CdnGuy
New Member
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Trump Timeline ... Trumpocalypse
- Thread starter CdnGuy
- Start date
tenpoundsleft
Member
Good metaphor for the Clintons and their crimes over the years - all ignored, swept away, stonewalled etc. - not even probation.
tenpoundsleft
Member
Great to see that the pinkoes are so afraid of Trump that all they can do is put up childish images...
tenpoundsleft
Member
Hey there Canuck dude - don't you have problems at home to worry about?
In a place where you're actually allowed to vote?
Then again, you probably voted for this wingnut.
Joseph W. McQuaid: Trump campaign insults NH voters' intelligence
http://www.unionleader.com/Joseph-W-McQuaid-Trump-campaign-insults-NH-voters-intelligence (Joseph W. McQuaid: Trump campaign insults NH voters' intelligence | New Hampshire)
Trump has shown himself to be a crude blowhard with no clear political philosophy and no deeper understanding of the important and serious role of President of the United States than one of the goons he lets rough up protesters in his crowds.
He reminds us of the grownup bully “Biff” in the “Back to the Future” movie series. Lo and behold, the screenwriter says that he based Biff on Trump. On Feb. 9, we trust New Hampshire Republicans will send “Biff Trump” back to somewhere — anywhere but on the road to the most important elective office in the United States at a most crucial time for this nation.
http://www.unionleader.com/Joseph-W-McQuaid-Trump-campaign-insults-NH-voters-intelligence (Joseph W. McQuaid: Trump campaign insults NH voters' intelligence | New Hampshire)
Trump has shown himself to be a crude blowhard with no clear political philosophy and no deeper understanding of the important and serious role of President of the United States than one of the goons he lets rough up protesters in his crowds.
He reminds us of the grownup bully “Biff” in the “Back to the Future” movie series. Lo and behold, the screenwriter says that he based Biff on Trump. On Feb. 9, we trust New Hampshire Republicans will send “Biff Trump” back to somewhere — anywhere but on the road to the most important elective office in the United States at a most crucial time for this nation.
I would hope any American, at least the ones with logical reasoning skills, would be afraid of an unqualified man as POTUS....
tenpoundsleft
Member
Absolutely, you got that right - Obama is definitely scary.
But we only have 388 days of that clown left to contend with!
Time left until Obama leaves office"
tenpoundsleft
Member
Trump simply cannot be any worse than our golfer-in-chief - and a mile better than the criminal psycho Hillary and her husband. At least Bubba Clinton was a proper politician - even likable in a sleazy way - and he did play ball with Congress. Hillary on the other hand will fuck us all from here to Sunday, repeatedly, every week.
CdnGuy
New Member
Seems I struck a nerve huh @tenpoundsleft. Defending the Donald, how cute....
tenpoundsleft
Member
Good thing you went to Med School and not Law School.
Nothing contradictory about the two statements.
The first agrees with your statement that "an unqualified man as POTUS" is scary - and the least qualified POTUS in modern times (perhaps ever) is unarguably the current office holder. He's somehow managed to remain unqualified - yet another exception to the Gladwell 10,000 hour rule...
The second says that Trump simply cannot be worse than our golfer-in-chief - and also better than a demonstrably criminal (the list is too long to mention all the misdeeds she has skated because of her and her husband's connections) graft seeker.
tenpoundsleft
Member
Well, you come across like a gay guy commenting on women's looks - you don't have a dog in this race, so your petty little snipes are unbecoming. Go stitch another maple leaf on your gym bag.
We didn't start a thread on your asshat PM, now did we? Either because Canada is a pointless country, or maybe because we're too polite to comment on affairs we have no say in. I'll let you pick which option.
The Donald needs no defending, he'll be the first to tell you that, he's got big balls. Would be nice to see that in the White House for a change. Even if he's not my preferred candidate, I'll still vote for him if the alternative is Hillary, Bernie, or any Democrat actually, they're all assholes.
http://spectator.org/articles/63436/yes-trump-can-win
• New York Times: Reagan’s candidacy is “patently ridiculous.”
