Thread Rating:
05-19-2016, 02:05 AM
The names of several people he is considering for the SCOTUS.
Everything below has been copied and pasted from Donald Trump's page. As of this point, I have no comment on the justices as I am yet to research them with the exception of a couple I know a bit about. But thought I would put this out there for discussion.
DONALD J. TRUMP RELEASES LIST OF POTENTIAL UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JUSTICES
(New York, NY) May 18, 2016 - Today Donald J. Trump released the much-anticipated list of people he would consider as potential replacements for Justice Scalia at the United States Supreme Court. This list was compiled, first and foremost, based on constitutional principles, with input from highly respected conservatives and Republican Party leadership.
Mr. Trump stated, âJustice Scalia was a remarkable person and a brilliant Supreme Court Justice. His career was defined by his reverence for the Constitution and his legacy of protecting Americansâ most cherished freedoms. He was a Justice who did not believe in legislating from the bench and he is a person whom I held in the highest regard and will always greatly respect his intelligence and conviction to uphold the Constitution of our country. The following list of potential Supreme Court justices is representative of the kind of constitutional principles I value and, as President, I plan to use this list as a guide to nominate our next United States Supreme Court Justices.â
Steven Colloton
Steven Colloton of Iowa is a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, a position he has held since President George W. Bush appointed him in 2003. Judge Colloton has a résumé that also includes distinguished service as the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa, a Special Assistant to the Attorney General in the Justice Departmentâs Office of Legal Counsel, and a lecturer of law at the University of Iowa. He received his law degree from Yale, and he clerked for Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Judge Colloton is an Iowa native.
Allison Eid
Allison Eid of Colorado is an associate justice of the Colorado Supreme Court. Colorado Governor Bill Owens appointed her to the seat in 2006; she was later retained for a full term by the voters (with 75% of voters favoring retention). Prior to her judicial service, Justice Eid served as Coloradoâs solicitor general and as a law professor at the University of Colorado. Justice Eid attended the University of Chicago Law School, and she clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas.
Raymond Gruender
Raymond Gruender of Missouri has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit since his 2004 appointment by President George W. Bush. Judge Gruender, who sits in St. Louis, Missouri, has extensive prosecutorial experience, culminating with his time as the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri. Judge Gruender received a law degree and an M.B.A. from Washington University in St. Louis.
Thomas Hardiman
Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit since 2007. Prior to serving as a circuit judge, he served as a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania since 2003. Before his judicial service, Judge Hardiman worked in private practice in Washington, D.C. and Pittsburgh. Judge Hardiman was the first in his family to attend college, graduating from Notre Dame.
Raymond Kethledge
Raymond Kethledge of Michigan has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit since 2008. Before his judicial service, Judge Kethledge served as judiciary counsel to Michigan Senator Spencer Abraham, worked as a partner in two law firms, and worked as an in-house counsel for the Ford Motor Company. Judge Kethledge obtained his law degree from the University of Michigan and clerked for Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Joan Larsen
Joan Larsen of Michigan is an Associate Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court. Justice Larsen was a professor at the University of Michigan School of Law from 1998 until her appointment to the bench. In 2002, she temporarily left academia to work as an Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Departmentâs Office of Legal Counsel. Justice Larsen received her law degree from Northwestern and clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia.
Thomas Lee
Thomas Lee of Utah has been an Associate Justice of the Utah Supreme Court since 2010. Beginning in 1997, he served on the faculty of Brigham Young University Law School, where he still teaches in an adjunct capacity. Justice Lee was Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Departmentâs Civil Division from 2004 to 2005. Justice Lee attended the University of Chicago Law School, and he clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas. Justice Lee is also the son of former U.S. Solicitor General Rex Lee and the brother of current U.S. Senator Mike Lee.
