Will President Trump run for a second term?

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 3:17 pm

AnneBoleyn;1499189 wrote: "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_rotflPatsy is entitled to her remarks, sexist and otherwise. One wonders, in her remarks regarding the upcoming election, if she is familiar with the term "patsy". She certainly seems to fall into that category.

But I wish her no ill, the facts remain, unless the biblical end of days occurs first, Hillary Clinton will be the next president, and hopefully, the Clinton administration, one of the best and brightest in all of American history, will be re-instated for another eight years.

Donald Trump will hopefully be serving jail time for his various frauds and scams, very possibly for even more than eight years.

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 3:27 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499191 wrote: 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

Announced last night, effective at the end of the DNCC

You could ask her why she resigned. Or we can make a guess, just like the media did.

Jumping to conclusions is the easiest exercise Humans have ever invented. And we're all damned good at it.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 4:00 pm

Lars

I was being serious with asking why she resigned.

If a computer system was hacked - why would that be Waserman's fault?

if that is the reason or bad timing?

Day 1 of the DC - Wasserman should've opened & closed.

Mark - please explain what Patsy means?

since you can't explain a Illegal Immigrant - & your term "some way or so"

You keeping repeating Clinton will be Pres. - ok we heard you.

what does Patsy mean?

Patsy

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 4:19 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499195 wrote: what does Patsy mean?

PatsyFrom the unabridged Random House Dictionary of the English Language: "patsy: a person who is easily swindled, deceived, coerced, persuaded, etc."

Patsy, you could look it up yourself, and while you have it open, you might even check out the difference betwixt "your" and "you're".

But you, Patsy, are certainly entitled to your beliefs, I don't wish to keep sparring with you, the November election will speak for itself.

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 4:31 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499195 wrote: Lars

I was being serious with asking why she resigned.

If a computer system was hacked - why would that be Waserman's fault?

if that is the reason or bad timing?

Day 1 of the DC - Wasserman should've opened & closed.

Mark - please explain what Patsy means?

since you can't explain a Illegal Immigrant - & your term "some way or so"

You keeping repeating Clinton will be Pres. - ok we heard you.

what does Patsy mean?

Patsy

I was being serious too. I am sure that her reasoning has to do with all of the blowback that will come from the email hack. But her resignation (offered on Monday morning, effective July 29) could be the result of a number of issues.

I dunno.

On the other hand, how much of the content of those emails is verifiable, and how much will it really show regarding the claims of DNC members trying to undermine Bernie. Will it show any criminal intent? We are off into that fuzzy world we seem to love so much where everybody has opinions, and some of those opinions may be based on solid evidence, but most are based upon supposition and speculation.

I'll wait for the Cliff Notes to come out.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 5:37 pm

Mark

I was being sarcastic - good God - give your stupidity a break.

actually posting the dict. - how stupid.

your just the - - bully in the school yard - it's just frustration

look up Illegal Immigrant in your dict. so you'll understand.

I'm sure there are plenty of illegals in the mid-west.

I'm not sparring - you can't explain & then you pull out the dict. ridiculous.

Patsy

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 8:05 pm

Well, how do you think Bill did?

I thought he did ok. Nothing riveting

felt like a history teacher talking about Lewis & Clark.:wah:

Patsy

Post by **LarsMac** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 10:03 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499206 wrote: Well, how do you think Bill did?

I thought he did ok. Nothing riveting

felt like a history teacher talking about Lewis & Clark.:wah:

Patsy

He is quite the showman when he wants to be.

I think he did OK. I only caught the last half of his speech.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Tue Jul 26, 2016 10:05 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499198 wrote: Mark

I was being sarcastic - good God - give your stupidity a break.

actually posting the dict. - how stupid.

your just the - - bully in the school yard - it's just frustration

look up Illegal Immigrant in your dict. so you'll understand.

I'm sure there are plenty of illegals in the mid-west.

I'm not sparring - you can't explain & then you pull out the dict. ridiculous.

PatsyPatsy, personal attacks are against the rules of the forum. When you ask me the meaning of the word "patsy" I'm assuming you don't know and I'm trying to help, especially since that is your name or perhaps nickname. I don't expect to have that help thrown back in my face.