• New York Times: “The astonishing thing is that this amusing but frivolous Reagan fantasy is taken so seriously by the news media and particularly by the President (Gerald Ford). It makes a lot of news, but it makes no sense.”
• New Republic: “Ronald Reagan to me is still the posturing, essentially mindless and totally unconvincing candy man that he’s been in my opinion ever since I watched his first try for the Republican nomination evaporate in Miami in 1968.”
• New Republic: “Reagan is Goldwater revisited…He is a divisive factor in the party.”
• Harper’s magazine: “That he should be regarded as a serious candidate for President is a shame and an embarrassment for the country at large to swallow.”
• Chicago Daily News: “The trouble with Reagan, of course, is that his positions on the major issues are cunningly phrased nonsense — irrationality conceived and hair-raising in their potential mischief… Here comes Barry Goldwater again, only more so, and at this stage another such debacle could sink the GOP so deep it might never recover.”
• Time: “Republicans now must decide whether he represents a conservative wave of the future or is just another Barry Goldwater calling on the party to mount a hopeless crusade against the twentieth century.”
• Newsweek: Ronald Reagan is “a man whose mind and nerve and mediagenic style have never been tested in Presidential politics and may not be adequate to the trial.”
• National Review (a conservative magazine): “Reagan’s image remains inchoate.… At the outset of his campaign, his image is largely that of the role-playing actor — pleasant on stage, but ill-equipped for the real world beyond the footlights. Reagan does not yet project the presidential image. He is not seen as a serious man.”
• Manchester Union-Leader (a conservative New Hampshire paper): Reagan “lacks the charisma and conviction needed to win.”
• Pravda, the official newspaper of the Soviet Union: Reagan is a “dinosaur from the ‘cold war.’… It is strange that there are still fish in the sea that are tempered by this putrid bait.”
And that’s just a sample from the media. Then there were the views of those stalwarts of the Republican Party Establishment:
• The Ripon Society: “The nomination of Ronald Reagan would McGovernize the Republican Party.”
• Vice President Nelson Rockefeller dismissed Reagan as “a minority of a minority” who “has been taking some extreme positions.”
• New York’s Republican Senator Jacob Javits: Reagan’s positions are “so extreme that they would alter our country’s very economic and social structure and our place in the world to such a degree as to make our country’s place at home and abroad, as we know it, a thing of the past.”
• Illinois Republican Senator Charles Percy said Reagan’s candidacy was “foolhardy” and would lead to a “crushing defeat” for the Republican Party. “It could signal the beginning of the end of our party as an effective force in American political life.”
• Former President Gerald Ford: “I hear more and more often that we don’t want, can’t afford to have a replay of 1964.” If the Republican Party nominates Ronald Reagan “it would be an impossible situation” because Reagan “is perceived as a most conservative Republican. A very conservative Republican can’t win in a national election.” Asked if that meant Ford thought Reagan can’t win, Ford replied to the New York Times: “That’s right.” The Times story went on to observe that Ford thought “Mr. Reagan would be a sure-loser in November” and that Reagan held “extreme and too-simple views.”
• New York Times: Reagan’s candidacy is “patently ridiculous.”
• New York Times: “The astonishing thing is that this amusing but frivolous Reagan fantasy is taken so seriously by the news media and particularly by the President (Gerald Ford). It makes a lot of news, but it makes no sense.”
• New Republic: “Ronald Reagan to me is still the posturing, essentially mindless and totally unconvincing candy man that he’s been in my opinion ever since I watched his first try for the Republican nomination evaporate in Miami in 1968.”
• New Republic: “Reagan is Goldwater revisited…He is a divisive factor in the party.”
• Harper’s magazine: “That he should be regarded as a serious candidate for President is a shame and an embarrassment for the country at large to swallow.”
• Chicago Daily News: “The trouble with Reagan, of course, is that his positions on the major issues are cunningly phrased nonsense — irrationality conceived and hair-raising in their potential mischief… Here comes Barry Goldwater again, only more so, and at this stage another such debacle could sink the GOP so deep it might never recover.”
