Will President Trump run for a second term?

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Sat Jul 23, 2016 8:01 pm

The economy is a big issue

My hubby & I travel a lot - homeless & not by choice people are homeless.

Streets are lined with shabby tents & grocery carts of their belongings.

Many can't make ends meet & their one foot is on the curb.

Louisiana still have misplaced people living in trailers from all the flooding disasters.

Hawaii - the streets are lined with homeless.

I really don't know how family's make it today.

I was brought up in a family of 6 kids - different time I know - we didn't have a great deal - clothes were hand me downs - but now kids want the label - the phone etc..

Not sure if some generations could relate.

Not sure what the younger are wanting from their President.

It's that group that scare me on their voting.

I wish the new first lady would stop remolding the white house - stop changing out the china etc. it's such a waste. just move into that large white mountain & feel fortunate.:wah:

Patsy

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Sat Jul 23, 2016 10:44 pm

Homelessness is a big problem in just about every city in the US. Mental healthcare is another problem. Another problem is that the roads and bridges are crumbling and some of the bridges are unsafe.

Trump said that the White House is an embarrassment and he has big plans for it. For starters, he said he would build a grand ballroom that will be better than any of the palaces in Europe.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Sun Jul 24, 2016 3:37 am

Wandrin;1499030 wrote: Trump said that the White House is an embarrassment and he has big plans for it. For starters, he said he would build a grand ballroom that will be better than any of the palaces in Europe.WOW! That'll be WONDERFUL! Who the **** cares about the homeless, the roads and the bridges? I got my dancin' shoes on already!

Post by **spot** » Sun Jul 24, 2016 4:53 am

Given the choice of the White House extension or reeding about yet another dead Syrian, I'll take the grand ballroom.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sun Jul 24, 2016 4:57 am

Why is it that Politics invariably comes down to Fashion Sense as part of their capacity to run a country? Talk of Hilary in Frumpy dresses, Trump in Leash-like ties, etc. Even in the U.K. there was Cameron telling Corbyn to 'put on a proper suit, do up his tie & sing the National Anthem'. Einstein was, unmistakably a genius, but I doubt he would argue that he was somewhat lacking in dress sense.

As far as Hilary's policies are concerned, I don't really know that much, to be honest. However, because Trump is so odious with his blatant approach to rallying votes by way of stirring up racial hatred & constantly playing to the masses with no consistency on anything, if I had a vote I would vote for a chimpanzee rather than for him, so Hilary would definitely get my vote (not that I'm meaning to imply that she has any similarity to a chimpanzee), but anything would be preferable to Trump.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Sun Jul 24, 2016 6:36 am

It now looks as if there is some sort of Clinton-Sanders dispute brewing which is, of course, the last thing that the Democratic Party needs.

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Sun Jul 24, 2016 7:59 am

Mark Aspam;1499037 wrote: It now looks as if there is some sort of Clinton-Sanders dispute brewing which is, of course, the last thing that the Democratic Party needs.

That might not be a bad thing. There are still a lot of Sanders supporters who feel that their voices are not being heard. If the party plays this right, and shows that those voices and concerns will be addressed in the party platform, it could have the result of increasing party unity and voter turnout. It will be interesting to watch.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Sun Jul 24, 2016 8:32 am

Wandrin;1499043 wrote: That might not be a bad thing. There are still a lot of Sanders supporters who feel that their voices are not being heard. If the party plays this right, and shows that those voices and concerns will be addressed in the party platform, it could have the result of increasing party unity and voter turnout. It will be interesting to watch.Sanders was on "Meet the Press" less than an hour ago and affirmed that he supports the Clinton candidacy unconditionally.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Sun Jul 24, 2016 8:33 am

Fourpart

The media & superficial people will pick every thread on Clinton & Trump, and they know this - Clinton pants suits are old & frumpy - if you can't change your clothes - will you change policies. Clinton needs to relate to a younger generation to win this election.

As I stated the cost - the label is so important to many.

Will the more expensive make a better leader - of course not.

