Do you still think Trump will win?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Someone is going to run against trump in Nov next year.

a reply to: Plotus

There will never be a landslide in trumps favor.
He is not that popular.
He barely squeaked by last time.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Will donna brazille and nbc be handing out debate questions early again?
F'n cheaters

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Plotus

There will never be a landslide in trumps favor.
He is not that popular.
He barely squeaked by last time.

Yeah no path to 270 right?
Your predictions lack

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Admitted
If it were an ATS poll, Trump would be forecast to win in a landslide.

In the real world, no. If he does win, he will scrape by as he did in 2016 with crafty, specific, targeting of just the right demographics. He's a great campaigner, self-promoter, and strategizer. Unfortunately it's only to fill his needs of adoration. He doesn't care about the issues our country has, only about speaking to what maintains the support of his base.

I'm concerned he will do absolutely anything to win in order to avoid criminal charges of obstruction when out of office before the statute of limitations expire. Really, I think that's a main concern of his. I don't see Trump as a guy that ever wanted to be President. If he had a way out in which he wouldn't lose his "street cred" he'd take it.

The moment you spouted criminal charges of obstruction, it rendered your post MOOT as there isn't anything there to suggest that in any way shape or form.

As is your reasoning that he'll "scrap by", Trump didn't "Scrap by" at all.

The moment you quoted me as saying "scrap by", not once but twice, your post was rendered moot.

You just don't like what I'm saying because it's anti-Trump. You can just say that. And quote me spelling words correctly.

As for there being nothing to support criminal charges of obstruction when he is out of office, read the Mueller report and try to understand why Mueller didn't pursue criminal charges against a sitting President. He absolutely could be charged when out of office. If not re-elected that is.

You're basically spewing left wing propaganda. The Democrats want to charge him, not anyone else, which is also why Mueller didn't find a crime and didn't charge the President as that is his role and job as Prosecutor.

The BS you're regurgitating is exactly what we all have been talking and pointing out, thanks for reinforcing our views about the witch hunt and once again, keep trying 😌

You're welcome! Your need of reinforcement and reassurance seems never-ending.

Mueller didn't pursue criminal charges against the President (or even look - remember him saying it was not a criminal investigation into the President?) because of the OLC policy not to charge a sitting president. This is why he says Congress needs to address it. He isn't going to say the President committed a crime because it isn't his place to do so, not against a sitting President. Plenty of others, however, close to the President, were indicted. It's no talking point it's just what has happened.

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: PhilbertDezineck

originally posted by: eManym
Al Gore has announced his candidacy. If he is nominated by the Dems, that may be the best chance they have at winning the presidency. Trump is doing a good job but he could be doing better.

He could do a better job with the cooperation of the Congress But that wont happen

Great job. Unfortunately he won't be around to pay off all the debt he has made pretending to be doing a good job.

Would look like I was doing great if I took out a mortgage worth of credit every day. Until the interest passed my earnings of coarse.

When he doubles the national debt like Bozo did then I will become concerned.

He has certainly surpassed Obama after the recovery (which was handed off to him)

Obama was bad but this is far worse. Especially since conservatives now dont care.

originally posted by: Fools

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Fools

Really seemed like a race war out there on the media.

In the media yeah, in reality, no.

It makes brains wonder. Just not enough brains.

I checked out years ago...I don't know why people even watch. It's like a sick masochism.

a reply to: shooterbrody

Unless the economy takes a dump. Then he is toast.

a reply to: luthier
Nope
The dem candidates are hot garbage

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: luthier
Nope
The dem candidates are hot garbage

No one will care. Trump has owned this economy like a fool so he can't distance himself..he is already loosing the suburbs which is why he will pass the gun legislation


Then loose some actual 2nd amendment supporters...etc..

a reply to: JAGStorm

Yes, he will still win.

All of the things you mentioned are over-exaggerated by the media.

a reply to: LSU2018

Like what the national debt reaching the military budget in yearly interest payments. With 4 trillion from trump by 2020?

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Admitted
If it were an ATS poll, Trump would be forecast to win in a landslide.

