Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

agip wrote:

johnny99 wrote:

I know this was a long time ago, and you may not remember. But Biden was Vice President from 2009-2017. During those years, the American economy did really well. If Biden can come close to replicating that, he and the Democrats will be fine.

Only a very small minority of people, which apparently includes you, consider Biden to be an extremist. You Trump people desperately wanted the Democrats to nominate Bernie, and you still haven't adjusted to Biden.

I would say that the Dems will no doubt go too far with their PC issues and create easy to exploit wedge issues for the Rs.

Maybe that's what igy is talking about.

Consequences of the big tent, no way to avoid that sort of criticism unless Ds become serial liars like the Rs.

johnny99 wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

I think you underestimate how people will feel after a year of extremist social policies, that will make economic conditions worse, not better.

I know this was a long time ago, and you may not remember. But Biden was Vice President from 2009-2017. During those years, the American economy did really well. If Biden can come close to replicating that, he and the Democrats will be fine.

Only a very small minority of people, which apparently includes you, consider Biden to be an extremist. You Trump people desperately wanted the Democrats to nominate Bernie, and you still haven't adjusted to Biden.

Obama was POTUS and not Biden. Biden was a proponent of a bill that would have made it more difficult for credit card holders to have their debt forgiven by filing for bankruptcy. Had it passed, it would have exacerbated the negative effects from the collapse of the sub-prime mortgage bubble.

Perhaps more than one poster is “dog whistled” to student loan forgiveness, and more stimulus checks. It seems to me where we are on an increasing path of a nation intent on less work for more money. Faux issues of systemic racism or transgender sports equality, designed more to divide people, than serving any useful purpose. Then again, it is the country and government we deserve.

Until an even bigger useful idiot decides to highjack the party.. which won't happen quickly enough to prevent the GOP's implosion. You know Tucker is waiting patiently to pounce once trump really leaves the turf.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Perhaps more than one poster is “dog whistled” to student loan forgiveness, and more stimulus checks. It seems to me where we are on an increasing path of a nation intent on less work for more money. Faux issues of systemic racism or transgender sports equality, designed more to divide people, than serving any useful purpose. Then again, it is the country and government we deserve.

Don't worry, Trump really did win and he'll be inaugurated soon enough to stop this liberal madness!

Ivyguy wrote:

Calamity Joe wrote:

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/bidens-early-blunders-hurt-democrats-2022-liz-peek

Hard to understand why this is posted here, rather than in the Biden thread.

Because but but but Joe and Hunter!

Trollminator wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Perhaps more than one poster is “dog whistled” to student loan forgiveness, and more stimulus checks. It seems to me where we are on an increasing path of a nation intent on less work for more money. Faux issues of systemic racism or transgender sports equality, designed more to divide people, than serving any useful purpose. Then again, it is the country and government we deserve.

Don't worry, Trump really did win and he'll be inaugurated soon enough to stop this liberal madness!

Good thing, so you can keep up your daily delusional Trump hard-on posting for another four years, whether he is in office or not.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Perhaps more than one poster is “dog whistled” to student loan forgiveness, and more stimulus checks. It seems to me where we are on an increasing path of a nation intent on less work for more money. Faux issues of systemic racism or transgender sports equality, designed more to divide people, than serving any useful purpose. Then again, it is the country and government we deserve.

'conservatives' have been saying exactly what you are saying since FDR, when they tried to stop

Social security and medicare and other popular programs meant to improve quality of life . They said the same thing about the ACA.

Would you agree that each program is on a path of a nation intent on less work for more money? Or in retrospect do you agree that they are good additions to American life?

My first reaction when 'conservatives' complain about policies meant to help poor and middle class people is deep suspicion and a general feeling that they are probably wrong.

Trollminator wrote:

agip wrote:

and lindsey graham on Jan 6 standing up in the senate and saying ni a folksy speech that THIS TIME he's through with trump...until the next day when he's back on team trump.

this is the problem...there is no R party power outside Trump. So there's no alternate gravity source to go to, if you are an R and want to move away from Trump. You can't do it. there's no alternative. Nowhere to go.

So you stay with him and hope he doesnt' end democracy.

Although some of them would be glad if he did.

Until an even bigger useful idiot decides to highjack the party.. which won't happen quickly enough to prevent the GOP's implosion. You know Tucker is waiting patiently to pounce once trump really leaves the turf.

I've never actually watched an entire tucker c show but from clips, it sounds like he just throws a bunch of mostly false trial balloons up and sees what people like to hear. In a way he's creating a right wing platform for the future by testing the waters to see what variety of red meat the m/gas want.

Trollminator wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Perhaps more than one poster is “dog whistled” to student loan forgiveness, and more stimulus checks. It seems to me where we are on an increasing path of a nation intent on less work for more money. Faux issues of systemic racism or transgender sports equality, designed more to divide people, than serving any useful purpose. Then again, it is the country and government we deserve.