I'd like a leader with a simple down to earth sense.

My brother stated - you should put granite counter tops in the kitchen -

I said - will it make me a better cook?

We need to know how these issues are going to be fixed & when.

Every term - we still have the same old problems.

The white house looks good though.

Patsy

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Sun Jul 24, 2016 1:55 pm

How do you think Clinton will handle her convention?

Meaning - will she pound Trump the mouth or will she get on with her ideas to fix the Country?

I feel it would beneficial to her to focus on how she'll fix the Country.

I don't like her idea to put every (needy) person on Medicare.

Patsy

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Sun Jul 24, 2016 3:13 pm

If she is smart, she will leave the Trump bashing to the other speakers and use the opportunity to lay out a positive vision for America. This would reveal such a stark contrast with the GOP convention of all negative all the time and "be very afraid". It would also give her a great chance to appeal to Sanders supporters.

I hope that's what she does. We'll soon find out.

I'm sure that Fox and maybe some other networks will cut away during her speech to interview Trump by phone. That is to be expected.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Sun Jul 24, 2016 3:34 pm

I hope she doesn't go to bashing Trump - really don't lower herself to that level & it doesn't accomplish anything.

She really has to get the younger generation on board with her.

I've been holding my own survey - 30 ish age are leaning towards Trump

60 & up are leaning & most decided for Trump, which scares me.

several 40ish are undecided.

I did not receive many for Clinton.

She has to come out fresh - as youthful as possible - she needs to stick to the positive strong direction the Country is headed. She needs to relate to me..:wah:

I really am scared of this election. I just never imagined Trump was for real - this joke is scaring me.

You think Trump will be on the phone interview? I don't recall a Clinton phone interview.

Patsy

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Sun Jul 24, 2016 4:21 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499071 wrote:

You think Trump will be on the phone interview? I don't recall a Clinton phone interview.

Patsy

Fox has let him do that in the past when Hillary is speaking. They just cut away from the speech and Trump gives his opinion about it, even though he's not watching it.

I agree with what you said. I think this is her opportunity to step up and show vision and leadership.

I don't think anyone, including Trump, expected it to go this far.

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Sun Jul 24, 2016 5:23 pm

Patsy, you must live in a rather conservative area. Around here, where everything revolves around the tech industries, people are terrified of a Tump presidency. He has said he wants to "close the Internet" to keep ISIS from using it. He called for a boycott of Apple for allowing iPhone owners to encrypt their data. He has said that he is against making Internet service providers providing fair service to their clients. He said he would rewrite all of the trade agreements to give the US a bigger edge. He said today that he might pull us out of the World Trade Organization. The list goes on and on of things he said he would do that would hurt our tech industries.

About the only place that I hear pro-Trump talk is when I walk my dog past the local bar and that is mostly yelling.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 9:13 am

What's up with Wasserman?

This whole system is corrupt.

I feel the Presidency is a auction - going to the highest bidder.

Disappointing

Patsy

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 9:24 am

In the UK there are limits on the amount a political party can spend on elections.

I wonder how far the billionaire Trump would have got if he had financial restraints on his electioneering ?

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 11:01 am

Michael Moore predicts Donald Trump will be President: 'I'm sorry to be a buzzkill' | People | News | The Independent

And if you believe Hillary Clinton is going to beat Trump with facts and smarts and logic, then you obviously missed the past year of 56 primaries and caucuses where 16 Republican candidates tried that and every kitchen sink they could throw at Trump and nothing could stop his juggernaut.â€

Only know him through bowling for columbine and fahreinheit 911 so not sure how he stands as a pundit but I think he has a point.

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 11:43 am

Bruv;1499102 wrote: In the UK there are limits on the amount a political party can spend on elections.

I wonder how far the billionaire Trump would have got if he had financial restraints on his electioneering ?

We have a very loose system where any group can raise and spend money for a candidate just by saying they are not controlled by the candidate. That's how most of the nasty attack ads are paid for.