Regarding "your" and "you're", here is a comparison:

"Excuse me, your fly is open!"

"Excuse me, you're standing on my foot!"

Got it? Most of us learned that in first or second grade. Maybe you just weren't paying attention.

Regarding immigration, I think that I've stated that before. Illegal immigrants who come here to commit crimes should be imprisoned or deported.

Illegal immigrants who come here to escape oppression and/or poverty should be given a path to citizenship, even if it means having to leave the country and then return with the proper documentation.

Got it? You have different ideas on the subject? Fine, who cares.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:27 am

How likely is Michelle Obama to stand at some poiint in the future do you think?

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 6:34 am

gmc;1499213 wrote: How likely is Michelle Obama to stand at some poiint in the future do you think?

Not bloody likely.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 9:39 am

Lars

Why would the Russians hack DC E-mails?

you mentioned the hack - what's your take on this?

I haven't heard anything to why the Russians?

There's a twist that the hack would benefit Trump?

Patsy

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 9:58 am

AnneBoleyn;1499220 wrote: Not bloody likely....but watch out for Chelsea Clinton.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 10:13 am

Another question

If & when Hillary becomes Pres. -

What do we call Bill? 1st Gentleman - or continue with Former Pres. as a introduction?

This would also be a historic position for Bill a former Pres.

Patsy

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 10:14 am

Patsy Warnick;1499224 wrote: Lars

Why would the Russians hack DC E-mails?

you mentioned the hack - what's your take on this?

I haven't heard anything to why the Russians?

There's a twist that the hack would benefit Trump?

Patsy

That is a darned good question. Other than The Russians seem to share a dislike for the Clinton campaign. And The Donald has declared an interest in disposing of NATO.

Of course it is only speculation that the hackers were sanctioned by the Russian Gummint.

Evidence does show that the hackers altered "some of the emails" before releasing them.

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 10:19 am

Patsy Warnick;1499226 wrote: Another question

If & when Hillary becomes Pres. -

What do we call Bill? 1st Gentleman - or continue with Former Pres. as a introduction?

This would also be a historic position for Bill a former Pres.

Patsy

"1st Gentleman" strikes me as a bit lame.

Of course, I always thought that "First Lady" has always seemed a little lame as well, in this "Enlightened Era"

I think we should call him "Mr Clinton"

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 11:25 am

LarsMac;1499228 wrote: "1st Gentleman" strikes me as a bit lame.

Of course, I always thought that "First Lady" has always seemed a little lame as well, in this "Enlightened Era"

I think we should call him "Mr Clinton"The proper form is President Emeritus.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:01 pm

Last night during the C.

One called Bill - 1st Gentleman - which struck me odd & wondered what will Bill be called in that position.

At this point Bill is introduce "former Pres. of the U.S. Bill C." as the other Pres. before & after him are introduced.

This is odd.

Russian hackers altered the e-mails - interesting to find out if Wasserman allowed or contributed to the hack.

some things not right with this Wasserman situation.

Patsy

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:20 pm

Mark Aspam;1499230 wrote: The proper form is President Emeritus.

Not exactly correct, sir.

Emeritus is a title bestowed upon a retiring office holder to recognize that while he/she no longer performs the duties of the office, he has been recognized for his/her work with such a title bestowed upon him/her by the organization.

The US has yet to bestow such a title on any former president.

Just taking off and running with this(Because I have some time to let the old brain wander)

(This is assuming that Hilary Clinton were to win the election)

"Mr Clinton" would be the most proper to use in a scenario where both he and his wife, the President, are together, since "President Clinton" would now be Hilary.

"Mr President" might be acceptable, as it will differentiate him from the now President, "Madam President" but would probably just complicate the whole thing.

at some time during the coarse of her office, all the former presidents were gathered in the same room with the current sitting president. It could be interesting if an interviewer tried to speak selectively to each of them with "President xxxxxxx" since there would be two who could answer to "President Bush" and two who could answer to "President Clinton"

I suspect that the only one in the room who should be addressed with the title "President" should be Hilary, though more properly, according to my Sister-in-law the diplomat, she should be addressed in such a setting as "Madam President" and all of the formers should simply be "Mr Bush", "Mr Clinton", "Mr Carter", etc.