William Pryor
William H. Pryor, Jr. of Alabama is a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. He has served on the court since 2004. Judge Pryor became the Alabama Attorney General in 1997 upon Jeff Sessionsâs election to the U.S. Senate. Judge Pryor was then elected in his own right in 1998 and reelected in 2002. In 2013, Judge Pryor was confirmed to a term on the United States Sentencing Commission. Judge Pryor received his law degree from Tulane, and he clerked for Judge John Minor Wisdom of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
David Stras
David Stras of Minnesota has been an Associate Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court since 2010. After his initial appointment, he was elected to a six-year term in 2012. Prior to his judicial service, Judge Stras worked as a legal academic at the University of Minnesota Law School. In his time there, he wrote extensively about the function and structure of the judiciary. Justice Stras received his law degree and an M.B.A. from the University of Kansas. He clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas.
Diane Sykes
Diane Sykes of Wisconsin has served as a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit since 2004. Prior to her federal appointment, Judge Sykes had been a Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court since 1999 and a Wisconsin trial court judge of both civil and criminal matters before that. Judge Sykes received her law degree from Marquette.
Don Willett
Don Willett of Texas has been a Justice of the Texas Supreme Court since 2005. He was initially appointed by Governor Rick Perry and has been reelected by the voters twice. Prior to his judicial service, Judge Willett worked as a senior fellow at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, as an advisor in George W. Bushâs gubernatorial and presidential administrations, as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Departmentâs Office of Legal Policy, and as a Deputy Attorney General under then-Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott. Justice Willett received his law degree and a masterâs degree from Duke.
Everything below has been copied and pasted from Donald Trump's page. As of this point, I have no comment on the justices as I am yet to research them with the exception of a couple I know a bit about. But thought I would put this out there for discussion.
DONALD J. TRUMP RELEASES LIST OF POTENTIAL UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JUSTICES
(New York, NY) May 18, 2016 - Today Donald J. Trump released the much-anticipated list of people he would consider as potential replacements for Justice Scalia at the United States Supreme Court. This list was compiled, first and foremost, based on constitutional principles, with input from highly respected conservatives and Republican Party leadership.
Mr. Trump stated, âJustice Scalia was a remarkable person and a brilliant Supreme Court Justice. His career was defined by his reverence for the Constitution and his legacy of protecting Americansâ most cherished freedoms. He was a Justice who did not believe in legislating from the bench and he is a person whom I held in the highest regard and will always greatly respect his intelligence and conviction to uphold the Constitution of our country. The following list of potential Supreme Court justices is representative of the kind of constitutional principles I value and, as President, I plan to use this list as a guide to nominate our next United States Supreme Court Justices.â
Steven Colloton
Steven Colloton of Iowa is a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, a position he has held since President George W. Bush appointed him in 2003. Judge Colloton has a résumé that also includes distinguished service as the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa, a Special Assistant to the Attorney General in the Justice Departmentâs Office of Legal Counsel, and a lecturer of law at the University of Iowa. He received his law degree from Yale, and he clerked for Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Judge Colloton is an Iowa native.
Allison Eid
Allison Eid of Colorado is an associate justice of the Colorado Supreme Court. Colorado Governor Bill Owens appointed her to the seat in 2006; she was later retained for a full term by the voters (with 75% of voters favoring retention). Prior to her judicial service, Justice Eid served as Coloradoâs solicitor general and as a law professor at the University of Colorado. Justice Eid attended the University of Chicago Law School, and she clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas.
Raymond Gruender
Raymond Gruender of Missouri has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit since his 2004 appointment by President George W. Bush. Judge Gruender, who sits in St. Louis, Missouri, has extensive prosecutorial experience, culminating with his time as the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri. Judge Gruender received a law degree and an M.B.A. from Washington University in St. Louis.
Thomas Hardiman
Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit since 2007. Prior to serving as a circuit judge, he served as a judge of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania since 2003. Before his judicial service, Judge Hardiman worked in private practice in Washington, D.C. and Pittsburgh. Judge Hardiman was the first in his family to attend college, graduating from Notre Dame.