Don't worry, Trump really did win and he'll be inaugurated soon enough to stop this liberal madness!

See, it'll happen the first week of March, Q said so!

Trollminator wrote:

Ivyguy wrote:

Hard to understand why this is posted here, rather than in the Biden thread.

Because but but but Joe and Hunter!

This is how Sally trolls. Always working to disrupt threads ... wandering off topic is the game plan. Going both ways; simultaneously a sadist and masochist.

This is what Graham was playing at

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1361374739407724545?s=20

While I do think Trump will stay active in politics, I recently read an interesting counter-argument.

It is that Trump wants money. Everything is to get money, with a secondary attraction to being adored by the masses.

Will being a political kingmaker get him either? Probably not. So why would he do it?

Trump might chuck the whole thing and try for something different, like show business.

Remember Obama went into show biz after politics- show biz and politics are close cousins and there's certainly a ton of money and adoration to be had from it.

So maybe Trump will show a lack of interest in party politics and just sort of fade away from the R party.

Just an interesting idea.

It is pretty clear the real standard of living has gone down. People are less connected to their community. For example, ACA has created a more bureaucratic healthcare system. My cancer treatment, though life saving, should never have been billed at over a half million dollars. It was a handout to managed care and big pharma. Government support of student loans have funded spa-like student life experiences, and over the top athletic complexes. Really little to do with the educational mission. Our family paid off student loan obligations before buying a new car, or taking a vacation. While many have used those same funds to buy a car, to take a vacation.

Eliminating moral hazard to behavior has become an addiction since the Financial Crisis. These things are not zero sum, the delude and weaken society. Clearly you are in the camp that unhinged spending can be sustained, and in fact necessary for the good of society. You seem to always draw the optimistic conclusion, but never balance against the cost. Face the facts, this debt can never be paid back.

A little hardship in life is good for everyone. The liberal mission is based on the concept that government fulfills the social contract, when in many cases it does the opposite. Liberals have no claim on a higher moral plane than do conservatives. All I am advocating for is balance.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

agip wrote:

'conservatives' have been saying exactly what you are saying since FDR, when they tried to stop

Social security and medicare and other popular programs meant to improve quality of life . They said the same thing about the ACA.

Would you agree that each program is on a path of a nation intent on less work for more money? Or in retrospect do you agree that they are good additions to American life?

My first reaction when 'conservatives' complain about policies meant to help poor and middle class people is deep suspicion and a general feeling that they are probably wrong.

It is pretty clear the real standard of living has gone down. .

I'll agree with some of what you wrote, except for the aboveeline.

You've been around even longer than I have man - you know how poor people were in the 60s and 70s and 80s. Today living standards are far, far higher than a generation or two ago. Cars, vacations, computers, dining out, much bigger houses...none of that was affordable back then at the levels of today.

So all the safety net items the 'conservatives' have fought against have not stopped the generational march to greater and greater material prosperity.

I mean look at this.

agip wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

It is pretty clear the real standard of living has gone down. .

I'll agree with some of what you wrote, except for the aboveeline.

You've been around even longer than I have man - you know how poor people were in the 60s and 70s and 80s. Today living standards are far, far higher than a generation or two ago. Cars, vacations, computers, dining out, much bigger houses...none of that was affordable back then at the levels of today.

So all the safety net items the 'conservatives' have fought against have not stopped the generational march to greater and greater material prosperity.

I mean look at this.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCEC96

or this one, tells the same story over generations

I kind of assume that you're not giving R politicians as much of a pass as you appear to be, above but....a few thoughts about having "nowhere to go":

1) Romney has been in no-man's land for years. Still collecting a paycheck, still voting on bills, etc. Whatever he's been able to do despite being some level of a R outcast has been enough for him to continue doing it - and I'm sure that he has PLENTY of other options (see below). There could easily be more Romney's.....there just aren't.

2) To a lesser extent and for less time, same as above for Sasse, Collins, etc.

3) Leave office. What's their average net worth? How many wouldn't EASILY have high-6 or 7-figure salaries (and/or the non-salaried equivalents) the next day doing any number of things? None?

I don't know exactly what the conventional wisdom list of pros and cons of having term limits looks like, but the Trump era has added at least one really big "pro" to the list: Reduce the likelihood of unprincipled, spineless politicians supporting an aspiring autocrat president.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

We all know of Kamala Harris’ qualifications, and skills at getting a head. If you know what I mean.

This is a disgusting post. Should get you banned.

yeah, they are leaving office. Non-Trump Rs have fled public office. That's exactly what has happened. The turnover among elected Rs in DC has been stunning.

As for Sasse, collins, romney, cheney. Yeah, they are the alternate pole. It's a small band of brothers and siblings. The fact that only four-six of them exist proves my point - they barely exist in the R party. Hard for them to offer much of a welcoming home to less prominent Rs facing election.