If describing the people present to a third party, "President Clinton" could specify Hilary but would be more properly "President Hilary Clinton", while "Former President Clinton", or "Former President George H Bush", etc. would be acceptably proper.

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 12:23 pm

LarsMac;1499233 wrote: Not exactly correct, sir.

Emeritus is a title bestowed upon a retiring office holder to recognize that while he/she no longer performs the duties of the office, he has been recognized for his/her work with such a title bestowed upon him/her by the organization.

The US has yet to bestow such a title on any former president.

Just taking off and running with this(Because I have some time to let the old brain wander)

(This is assuming that Hilary Clinton were to win the election)

"Mr Clinton" would be the most proper to use in a scenario where both he and his wife, the President, are together, since "President Clinton" would now be Hilary.

"Mr President" might be acceptable, as it will differentiate him from the now President, "Madam President" but would probably just complicate the whole thing.

at some time during the coarse of her office, all the former presidents were gathered in the same room with the current sitting president. It could be interesting if an interviewer tried to speak selectively to each of them with "President xxxxxxx" since there would be two who could answer to "President Bush" and two who could answer to "President Clinton"

I suspect that the only one in the room who should be addressed with the title "President" should be Hilary, though more properly, according to my Sister-in-law the diplomat, she should be addressed in such a setting as "Madam President" and all of the formers should simply be "Mr Bush", "Mr Clinton", "Mr Carter", etc.

If describing the people present to a third party, "President Clinton" could specify Hilary but would be more properly "President Hilary Clinton", while "Former President Clinton", or "Former President George H Bush", etc. would be acceptably proper.

And, after all that, I find this: How to Address a Former President of the United States

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 1:29 pm

LarsMac;1499233 wrote: Not exactly correct, sir.

Emeritus is a title bestowed upon a retiring office holder to recognize that while he/she no longer performs the duties of the office, he has been recognized for his/her work with such a title bestowed upon him/her by the organization.

The US has yet to bestow such a title on any former president.

Just taking off and running with this(Because I have some time to let the old brain wander)

(This is assuming that Hilary Clinton were to win the election)

"Mr Clinton" would be the most proper to use in a scenario where both he and his wife, the President, are together, since "President Clinton" would now be Hilary.

"Mr President" might be acceptable, as it will differentiate him from the now President, "Madam President" but would probably just complicate the whole thing.

at some time during the coarse of her office, all the former presidents were gathered in the same room with the current sitting president. It could be interesting if an interviewer tried to speak selectively to each of them with "President xxxxxxx" since there would be two who could answer to "President Bush" and two who could answer to "President Clinton"

I suspect that the only one in the room who should be addressed with the title "President" should be Hilary, though more properly, according to my Sister-in-law the diplomat, she should be addressed in such a setting as "Madam President" and all of the formers should simply be "Mr Bush", "Mr Clinton", "Mr Carter", etc.

If describing the people present to a third party, "President Clinton" could specify Hilary but would be more properly "President Hilary Clinton", while "Former President Clinton", or "Former President George H Bush", etc. would be acceptably proper.It's not a question of bestowal but of common usage. Former US presidents are usually referred to informally as President ****** and this would, I suppose, also be fine for President Bill Clinton. But emeritus is commonly used widely. If there is a FORMAL US government edict prohibiting or restricting it, then of course I will agree with you, please cite it.

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 1:35 pm

Mark Aspam;1499237 wrote: It's not a question of bestowal but of common usage. Former US presidents are usually referred to informally as President ****** and this would, I suppose, also be fine for President Bill Clinton. But emeritus is commonly used widely. If there is a FORMAL US government edict prohibiting or restricting it, then of course I will agree with you, please cite it.

Not saying it ain't so, but, I have yet to hear anyone use the term "Emeritus" when referring to a former POTUS.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 1:57 pm

In the past few minutes I've done some searching on Google and have found a wide variety of opinions on the matter , most of them supporting your side.