Raymond Kethledge
Raymond Kethledge of Michigan has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit since 2008. Before his judicial service, Judge Kethledge served as judiciary counsel to Michigan Senator Spencer Abraham, worked as a partner in two law firms, and worked as an in-house counsel for the Ford Motor Company. Judge Kethledge obtained his law degree from the University of Michigan and clerked for Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Joan Larsen
Joan Larsen of Michigan is an Associate Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court. Justice Larsen was a professor at the University of Michigan School of Law from 1998 until her appointment to the bench. In 2002, she temporarily left academia to work as an Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Departmentâs Office of Legal Counsel. Justice Larsen received her law degree from Northwestern and clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia.
Thomas Lee
Thomas Lee of Utah has been an Associate Justice of the Utah Supreme Court since 2010. Beginning in 1997, he served on the faculty of Brigham Young University Law School, where he still teaches in an adjunct capacity. Justice Lee was Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Departmentâs Civil Division from 2004 to 2005. Justice Lee attended the University of Chicago Law School, and he clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas. Justice Lee is also the son of former U.S. Solicitor General Rex Lee and the brother of current U.S. Senator Mike Lee.
William Pryor
William H. Pryor, Jr. of Alabama is a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. He has served on the court since 2004. Judge Pryor became the Alabama Attorney General in 1997 upon Jeff Sessionsâs election to the U.S. Senate. Judge Pryor was then elected in his own right in 1998 and reelected in 2002. In 2013, Judge Pryor was confirmed to a term on the United States Sentencing Commission. Judge Pryor received his law degree from Tulane, and he clerked for Judge John Minor Wisdom of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
David Stras
David Stras of Minnesota has been an Associate Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court since 2010. After his initial appointment, he was elected to a six-year term in 2012. Prior to his judicial service, Judge Stras worked as a legal academic at the University of Minnesota Law School. In his time there, he wrote extensively about the function and structure of the judiciary. Justice Stras received his law degree and an M.B.A. from the University of Kansas. He clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas.
Diane Sykes
Diane Sykes of Wisconsin has served as a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit since 2004. Prior to her federal appointment, Judge Sykes had been a Justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court since 1999 and a Wisconsin trial court judge of both civil and criminal matters before that. Judge Sykes received her law degree from Marquette.
Don Willett
Don Willett of Texas has been a Justice of the Texas Supreme Court since 2005. He was initially appointed by Governor Rick Perry and has been reelected by the voters twice. Prior to his judicial service, Judge Willett worked as a senior fellow at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, as an advisor in George W. Bushâs gubernatorial and presidential administrations, as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Departmentâs Office of Legal Policy, and as a Deputy Attorney General under then-Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott. Justice Willett received his law degree and a masterâs degree from Duke.
![[-]](https://bluegrassrivals.com/forum/images/lifestyle/collapse.png)
05-19-2016, 03:20 AM
"This list ought to be encouraging to anyone who prioritizes the rule of law, and I congratulate Mr. Trump on making a very significant policy statement about his desire to prioritize the future of the Supreme Court," said Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network, a group leading the opposition to President Barack's Obama's pick to replace Scalia, Merrick Garland.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, a Republican who has refused to hold a hearing to consider Garland's appointment to the high court, said Trump has "laid out an impressive list of highly qualified jurists."
http://elections.ap.org/content/trump-un...ourt-picks
Impressive list by any conservative standard. Like I said, give the man a chance. :Thumbs:
The left are already suffering convulsive muscle tics.
"Clinton, meanwhile, had warned before Wednesday that Trump's picks for the court would roll back the rights of individuals and further empower corporations. Ilyse Hogue, the president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, which has endorsed Clinton, panned the list as "a woman's worst nightmare."
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, a Republican who has refused to hold a hearing to consider Garland's appointment to the high court, said Trump has "laid out an impressive list of highly qualified jurists."
http://elections.ap.org/content/trump-un...ourt-picks
Impressive list by any conservative standard. Like I said, give the man a chance. :Thumbs:
The left are already suffering convulsive muscle tics.