There seems to be some question as to how rich Trump actually is and that is nowhere near what he claims. He refuses to disclose his tax records, so it's anybody's guess.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:05 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499100 wrote: What's up with Wasserman?

This whole system is corrupt.

I feel the Presidency is a auction - going to the highest bidder.

Disappointing

PatsyMy understanding - at 2pm CDT, is that the DNC has been circulating - unofficially - some negative propaganda about Sanders. There will be more on this later I'm sure.

What I have not heard mentioned in this regard, however, is that, strictly speaking, Sanders is not officially a Democrat. He is running on the Democratic ticket but anyone could do that - Trump could have, I could have myself even if I were not a registered Democrat, which I am.

So we shall see - it's too bad that Debbie lost her job, she should have had better sense. I don't think it's so much a matter of corruption as of poor judgment.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:18 pm

I believe that poor judgment cost Bernie Sanders the ticket.

That's corruption - which Trump has pointed out several times.

The whole system is a joke. Every one has excuses for all the B.S..

Oh, we have a "loose" system alright.

Brings right back to one of my 1st replies here - what a joke.

Patsy

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:42 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499115 wrote: I believe that poor judgment cost Bernie Sanders the ticket.

That's corruption... No. it's not, it's politics. Also, which ticket did he lose? The convention begins today. Hillary will undoubtedly be nominated. I personally don't think much of her VP choice, I would have preferred Bernie, but that is her choice to make.

As far as I know, Bernie is still supporting her.

And if you think that the current system is so corrucpt, start your own party and run for president yourself. To my knowledge there is nothing to prevent you from doing that (I'm assuming that you're an American) and there are in fact several minor parties most of whom take themselves quite seriously.

The best-known exception is the Monster Raving Loony party, but that is in the UK.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 12:59 pm

posted by mark apsam

The best-known exception is the Monster Raving Loony party, but that is in the UK.

They are beginning to seem quite sane these days.

In a hurried statement today â€˜Nick the Flying Brickâ€™ party Treasurer and Shadow Minister for the â€˜Abolition of Gravityâ€™ stated categorically that the â€˜Official Monster Raving Loony Partyâ€™ have had no resignations and have no plans for a leadership contest.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 1:35 pm

Mark

you sound ridiculous

and if you don't think there's corruption - keep our blinders on.

Patsy

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 6:07 pm

We seem to be having a riot started over this NON-Corrupt election.

Sander's supporters are yelling

Hell NO "DNC" we won't vote for Hillary.

Why is there always a scandal around Hillary?

Patsy

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 7:52 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499123 wrote: We seem to be having a riot started over this NON-Corrupt election.

Sander's supporters are yelling

Hell NO "DNC" we won't vote for Hillary.

Why is there always a scandal around Hillary?

Because there is always someone who will yell "scandal" whenever anything involves Hillary. This has been going on for 20+ years.

I wouldn't really call it a "riot" over the Sanders supporters, but they were certainly making their voices heard. It will be interesting when Sanders speaks.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 8:37 pm

You didn't care for "riot" :yh_rotfl :yh_rotfl

I thought I'd throw a little fire out there..

Funny Huh..:wah:

interesting chain of events tonight

Patsy

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 8:58 pm

It's very interesting to watch.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Mon Jul 25, 2016 9:41 pm

Well I'm waiting - what did you think of day 1 of D convention?

Did you think there's momentum - other than the riot? :wah:

Patsy

Post by **spot** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 2:32 am

I may have mistaken Michelle Obama's words on the radio this morning but I think she offered a way to distinguish Republicans from Democrats - they aim low while we get high.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 4:12 am

Why can't she pick him as vice president it would seem to offer a good compromise.?

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 5:55 am

gmc;1499135 wrote: Why can't she pick him as vice president it would seem to offer a good compromise.?

Probably need a bloody amendment.......or summat.

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 7:08 am

gmc;1499135 wrote: Why can't she pick him as vice president it would seem to offer a good compromise.?

Because Hilary is playing the long game. Sanders will better serve the "Cause" by staying in the Senate.

