Trump Is Just A Terrible President, Totally Unfit For The Job

[jrober38]

3 minutes ago, westside2 said:

Link???

 

He doesn't even get paid for his work. He donates his salary. 

 

We'll never know because he won't release any tax info.

 

Didn't Ivanka and Jared make like $135 mil in 2018?

And people are furious about Hunter Biden making like $1 mil.

[Westside]

17 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

We'll never know because he won't release any tax info.

 

Didn't Ivanka and Jared make like $135 mil in 2018?

And people are furious about Hunter Biden making like $1 mil.

God you're an idiot.

[3rdnlng]

As seen of FB:

 

I'm not posting this for debate. I don’t need any comments. Unfriend me if you must. Just please consider this...when you think the President is a jerk...
The bottom line has been that Trump IS a jerk. He’s crude, he bloviates, he gets his feelings hurt and he’s a hot head. And he should stay off Twitter.
Let me tell you what else he is. He is a guy that demands performance. He is a guy that asks lots of questions. The questions he asks aren’t cloaked in fancy phrases, they are “why the hell....” questions.
For decades the health industry has thrown away billions of face masks after one use. Trump asks, “Why the hell are we throwing them away? Why not sterilize them and use them numerous times?” He’s the guy that gets hospital ships readied in one week, when it would have taken a bureaucrat weeks or months to get it done. He’s the guy that gets temporary hospitals built in three days. He’s the guy that gets industries to build ventilators and face masks in a business that’s highly regulated by agencies that move like sloths.
He’s the guy that asks why we aren’t using drugs that might work on people that are dying; what the hell do we have to lose? In spite of all the naysayers. He’s the guy that shut down travel from China, when the liberals and the media were screaming xenophobia and racist. Now they are asking why didn't he react sooner? He’s the guy that ran on securing the border in the face of a screaming press and media. When he shut down borders in the midst of the coronavirus virus they were up in arms over such a draconian move. Then the rest of the world followed suit all over, including the European Union between member countries.
Has he made mistakes, yep. Everyone I know would have. All of these experts wouldn’t have done any better. Trump is working harder than I’ve ever seen a President work. He isn’t hiding in his office, he’s out front every day.
Take for instance, all the shortages of PPE’s and ventilators. I’m unaware of anything that prevented all of these governors from ordering all the PPE and ventilators for emergency purposes over the last two years. And yet, it is Trump’s fault that they didn’t.
He’s balanced his approach and listened to the experts, when his distractors said he wouldn’t and couldn’t. When he offers hope, he’s lying and when he’s straight forward, he should be hopeful. It’s a no win, but he is not deterred by all of that BS coming from the press and the liberals.
I’ll take this kind of leadership over a nice guy that can make eloquent speeches.

He is my President ??

[IDBillzFan]

41 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

If you think the Trump's haven't been lining their pockets over the past 3 years you're living under a rock.

 

I have to give you credit. I remember how furious you were when you found out Hillary was laundering billions through the Clinton Foundation. The plutonium deal she cut was enough to feed a third-world country for years.

 

You were FURIOUS about that.

 

Nice to see you are consistent in your concerns.

 

 

 

 

[3rdnlng]

40 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

We'll never know because he won't release any tax info.

 

Didn't Ivanka and Jared make like $135 mil in 2018?

And people are furious about Hunter Biden making like $1 mil.

Links? I bet you can't provide them.

[SectionC3]

52 minutes ago, westside2 said:

I can't understand liberals and their support for Biden. All the money him and his family has stolen. He's a professional crook.

 

Got some facts? Or a link?

[SectionC3]

2 hours ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

It's simple math, actually.

 

America - Hillary (Gorsuch + Kavanaugh) = Trump support.

 

I was never a Trump supporter, but if our country was being run by Hillary right now, it would be the very definition of a schittshow because in addition to putting wacked out leftists on the Supreme Court in replacement of conservatives,  we also know actions mean more than words, and Hillary's actions during this pandemic would begin with her trying to navigate a few steps on her way to a podium while accepting some more money from China into her "foundation."

 

So to recap, I don't celebrate Trump. I celebrate no Hillary. It's the purest form of addition by subtraction because that hag would truly destroy the country.

 

"[W]ould be the very definition of a schittshow?"  With respect, what's going on right now is nuts.  Bananas.  Do you watch the President's press conferences?  One day he's saying that he takes no responsibility for the pandemic response.  The next day he claims absolute authority.  His cavalier approach to the truth is beyond anything that I could have comprehended before this presidency.  Don't agree with him?  You're fake news.  Or nasty.  Or a bad reporter.  Or a liar.  It doesn't matter if you're the New York Times or even the Wall Street Journal.  

