Trump 2025

Quote: SOOPOO

Then you must also blame the Democrat Party leadership for allowing the far left to dominate the narrative. And make the mess that Donald Trump is a CLEARLY better option than any Democrat candidate.

Kamala didn't have answers for obvious questions such as how are her policies and positions different than Biden's. Did the far leftr sominate the narrative, or did the GOP framing of the Democratic party control the narrative? I hope the people who voted for the mess that is the incoming President are happy with the results. If things go sideways, they'll have nobody to blame but themselves.

Quote:

1. We agree that only biologically born women can compete in women’s sports.

What do we do with the Castor Semenya's and the Christine Mboma's of he world?

Quote:

2. We agree that ours is a country of laws, and no state can actively subvert federal immigration law

Which states are doing so now? Making the Feds follow the Constitution in immigration enforcement isn't actively subverting immigration law.

Quote:

3. Race and gender will play no factor in our selection of candidates, nor hiring, nor school admission, etc.

More hateful rhetoric from the party of rich White men, angry they have to share access and power with people who aren't rich White men.

Quote:

Americans flocked to the Republicans because those simple concepts were rejected by Harris/Schumer/Jeffries.

And I hope those lemmings flockers are willing to accept the consequences of their vote.

Quote: missedhervee

Big boys like me don't cry.

I am mostly disturbed at how the bedrock of my legal training, a nationwide belief in the Rule of Law, has been smashed.

The fact that half of America genuinely believes, sans proof, that the jury trials were rigged, unfair and illegal boggles my legal mind: frankly I never thought we'd sink so low as a people.

As soon as MAGA demanded we believe in "alternative acts", that's when the wheels started to fall off the wagon.

Quote: GenoDRPh

That's what we voted for. In 2016, we voted into office a man committed to appointing douchenozzles to the USSC. And we got 3 of them on the court. In 2024, we reelected the same man back into office knowing he appointed 3 douchenozzles to the court AND having been convicted of felonies AND having been found liable for SA. That's who we voted for. And frankly, those of you who left your ballot blank, or voted "libertarian" or whatever share part of the blame. You have 2 choices in a Presidential election-Democrat or Republican. Voting for anyone else or not voting at all means you risk having the person you least want to be President among the two choices being inaugurated come the following Jan 20.

You have a real problem with judges who follow the Constitution it seems.

Quote: missedhervee

Big boys like me don't cry.

I am mostly disturbed at how the bedrock of my legal training, a nationwide belief in the Rule of Law, has been smashed.

The fact that half of America genuinely believes, sans proof, that the jury trials were rigged, unfair and illegal boggles my legal mind: frankly I never thought we'd sink so low as a people.

The rule of law was smashed when the left wing engaged in lawfare to beat a guy they could not beat legit. For crying out loud, a first day of law school kid can see that there is no civil fraud when the loan was being paid back on schedule.

Maybe your legal training was from the Joseph Stalin School of Law?

Quote: SOOPOO

Then you must also blame the Democrat Party leadership for allowing the far left to dominate the narrative. And make the mess that Donald Trump is a CLEARLY better option than any Democrat candidate.

I think these few points would have swung the election Democrat’s way…

1. We agree that only biologically born women can compete in women’s sports.
2. We agree that ours is a country of laws, and no state can actively subvert federal immigration law
3. Race and gender will play no factor in our selection of candidates, nor hiring, nor school admission, etc.

Americans flocked to the Republicans because those simple concepts were rejected by Harris/Schumer/Jeffries.

1. Gender issues need to be addressed in courts, not by voting.
2. You're joking right? A country of laws where our next President calls jan 6 people heroes?
3. Trump failed to pick the most qualified. If that's not what you're actually concerned with, then you have no point at all.

Quote: missedhervee

Big boys like me don't cry.

I am mostly disturbed at how the bedrock of my legal training, a nationwide belief in the Rule of Law, has been smashed.

The fact that half of America genuinely believes, sans proof, that the jury trials were rigged, unfair and illegal boggles my legal mind: frankly I never thought we'd sink so low as a people.

That you can’t see the trials SOLELY came to be BECAUSE Trump was those DA’s political enemy boggles my mind. You gotta cut back on the weed.

In a surprise (to me!) Johnson received UNANIMOUS support from the Republicans to be speaker in 2025. This is GREAT. He got there essentially by Trump convincing a few whacko righties to vote for him. You all must know if Trump had unchecked power he would NOT have picked Johnson, but someone RIGHT of him. But Trump and his team must have realized that to GET STUFF DONE Johnson was the only viable choice.

I think Musk made $25 billion yesterday. It will energize him to help us poor folk save money! It’s DOGE time!

Quote: rxwine

1. Gender issues need to be addressed in courts, not by voting.
2. You're joking right? A country of laws where our next President calls jan 6 people heroes?
3. Trump failed to pick the most qualified. If that's not what you're actually concerned with, then you have no point at all.

Gender issues nered to be addressed by science. Namely gender is assigned at conception and is unchangable. A few mentally ill men thinking otherwise does not change that.

Jan 6 people are heroes. Until we start calling BLM the racists and thuggery are you have no standing there.

Trump picked people based on qualifications. Skin color and gender are not qualifications.

Quote: rxwine

1. Gender issues need to be addressed in courts, not by voting.
2. You're joking right? A country of laws where our next President calls jan 6 people heroes?
3. Trump failed to pick the most qualified. If that's not what you're actually concerned with, then you have no point at all.

Disagree on 1. I’d let the PEOPLE decide with their voices (votes).
AGREE wholeheartedly on 2. It certainly is one of the major flaws of the Republican Party, and Trump specifically.
Disagree on 3. I am NOT saying Trump picks great people. But that is a totally separate issue from using race and gender to pick people. Imagine this statement…. ‘The department of mortars and pestles has done an amazing job throughout the years of grinding through the problems of our country. Since all the leaders have been white males, I’ll of course only be looking for another white male’. Please explain to me if you really believe Buttigieg was ‘qualified’ for the job he was picked for. Unless by qualified, you just mean ‘smart guy’.

Quote: SOOPOO

Disagree on 1. I’d let the PEOPLE decide with their voices (votes).
AGREE wholeheartedly on 2. It certainly is one of the major flaws of the Republican Party, and Trump specifically.
Disagree on 3. I am NOT saying Trump picks great people. But that is a totally separate issue from using race and gender to pick people. Imagine this statement…. ‘The department of mortars and pestles has done an amazing job throughout the years of grinding through the problems of our country. Since all the leaders have been white males, I’ll of course only be looking for another white male’. Please explain to me if you really believe Buttigieg was ‘qualified’ for the job he was picked for. Unless by qualified, you just mean ‘smart guy’.

1.Science would have to exclude psychology to define gender only by biology. I think it's anti-science to exclude psychology which doesn't always strictly attribute everything to physiology. It doesn't define normal as only one strict definition either. And it would be a mistake to do so, as we would start excluding more things as abnormal than just gender issues. It would redefine gays as abnormal which would be fine with the bigots.

But science doesn't define laws. Especially with the Republican conservatives. and liberal wacky sciene beliefs like crystal gazing and healing ointments and such Oprah-esque beliefs.

Courts should settle the issue.

BTW, I'm not saying the Democrats picks meets the standards of qualified, I'm saying Trump failed to do anything that makes DEI look inferior with many of his picks.

So, your complaints are dead to me, unless proven otherwise.