In the real world, no. If he does win, he will scrape by as he did in 2016 with crafty, specific, targeting of just the right demographics. He's a great campaigner, self-promoter, and strategizer. Unfortunately it's only to fill his needs of adoration. He doesn't care about the issues our country has, only about speaking to what maintains the support of his base.

I'm concerned he will do absolutely anything to win in order to avoid criminal charges of obstruction when out of office before the statute of limitations expire. Really, I think that's a main concern of his. I don't see Trump as a guy that ever wanted to be President. If he had a way out in which he wouldn't lose his "street cred" he'd take it.

The moment you spouted criminal charges of obstruction, it rendered your post MOOT as there isn't anything there to suggest that in any way shape or form.

As is your reasoning that he'll "scrap by", Trump didn't "Scrap by" at all.

The moment you quoted me as saying "scrap by", not once but twice, your post was rendered moot.

You just don't like what I'm saying because it's anti-Trump. You can just say that. And quote me spelling words correctly.

As for there being nothing to support criminal charges of obstruction when he is out of office, read the Mueller report and try to understand why Mueller didn't pursue criminal charges against a sitting President. He absolutely could be charged when out of office. If not re-elected that is.

You're basically spewing left wing propaganda. The Democrats want to charge him, not anyone else, which is also why Mueller didn't find a crime and didn't charge the President as that is his role and job as Prosecutor.

The BS you're regurgitating is exactly what we all have been talking and pointing out, thanks for reinforcing our views about the witch hunt and once again, keep trying 😌

You're welcome! Your need of reinforcement and reassurance seems never-ending.

Mueller didn't pursue criminal charges against the President (or even look - remember him saying it was not a criminal investigation into the President?) because of the OLC policy not to charge a sitting president. This is why he says Congress needs to address it. He isn't going to say the President committed a crime because it isn't his place to do so, not against a sitting President. Plenty of others, however, close to the President, were indicted. It's no talking point it's just what has happened.

Absolutely and you are indeed correct as to my persistence is endless, especially when those fellow Americans have been consuming liberal media, i.e., fake news.

“That is not the correct way to say it,” Mueller said. “As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime.”

They could not determine a crime, therefore, the OLC guideline wasn't the reasoning for, and as you say, this wasn't a criminal investigation into the President.

There is no point for this to go to Congress as the final decision ultimately laid at Barrs feet, who's determination is based off the traditional understanding that a President can be held for Obstruction through BLATANT criminal conduct, e.g., witness tampering, bribery, etc.
By contrast, the "Angry Democrat" (Trump et al) partisan lawyers on Mullers team operated under a broad and expansive contruction of Onstruction, for example, firing of a director or agency lead, to include Special Prosecutor if deemed the Presidents motives were corrupt.

The reason it needed to get to Congress was not because they were working for Justice, lol, they were hoping to kick it off to Congressional Democrats in the hopes to start Impeachment inquiries, at the very least, hurt Trump politically.

Truth is, they failed. Attorney General Barr is an old school professional, former swamp creature, turned good, he saw through the BS and Muellers team knew it.

You're Welcome 😐

a reply to: luthier

Every time anything positive is said about the economy it's Obama's. Whenever someone wants to say something bad it's Trump's. I guess consistency is too much to ask for.

a reply to: luthier

The only way to reduce the budget is a serious reduction in entitlements. No one will do it because it is suicide. It is almost inevitable we will go over the cliff because people are morons and politicians are spineless wimps who only care about re-election.

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: luthier
Nope
The dem candidates are hot garbage

No one will care. Trump has owned this economy like a fool so he can't distance himself..he is already loosing the suburbs which is why he will pass the gun legislation


Then loose some actual 2nd amendment supporters...etc..

Nope
He will gain the suburban female vote
Wont lose any 2a voters
The dems want gun confiscation

originally posted by: eManym
I just caught this news article:

Al Gore, Saying “What The Hell?,” Throws Hat Into 2020 Rac

Yay!...Another old Democrat White guy is running.

-----------------------------------------------------

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Admitted

originally posted by: Arnie123

originally posted by: Admitted
If it were an ATS poll, Trump would be forecast to win in a landslide.