"Clinton, meanwhile, had warned before Wednesday that Trump's picks for the court would roll back the rights of individuals and further empower corporations. Ilyse Hogue, the president of NARAL Pro-Choice America, which has endorsed Clinton, panned the list as "a woman's worst nightmare."
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
05-19-2016, 05:16 AM
Very good list from our future Pres.
05-19-2016, 02:55 PM
I was a little surprised with Don Willet being on the list. Not because of his work on the bench as much as his views towards Trump. Nonetheless this will put pressure on some people and not necessarily just Dems. I do hope it alleviates some concerns. I know everyone can't be on the same page, that's just life but hopefully it will bring some more around. After seeing the video of the Dems in Nevada, i'm pretty sure they are in disarray at the moment 
nicker:
nicker:
05-19-2016, 03:51 PM
^I saw that, too. Appears both political parties are in disarray at the moment. Perhaps it's time to over haul the entire election process.
I'm with Wide on this one. I need to do a little studying about it before commenting.
I'm with Wide on this one. I need to do a little studying about it before commenting.
05-19-2016, 08:43 PM
If everyone would like, I could do a breakdown of these judges once I get a chance to research them.
Other than that, right now all I have to add is that Donald Trump mentioned via Twitter that we may see more potential nominees in coming weeks.
Other than that, right now all I have to add is that Donald Trump mentioned via Twitter that we may see more potential nominees in coming weeks.
05-19-2016, 11:25 PM
WideRight05 Wrote:If everyone would like, I could do a breakdown of these judges once I get a chance to research them.Knowledge is never a bad thing, Wide, but this list is just another cheap, clumsy Trump political device. Putting together a list of conservative judges does not cost Trump anything and it should get him some support from conservatives who are on the fence between voting for him and casting a protest vote.
Other than that, right now all I have to add is that Donald Trump mentioned via Twitter that we may see more potential nominees in coming weeks.
Putting Don Willett in the list was a shrewd but cynical move. Trump would never nominate a vocal Trump critic to any position, let alone a lifetime appointment that would place him in a position to swat down part of Trump's agenda. OTOH, if Willett is an ambitious man with his heart set on being on the SC, then maybe he will tone down his tweets about Trump.
Putting Willett on a list of 11 judges when the winner in November is unlikely to appoint more than 4 justices is a no brainer. But the list, like Trump's many strong positions that are now being called "suggestions" does not bind Trump in any way. If Trump is elected, he is a likely one term president, and he will be relatively immune to political pressure from the right.
Even if Trump were serious about this list, calling the 11 judges on the list pro-life does nothing to improve their chances of ever winning Senate confirmation. Trump should have released the list and then left it to others to speculate on the judicial philosophies of the jurists. He should have stressed their records as judges who believe the Constitution means what it says and left it to others to characterize the judges as pro-life Constitutionalists.
In other words, it looks like a great list, but a great list of other people does not make Trump look any more fit for the job. I would have been much more impressed if Trump could describe the attributes that his nominees for the Supreme Court will have instead of having one of his minions throw together a list for him.
This is a man who lied about self financing his campaign for the entire primary season, despite ample evidence that he was not being honest. I hope people do not really believe that this list is any kind of commitment to appoint judges who will make conservatives happy. It isn't. It is a list of names that was assembled for purely political purposes.
05-20-2016, 12:20 AM
^^Remind me again, how many of your dour and gloomy prognostications have come to fruition thus far? Cause I can't remember a single one.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
05-20-2016, 12:24 AM
TheRealThing Wrote:^^Remind me again, how many of your dour and gloomy prognostications have come to fruition this far? Cause I can't remember a single one.I just reminded you of a big one in the post that you just dismissed. Donald Trump was never a self funded candidate and always intended to have donors repay the personal loans that he made to his campaign. Are you disputing that fact? Are you disputing that I have been predicting that was Trump's intent for months? Or are you going to admit the truth?