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 2:05 pm

When asked about it, Bill Clinton said that he likes the sound of "First Laddie".

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 2:59 pm

Shouldn't we all be concerned why Russia is involved?

Patsy

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 4:30 pm

And I thought that Bill Clinton wore a very stylish pant suit for his speech.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 5:29 pm

Wandrin

Bill usually looks pretty sharp

I thought Bill was a little thin for my liking.

Patsy

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 5:35 pm

Bill usually looks pretty sharp

I thought Bill was a little thin for my liking.

It's funny. I didn't read any articles or see any news stories talking about what he was wearing. I'm sure there will be plenty when Hillary speaks.

Maybe Bill is just staying in shape. I hope so.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 6:00 pm

No - I didn't hear any comment.

Bill had heart surgery some time back - I believe he's a vegetarian now.

Not sure if he still jogs - but he gave up McDonalds..:wah:

He needs a little more meat on his bones.

Patsy

Post by **LarsMac** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 6:35 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499252 wrote: Shouldn't we all be concerned why Russia is involved?

Patsy

yup

Question is, were these hackers just thugs, or were they actually Russian Intelligence, as some reports claim.

Have to wait for the FBI report to release, I guess.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 7:25 pm

Presidential Elections are about as much to do with real issues as an episode of Jerry Springer.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 8:10 pm

Fourpart is here to stir the pot:wah:

Throw some bait out there

any takers -:yh_rotfl

Patsy

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Wed Jul 27, 2016 8:26 pm

I think Pres. Obama did a great job.

Patsy

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 3:05 am

Patsy Warnick;1499265 wrote: I think Pres. Obama did a great job.

Patsy
Just think though, if John McCain had won you'd have had Sarah Palin as Vice President for the last eight years. Really. Don't laugh, it's true. And if pressure of office had got too much for his health, Ms Palin would have had her trigger finger on the nuclear button all this while.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 6:08 am

Patsy Warnick;1499265 wrote: I think Pres. Obama did a great job.

Patsy

I agree wholeheartedly with that. I was listening to his validation speech of Hillary Clinton last night. He is also such an eloquent, down to earth speaker. He will most certainly go down in history as one of the Greats. Not only for being the first Black President, against all expectations, but for getting in for a 2nd term at that. I only hope that in future elections he will stand again. The world needs leaders like him.

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 7:10 am

FourPart;1499272 wrote: I agree wholeheartedly with that. I was listening to his validation speech of Hillary Clinton last night. He is also such an eloquent, down to earth speaker. He will most certainly go down in history as one of the Greats. Not only for being the first Black President, against all expectations, but for getting in for a 2nd term at that. I only hope that in future elections he will stand again. The world needs leaders like him.

He cannot stand for the Presidential office, again. I am sure that he will contribute in other ways, though.

I rather like the idea of assigning him to a seat in the Supreme Court.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 7:43 am

"I rather like the idea of assigning him to a seat in the Supreme Court."

Assigned? Are you sure that's the word you mean Lars?

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 9:20 am

AnneBoleyn;1499284 wrote: "I rather like the idea of assigning him to a seat in the Supreme Court."

Assigned? Are you sure that's the word you mean Lars?

I believe that what I meant was to Appoint him to a seat.

When you think about it though, it's kinda the same thing. Right?

:P

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 9:27 am

Spot

Palin had a lot to do with McCain losing.

Just think - John Kennedy Jr. could/would be on this platform today.

Patsy

Post by **spot** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 9:47 am

Patsy Warnick;1499292 wrote: Spot

Palin had a lot to do with McCain losing.

It was somewhat witless of him to pick her then, wasn't it.

I find it notable that Americans turned down two genuine war heroes, John McCain and John Kerry, but elected Chief Chickenhawk "Stay-out-of-harm's-way" Dubya for eight years along with the equally spineless "five draft deferments" Cheney.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 12:01 pm

Spot

McCain would've been a good Pres..

Palin was a box of rocks. When Palin was asked about foreign affairs regarding Russia - Palin's answer was she could see Russia from her property.:yh_rotfl

(Alaska).

