Donald Trump Is Now the Odds-On Favorite to Be President in 2025

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  john-russell  •  one month ago  •  52 comments

Donald Trump Is Now the Odds-On Favorite to Be President in 2025
The twice-impeached, disgraced loser who was schlonged in the 2020 election, tried to stay in power against the will of the people, and then came ten cowardly Republican senators away from being disqualified from ever running for office again, is now more likely than any other person in the world to take the next oath of office on the Capitol steps on January 20, 2025. How is that for some weird shit?

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



www.thebulwark.com   /donald-trump-is-now-the-odd-on-favorite-to-be-president-in-2025/

Donald Trump Is Now the Odds-On Favorite to Be President in 2025 - The Bulwark


Tim Miller 8-10 minutes   11/1/2021




S o Donald Trump is now the odds-on favorite to be president of the United States in 2025.

I know that lede sentence was also the headline, but I wanted you to read it one more time just to let it really settle in the ol’ noggin before pressing forward.

The twice-impeached, disgraced loser who was schlonged in the 2020 election, tried to stay in power against the will of the people, and then came ten cowardly Republican senators away from being disqualified from ever running for office again, is now more likely than any other person in the world to take the next oath of office on the Capitol steps on January 20, 2025.

How is   that   for some weird shit?

Now I’m sure some will roll their eyes when this headline comes across the Twitter feed. Attribute this article to my raging Trump Derangement Syndrome or   The Bulwark ’s Cady Heron-level obsession with Mar-a-Lago’s in-house wedding toastmaster.

But this ain’t about my compulsions. It’s the actual, real-world reality being presented by those who have the most skin in the game.

Both the major off-shore gambling quants and the online trading markets have moved in Mr. Trump’s favor in the past couple weeks.

Over at   Predict-It , on the question of who will win the 2024 election, Trump was the most expensive bet going for $0.28 while the incumbent is selling for $0.26. At   Smarkets.com , the worm turned on October 12 with Trump moving past Biden as most likely to win in 2024 and he’s expanded his advantage in the past few weeks.

I’d understand if you had some doubts about whether the same stonkheads who sent the   DWAC SPAC behind Trump’s nonexistent social media site   to the moon can be trusted when it comes to handicapping elections, but the offshore bookmakers are singing from the same Wall Street Bets hymnbook.

Oddschecker   has Trump at about a 3:1 chance of winning (+333) while Biden is at 4:1 (+400). PaddyPower, the famed Irish bookmaker that is now backed by FanDuel, gave Trump the third best odds in August, but now has him in poll position.   BetOnline.ag   is even more bullish on the former guy, putting his odds at +250, with Biden at +350.

So I’m not a big politics gambler and hadn’t realized this sea change had happened over the past few weeks until I went looking for it after this disturbing realization came to me mid-shower the other morning. (Aside: Dear God, grant me the ability to think about something besides the 2024 election during my morning scrubdown.)

During a thorough lather I did some quick arithmetic. I figured that the Democrats are about a 52/48 favorite over the Republicans in 2024 based on incumbency and the thirty-year streak of winning the popular vote all but once. But I’m not that good at doing math in my head so I rounded the odds to 55/45 in order to make things easier and give Uncle Joe a bit of a boost.

From there I figured that Biden is about 60 percent likely to run in 2024, given that he’ll be almost a decade older than Ronny Reagan was when he ran as the longest-in-the-tooth person to be nominated on a major party ticket in 1984.

So take a 55 percent chance of his party winning, add a 60 percent chance of running and that gives Biden a 33 percent chance of being re-elected.

Now let’s look at Trump. I think it’s more like an 80 percent chance that he runs. Here’s why: It’s hard to imagine him being alive and allowing someone else to get all the attention.