05-20-2016, 12:25 AM
I haven't finished all the reading I want to do about this list, but from what I have gathered so far, I tend to like the list. It's diverse, and so far the ones I have researched have valid credentials. Some of them, even more valid....to the point of being impressive.
05-20-2016, 12:59 AM
So now we are slowly transitioning from Trump can't win to Trump will be a one time president. Seems I heard that about Obama as well. Keep guessing Hoot, I'm pulling for ya to get one right nicker:
nicker:
05-20-2016, 04:19 AM
Hoot Gibson Wrote:I just reminded you of a big one in the post that you just dismissed. Donald Trump was never a self funded candidate and always intended to have donors repay the personal loans that he made to his campaign. Are you disputing that fact? Are you disputing that I have been predicting that was Trump's intent for months? Or are you going to admit the truth?
It's only big in your mind. He got the nomination on his own, anybody who wants to contribute now knows what they're getting.
Part of the point Trump was making is that whoever the establishment would have backed, whether Jeb Bush or Rubio, whoever, it would have been the same old ridiculousness. More politically correct nonsense, more shrinking from the threat of Democrat buzz words or names. I mean look at what Paul Ryan has been saying, he's so thoroughly whipped and coopted into the liberal fold, his rhetoric now sounds much more like a Democrat than a Republican. And that's the point, we have the liberal Dems and the liberal Republicans (RINO's) But he's supposedly very concerned about Trump's attitude about Muslims, illegal immigrants, women, minorities, and according to him, that attitude does not reflect the values of the Republican establishment and they are concerned all those folks might be insulted in some way. :please:
They're voting for him in droves the last I heard. Hillary's negatives have now surpassed Trump's and after all, the only reason Trump's negatives were so high in the first place is attributable to an unfortunate truth. That being the fact that nearly every voter in this land gets their opinion given to them by the liberal media. They're the main slime merchants in all of this although, I did correctly predict that establishment Republicans would form an unholy alliance with the Dems and the liberal media. But the truth has now begun to shine through and Trump will win in an historic landslide this fall.
I still say you're 0 fer.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
05-20-2016, 04:40 AM
TheRealThing Wrote:It's only big in your mind. He got the nomination on his own, anybody who wants to contribute now knows what they're getting.Transparent denial of the facts on your part. What difference does it make when a candidate is bought by special interests? Trump lied to you about taking money from special interests and you cannot admit that you were wrong.
Part of the point Trump was making is that whoever the establishment would have backed, whether Jeb Bush or Rubio, whoever, it would have been the same old ridiculousness. More politically correct nonsense, more shrinking from the threat of Democrat buzz words or names. I mean look at what Paul Ryan has been saying, he's so thoroughly whipped and coopted into the liberal fold, his rhetoric now sounds much more like a Democrat than a Republican. And that's the point, we have the liberal Dems and the liberal Republicans (RINO's) But he's supposedly very concerned about Trump's attitude about Muslims, illegal immigrants, women, minorities, and according to him, that attitude does not reflect the values of the Republican establishment and they are concerned all those folks might be insulted in some way. :please:
They're voting for him in droves the last I heard. Hillary's negatives have now surpassed Trump's and after all, the only reason Trump's negatives were so high in the first place is attributable to an unfortunate truth. That being the fact that nearly every voter in this land gets their opinion given to them by the liberal media. They're the main slime merchants in all of this although, I did correctly predict that establishment Republicans would form an unholy alliance with the Dems and the liberal media. But the truth has now begun to shine through and Trump will win in an historic landslide this fall.
I still say you're 0 fer.
What you are saying is that if Candidate A loans himself $20 million (while insisting he is financing his own campaign) in the primary season and then accepts then accepts $500 million during the general campaign from special interests (and uses $20 million to repay himself) and Candidate B accepts $20 million in special interest donations in the primary campaign and another $480 million in the general campaign, then Candidate A is pure as the driven snow and Candidate B is bought and paid for.
