Who will beat Hillary in 2020?

Potential Trivia Question:

Name three individuals that were both sexual predators and ruined a Clinton Presidency?
 
I can name the only campaign in history to conjure a barrage of phony sexual assault victims to win an election. Pretty sickening...

 
I mentioned on another thread that now that the DNC has issued the official talking points we will probably see her supporters come back to WM and parrot the official DNC line.
 
A past Miss Texas candidate here in SA posted on FB that she had received a call from the Clinton camp that knew she had cross paths with Donald Trump twice. They asked her if she ever had any bad experience, and if so they will pay her really well for that information. They are just a bunch of sleazy gangsters. What is impressive though is that they knew she had crossed paths with Trump twice.
 
It's funny to look back at some of these old threads




texas_ex2000 said:
35, Trump is the trainwreck. The GOP was handed this election on a platter. A non-mysogynist Trump wins this election. Cruz would have won this election. Kasich would have won this election. Rubio would have won this election.......
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Joe Fan said:
It's funny to look back at some of these old threads

Click to expand...

I'm not a Trump fan, nor a Trump apologist. I am ardently anti-socialist and anti-media, not because I dislike the institution of the media...but because the mainstream media has perverted their responsibilities to the country. I'm also very pro Patriotism and American Exceptionalism in the old fashioned sense. And despite what liberals tell you, American Patriotism and Exceptionalism have nothing to do with one's ethnicity. These are for everyone...except for those who reject American Patriotism, Exceptionalism, and Culture.

That post you quoted was right after allegations of sexual assault by a few women. Even after the Access Hollywood tape, I was still in the "Never Hillary" camp, but those accusations put me over the top. However, I wound up voting for Trump, because subsequent to that post, it became more obvious the media in conjunction with the Clinton Campaign were completely full of it in their reporting about these women and these allegations. And the fact all of these were just coming out just two weeks before the election by completely suspect women after bribes by Hillary and the DNC (such as the one mentioned by @I35), it was plainly obvious what was really happening and what was the real threat to democracy.

Don't forget I posted this on this thread too!
texas_ex2000 said:
BTW, Hillary could still lose this. A massive new wikileaks corruption scandal or a grand mal seizure...or even a BREXITesque correction on election day, it could happen.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
DTCJpZYW4AAZuqI.jpg
 
Yes, Dems, please run Oprah for POTUS. She's gonna get Harvey Weinstein hung around her neck like an albatross. Oprah will need protection from HRC, tho.
 
So an electorate the selects a thrice married, "grab 'em by the p----" president is going to be outraged by someone had associations with a person they apparently didn't know was a sexual predator. Should we disqualify every Republican who kissed up to Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly?
 
Well, if Oprah comes to her senses and decides not to run, the Dems can always run Snoop Dog on a pro-marijuana platform or maybe Kanye West on a "put the Khardashians in the White House platform". Either one of those will energize their millennial base.
 
Crockett said:
So an electorate the selects a thrice married, "grab 'em by the p----" president is going to be outraged by someone had associations with a person they apparently didn't know was a sexual predator. Should we disqualify every Republican who kissed up to Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly?
Click to expand...

There are a lot of reasons Oprah likely won't run, and would probably be miserable if she did, and would also probably lose. Her connection with Weinstein isn't one of them.

Basically, her supporters who would actually vote for her at this point are either cultish Oprah-worshippers or die-hard anti-Trumpers who just want him out, and likely won't vote for her in the primary because they'll realize they can't screw up another election by putting in someone who won't do a thing to win back the people who abandoned the dems to vote Trump last time out. (Unless they're completely delusional, in which case they may feel like Oprah is too nice and too unwilling to be mean to conservatives, so they may prefer Warren, Harris, or Sanders. Which would REALLY work out well for everyone...)

Ultimately she won't run because she is on record as hating politics. She wants everyone to love her, and running for president means at least 30 percent of the country will loath her and another 10-15 percent will grow much much less fond of her. The more she has to vocalize what she believes on the issues, the more she's going to erode her TV audience, and the more people are going to view her as a lightweight.

Of course, she could pull an Obama. The media did a fantastic job of shielding a lot of his background, influences, and viewpoints from the mainstream voter, and he basically ended up being a blank slate for a lot of people in the first election.
 
I admit Jeff Flake has made made me curious who he hangs out with, who is giving this guy advice, who are his friends? It sort of reminds me of Dana Holgorsen's decision to wear a visor on the sideline. Why doesnt his wife or a best friend or really anyone close to him make him stop? For his own good?

