attempt to remove the Electoral College and there is no sign that such an attempt is at hand. Just whining from a sore loser candidate who can’t move on with her life.

Oh, by the way, that article by the “mayor of Livermore” is nice but it was written by a conservative columnist named Evan Sayet for townhall.com and published in a July 2017.

Marshall Kamena was a non-partisan (at least, officially) mayor of Livermore from 2001-2011. He may have forwarded or linked-to Sayet’s article, or something like that but he is not the original author.

The electoral college will always be in place. Always.

No matter how loud the libs biatch.

Liberals complain about the Electoral College but how many conservatives have you heard call for redoing the electoral system due to the large cities swaying the votes for an entire state ?

None. Think about it.

(05-27-2018 02:59 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(05-27-2018 02:45 PM)Ohio Poly Wrote:  

(05-26-2018 11:28 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  Sure, California, New York, and a handful of other NE states should decide the presidental election each year. Certainly what our founding fathers had in mind.

The people of the U.S. should decide the presidential election each year. That's what HRC rightly points out is not happening.

BOTH you and HRC are completely IGNORANT of the way our founding fathers set up our government. It is a representative republic NOT a democracy and it was set up like that intentionally. It is NOT out of date, it functions as intended. If HRC wanted to win in 2017 she shouldn't have taken the month of August off, she also should have spent time in the "heartland" Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, instead of largely ignoring them. The great thing about a representative republic as the US is set up, it's still a national campaign except for the looney left cost and the libtard north-east.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volo...c16ddd2cee