• Time: “Republicans now must decide whether he represents a conservative wave of the future or is just another Barry Goldwater calling on the party to mount a hopeless crusade against the twentieth century.”
• Newsweek: Ronald Reagan is “a man whose mind and nerve and mediagenic style have never been tested in Presidential politics and may not be adequate to the trial.”
• National Review (a conservative magazine): “Reagan’s image remains inchoate.… At the outset of his campaign, his image is largely that of the role-playing actor — pleasant on stage, but ill-equipped for the real world beyond the footlights. Reagan does not yet project the presidential image. He is not seen as a serious man.”
• Manchester Union-Leader (a conservative New Hampshire paper): Reagan “lacks the charisma and conviction needed to win.”
• Pravda, the official newspaper of the Soviet Union: Reagan is a “dinosaur from the ‘cold war.’… It is strange that there are still fish in the sea that are tempered by this putrid bait.”
And that’s just a sample from the media. Then there were the views of those stalwarts of the Republican Party Establishment:
• The Ripon Society: “The nomination of Ronald Reagan would McGovernize the Republican Party.”
• Vice President Nelson Rockefeller dismissed Reagan as “a minority of a minority” who “has been taking some extreme positions.”
• New York’s Republican Senator Jacob Javits: Reagan’s positions are “so extreme that they would alter our country’s very economic and social structure and our place in the world to such a degree as to make our country’s place at home and abroad, as we know it, a thing of the past.”
• Illinois Republican Senator Charles Percy said Reagan’s candidacy was “foolhardy” and would lead to a “crushing defeat” for the Republican Party. “It could signal the beginning of the end of our party as an effective force in American political life.”
• Former President Gerald Ford: “I hear more and more often that we don’t want, can’t afford to have a replay of 1964.” If the Republican Party nominates Ronald Reagan “it would be an impossible situation” because Reagan “is perceived as a most conservative Republican. A very conservative Republican can’t win in a national election.” Asked if that meant Ford thought Reagan can’t win, Ford replied to the New York Times: “That’s right.” The Times story went on to observe that Ford thought “Mr. Reagan would be a sure-loser in November” and that Reagan held “extreme and too-simple views.”
CdnGuy
New Member
Well thanks for the tip @tenpoundsleft. Be my guest start any thread you feel you like. This is an open fourm and I enjoy hearing & listening to everyone views..even yours big guy.
So I could give a fuck what you think I should or should not comment on. And yes directly it doesn't effect Canada who is voted in, but in the long run it will effect North America which last I checked Canada is apart of ass clown! 
So I could give a fuck what you think I should or should not comment on. And yes directly it doesn't effect Canada who is voted in, but in the long run it will effect North America which last I checked Canada is apart of ass clown!
I'm not sure hooked on phonics worked for you in the way the advertisers claimed it would but you go from agreeing that someone unqualified for POTUS is scary to someone with absolutely no qualifications or experience in politics is better.
Here's a napkin for the DNA Trump left on your chin
Well thanks for the tip @tenpoundsleft. Be my guest start any thread you feel you like. This is an open fourm and I enjoy hearing & listening to everyone views..even yours big guy.
You obviously struck a nerve commenting on his "political" idol. It's like when you try to tell a kid that Pokemon and power rangers aren't all they're cracked up to be
Canada PM visit to White House, State Dinner planned for March
Canada PM visit to White House, State Dinner planned for March - CNNPolitics.com
Honolulu (CNN) - President Barack Obama will deliver a lavish welcome to Canada's liberal new leader at the first state dinner of 2016, the White House said Monday.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will visit Washington on March 10, the White House said. It will be his first official visit to the United States since assuming office this fall.
Canada PM visit to White House, State Dinner planned for March - CNNPolitics.com
Honolulu (CNN) - President Barack Obama will deliver a lavish welcome to Canada's liberal new leader at the first state dinner of 2016, the White House said Monday.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will visit Washington on March 10, the White House said. It will be his first official visit to the United States since assuming office this fall.
Well let us compare Obama and Biden with Bush and Cheney. Two were/are war criminals. So the POTUS before Obama was even bigger POS, and him and Dick can share a cell in hell together.
