This thread was started to test the premise constructive ideas will emerge when people engage in cooperative dialogue. I was not looking to be convinced to vote for Trump. I've been convinced not to vote for Trump since the end of January, 2017. Never again. My intention was not stated at the beginning of the thread as I did not want it to influence the direction I hoped the thread would take. The question establishing the topic and the setting of guidelines was all that was needed. I wanted to be a hands off observer for the most part to see what direction it would take. It went well for a while but deteriorated later in the afternoon when I was off line for a medical appointment, so I let it go. It's my hope those who participated or read the thread as it progressed will take time to consider how shelving negative attitudes and supressing hostile tendencies to insult someone you are in dialogue with will facilitate constructive ideas and a spirit of mutual cooperation.[/QUOTE] Lacuna, I was only able to read a few pages of 15 or so but would like to read your opinion in the thread if you’ve left one already. Please give me the pertinent post numbers. I too would like to see what you believe the issues to be on both sides so that I can respond with a thoughtful and informed post. I was going to say intelligent, but I know you wouldn’t believe that. JK!
No, read post 297. Lacuna said she made up her mind over three years ago she would never vote for Trump. See, I realize that there are some on here who are set in their ways like you, me and lacuna but because she wanted to have a discussion as to why we supported Trump I thought she was open minded. But alas, she wasn’t. Said so herself in post 297.
I didn't record my thoughts on the issues or impressions of what was discussed. To do that I will need to go through the thread and consider more carefully what each poster contributed or commented on what was being posted. I know there were some good ideas worth keeping in mind, but not prepared with a summation. As I posted above my greater intention was to start a thread fostering a cooperative dialogue on a loaded question asked of a diverse group of people as we have here.
@GatorLegend Sorry, I forgot to include the link to what I did post. It's long. Probably TL;DR for some people. Question for Trump supporters
Hey, and I can respect that. I wish you would go back and read post number 20. I thought that gentleman laid out his thoughts much more eloquently than I ever could. I agree with him 100%. Then please compare that to the posts of gatorjo who responds to every post with already debunked democrat talking points attacking DJT but not his policies. You can’t have a discussion with Jo.
No, YOU can't have a discussion with Jo because you tell lies, then run away when asked to substantiate them. Sorry, but not sorry - this country has long passed the point where discourse should be HONEST. Telling lies needs to be specifically called out as unacceptable. Even if a poster cloaks it in some routine of "Look how genial I am am while I lie!!" Want to have a discussion? OK - start by explaining how no fewer than SIX different groups of citizens in Grand Juries, in as many different locations, indicting Trump for FELONIES equates to......."Biden weaponizing the Justice Department." Let's have that discussion. Explain your assertion.
I think the stark choices in the Governorship race will add to the turn out. A trump-like candidate that downplays/denies the holocaust is not the political bonafides that they once were. (Hope).
An argument that evidence should not have been allowed applies only if it involved OFFICIAL DUTIES. Checks to his personal lawyer for personal business are not official duties of the President. Neither is personal business before or after he was President.
But they did present some evidence that came about during his official duties. Which, under some readings of the SCOTUS ruling shouldn't have been allowed and the conviction should be vacated. I believe there were a few of his tweets and testimony from Hope Hicks that are being contested. Nothing central to the case, nothing that should change the verdict, but enough for his lawyers to stretch things out past the election.
Lacuna, I got a chance to read your large post. Unfortunately it didn’t address my request to you. I wanted to know what your likes/dislikes were of the platforms of each party. That way I said I would try to thoughtfully respond. Thanks.
Did you want to reply about the mistruths you post that Biden "weaponized the Justice Department" in numerous non-federal jurisdictions? Seems like you're just trying to post falsehoods and ignore being asked to substantiate them. Weird.
Not familiar with everyone on that list but looks like you’ve got at least a couple problems with it. Ben Carson and Mike Pompeo both spoke at the 2024 convention and gave outstanding speeches supporting Trump. You must remember that when Trump took office he was not familiar with all of the bad actors in the deep Swamp and had to appoint people with experience in certain departments of the government that were suggested to him. Now that he found out who the backstabbing, leaking Swamp creatures are I don’t expect him to make the same mistakes again. Now you seem to ignore the fact that Kamala had 92% of her original staff leave her employ/team. The rumor is that she is extremely hard to work for. Who knows, maybe she encountered the same issue Trump did. Next time please try to be more fair and balanced!
How many of those people do you think Trump fired, Versus how many of them quit? If Trump fired them, I’d get your point. But since they all quit at different times, and all loudly voiced their discontent at Trump’s ability to govern, I think your point misses the mark.
You may be correct Joseph, like I said, I’m not familiar with most of those people. But why not also mention that the same may be true about the 92% who were fired and or resigned from the Harrris team?
Fair point, but you’d need to at least show me the people who resigned under Biden/Harris and show me where they criticized their ability to govern. I don’t think there was ever a time where so many people quit on one President as they did with Trump. The only other one that I could think of would be Nixon, but that was only after Nixon was caught cheating red—handed, and even then there wasn’t the same number of mass exodus followed by mass on-the-record statements claiming the President was an incompetent leader. We all have our opinions, and politics is usually 90% opinion. And so don’t take my word for anything. Just listen to the people that Trump hired/appointed have to say about Trump’s abilities as President.
Does poster actually believe that Cabinet-level appointees and the vetting that goes with those types are equivalent to office hires for the VP?