 

I wrote that paragraph before I even read your "whataboutism" point with respect to China, navigating the podium, and her foundation.  I don't much care for Hillary Clinton, but what you said . . . it has no basis in truth, logic, or reason.  It's rank speculation and willfully ignorant of the atrocious job that this president has done with respect to the pandemic response.  

 

The Boston Globe said it better than I ever could: Trump is "epically outmatched" by the pandemic.  We see it live every day in these bonkers pressers from the White House.  We see it when Jared Kushner is put in charge, acts like a moron in front of a microphone, and then is sidelined.  We see it when Peter Navarro, a smart person but one uneducated in matters of this nature, fights an experienced, accomplished virologist with respect to the loosening of social distancing restrictions.  We see it when COVID testing remains a significant impediment to pandemic control and economic awakening, despite the fact that the president said a month ago that "anyone who wants a test can have one."  We see it in old news clips in which the president tried to wish the virus away and deemed it a political hoax.  We see it when the president blows the dog whistle to blame Obama and China for the problem without acknowledging his own missteps. We see it with the ridiculous attempt to pin this mess on the WHO.  And, most sadly, we see it in the so-called "fake news" reports of ER docs, nurses, and families affected by this crisis.  

Edited April 16, 2020 by SectionC3

[jrober38]

40 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

I have to give you credit. I remember how furious you were when you found out Hillary was laundering billions through the Clinton Foundation. The plutonium deal she cut was enough to feed a third-world country for years.

 

You were FURIOUS about that.

 

Nice to see you are consistent in your concerns.

 

 

 

 

 

I was furious with Hilary. She's a total crook. 

[Deranged Rhino]

2 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

One more point: Even Matt Drudge is turning on this guy.  The intellectual conservatives know that this president is off the rails.  He might be a nationalist, and he is a narcissist, but he is definitely not a conservative. 

 

Drudge sold his company to a foreign corporation a while ago, and immediately their content began to change. It has nothing to do with the deficit and everything to do with what's not being reported in the news. Drudge as an outlet is now a complete never Trump rag because of it. 

 

Calling them the "intellectual conservative" is laughable. He's a cut out, bought and paid for. Like Frum. Like Kristol. Like Boot. 

54 minutes ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

I have to give you credit. I remember how furious you were when you found out Hillary was laundering billions through the Clinton Foundation. The plutonium deal she cut was enough to feed a third-world country for years.

 

You were FURIOUS about that.

 

Nice to see you are consistent in your concerns.

 

The math they can't escape: 

 

Clinton came into office broke -- left a millionaire many times over. 

Obama came into office broke -- left a millionaire many times over. 

Trump came into office rich -- and will leave with less net worth than when he started. 

 

But yeah, according to the @jrober38 -- the same guy who just two weeks ago was screaming everyone in America was going to die -- Trump is "lining his pockets"  

 

Facts aren't friends to those with partisan agendas. Jrober continues to prove he's not a serious thinker. He's an NPC. 

Edited April 16, 2020 by Deranged Rhino

[3rdnlng]

1 hour ago, SectionC3 said:

 

"[W]ould be the very definition of a schittshow?"  With respect, what's going on right now is nuts.  Bananas.  Do you watch the President's press conferences?  One day he's saying that he takes no responsibility for the pandemic response.  The next day he claims absolute authority.  His cavalier approach to the truth is beyond anything that I could have comprehended before this presidency.  Don't agree with him?  You're fake news.  Or nasty.  Or a bad reporter.  Or a liar.  It doesn't matter if you're the New York Times or even the Wall Street Journal.  

 

I wrote that paragraph before I even read your "whataboutism" point with respect to China, navigating the podium, and her foundation.  I don't much care for Hillary Clinton, but what you said . . . it has no basis in truth, logic, or reason.  It's rank speculation and willfully ignorant of the atrocious job that this president has done with respect to the pandemic response.  