For some reason many were afraid of John Kerry?

This election we have no choice - we really don't. The Pres. has to be Hillary.

Trump's a fool - embarrassing.

Other's around the world have to be wondering/worried for the U.S. with Trump as a choice for Pres.?

I am worried with the amount of Trump supporters.

Patsy

Post by **LarsMac** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 12:46 pm

Patsy Warnick;1499305 wrote: Spot

McCain would've been a good Pres..

Palin was a box of rocks. When Palin was asked about foreign affairs regarding Russia - Palin's answer was she could see Russia from her property.:yh_rotfl

(Alaska).

For some reason many were afraid of John Kerry?

This election we have no choice - we really don't. The Pres. has to be Hillary.

Trump's a fool - embarrassing.

Other's around the world have to be wondering/worried for the U.S. with Trump as a choice for Pres.?

I am worried with the amount of Trump supporters.

Patsy

I agree with everything you posted, but wanted to add a comment about Kerry.

Kerry, I could have voted for. But We had lived in North Carolina for a while, and knew way too much about Edwards to feel comfy with him that close to the White House.

He was another scary one. He spent Millions of his own money to win an election to the Senate.

He also had other things going on that never came out during the election. Some of it came out afterwards, but We won't go there.

Bottom line for both Kerry and McCain, it was their choice of VP that killed their campaigns.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:05 pm

Lars

Oh, forgot about Edwards as Kerry's running mate.

Edwards was handsome & couldn't keep things zipped up and a child with his mistress while his wife was dealing with cancer. I can't respect that.

Yup - their choices for running mate buried them. too bad.

Looking forward to DC - Hillary will be speaking tonight.

I noticed she had her hair cut & colored - fresher look - but that pant suit - I have a running bet with my hubby & that pant suit look - I'm winning..!:yh_rotfl

Last night would've been a good night for the blue jeans - T-shirt & jean jacket.

How'd ya like it when Hillary put her head on Pres. Obama's shoulder/chest area?

Patsy

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:30 pm

LarsMac;1499291 wrote: I believe that what I meant was to Appoint him to a seat.

When you think about it though, it's kinda the same thing. Right?

:P

Used to be. Not lately.

Mark Aspam · Post by **Mark Aspam** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 4:29 pm

Patsy, I may disagree with you on everything else, but I sure agree with your comments on the pant suits.

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 4:57 pm

Mark

We don't really disagree - I am misunderstood since you can't see my body language many times I poke for fun.

I haven't wanted to debate the good bad & ugly on either Trump or Clinton.

There's a lot of time from now & Nov..

The debates will gives us enough to argue about.:wah:

You were assuming I was voting for trump - are you out of your mind?:yh_rotfl

I'm not crazy about Hillary - but really what choice do we have?

The pant suit just ages her & Hillary has to reach the younger generation - like Michele Obama.

We can't have everything - but lighten up Hillary.

Tonight should be interesting.

Good talking to you Mark

Patsy

Wandrin · Post by **Wandrin** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 5:01 pm

21 years ago, Walmart sold a T-shirt that said "Someday a woman will be president". Then they suddenly yanked it from the shelves saying "the message went against their philosophy of family values". After public outcry, they began selling the shirts again. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... president/

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 7:24 pm

Chelsea is boring..

Was I expecting too much?

a little enthusiasm please

Patsy

Patsy Warnick · Post by **Patsy Warnick** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 9:19 pm

I thought Hillary did a good job - she smiled more then I'd ever seen before.

a little bit of a lecture - she should've ended 10 minutes earlier than she did - she was on a high note and then it was dragging on.

and another pant suit - are you kidding me.!

Patsy

magentaflame · Post by **magentaflame** » Thu Jul 28, 2016 11:42 pm

Oh my comment on the pantsuit on the other thread was about bill not hillary.

I ended up watching the whole speech. I sighed a lot. But all up an uplifting good speech. I cant see her promises happening within four years though , and lets face it, the 1% ters will kick back so badly she wont be able to achieve what she said.........shame but thats life.