This is exactly why to vote for DeSantis and not Trump

17,469 Views | 319 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by Ag with kids
taterchip
How long do you want to ignore this user?
J. Walter Weatherman said:

taterchip said:

Most of the time, I'd focus more on the candidates. But with the exception of the "swamp" candidates like a Christie, I think any of the rest is exponentially better than Biden. For the record, though, go with the candidate that the establishment is doing everything in their power to get rid of. He is the deep state's greatest fear. And for good reason, they know he'll go after their corruption. BTW, Pence said, "he was proud of the Trump administration" and Vivek said, "best POTUS in the last century". Go with the tried and true. Fraudulent elections will keep all of them out.


Why would anyone think he'll go after corruption when he didn't do it when he had both the house and senate? (despite promising to "lock her up" a thousand times on the campaign trail)


Then I have a question for you. Why is the deep state so adamant with trying to keep him from running for POTUS. If he's harmless, let him be. Seems to me, he did fire a bunch of people his first term, and admittedly, hired some bad people, i.e. Barr. Listen, if he doesn't know the bad guys by now, he's cognitively worse off than Biden. BTW, "the wall" is a great example of going after corruption, not to mention his overall administration record on illegal drugs. He fought virtually every dimwit Dem for that, I might add.
FL_Ag1998
How long do you want to ignore this user?
taterchip said:

J. Walter Weatherman said:

taterchip said:

Most of the time, I'd focus more on the candidates. But with the exception of the "swamp" candidates like a Christie, I think any of the rest is exponentially better than Biden. For the record, though, go with the candidate that the establishment is doing everything in their power to get rid of. He is the deep state's greatest fear. And for good reason, they know he'll go after their corruption. BTW, Pence said, "he was proud of the Trump administration" and Vivek said, "best POTUS in the last century". Go with the tried and true. Fraudulent elections will keep all of them out.


Why would anyone think he'll go after corruption when he didn't do it when he had both the house and senate? (despite promising to "lock her up" a thousand times on the campaign trail)


Then I have a question for you. Why is the deep state so adamant with trying to keep him from running for POTUS. If he's harmless, let him be. Seems to me, he did fire a bunch of people his first term, and admittedly, hired some bad people, i.e. Barr. Listen, if he doesn't know the bad guys by now, he's cognitively worse off than Biden. BTW, "the wall" is a great example of going after corruption, not to mention his overall administration record on illegal drugs. He fought virtually every dimwit Dem for that, I might add.


IMO the MSM's targeting of Trump is two-fold and a calculated risk....they hate him and would love to see him in prison AND they know targeting him boosts his base suport (look in tge mirror for proof of that) but it weakens his support outside of his base. In other words it just might get Trump the Rep nomination but it'll taint him so much that he's doomed in the General election.

Desantis gets just as much if not more arrows shot at him by the MSM and by Trump and Trump's sidekick Ramaswamy. But that's because the MSM is truly scared that Desantis will be able to get done what Trump can only bluster about.

But better yet, why not take a hard look at the candidates that the leftist MSM isn't going hard after, and question why those candidates aren't being crucified and put under a microscope like Trump or Desantis. Maybe those are the candidates that should be eliminated from your consideration as the Rep candidate.

For example Haley, Christie, Ramaswamy aren't getting anywhere near the daily scrutiny, false allegations, and vitriol that Trump and Desantis are getting. In fact the MSM currently seems to be trying to convince us that Haley is the R's best threat to win back the White House. Surely we can trust that the MSM wants what's best for the Rep party?
J. Walter Weatherman
How long do you want to ignore this user?
taterchip said:

J. Walter Weatherman said:

taterchip said:

Most of the time, I'd focus more on the candidates. But with the exception of the "swamp" candidates like a Christie, I think any of the rest is exponentially better than Biden. For the record, though, go with the candidate that the establishment is doing everything in their power to get rid of. He is the deep state's greatest fear. And for good reason, they know he'll go after their corruption. BTW, Pence said, "he was proud of the Trump administration" and Vivek said, "best POTUS in the last century". Go with the tried and true. Fraudulent elections will keep all of them out.


Why would anyone think he'll go after corruption when he didn't do it when he had both the house and senate? (despite promising to "lock her up" a thousand times on the campaign trail)


Then I have a question for you. Why is the deep state so adamant with trying to keep him from running for POTUS. If he's harmless, let him be. Seems to me, he did fire a bunch of people his first term, and admittedly, hired some bad people, i.e. Barr. Listen, if he doesn't know the bad guys by now, he's cognitively worse off than Biden. BTW, "the wall" is a great example of going after corruption, not to mention his overall administration record on illegal drugs. He fought virtually every dimwit Dem for that, I might add.


My opinion on the three entities that I'm assuming you are saying make up the deep state:

Each prosecutor thinks he broke the law and that they can prove it.
The media keeps him front and center because he drives ratings and clicks.
The democrats want to continue to do everything they can to frame him as the face of the GOP because they know moderates hate him. They did this with a ton of success in 2022, crossed primary lines to vote for his candidates in purple states/district primaries and in some cases even spent advertising $$ promoting those candidates

Not much more complicated than that to me.
InfantryAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
J. Walter Weatherman said:


Each prosecutor thinks he broke the law and that they can prove it.
This ONLY true because of the jury pools in their jurisdiction. Get a neutral jury and none of these happen except the Florida classified info. If Trump wasn't running, that would have never even been prosecuted.
Ag with kids
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fka ftc said:

Ag with kids said:

fka ftc said:

Ag with kids said:

fka ftc said:

Ag with kids said:

fka ftc said:

samurai_science said:

Trump allowed Fauci to restart Gain of Function research that created the virus. This is never addressed by Trumpers.

Fauci was known since the 80s and had a bad reputation. Trump should have done his homework.





So, you built a strawman and I didn't bite on it?

Sorry.

No one said anything about a meeting between them to give permission EXCEPT FOR you.

If he's head of the executive branch then he's responsible for the actions of the executive branch.

But, as I clarified, I don't think ANYONE would have thought that decision back in 2017 would have caused the cluster **** it became.
You think its a strawman to go from "Trump allowed Fauci to restart Gain of Function research" to asking for a source showing that Trump had a discussion on the matter?

Son, that is not a strawman. That's exposing you for trying to implicate Trump because he didn't block funding on an administrative expenditure.
Hell, he was impeached over not sending more to Ukraine.

Congress has the power of the purse if I recall Nancy's repeated assertions. So would this funding approval not fall on the house? I know that is inconvenient to your narrative.
So you agree that Trump was responsible for allowing the gain of function research to restart.

Good. We're making progress.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.