You are a crooked candidate's dream. You see exactly what Trump tells you that you are seeing.
05-20-2016, 04:52 AM
Demarcus ware Wrote:So now we are slowly transitioning from Trump can't win to Trump will be a one time president. Seems I heard that about Obama as well. Keep guessing Hoot, I'm pulling for ya to get one rightNo, I still do not believe Trump can win and if I am wrong, I do not believe that Hillary Clinton will be the candidate that he beats. If Hillary is trailing Trump after the conventions, I believe that Democrats will replace her. Hillary is still facing an active opponent and Trump is not.
Trump has no active opposition remaining and he won only 66.6% of the vote in Oregon and 18 of 26 delegates.
Whether Trump wins or loses, the fact remains that he has run an extremely dishonest campaign and reluctant supporters do not tend to turnout to vote in high numbers. If he were not running against a criminal, he would have no chance at winning.
05-20-2016, 05:55 AM
Hoot Gibson Wrote:Transparent denial of the facts on your part. What difference does it make when a candidate is bought by special interests? Trump lied to you about taking money from special interests and you cannot admit that you were wrong.
What you are saying is that if Candidate A loans himself $20 million (while insisting he is financing his own campaign) in the primary season and then accepts then accepts $500 million during the general campaign from special interests (and uses $20 million to repay himself) and Candidate B accepts $20 million in special interest donations in the primary campaign and another $480 million in the general campaign, then Candidate A is pure as the driven snow and Candidate B is bought and paid for.
You are a crooked candidate's dream. You see exactly what Trump tells you that you are seeing.
You know, the Titanic is going down and all you want to do is sue the steamship line.
But no, I said what I intended to say apart from your obsession to paint Trump as the bad guy here. I know you've fallen overboard and all, but you're never going to argue me to submission. And you are a counselor's dream. Trump will win in a landslide and you are still 0-fer.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
05-20-2016, 06:09 AM
TheRealThing Wrote:You know, the Titanic is going down and all you want to do is sue the steamship line.I would say that your logic concerning Trump lying about self funding his campaign and then soliciting large donations from the same special interests as he condemned other candidates for taking their money is flawed, but there is no logic to your position at all.
But no, I said what I intended to say apart from your obsession to paint Trump as the bad guy here. I know you've fallen overboard and all, but you're never going to argue me to submission. And you are a counselor's dream. Trump will win in a landslide and you are still 0-fer.
Go ahead and continue your childish insults, TRT. If your hypocrisy and loss of critical thinking skills does not concern you, then I am not going to let it bother me either.
05-20-2016, 06:10 AM
Hoot Gibson Wrote:No, I still do not believe Trump can win and if I am wrong, I do not believe that Hillary Clinton will be the candidate that he beats. If Hillary is trailing Trump after the conventions, I believe that Democrats will replace her. Hillary is still facing an active opponent and Trump is not.
Trump has no active opposition remaining and he won only 66.6% of the vote in Oregon and 18 of 26 delegates.
Whether Trump wins or loses, the fact remains that he has run an extremely dishonest campaign and reluctant supporters do not tend to turnout to vote in high numbers. If he were not running against a criminal, he would have no chance at winning.
Exactly, except for that nagging little detail of having been picked by the people.
Talk about your transparent denial. Not that I'm in any way feeling sorry for the Dems but, look at what they are struggling with this time. I mean, Shrillary or Bernie? No wonder they're still within spitting distance of each other. Bernie, (the consummate straw man candidate who was meant to barely make a feeble attempt to make it seem a little like a race instead of a coronation) is about as 'active' as a garden slug, the only reason you know if he's even alive is because of the slime trail he leaves behind. And Hillary is even worse, I have said for years that the Dems have become a regular zoo and the zoo keepers are just as strange.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
05-20-2016, 06:18 AM
Hoot Gibson Wrote:I would say that your logic concerning Trump lying about self funding his campaign and then soliciting large donations from the same special interests as he condemned other candidates for taking their money is flawed, but there is no logic to your position at all.