 

The Boston Globe said it better than I ever could: Trump is "epically outmatched" by the pandemic.  We see it live every day in these bonkers pressers from the White House.  We see it when Jared Kushner is put in charge, acts like a moron in front of a microphone, and then is sidelined.  We see it when Peter Navarro, a smart person but one uneducated in matters of this nature, fights an experienced, accomplished virologist with respect to the loosening of social distancing restrictions.  We see it when COVID testing remains a significant impediment to pandemic control and economic awakening, despite the fact that the president said a month ago that "anyone who wants a test can have one."  We see it in old news clips in which the president tried to wish the virus away and deemed it a political hoax.  We see it when the president blows the dog whistle to blame Obama and China for the problem without acknowledging his own missteps. We see it with the ridiculous attempt to pin this mess on the WHO.  And, most sadly, we see it in the so-called "fake news" reports of ER docs, nurses, and families affected by this crisis.  

There's so much wrong in this post that I don't know where to begin. I'll start small: what did the WHO do to try to get the virus in check? 

[Gary M]

4 hours ago, jrober38 said:

I cannot understand why Conservatives support Trump, his deficits and his spending problem. 

 

 

Do you ever play Monopoly?

 

Do you know how you win?

 

Trump plays the long game, the spending now will generate income in the future.

 

The trick, and I am not sure how he will do it,  get Pelosi and Schumer to stop spending more than they bring in.

2 hours ago, jrober38 said:

 

We'll never know because he won't release any tax info.

 

Didn't Ivanka and Jared make like $135 mil in 2018?

And people are furious about Hunter Biden making like $1 mil.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2017/01/20/how-barack-obama-has-made-20-million-since-arriving-in-washington/#6b128ebd5bf0

[Chef Jim]

1 hour ago, jrober38 said:

 

I was furious with Hilary. She's a total crook. 

Who did you vote for in 2016?

[SectionC3]

57 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

There's so much wrong in this post that I don't know where to begin. I'll start small: what did the WHO do to try to get the virus in check? 

 

Typical Trumper response.  Ignore the balance of the points, and instead attempt to undermine through distraction.  

 

I'll let the WHO answer your question: https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/04/15/835179442/we-alerted-the-world-to-coronavirus-on-jan-5-who-says-in-response-to-u-s.  I'll add that important measure taken by the WHO (alerting the international community to the concern in early January 2020, and publishing the genetic sequence of the virus approximately one week later) occurred approximately one month before the President of the United States attempted to wish the virus away, suggesting that it would just "disappear," and characterized the virus as a political hoax.  The bottom line is that while the WHO warned the world of the dangers of coronavirus, the President of the United States deluded himself and attempted to delude the public into ignoring the problem. 

 

I suspect that most would not believe that unemployment numbers prompted by the pandemic, the likes of which have not been seen since the Great Depression, are a hoax.  Perhaps we should ask ourselves if those numbers would be as high as they are had the person with "absolute authority" in this country, I don't know, respected the threat and pushed for the development of an aggressive testing program, and similarly pushed the scientific community to begin drug therapies for the virus.  That sort of was the point of the WHO publishing the genetic sequence of the virus.  

 

In any event, I'm all ears if you have a response on the merits to the litany of other criticisms I raised with respect to the president's mishandling of the pandemic. 

30 minutes ago, Gary M said:

 

 

Do you ever play Monopoly?

 

Do you know how you win?

 

Trump plays the long game, the spending now will generate income in the future.

 

The trick, and I am not sure how he will do it,  get Pelosi and Schumer to stop spending more than they bring in.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2017/01/20/how-barack-obama-has-made-20-million-since-arriving-in-washington/#6b128ebd5bf0

 

 

This is rich.  Got a study to support your point?  If not, when exactly will the "spending now . . . generate income in the future?" And, more importantly, will the "spending now," which frankly has occurred inversely through the reduction in receivables by the US Treasury occasioned by the Trump tax cuts for the rich, generate enough income to pay for itself in the future?

 

The data thus far says that the tax and spend approach of the president (who, not that you need the civics lesson, must approve the "Pelosi" spending to which you refer given that Republicans control the Senate, and that Democrats only control the House) has not worked: https://www.npr.org/2019/12/20/789540931/2-years-later-trump-tax-cuts-have-failed-to-deliver-on-gops-promises.  I'm not entirely sure what you mean when you refer to "Schumer" spending, since Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, control the Senate. 

 

That said, my understanding of fiscal conservatism is that it involves things like low taxes for all and balanced budgets.  Not tariffs, tax giveaways to the top 2%, and massive deficit spending. 

Edited April 16, 2020 by SectionC3

[Gary M]

8 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

Typical Trumper response.  Ignore the balance of the points, and instead attempt to undermine through distraction.  

