• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump wants civil war

Amelia said:
Trump wants civil war. He thinks it's a winning campaign strategy for him.
Click to expand...

so is your new name "Kreskin"

have you started reading minds?

do you have magical powers to somehow know the future now?

what are the lotto's numbers for tonights drawing if you do.....

what kind of crazy talk is this? i mean really.....
 
Amelia said:
Trump wants civil war. He thinks it's a winning campaign strategy for him.
Click to expand...

Maybe Trump wants cake. It's a winning strategy for a nice smooth fart.
 
tres borrachos said:
What are you babbling about, and why did you quote my post to go into this off topic rant?
Click to expand...

If you can't divine any resemblance between your post and my simple response, I don't know what to tell ya
 
SoCal said:
Wow someone else? I've been saying for months that there's a chance that Trumpolini will demand one way or another, four more years, even if he loses the election.
Click to expand...

A couple of years ago there were rumors President Obama wouldn't give up power....

Prior to that rumor was Bush would declare martial law and retain the Presidency...

Wash, rinse and repeat.
 
GDViking said:
He is using divide and conquer, the Republican game plan.

Remember Scott Walker?

Point of interest, trump just appointed Walker to a government think tank...
Click to expand...
actually balkanizing the USA into warring ethnic special interest groups has been the Dem strategy for 30 years. The late great moderate David Border noted that in the late 80s.
 
gdgyva said:
so is your new name "Kreskin"

have you started reading minds?

do you have magical powers to somehow know the future now?

what are the lotto's numbers for tonights drawing if you do.....

what kind of crazy talk is this? i mean really.....
Click to expand...

They have run out of real issues (like his tweets) to complain about, so they make up fictional nonsense and then complain about that.
 
What if...? said:
The right gets up to plenty of controlling of folks who are enemies of america because they don't agree with them. Always have.
Click to expand...

Incorrect. The esteemed father of the republican party Mr Lincoln responds.

Cooper Union Address (Abraham Lincoln's Cooper Union Address)

“** But you say you are conservative - eminently conservative - while we are revolutionary, destructive, or something of the sort. What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried? We stick to, contend for, the identical old policy on the point in controversy which was adopted by "our fathers who framed the Government under which we live;" while you with one accord reject, and scout, and spit upon that old policy, and insist upon substituting something new. True, you disagree among yourselves as to what that substitute shall be. You are divided on new propositions and plans, but you are unanimous in rejecting and denouncing the old policy of the fathers. Some of you are for reviving the foreign slave trade; some for a Congressional Slave-Code for the Territories; some for Congress forbidding the Territories to prohibit Slavery within their limits; some for maintaining Slavery in the Territories through the judiciary; some for the "gur-reat pur-rinciple" that "if one man would enslave another, no third man should object," fantastically called "Popular Sovereignty;" but never a man among you is in favor of federal prohibition of slavery in federal territories, according to the practice of "our fathers who framed the Government under which we live." Not one of all your various plans can show a precedent or an advocate in the century within which our Government originated. Consider, then, whether your claim of conservatism for yourselves, and your charge or destructiveness against us, are based on the most clear and stable foundations.**
** Again, you say we have made the slavery question more prominent than it formerly was. We deny it. We admit that it is more prominent, but we deny that we made it so. It was not we, but you, who discarded the old policy of the fathers. We resisted, and still resist, your innovation; and thence comes the greater prominence of the question. Would you have that question reduced to its former proportions? Go back to that old policy. What has been will be again, under the same conditions. If you would have the peace of the old times, readopt the precepts and policy of the old times.”**

In the same address Lincoln explains how the opposition to the republican party were in fact far afield from the principles of the constitution where all men are created equal."

This applies then and now if one bothers to observe.
 
veritas1 said:
That's funny. Mueller told you otherwise. Why don't you believe Mueller?
Click to expand...

Some seem to be tiring of the near endless msm lying.

CNN’s ratings drop again after three-year low last month

"CNN’s ratings dropped again in April after the network experienced its worst month in three years.

Prime-time viewership at CNN was 761,000 with 553,000 viewers during the daytime, according to Nielsen Media Research.

CNN’s ratings drop resulted in the lowest number of demographic viewers since August 2015. CNN’s "Cuomo Primetime" with host Chris Cuomo saw its worst demographic viewership numbers since its debut in June 2018.