If Sanders is VP, the Republican governor of Vermont chooses who to replace him. He will likely pick a Republican.

She picked a VP from a state with a Dem governor, who will replace him with another Dem.

These Bernie Bots are really no better than the Stormtrumpers. They are short-sited and ready to tip the apple cart because they don't think they are getting their way.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 8:05 am

spot;1499133 wrote: I may have mistaken Michelle Obama's words on the radio this morning but I think she offered a way to distinguish Republicans from Democrats - they aim low while we get high.

Now that right there is funny..

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 9:43 am

LarsMac;1499146 wrote: Because Hilary is playing the long game. Sanders will better serve the "Cause" by staying in the Senate.

If Sanders is VP, the Republican governor of Vermont chooses who to replace him. He will likely pick a Republican.

She picked a VP from a state with a Dem governor, who will replace him with another Dem.

These Bernie Bots are really no better than the Stormtrumpers. They are short-sited and ready to tip the apple cart because they don't think they are getting their way.

Kind of seems like they are all ready to rip the apple cart apart one side because they don't think it necessary and the other because they want to drive on the left.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 9:55 am

LarsMac;1499146 wrote: 1. Because Hilary is playing the long game. Sanders will better serve the "Cause" by staying in the Senate.

2. If Sanders is VP, the Republican governor of Vermont chooses who to replace him. He will likely pick a Republican. .1. Which "cause" would that be? He is not a Democrat and if he were vice-president he would still be in the Senate, as its president. That's the vice-president's job. In case of ties he casts the winning vote.

2. Run that by me again? The guv of Vermont was a Democrat the last time I looked. Do you know something that I don't?

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 10:17 am

Mark Aspam;1499159 wrote: 1. Which "cause" would that be? He is not a Democrat and if he were vice-president he would still be in the Senate, as its president. That's the vice-president's job. In case of ties he casts the winning vote.

2. Run that by me again? The guv of Vermont was a Democrat the last time I looked. Do you know something that I don't?

oops, you're right.

But Sanders is a leader in the Senate. And as VP, his work in the Senate is only a part of his job, and he has little to say, and no real vote.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 12:16 pm

Wasserman-Schultz resigns from the DNC and Clinton hires her immediately

Oh, job well done Wasserman.

I'll be nice & ask why did Wasserman resign?

Patsy

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 12:29 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499168 wrote: Wasserman-Schultz resigns from the DNC and Clinton hires her immediately

Oh, job well done Wasserman.

I'll be nice & ask why did Wasserman resign?

Patsy

It appears that she "Fell on her Sword" over the emails showing that she and other DNC personnel tried to rig the game against Bernie.

Of course I can't help but wonder how the DNC let Bernie sign up as a Democratic candidate in the first place, since he is not a Democrat.

Also wondering what exactly an "honorary Chair" does.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 1:05 pm

What does the sword mean?

Certainly Wasserman didn't do anything twisted - illegal or corrupt.

Certainly Hillary wouldn't want to hire Wasserman knowing she did a twist or a illegal action in her position.

By Hillary hiring her - it seems to be a reward.

That's the Bridge over Troubled Waters...:wah:

Patsy

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 1:09 pm

LarsMac;1499172 wrote: It appears that she "Fell on her Sword" over the emails showing that she and other DNC personnel tried to rig the game against Bernie.

Of course I can't help but wonder how the DNC let Bernie sign up as a Democratic candidate in the first place, since he is not a Democrat.

Also wondering what exactly an "honorary Chair" does.I dunno about "exactly" but my understanding from RELIABLE sources is that she will probably campaign for Hillary without pay. "Honorary" is not "hired".

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 1:11 pm

Mark Aspam;1499176 wrote: I dunno about "exactly" but my understanding from RELIABLE sources is that she will probably campaign for Hillary without pay. "Honorary" is not "hired".

Well, rumor has it that she didn't get off to a good start yesterday.

But she's probably counting on peoples' short memories

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 1:21 pm

LarsMac;1499177 wrote: Well, rumor has it that she didn't get off to a good start yesterday.