 

I'll let the WHO answer your question: https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/04/15/835179442/we-alerted-the-world-to-coronavirus-on-jan-5-who-says-in-response-to-u-s.  I'll add that important measure taken by the WHO (alerting the international community to the concern in early January 2020, and publishing the genetic sequence of the virus approximately one week later) occurred approximately one month before the President of the United States attempted to wish the virus away, suggesting that it would just "disappear," and characterized the virus as a political hoax.  

 

I suspect that most would not believe that unemployment numbers prompted by the pandemic, the likes of which have not been seen since the Great Depression, are not a hoax.  Perhaps we should ask ourselves if those numbers would be as high as they are had the person with "absolute authority" in this country, I don't know, respected the threat and pushed for the development of an aggressive testing program, and similarly pushed the scientific community to begin drug therapies for the virus.  That sort of was the point of the WHO publishing the genetic sequence of the virus.  

 

In any event, I'm all ears if you have a response on the merits to the litany of other criticisms I raised with respect to the president's mishandling of the pandemic. 

 

 

This is rich.  Got a study to support your point?  The data thus far says that the tax and spend approach of the president (who, not that you need the civics lesson, must approve the "Pelosi" spending to which you refer given that Republicans control the Senate, and Democrats only control the House) has not worked: https://www.npr.org/2019/12/20/789540931/2-years-later-trump-tax-cuts-have-failed-to-deliver-on-gops-promises.  I'm not entirely sure what you mean when you refer to "Schumer" spending, since Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, control the Senate. 

 

That said, my understanding of fiscal conservatism is that it involves things like low taxes for all and balanced budgets.  Not tariffs, tax giveaways to the top 2%, and massive deficit spending. 

 

Sorry forgot to mention the Rhinos in the house, just hang in there, in after four more years you will see the difference.

 

"tax giveaways to the top 2%" that's funny, as mentioned in another thread, it's their money.

[SectionC3]

Just now, Gary M said:

 

Sorry forgot to mention the Rhinos in the house, just hang in there, in after four more years you will see the difference.

 

"tax giveaways to the top 2%" that's funny, as mentioned in another thread, it's their money.

 

That's the ticket.  "RINOs." Got it.  So the "RINOs," Pelosi, and Schumer are responsible for the irresponsible spending.  Makes perfect sense. 

 

I had to edit the post because I missed the corollary to the theory: there are so many RINOs that a presidential veto of all of this irresponsible spending would be overridden, so naturally the president doesn't bother to exercise his veto power with respect to such issues and instead will focus on eliminating the RINO source of the problem.  Now I think I've covered all of the bases. 

2 minutes ago, Gary M said:

 

Sorry forgot to mention the Rhinos in the house, just hang in there, in after four more years you will see the difference.

 

"tax giveaways to the top 2%" that's funny, as mentioned in another thread, it's their money.

 

One more thing: still no study or data to support your "tax and spend" conservatism points.  

Edited April 16, 2020 by SectionC3

[Gary M]

1 minute ago, SectionC3 said:

 

That's the ticket.  "RINOs." Got it.  So the "RINOs," Pelosi, and Schumer are responsible for the irresponsible spending.  Makes perfect sense. 

 

Yes that's how it works, they write the Bills and the President signs them.

 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwiKr_XBz-3oAhUpgnIEHRv5CTkQ3ywwAHoECBQQAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DFFroMQlKiag&usg=AOvVaw0UnK1AU54bPTwU8Nnv2ci0

[SectionC3]

I'm not going to click on the link, but I might suggest that you read the part about the president's veto power if it's in there. 

[Gary M]

2 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

I'm not going to click on the link, but I might suggest that you read the part about the president's veto power if it's in there. 

 

Yes he should have vetoed the PPP because Pelosi stuck the $25 mil for the every vital Kennedy Center.

[SectionC3]

3 minutes ago, Gary M said:

 

Yes he should have vetoed the PPP because Pelosi stuck the $25 mil for the every vital Kennedy Center.

 

That's a $350 billion (with a "B") dollar program, right?  Perhaps instead of focusing on a tiny slice of that spending package, and ignoring the Trump tax and spend policies of the past 3.5 years, we should focus on the issue whether the package itself would have been necessary had the President of the United States (the one who claims to have "absolute authority") proactively addressed the pandemic.  

Edited April 16, 2020 by SectionC3

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, SectionC3 said:

 

That's a $350 billion (with a "B") dollar program, right?  Perhaps instead of focusing on a tiny slice of that spending package, and ignoring the Trump tax and spend policies of the past 3.5 years, we should focus on the issue whether the package itself would have been necessary had the President of the United States (the one who claims to have "absolute authority") proactively addressed the pandemic.