Go ahead and continue your childish insults, TRT. If your hypocrisy and loss of critical thinking skills does not concern you, then I am not going to let it bother me either.
The only thing I've lost is a lucid debate partner.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
05-20-2016, 06:21 AM
TheRealThing Wrote:Exactly, except for that nagging little detail of having been picked by the people.I am not pulling for Trump or Hillary. It will be a blight on this nation's history if either of them become president. Anybody who thinks a Hillary or Trump win will be a reason to gloat, has a warped set of values.
Talk about your transparent denial. Not that I'm in any way feeling sorry for the Dems but, look at what they are struggling with this time. I mean, Shrillary or Bernie? No wonder they're still within spitting distance of each other. Bernie, (the consummate straw man candidate who was meant to barely make a feeble attempt to make it seem a little like a race instead of a coronation) is about as 'active' as a garden slug, the only reason you know if he's even alive is because of the slime trail he leaves behind. And Hillary is even worse, I have said for years that the Dems have become a regular zoo and the zoo keepers are just as strange.
Trump has won about 40 percent of Republican support so far. That is not exactly evidence that he has been "picked by the people." in Oregon, two-thirds of Republican voters supported him and he was running unopposed. That is not exactly a mandate.
The funny thing is, polls still show that the "garden slug" would top Trump in a general election match-up. It is hard for me to believe that an avowed socialist could be elected, but Sanders polls very well against Trump for a slug.
05-20-2016, 01:52 PM
I wouldn't be surprised at all ifor after the primary the dems choose Biden over Hillary if it's still obvious Trump can and will beat her.
05-20-2016, 05:25 PM
RunItUpTheGut Wrote:I wouldn't be surprised at all ifor after the primary the dems choose Biden over Hillary if it's still obvious Trump can and will beat her.I agree and have predicted that in more than one post. Obama can force Clinton out at any time he wants by threatening to give Lynch the green light to indict her. Like you, I believe if it happens it will happen after the convention. Otherwise, Bernie's mob might open fire.
05-20-2016, 06:23 PM
Hoot Gibson Wrote:I agree and have predicted that in more than one post. Obama can force Clinton out at any time he wants by threatening to give Lynch the green light to indict her. Like you, I believe if it happens it will happen after the convention. Otherwise, Bernie's mob might open fire.It's looks like with Bernie's mob, the DNC just might be 1000 times worse that in 1968.
05-20-2016, 07:05 PM
Demarcus ware Wrote:It's looks like with Bernie's mob, the DNC just might be 1000 times worse that in 1968.
I believe Hillary's campaign is in relative free fall. It is arguable to say that the only thing separating the US from a Sanders nomination, is an FBI indictment recommendation. If it's Hill and Bill again, the voter turnout will be light; If it's Bernie, I would think the takers will shake themselves out of their Mountain Dew and Twinkie induced diabetic stupors and show up at the polls.
Either scenario puts the US perilously close to the unthinkable, if it's to be Bernie, we get in a meteoric burst for a few months free everything, along with the immediate collapse of sovereignty. And if it's Hillary we get basically the same thing, but it would take possibly a few years for the end of American sovereignty to fully play out.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
05-20-2016, 08:16 PM
TheRealThing Wrote:I believe Hillary's campaign is in relative free fall. It is arguable to say that the only thing separating the US from a Sanders nomination, is an FBI indictment recommendation. If it's Hill and Bill again, the voter turnout will be light; If it's Bernie, I would think the takers will shake themselves out of their Mountain Dew and Twinkie induced diabetic stupors and show up at the polls.While Bernie still won't really go after Hillary, it seems he is getting more aggressive. He made the "She's not qualified to be president" comment, then backed off from it, Bernie actually scares me just as bad as Hillary if not worse.
