Our President graced us this morning with this tweet that seemed a bit out of place: After a bit of digging, it appears it was brought on by this NY Post article discussing possible Dem candidates for 2020 Cuban even tweeted out an interesting article that implies that he is still thinking about 2020 ------------ So, is Cuban a viable candidate? If Texas bought into his message and actually went blue, I think it's a done deal. Even without Texas, I think Cuban could pull enough conservative voters (without alienating the left) to make him a serious threat. Of course, this is assuming that Trump doesn't do something seriously damaging in between now and then.
Cuban could defeat Trump. He might even carry some red states. Trump is his own worst enemy. It is not clear to me if Trump can stay unimpeached for four years.
brilliant , Chandler Parson as ~ 1st lady "So when I hear candidates ask that another make public their tax returns, it scares me....,it is none of your business....." Cuban wrote
Sounds like a good way to get Trump a 2nd term. The lesson from this past election should be that when you run a complete joke of a candidate like Hillary Clinton, you can get beat by a total joke of a candidate like Donald Trump.....that should teach Democrats to not run a complete joke of a candidate next time if they want to win.....not that they should go out and find another joke of a candidate. But you know, whatever.
You are incorrect. Hillary Clinton was not a complete joke of a candidate, and Donald Trump was not a complete joke of a candidate to his followers. If that were the case, how would you explain Trump landing the Republican nomination over people like Cruz? Do you consider Ted Cruz a joke of a candidate? Or Marco Rubio? Or Rand Paul? I certainly don't. Donald Trump won for a few simple reasons: 1. He automatically won red states that any Republican candidate would have won. 2. He won states that Clinton should have won but didn't (the blame is on her for that) 3. He won in very small margins for the states that gave him the considerable electoral college advantage. 4. People love celebrities, even the idiot ones like Trump. 5. People were willing to overlook his many flaws because (a) he's a big name, (b) Clinton was not the best candidate (complete joke is an exaggeration- a complete-joke candidate would not win the popular vote by a few million), and (c) people want change. That's objective. I have to accept the fact that people don't see what a true idiot the guy is. That's fine- a lot of people are uneducated on both sides, and I have to accept living in a world that at times demonstrates enormous ignorance. Yes, ignorance. If you can't see how absurd it is to equate Clinton with Trump, and you can't see how someone of his ilk is going to have a disastrous Presidency, then I can't help you. We're already seeing signs of it a few weeks in, and it's only going to get worse. 70 year-old people don't change- if anything, they double down and get more set in their ways. Most of his decisions will not affect me personally, so I could easily sit in my office and say I don't give a **** what he does. But when confronted with a bully, I have no choice. President Pulp Fiction sucks, period.
I see what you are saying, but the reason he beat those in the primary was due to the voting pool being so diluted. There was what, 17 candidates at one point? Trump winning the primary had to do with having a solid but small group that supported him from day one likely due to name recognition or something stupid like that. That's enough to win a 15 way race and he won a bunch of them early which gave him a lead that no one could overcome. Due to how fractured GOP support was, he won the nomination with only 44% of the vote....with a lot of those votes coming after he had it locked up already. In a one on one race I think Trump loses to Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, and maybe even to Paul (who is the best of the candidates which makes me think Republicans would never support him). Unfortunately there was never really a one on one race, even near the end it was still a 4 man race. Hillary lost a one on one race due to her being a remarkably terrible candidate and I'll explain why. You have her on film being on every side of pretty much every issue....much like Trump. No one trusts her and she's been caught lying so many times that it makes sense that no one should trust her. She legitimately should be in jail for crimes committed while Secretary of State. She's flat out unlikable, she might be one of the few people in the planet as unlikable or even more unlikable than Donald Trump. She simply has no charisma whatsoever. If you remember, I was strongly against both, and I had my little freak out well before the election when I realized that one of those two national disgraces were going to be the next president. I think some people convinced themselves that Hillary wasn't awful either due to the fact that her views (at least half the time, she flip flops on everything) were closer to their views or out of fear of Trump. There are also those who did the same for Trump but the fact is, both of them were the bottom of the barrel. We might as well have had 2 random jagoffs from the old Jersey Shore cast running for president, it wouldn't have been considerably worse.
Rand Paul is too short, Marco Rubio folded on camera one too many times (along with being too short) and people dislike Ted Cruz's weird face and voice. Plus all of them supported amnesty for illegal aliens.
I just deal in facts. Height has no impact on the ability to perform as POTUS. It has a massive impact on the ability to be elected. Probably offset if you are running against Clinton but it is there. Same reason a bald guy won't be elected. People can make fun of trumps hair all they want but is his head looked like Crazy Bernie's head he wouldn't be POTUS.
It is a factor in why they lost so call it r****ded if you want. If you want to see true Tardism read Sweet Tard 4 2's latest bowel movement.
When you heard the complaints about Hillary, it was this: Benghazi, emails, deplorables comment, burnout (not another Clinton). Pretty weak compared to Trump. But, hey, it's over. There's no guarantee someone like Sanders would have beaten Trump. They would have jumped on the socialism thing and painted him as a communist. Sometimes, the ugly side of America wins, plain and simple. Plus, you have to admit there are a lot of stupid people out there- politically speaking. They're not stupid about everything- but many people out there are very short-sighted when it comes to politics. These are the type of people that think building a wall is a piece of cake and is going to transform America. They believe Trump is truly going to drain the swamp. Some liberals are just as dumb, as well. They make every little slight into a major incident. You have to be smart about opposing Trump; otherwise, all you do is drive independents to move for him again. I didn't and won't insult Reagan, Bush, etc. I respect people that have different political opinions. Like you, or others. Nothing wrong with that. It's the bullying and insulting I won't tolerate. Like BigTexx- he can't ever just make his point, he has to do his stupid BWAHAA Liberals! - **** people like that, they're people of low character. Same with Trump- he is an extremely low-character bully who, truth be told, deserves to have his ass beat. I have zero respect for him as a person. "So-called judge,' Pocahontas- he's an ******* and I refuse to forget that under this "You're just sore he won." No, I don't care that a Republican won. I do care that a complete ******* won. It's bothersome. But, **** it, he'll dig his own grave. He is who he is.
I share some of the same concerns, only there really are a lot of people who are/were fully butt hurt that he won and lashing out as a result......doesn't mean that there isn't a million reasons to dislike Trump. He was a national disgrace well before he entered the realm of politics.
