2024 Presidential Race

#3,426
#3,426
  • Like
Reactions: sonofUT62, OrangeBoro, norrislakevol and 4 others
#3,427
#3,427
evillawyer said:
Given that this board leans decidedly right, I'm curious to know something. Most of the right-leaning folks on here probably believe that Hillary's use of a private email server was disqualifying, even if she wasn't charged, much less convicted of anything. How do you reconcile that with your continued support of Trump, given his grossly improper handling of top secret info? Why was it, in your mind, disqualifying for her, but not for him?
Click to expand...
That is the point, dum-dum. Stop the gaslighting. Any competent DOJ would have charged her.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood, norrislakevol, whodeycin85 and 1 other person
#3,430
#3,430
W.TN.Orange Blood said:
Click to expand...


I think they are definitely. I look at the insanity in CA, NY and Chicago and just don't believe people vote against their best self interest. Take Newsome's recall..no freaking way he garnered more votes in the recall than he did in the election. Take Chicago, no way they elect even a bigger radical. Take NYC and SF..these cities are becoming sewers with out of control crime, homelessness, LGBT dictates, and yet people still elect these clowns? No way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood, dovervolz and norrislakevol
#3,431
#3,431
South Carolina GOP works to push back first in the South primary

The South Carolina Republican Party has moved to set the state's first in the South primary for Feb. 24th, later than usual.

The move is to allow candidates more time to campaign in the all-important early primary state after the Feb. 6 primary in Nevada. In 2016, South Carolina's Republican primary was held on Feb. 20, while Nevada's caucus was on Feb. 23.

It will now head to the Republican National Committee for approval before the October deadline.

South Carolina GOP works to push back first in the South primary
 
#3,432
#3,432
All you get out of this old POS is lies, lies, & more damn lies. Not to mention he's corrupt as hell by being paid & receiving millions & millions of dollars by changing government policies to favor the outcomes to our enemies of hostile nations.

 
  • Like
Reactions: dovervolz
#3,434
#3,434
turbovol said:
Indict Obama? For what? Indict Biden? For what? Indict Clinton? For What? Barr could have indicted Clinton if there was anything there--there wasn't.

Stop living in "what aboutism" fantasy land. People who respond to the gangster's deep-rooted corruption and lawbreaking by trying
to lump the Democrats with him are a laugh. There's fact and there's fiction--but when your brain as been addled by politics and ideology, you lose
the capacity the tell the difference between the two. That's the situation here.
Click to expand...

People that think they are not guily of the same, or that Trump has not been unfairly targeted since before he took office are stupid sheep.

What laws has Biden not broken that they are not persuing??
 
#3,439
#3,439
headhunter15 said:
If he’s the nominee, I’ll vote for him. I’m not really sure what has happened to him. I think he waited too long to jump in the race and Trump has become a bulldozer again. I also think his constant culture war fight & “Florida Plan” does not resonate with all of America.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. I think as long as he took he would've been better off waiting until 2028 because he lost a lot of momentum. Then too many people have gotten in the race. Desantis is competing with Ramaswamy for my vote. Vivek is just saying all the right things for America. I vote based on principles not popularity.

However, I may vote across the aisle for Kennedy, Jr in the primary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85 and headhunter15
#3,441
#3,441
I don't know if you'd call this guy nutty or eccentric but he is a socialist of the Bohshevic variety. The fact that he attempts to being in the democrat party, along with communist voices speaks to the base of the democrat party.

I don't think he gets on the ballot but I'd like for him to cause problems for their ideological party.

 
  • Like
Reactions: DC_Vol
#3,449
#3,449
evillawyer said:
Given that this board leans decidedly right, I'm curious to know something. Most of the right-leaning folks on here probably believe that Hillary's use of a private email server was disqualifying, even if she wasn't charged, much less convicted of anything. How do you reconcile that with your continued support of Trump, given his grossly improper handling of top secret info? Why was it, in your mind, disqualifying for her, but not for him?
Click to expand...

Simply, Trump was Presiodent, Hillary was not. Mind you, I give the same cover to Obama, who took a ton of documents, IMO because they were incriminating. BUT I have no issues with him doing so because it has been the law and precedence. Biden did not have that cover, nor did Pence - though I would argue VPs should have some lesser version of the Presidential cover. Still, ONLY the President can basically at any time while they are President declare anything personal and poof, thats it.

Now if they can prove that he still had something that he decided not to declare personal, then ok - but this is akin to a traffic ticket. Why? because the same guy was actually President for 4 years with the same info. Everyone is acting like he is stealing nuclear secrets to give to his buddy Putin. Its absurd.

No other president would even get sniffed at except Trump and that is because 1. He is the leading GOP candidate (beating Biden in the polls too) 2. They utterly hate him in ways that are hard to describe 3. Other Presidents would not run their mouth so much. granted, the Archives have had disagreements with almost EVERY President, ALL of whom mostly told them to take a flying leap but nobody has done it so obnoxiously as Trump does.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top