But she's probably counting on peoples' short memoriesI don't think it has as much to do with memory as with the future of our nation.

I certainly plan to campaign for Hillary and I'm not being hired nor paid.

But getting back to short memories, have all the Trump supporters forgotten about his many scams and rackets such as the "Trump University" hoax?

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 1:31 pm

Wasserman will not be donating her time

She was hired by Clinton - hired immediately.

Why would Clinton want this dishonest person associated with her?

Clinton already has enough negative - illegal suspicious situation hanging over her - why add another negative?

It's a reward - for a corrupt system.

I don't have a short memory - in fact Mark your repeating yourself.

Patsy

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 1:50 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499179 wrote: 1. Wasserman will not be donating her time

2. She was hired by Clinton - hired immediately.

3. Why would Clinton want this dishonest person associated with her?

4. Clinton already has enough negative - illegal suspicious situation hanging over her - why add another negative?

1. Yes, she will. You need to seek reliable sources and not right-wing propaganda material.

2. No she was not. "Hired" implies payment.

3. There is no one in this entire matter more dishonest than Donald Trump. He should be serving prison time right now for his Trump University fraud.

4. I don't see anything hanging. She misfiled some emails for her own convenience and admitted that she had used poor judgment. Case closed.

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 1:54 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499179 wrote: Wasserman will not be donating her time

She was hired by Clinton - hired immediately.

Why would Clinton want this dishonest person associated with her?

Clinton already has enough negative - illegal suspicious situation hanging over her - why add another negative?

It's a reward - for a corrupt system.

I don't have a short memory - in fact Mark your repeating yourself.

Patsy

The only place I see the phrase that suggests that Hilary hired her is in the right-wing media babblers.

Not that I really care. We are not talking illegal activity, here.

and as for the emails, it is out now that the russian hackers that acquired those emails for Assange appear to have had their way with the documents before handing them over.

There is no veracity in the claims of what those emails might actually reveal.

Not something I will lose sleep over.

What will lose me sleep is wondering why the Russians are so interested in seeing The Donald in the White House.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 1:57 pm

I don't know of any Female to do anything for FREE.

Hillary stated she Hired Wasserman.

Misfiled e-mails for her convenience :yh_rotfl :yh_rotfl too funny

apparently you don't have the full report on that issue either.

poor judgment with the E-mails

poor judgment on the Country

poor judgment hiring Wasserman - she resigned for a reason - corruption. Why didn't Wasserman open & close the DNC as usual? No she resigned on day 1 - :yh_rotfl.

Patsy

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 2:04 pm

Blame this on a Russian hacker - B.S.

and they found this out so quickly

yet it took how long to figure Hillary's E-mail issue

oh, it was the convenience & poor judgment that moved that process along so quickly.:wah:

Wasserman's hiring was announced during the DNC last night

I'm not convinced this Hacking has anything to do with the Russians - they just picked a name out of the clouds & so quickly - this couldn't be detected prior to last night? ridiculous

Patsy

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 2:05 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499184 wrote: I don't know of any Female to do anything for FREE.

Hillary stated she Hired Wasserman.

Misfiled e-mails for her convenience :yh_rotfl :yh_rotfl too funny

apparently you don't have the full report on that issue either.

poor judgment with the E-mails

poor judgment on the Country

poor judgment hiring Wasserman - she resigned for a reason - corruption. Why didn't Wasserman open & close the DNC as usual? No she resigned on day 1 - :yh_rotfl.

Patsy

Actually, her resignation is not effective until the end of the week. Therefore, Hilary has not yet employed her.

So, you believe Herr Drumpf exhibits great judgement, do you?

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 3:00 pm

"I don't know of any Female to do anything for FREE."

Uhh, Patsy, my friend, that is a sexist remark. I'll take it that you were being light-hearted & making a joke. :yh_rotfl

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 3:11 pm

Of course Anne:yh_rotfl

It still make me chuckle.

Lars

It was announced last night - right along with the Russian hack report.

which should be believed? why did Wasserman resign again?

Patsy