Fox News dominated the cable news viewership numbers with 2,388,000 viewers, followed by MSNBC with 1,654,000 and CNN. Fox also held the top two cable news programs, with "Tucker Carlson Tonight" garnering 2.8 million viewers and "Hannity" bringing in 3.1 million viewers.

In April, CNN had its worst ratings since October 2015, experiencing a 26% fall in viewership from the same month a year ago."


After Mueller Report’s Conclusion, MSNBC Ratings Take Nosedive

"Before President Donald Trump was sworn into office, the mainstream media lambasted him over unsubstantiated allegations of collusion between his 2016 campaign and the Russian government.

Chief among those who pushed the Russian conspiracy theory was MSNBC host Rachel Maddow, whose editorials garnered her a spike in viewers that equated to the highest ratings she had ever seen.

After two years of media speculation and a special counsel investigation, Robert Mueller submitted his final report on March 22, and Attorney General William Barr summarized the “principle conclusions” in a letter to Congress two days later. There was no evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia.

And just like that, Maddow’s stellar ratings plummeted over the week following the final report"
 
trixare4kids said:
Today Trump disavowed the send her back chants at his rally.
If you are saying it is not a winning strategy to attack the toxic squad's politics, you are sadly and naively mistaken.
Click to expand...



And now he has undisavowed it.


That was fast. I expected it ... but not so soon.



But what else is he going to do? He can't afford to turn off the small segment of the nation that approves of him trashing American ideals. He needs every last one of those people to get out to vote.

Of course he could have tried to be a decent human being, to expand his base and his approval numbers. But that was too much to ask apparently.
 
Amelia said:
And now he has undisavowed it.


That was fast. I expected it ... but not so soon.



But what else is he going to do? He can't afford to turn off the small segment of the nation that approves of him trashing American ideals. He needs every last one of those people to get out to vote.

Of course he could have tried to be a decent human being, to expand his base and his approval numbers. But that was too much to ask apparently.
Click to expand...

To be fair, I'm pretty sure he never learned how.
 
akyron said:
Incorrect. The esteemed father of the republican party Mr Lincoln responds.

Cooper Union Address (Abraham Lincoln's Cooper Union Address)

“** But you say you are conservative - eminently conservative - while we are revolutionary, destructive, or something of the sort. What is conservatism? Is it not adherence to the old and tried, against the new and untried? We stick to, contend for, the identical old policy on the point in controversy which was adopted by "our fathers who framed the Government under which we live;" while you with one accord reject, and scout, and spit upon that old policy, and insist upon substituting something new. True, you disagree among yourselves as to what that substitute shall be. You are divided on new propositions and plans, but you are unanimous in rejecting and denouncing the old policy of the fathers. Some of you are for reviving the foreign slave trade; some for a Congressional Slave-Code for the Territories; some for Congress forbidding the Territories to prohibit Slavery within their limits; some for maintaining Slavery in the Territories through the judiciary; some for the "gur-reat pur-rinciple" that "if one man would enslave another, no third man should object," fantastically called "Popular Sovereignty;" but never a man among you is in favor of federal prohibition of slavery in federal territories, according to the practice of "our fathers who framed the Government under which we live." Not one of all your various plans can show a precedent or an advocate in the century within which our Government originated. Consider, then, whether your claim of conservatism for yourselves, and your charge or destructiveness against us, are based on the most clear and stable foundations.**
** Again, you say we have made the slavery question more prominent than it formerly was. We deny it. We admit that it is more prominent, but we deny that we made it so. It was not we, but you, who discarded the old policy of the fathers. We resisted, and still resist, your innovation; and thence comes the greater prominence of the question. Would you have that question reduced to its former proportions? Go back to that old policy. What has been will be again, under the same conditions. If you would have the peace of the old times, readopt the precepts and policy of the old times.”**

In the same address Lincoln explains how the opposition to the republican party were in fact far afield from the principles of the constitution where all men are created equal."

This applies then and now if one bothers to observe.
Click to expand...

Lincoln's speech is misleading in that "conservative" can have multiple meanings, not just the one Lincoln prescribes. While Lincoln is certainly correct that conservative can mean the preservation and "adherence of the old and tried," it can also mean the limitation of governmental power. To be very stingy in allocating power to a governmental body is a very conservative principle, which is why the US Constitution was constructed as it was - with limited federal powers. The majority of those at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 were very conservative indeed.