Either scenario puts the US perilously close to the unthinkable, if it's to be Bernie, we get in a meteoric burst for a few months free everything, along with the immediate collapse of sovereignty. And if it's Hillary we get basically the same thing, but it would take possibly a few years for the end of American sovereignty to fully play out.
05-20-2016, 10:23 PM
Demarcus ware Wrote:While Bernie still won't really go after Hillary, it seems he is getting more aggressive. He made the "She's not qualified to be president" comment, then backed off from it, Bernie actually scares me just as bad as Hillary if not worse.I think Bernie is far worse. Hillary is a crook who will adopt whatever policies that can keep her in office, out of jail, and living a lavish lifestyle.
Bernie is a committed communist/socialist, who would not shed a tear if our standard of living was slashed in half (or worse), as long as all of us (except him, his family, and his friends) shared equally in the misery and poverty.
I suspect that the Democrats really would like to replace Hillary with a candidate like Booker after the convention. Biden has run for president before and he was a horrible candidate. He is another 8 years older since he last ran for president, so I am sure that he and Trump would keep the gaffe counters working overtime.
05-21-2016, 12:15 AM
:poker face:
That's what I meant, he is worse. And the reason he's worse is because there seems to be sufficient number of shameless and gleeful 'takers' to vote him into office. Democrats, who represent the dregs of society, actually use taxpayer dollars to buy the votes of those who don't and won't work. What a scheme! If and when organized labor ever wakes up to see the truth, they're going to hate themselves.
That's why I don't get the overall consternation where the validity of Tea Party is concerned. If history found that the colonists were justified in their quest for representation, I just don't see how it can pass by and not recognize the plight of the American working class. This is the land of equality of opportunity, not equal pay and over the moon freebies.
Demarcus ware Wrote:While Bernie still won't really go after Hillary, it seems he is getting more aggressive. He made the "She's not qualified to be president" comment, then backed off from it, Bernie actually scares me just as bad as Hillary if not worse.
That's what I meant, he is worse. And the reason he's worse is because there seems to be sufficient number of shameless and gleeful 'takers' to vote him into office. Democrats, who represent the dregs of society, actually use taxpayer dollars to buy the votes of those who don't and won't work. What a scheme! If and when organized labor ever wakes up to see the truth, they're going to hate themselves.
That's why I don't get the overall consternation where the validity of Tea Party is concerned. If history found that the colonists were justified in their quest for representation, I just don't see how it can pass by and not recognize the plight of the American working class. This is the land of equality of opportunity, not equal pay and over the moon freebies.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
05-21-2016, 01:05 AM
Well we can all agree on one thing.
The socialist scum spreading throughout the democratic party should be rounded up and deported just like the millions of illegals among us.
The socialist scum spreading throughout the democratic party should be rounded up and deported just like the millions of illegals among us.
05-21-2016, 02:20 AM
TheRealThing Wrote::poker face:I was more or less agreeing with you, was in a hurry and didn't exactly word it right. Sorry for the confusion there poker face
That's what I meant, he is worse. And the reason he's worse is because there seems to be sufficient number of shameless and gleeful 'takers' to vote him into office. Democrats, who represent the dregs of society, actually use taxpayer dollars to buy the votes of those who don't and won't work. What a scheme! If and when organized labor ever wakes up to see the truth, they're going to hate themselves.
That's why I don't get the overall consternation where the validity of Tea Party is concerned. If history found that the colonists were justified in their quest for representation, I just don't see how it can pass by and not recognize the plight of the American working class. This is the land of equality of opportunity, not equal pay and over the moon freebies.
nicker:
05-21-2016, 02:34 AM
Demarcus ware Wrote:I was more or less agreeing with you, was in a hurry and didn't exactly word it right. Sorry for the confusion there poker face
:thatsfunn You recognize dry humor when you see it. I get in a lot of trouble sometimes for things like that post but I thought I had you pegged right. :Thumbs:
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)