Jeff Flake still may challenge Trump in 2020: "Somebody needs to run"​
 
I like how Holgerson wears a visor and burns the hell out of his scalp. It is like he is purposely trying to get skin cancer.
 
Some of you guys need to go back and read pre-election of Trump what you were spewing. Challenged me on stuff that’s laughable now.

I accept your apology and we’re all good now.
 
I35 said:
Some of you guys need to go back and read pre-election of Trump what you were spewing. Challenged me on stuff that’s laughable now.

I accept your apology and we’re all good now.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the stuff the libs/RINOs were spewing was pretty funny.
 
Mr. Deez said:
I've already done this at length, but I'll summarize. First, he opposes entitlement reform. That's a $1T per year disaster position - much bigger than Obamacare or any other issue. You can't call yourself a conservative and take that position. It's a defining issue.

Second, he's wrong on immigration. The "build a wall and deport everybody" approach is impractical, expensive, unnecessary, and dumb. Of course, he has partially flip-flopped on this, but I'm going to hold him to the position that got him the nomination.

Third, though I'm not a neocon in the William Kristol mold, I do support maintaining the post-WWII alliances that have mostly served us well for the last 70 years. I also think our policy of discouraging nuclear proliferation has been wise. Trump diverts from those positions from time to time and then flip flops for a few days and then flip flops back. I can't endorse that kind of instability on foreign policy.

Fourth, I oppose term limits on members of Congress, which Trump now supports.

Fifth, I'm a deficit hawk more than I'm a tax cutter. Trump is basically calling for large tax cuts and big spending increases. Not smart when we're in the hole by $20T and not fiscally conservative.

Sixth, though this touches on his temperament, I'm a skeptic of our trade policy and agreements, but I don't trust Trump to fix the problem. I think he'd much more likely make it worse than make it better, so unless we get somebody who's a little more thoughtful, I prefer the status quo.

There are probably more, but that's what I can come up with on the fly.
Click to expand...

Deez, not trying to start anything. But just curious if you’ve changed your view on any of your concerns pre-election of Trump as far as the above comments you made?
 
I35 said:
Deez, not trying to start anything. But just curious if you’ve changed your view on any of your concerns pre-election of Trump as far as the above comments you made?
Click to expand...

Fair question to ask. I'll say yes and no and provide specifics.

On entitlement reform, my view hasn't changed. Trump and the rest of the party are a mess on the issue. Total disaster.

On immigration, I still think the wall is a bad idea, and I'd still like to see employers pursued. I don't see a lot of action from Trump on that angle. I'm probably closer to him than I was before, but that's mostly because he hasn't really done what he claimed he'd do. The wall isn't here (and likely isn't coming with Democrats running the House), and he never enacted an actual Muslim ban, despite the moronic claims from Democrats that he has. Of course, Democrats have been in complete and total crazy town on the issue.

He has been much better on foreign policy than I had expected. Though I favor the Russia probe continuing, so far, nothing has turned up. Most importantly, he has not shown much indication of doing Vladimir Putin's dirty work. Quite the contrary, he is building up the US's and NATO's military capabilities and defense posture in Europe, which is the last thing Putin would want. From a diplomatic standpoint, Merkel and Macron have bitched about him some, but it's pretty clear that they're doing it more because of political appearances and to virtue signal to more PC elements in their own coalitions than because of substance.

I also think Trump is aware that foreign policy is where he personally knows the least, and he has wisely delegated to people with greater knowledge on that area, such as Pence, Pompeo, and Haley. Mattis is one of the best SecDefs in history.

I still oppose terms limits on members of Congress. He's not making this a priority, so I'm not particularly concerned one way or the other.

On the budget deficit, he has been terrible. (See my comments on entitlement reform.) Furthermore, the rest of the GOP has largely embraced his mindset and pitched deficit reduction to the wind. The deficit is in the $1T range with a roaring economy. That is a colossal disgrace, and there's no excuse for it. The Democrats are even worse, but it's sad and dangerous that we basically have no fiscally responsible party anymore. It's just borrow and spend indefinitely.

He has handled trade policy better than I expected he would. He's not starting "trade wars." That's baseless and superficial hyperbole and devoid of context. There are and will be some hiccups along the way, but it looks like by the end of his first term, we'll be on better footing with Mexico, Canada, China, and the European Union, and that's a good thing. I'd like to see a better TPP deal worked out, but that can be done later.

So that's my analysis at this point.
 
Nobody with a family and remotely conservative bent politically that has any money and is successful will ever run for President again unless they are a complete egomaniac and narcissist. Nobody worth a damn would go through, much less put their family through such a brutal ordeal. It is simply not worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top