I don't disagree with Lincoln, I just think he was being a bit myopic when it concerns conservatism by only applying one meaning. Although I do understand his point. Considering he was addressing the slave trade it would not do to confuse his audience with multiple definitions of conservatism. I just felt it was necessary to point out that there is more to conservatism than just preserving the past.
 
DamnYankee said:
These leftists post this nonsense for attention.
Click to expand...

I view it as a cry for help. The MSM and liberals on social media should be ashamed for afflicting so many people with TDS.

Amelia said:
Trump wants civil war. He thinks it's a winning campaign strategy for him.
Click to expand...

Do you need a hug?
 
Fledermaus said:
A couple of years ago there were rumors President Obama wouldn't give up power....

Prior to that rumor was Bush would declare martial law and retain the Presidency...

Wash, rinse and repeat.
Click to expand...

Three presidents all the same, just three peas in a pod. Nothing to see here, move along... :roll:

I hadn't heard anyone worried about Obama or Bush refusing to give up power. Do you have links to any mainstream media reports on rumors or editorials suggesting this possibility? I want to believe you, but people who devote themselves to a bald-faced liar, always gives me doubt about their veracity (just like the Cult's attraction to his racism).

Did Obama and Bush continue their partisan campaign rallies after taking office?
Did Obama and Bush regularly talk about refusing to leave office?
Did Obama and Bush welcome foreign interference in our elections, so long as he’s the beneficiary?
Did Obama and Bush divide the nation by stoking our nation's hate and racial fears?
Did Obama and Bush side with Russia over our intelligence agencies?
Did Obama and Bush call our free press the enemy of the people?

No, this time it's quite different, it's not wash, rinse and repeat, it's wash, rinse and what the f____?...
 
Last edited:
SoCal said:
Three presidents all the same, just three peas in a pod. Nothing to see here, move along... :roll:

I hadn't heard anyone worried about Obama or Bush refusing to give up power. Do you have links to any mainstream media reports on rumors or editorials suggesting this possibility? I want to believe you, but people who devote themselves to a bald-faced liar, always gives me doubt about their veracity (just like the Cult's attraction to his racism).

Did Obama and Bush continue their partisan campaign rallies after taking office?
Did Obama and Bush regularly talk about refusing to leave office?
Did Obama and Bush welcome foreign interference in our elections, so long as he’s the beneficiary?
Did Obama and Bush divide the nation by stoking our nation's hate and racial fears?

No, this time it's quite different, it's not wash, rinse and repeat, it's wash, rinse and what the f____?...
Click to expand...

Your paranoia is noted.

As to rallys while in office.... Yes, others did it.

And Trump talks... And talks... And talks... And this means what exactly?

And "welcoming" foreign interference... Please show where he "welcomed" it.

And dividing the nation? Just about every President divided the nation in some way.

You aren't acquainted with American History... Are you?
 
DamnYankee said:
True. Leftist Antifa terrorists are already engaged in a civil war against America. So, I see your point.
Click to expand...

We get it, neo-nazi's are your friend and some of them are very fine people. :lol:
 
Amelia said:
Trump wants civil war. He thinks it's a winning campaign strategy for him.
Click to expand...


I decided that he doesn't really want the violence, just the emotional effects of pushing the sides to the brink.

But he has been playing with fire, and now we're getting the violence.

Can we put it back in the bottle and screw the lid on tight, or is it too late?
 
Amelia said:
I decided that he doesn't really want the violence, just the emotional effects of pushing the sides to the brink.

But he has been playing with fire, and now we're getting the violence.

Can we put it back in the bottle and screw the lid on tight, or is it too late?
Click to expand...

Where have you been since 2016? What part of all that leftist violence and destruction for the last three years escaped your grasp? And only NOW you see the violence? Boy, that takes some serious self-delusion.
 
Glitch said:
Where have you been since 2016? What part of all that leftist violence and destruction for the last three years escaped your grasp? And only NOW you see the violence? Boy, that takes some serious self-delusion.
Click to expand...

Right wing extremists are responsible for the overwhelming majority of domestic terror attacks that also result in death.
 
Cardinal said:
Right wing extremists are responsible for the overwhelming majority of domestic terror attacks that also result in death.
Click to expand...

How many deaths are there from that -compared to inner city gangs killing other gangsters as well as innocents in order to perpetuate and pay for drug trafficking? And what do you think the political leanings are of those killers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom