#SummaCumLiar

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Like I said before the right and the boot licking GOP are ok with the means as long as they justify the ends. Too many superlatives (none positive) to describe Trump, the convictions mounting, the lies hard to even count at this point, the quantities of quality people jumping ship, the American brand diminished world wide, but we are winning right?

I'm on the right, but don't lick his boots. I do think there's value in remembering that his presidency is judged on both his personal ethics, and whether or not his policies make our lives better. I see you, Pete, Spence, WDMSO, and to a lesser extent Paul, giving 100% weight to his personal ethics, and 0% weight to his results. Would you do that with the guy who runs your company? Would you rather have a decent guy who can't do anything right, or a mean SOB who cheats on his wife at home, but leads your company to success?

"Like I said before the right and the boot licking GOP left are ok with the means painting him in the most negative light possible as long as they justify the ends forget how it felt when he destroyed their candidate and made them all look like morons in the process. Too many superlatives (none positive) to describe Trump (not even 'one who is improving the economy, despite all the evidence to the contrary), the convictions mounting (none against him, but why let that get in the way), the lies hard to even count at this point, the quantities of quality people jumping ship (people we all hated when they first joined the ship, but let's revise history because it helps us paint him in a negative light), the American brand diminished world wide (tell that to ISIS), but we are winning right? Ummm, yes."

Fixed it for you.

By what standard is the 'American Brand' diminished worldwide? Are immigrants refusing to come here, and choosing Canada instead? Is that what all these caravans' ultimate goal is, to walk to Canada? Because our brand is diminished? If our brand can handle a guy who apologized for all of our shortcomings, it can handle a guy who thinks we're all that and a bag of chips.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I'm on the right, but don't lick his boots. I do think there's value in remembering that his presidency is judged on both his personal ethics, and whether or not his policies make our lives better. I see you, Pete, Spence, WDMSO, and to a lesser extent Paul, giving 100% weight to his personal ethics, and 0% weight to his results. Would you do that with the guy who runs your company? Would you rather have a decent guy who can't do anything right, or a mean SOB who cheats on his wife at home, but leads your company to success?

You might also note that the personal ethics that most complain about occurred before he became President. His past actions should not be used to accuse him of besmirching his present office. Nor, if his past actions have not been continued in his role of POTUS, should they be considered the "means" he uses to get things done as President.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You might also note that the personal ethics that most complain about occurred before he became President. His past actions should not be used to accuse him of besmirching his present office. Nor, if his past actions have not been continued in his role of POTUS, should they be considered the "means" he uses to get things done as President.

Agreed.

This all boils down to, he beat them. he beat them at their own game - fighting dirty, lying, smearing, and insulting his opponents. He beat them at their own game, he pulverized them at their own game, by winning the election. Then to top it all off, he's making things better by many rational standards (not debt, not by refusing to build a wall for 2 years, not by praising Kim Jong Un or whatever his name is). He made them look stupid, and continues to make them look stupid.

Larry Summers was Obama's top economic advisor (I think?), he said 3% growth was as realistic as the tooth fairy, then bam, Trump did it.

Do you see Summers on TV, admitting Trump was right and he was wrong? Nope. Because they aren't capable of that kind of honesty. Trump did what Summers said was impossible.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Agreed.

This all boils down to, he beat them. he beat them at their own game - fighting dirty, lying, smearing, and insulting his opponents. He beat them at their own game, he pulverized them at their own game, by winning the election. Then to top it all off, he's making things better by many rational standards (not debt, not by refusing to build a wall for 2 years, not by praising Kim Jong Un or whatever his name is). He made them look stupid, and continues to make them look stupid.

Larry Summers was Obama's top economic advisor (I think?), he said 3% growth was as realistic as the tooth fairy, then bam, Trump did it.

Do you see Summers on TV, admitting Trump was right and he was wrong? Nope. Because they aren't capable of that kind of honesty. Trump did what Summers said was impossible.

This all boils down to, he beat them



Again this shows how in love you are with Trump and how deep your denial runs and a typical response from the faithful ... wilfully ignoring the real reason it's happening ... all the convictions and the investigations it's called breaking the law and Trump hired them and he's responsible for their behavior ... that's what leadership is about


Because they aren't capable of that kind of honesty.

The Minute you and your Conservative pals Demand the same kind of honesty from the POTUS you really have zero credibility in the honesty department

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

The Minute you and your Conservative pals Demand the same kind of honesty from the POTUS you really have zero credibility in the honesty department

do you demand honesty from democrats?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

do you demand honesty from democrats?

I demand it from any sitting POTUS unlike many here
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I demand it from any sitting POTUS unlike many here
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

But not from anybody else in government? Senators can lie. Governors can lie. Presidential hopefuls can lie. Presidents can jam cigars in vaginas and lie about it. But Trump,a guy who has spent his life lying long before he knew how to spell politics, this gives you a purpose to suddenly condemn lying. Hahaha...the morality police have spoken. Snowflake style
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I demand it from any sitting POTUS unlike many here
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm rooting for impeachment as much as and probably more than you

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

This all boils down to, he beat them



Again this shows how in love you are with Trump and how deep your denial runs and a typical response from the faithful ... wilfully ignoring the real reason it's happening ... all the convictions and the investigations it's called breaking the law and Trump hired them and he's responsible for their behavior ... that's what leadership is about

You're saying that the booming economy is due to Trump hiring a criminal lawyer that had nothing to do with the economy? Or due to Flynn being needlessly maneuvered into a perjury trap? Or due to several Russians who are not connected to Trump being indicted (but not convicted nor will they be) for election tampering? Please explain the connection.


Because they aren't capable of that kind of honesty.

The Minute you and your Conservative pals Demand the same kind of honesty from the POTUS you really have zero credibility in the honesty department

So, if you believe that the President is dishonest, you should be dishonest?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

So, if you believe that the President is dishonest, you should be dishonest?

I know Trump is dishonest (it’s well documented)

The only way I would also be dishonest. Is if I thought like you and many of his faithful . And
think he is not dishonest . And it’s all a lie to discredit him .. in light of all the his documented lies
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

The only way I would also be dishonest. Is if I thought like you and many of his faithful . And
think he is not dishonest .

You're dishonest--I have not said that he is always honest. I think that you and many of the anti-Trump faithful exaggerate or deliberately misinterpret a lot his comments in ways that portray them as lies. I'm sure, however, that he is not always honest--like most politicians, and most humans, including you.

[Sea Dangles]

Originally Posted by wdmso

I know Trump is dishonest (it’s well documented)

The only way I would also be dishonest. Is if I thought like you and many of his faithful . And
think he is not dishonest . And it’s all a lie to discredit him .. in light of all the his documented lies
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just point out one documented instance when you have held your own party (D) accountable to the same standards you expect from Trump. Otherwise ,you are dishonest.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You might also note that the personal ethics that most complain about occurred before he became President. His past actions should not be used to accuse him of besmirching his present office. Nor, if his past actions have not been continued in his role of POTUS, should they be considered the "means" he uses to get things done as President.

Hard for Republicans to use this argument after the Whitewater investigation and the Clinton impeachment.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Hard for Republicans to use this argument after the Whitewater investigation and the Clinton impeachment.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Clinton lied under oath while President. He was unfaithful to his wife while President.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Clied lied under oath while President. He was unfaithful to his wife while President.

And Congress spent 80 million and years investigating whitewater and when Starr and his leaky apprentices couldn’t make that or Fosters suicide fly they went after a sex act.
You’re not saying marital fidelity counts for Republicans are you
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

And Congress spent 80 million and years investigating whitewater and when Starr and his leaky apprentices couldn’t make that or Fosters suicide fly they went after a sex act.
You’re not saying marital fidelity counts for Republicans are you
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're changing the subject. And wandering down another rabbit hole.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You might also note that the personal ethics that most complain about occurred before he became President. His past actions should not be used to accuse him of besmirching his present office.

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Hard for Republicans to use this argument after the Whitewater investigation and the Clinton impeachment.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by detbuch

Clinton lied under oath while President. He was unfaithful to his wife while President.

Originally Posted by Pete F.

And Congress spent 80 million and years investigating whitewater and when Starr and his leaky apprentices couldn’t make that or Fosters suicide fly they went after a sex act.
You’re not saying marital fidelity counts for Republicans are you
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by detbuch

You're changing the subject. And wandering down another rabbit hole.

No, you're wrong.

You said this: "You might also note that the personal ethics that most complain about occurred before he became President. His past actions should not be used to accuse him of besmirching his present office."
Ken Starr and his leaky apprentices, one of whom was Kavanaugh (had to throw that in), spent two years investigating Whitewater, which occurred prior to Clinton's election and when they could not find what they wanted, the Republicans moved on to other things, since they were out to "get" him. That was called "a witch hunt" but by the Democratic minority, not the President.
Luckily for Clinton his approval rating was double what Trump's is and actually increased to 70% the week of his impeachment.
That's a far cry from Trump's, which floats one side or the other of 40%.