In the real world, no. If he does win, he will scrape by as he did in 2016 with crafty, specific, targeting of just the right demographics. He's a great campaigner, self-promoter, and strategizer. Unfortunately it's only to fill his needs of adoration. He doesn't care about the issues our country has, only about speaking to what maintains the support of his base.

I'm concerned he will do absolutely anything to win in order to avoid criminal charges of obstruction when out of office before the statute of limitations expire. Really, I think that's a main concern of his. I don't see Trump as a guy that ever wanted to be President. If he had a way out in which he wouldn't lose his "street cred" he'd take it.

The moment you spouted criminal charges of obstruction, it rendered your post MOOT as there isn't anything there to suggest that in any way shape or form.

As is your reasoning that he'll "scrap by", Trump didn't "Scrap by" at all.

The moment you quoted me as saying "scrap by", not once but twice, your post was rendered moot.

You just don't like what I'm saying because it's anti-Trump. You can just say that. And quote me spelling words correctly.

As for there being nothing to support criminal charges of obstruction when he is out of office, read the Mueller report and try to understand why Mueller didn't pursue criminal charges against a sitting President. He absolutely could be charged when out of office. If not re-elected that is.

You're basically spewing left wing propaganda. The Democrats want to charge him, not anyone else, which is also why Mueller didn't find a crime and didn't charge the President as that is his role and job as Prosecutor.

The BS you're regurgitating is exactly what we all have been talking and pointing out, thanks for reinforcing our views about the witch hunt and once again, keep trying 😌

You're welcome! Your need of reinforcement and reassurance seems never-ending.

Mueller didn't pursue criminal charges against the President (or even look - remember him saying it was not a criminal investigation into the President?) because of the OLC policy not to charge a sitting president. This is why he says Congress needs to address it. He isn't going to say the President committed a crime because it isn't his place to do so, not against a sitting President. Plenty of others, however, close to the President, were indicted. It's no talking point it's just what has happened.

Absolutely and you are indeed correct as to my persistence is endless, especially when those fellow Americans have been consuming liberal media, i.e., fake news.

“That is not the correct way to say it,” Mueller said. “As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime.”

They could not determine a crime, therefore, the OLC guideline wasn't the reasoning for, and as you say, this wasn't a criminal investigation into the President.

There is no point for this to go to Congress as the final decision ultimately laid at Barrs feet, who's determination is based off the traditional understanding that a President can be held for Obstruction through BLATANT criminal conduct, e.g., witness tampering, bribery, etc.
By contrast, the "Angry Democrat" (Trump et al) partisan lawyers on Mullers team operated under a broad and expansive contruction of Onstruction, for example, firing of a director or agency lead, to include Special Prosecutor if deemed the Presidents motives were corrupt.

The reason it needed to get to Congress was not because they were working for Justice, lol, they were hoping to kick it off to Congressional Democrats in the hopes to start Impeachment inquiries, at the very least, hurt Trump politically.

Truth is, they failed. Attorney General Barr is an old school professional, former swamp creature, turned good, he saw through the BS and Muellers team knew it.

You're Welcome 😐

Your quote from Mueller:

"That's not the correct way to say it," Mueller said. "We did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime."

Is followed by this (also Mueller):

"Based on Justice Department policy and principles of fairness, we decided we would not make a determination as to whether the President committed a crime. That was our decision then and it remains our decision today."

He didn't reach a determination not because there wasn't a crime but due to the OLC policy of not indicting a sitting president it would not have been appropriate for him to go down that path (to even begin that line of investigation). Not appropriate to say, "he's guilty but I can't charge him". Mueller actually has integrity. It wouldn't be fair to Trump for Mueller to say such and Trump cannot be charged and thus defend himself in court.

My belief is that would be diferent were Trump to not get a second term.

And it is up to Congress to investigate the President, and impeach if evidence is found, that's their job. It wasn't for Mueller to do.

I agree it's a waste of time. Nothing will get done in Congress and impeachment is useless here. He'll only be out of office if the people vote him out, as it should be I think.

The Dems know that none of their current Candidates have a hope in hell of beating Trump. I believe that by the end of the year they will roll out Michelle Obama as a hail-Mary, and "she" will be the Democratic nominee.

a reply to: IamAbeliever

Is " " a code? Pretty clever I see what you did there.