You are telling me Trump is gonna be sending out Truth Social   regeets   from the Al-Saw palace while occasionally showing up as a surrogate for the Hot New Thing?   Our   Donald J. Trump? Sorry, don’t buy it. Maybe the hamburgers could catch up to him—the actuarial tables are the actuarial tables. Or maybe I’m wrong. But if I’m right and Trump is alive, has two thumbs, and a smart phone, then ain’t   nobody   beating him in a Republican primary. Especially given that nobody would actually be competing against him. (More on this in a second.)

So take the 45 percent chance of his party winning and match it to the 80 percent chance that he’s the nominee and even with the lowball estimate for the GOP’s chances, Trump   still   has a 36 percent chance of doing the Grover Cleveland deal. Which is better odds than Biden.


S o what’s the point of this exercise, besides a little post-Halloween fright?

It’s a wake-up call that people should start taking   really fucking seriously   the notion that a guy who incited a deadly mob on the Capitol in an attempt to overthrow our democracy is the frontrunner to become president again. Once that reality is accepted, there ought to be a lot of downstream considerations being made by different participants in our politics.

(1) The Democrats might want to focus more on competency and broadening their appeal, rather than participating in an internecine murder-suicide over how many trillions of dollars they spend. In addition they might also want to consider focusing on the problems that people tell pollsters they care about, rather than on the whims of D.C. interest groups.

(2) The media should probably start treating Donald Trump like the frontrunner he is, rather than a drunk uncle whose deranged ravings can be ignored unless it’s convenient or there’s a hole in the D-block.

But most importantly, (3) Republican politicians and commentators who claim they don’t want a wannabe authoritarian lunatic to become president again should probably do something to try and stop it.

And on this last point, I am deadly serious.

Nine months ago almost all the leading figures on the right stated that Donald Trump should be removed from office because he was so deranged and dangerous.

The   Wall Street Journal   editorial board called for Trump’s resignation saying that he “has refused to accept the basic bargain of democracy” and that January 6 “probably finished him as a serious political figure.”   National Review   ran ,   by   my   count ,   seven   separate   columns,   including one from The Editors , calling for his impeachment. “There must be a consequence and it should come from the nation’s legislature,” they wrote.

Mitch McConnell   railed against   Trump, “after it was clear to any reasonable observer that Vice President Pence was in serious danger. Even as the mob carrying Trump banners was beating cops and breaching perimeters their president sent a further tweet attacking [Pence].” Kevin McCarthy said Trump “bears responsibility” for the riot at the capitol. Seven Republican senators voted to disqualify him from ever running for office again.

And yet just yesterday one of their ostensibly more sane colleagues Tim Scott, a potential presidential candidate in his own right (in a non-Trump world),   preemptively endorsed Trump   for 2024! Why, God, why?

The   Atlantic   ran a silly, made-for-Twitter column over the weekend about how   Never Trumpers should support anti-vaxxer-in-chief Ron DeSantis   now, because he’s better than the bad orangina. And I guess that’s true in the most narrow and literal sense. I mean, having a rabid raft of fire ants build a nest inside my ass is also preferable to President Trump Part Deux but I’m not sure a TDSer endorsing Butthole Fire Ants will have a major impact on the Republican primary electorate.

So rather than turning to us Never Trumpers to save the hot mess that is the GOP . . . maybe the DeSantis 2024 movement should start with all the people who supported Trump in 2016 and 2020 but then, when they thought the coast was clear, called for his impeachment a few weeks later?

Maybe those guys could show some balls and start a concerted effort to defeat Trump? But of course, the question answers itself.

Because if Republicans in good standing don’t do anything to change the current dynamic and instead continue their strategy of owning the libs while secretly praying that their god king gets a move-on to his eternal reward, well, then we’re going to be repeating the same nightmare that engulfed us for the past half-decade, all over again.

So here’s my message both to the cowards who know better and to the people of good will who put it on the line because they care about our constitutional Republic:

Right now, today, Donald Trump is the favorite to win the presidency again. If you don’t want that to happen, then start acting like it.




Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  seeder  JohnRussell    one month ago

Right now, today, Donald Trump is the favorite to win the presidency again. If you don’t want that to happen, then start acting like it.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Junior Quiet
1.1  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @1    one month ago

You've seeded an article where the premise of Trump's return is based on odds from off-shore bookmakers.

How....precisely....do you expect any of us to influence that?

 
 
 
squiggy
Sophomore Quiet
1.2  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @1    4 weeks ago

... and he's doin it rent-free.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
2  Sparty On    one month ago

Lol .... slow news day for the TDS afflicted?

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3  Snuffy    one month ago

For the record I don't want Trump elected to the presidency in 24. IMO his actions since the election have ended my desire to have him in office.  I like a lot of the policies and actions he took while in office but his actions since losing the 20 elections were too much for me.

With that said, you want Trump defeated then IMO the Democrats need to put forth a better choice. I still believe the reason why Trump won in 2016 was because people were tired of electing the same type of people into office and not seeing any real changes and HRC was just another in a long line of Washington elites who mouth words but don't really do anything for the majority of the people. And daily we see the Democrat party tearing themselves apart pushing agendas that benefit the wealthy coastal elites but tend to ignore a lot of people. 

You want my vote, then bring out a candidate to earn my vote.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3    one month ago

Donald Trump tried to steal the election. Anyone who votes for him at this point is a traitor themselves.  I dont care who he is running against. You dont want him? nominate a better Republican then. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1.1  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1    one month ago
You dont want him? nominate a better Republican then. 

I don't control who the Republican's nominate any more than you control who the Democrats nominate.  Perhaps even less as I'm a registered independent and do not vote in the primaries, but I don't know if  you do or not. But your constant broad brushing of people who might, and at this point it's a might, vote again for Trump is both tiresome and bothersome. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.1    one month ago

There was never a good reason to vote for Trump but now that we know he tried to overthrow the government and steal the election, people who vote for Trump from this point on are traitors. 

Its not my problem, it is the problem of those who continue to say they will vote for him. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    one month ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.1.4  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    one month ago
it is the problem of those who continue to say they will vote for him. 

I doubt that the people who vote for him have any problems with it.

No problem at all.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
3.1.5  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    one month ago

Your opinion on this matter is absolutely worthless ..... less than worthless actually.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1.6  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.2    one month ago

I gave you a good reason why I and a lot of people voted for Trump in 2016.  You don't want to accept it as a good reason, that's on you.  And I take offense at you calling me a traitor as I refuse to cancel him out for 2024.  As I said i don't want him to run but if he's the better choice then he will get my vote. If the Democrats continue to push out the same old tired candidates who continue with the same bullshit policies that we have seen for way too many years now why should I support or vote for them?  You telling me who I can vote for and if I vote for the wrong person in your opinion I am a traitor is way too fascist a comment.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.7  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.6    one month ago
And I take offense at you calling me a traitor as I refuse to cancel him out for 2024.  As I said i don't want him to run but if he's the better choice then he will get my vote.

What do you mean "cancel him out" ?  as if he is the victim of "wokeness". He's a fucking criminal. He tried to have the election results overthrown for his personal benefit. 

I'm done cutting Trump voters any slack unless they denounce him right now. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1.8  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.7    one month ago

Then all I can say  [REMOVED, you can't cay that  As I've said numerous times that you refuse to understand, I don't want him to run in 2024. But if he does and the only choice is to vote for him or vote for the same old tired Democratic candidate then I know where my fucking vote will go.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.9  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.8    one month ago

Then you are farther to the right then you think. Virtually all of the well known "never Trump" Republicans announced prior to the election last year that they were voting for Biden BECAUSE Trump was 100 percent unacceptable. That was the starting point. When you start at the point that Trump is a danger to the nation then you dont later say "unless...". Some of the same "never Trumpers" have already said they will vote for Democrats in every election until the Republican Party throws Trump out. 

You start from the point that it is up to the Democrats to show you that you shouldnt vote for Trump , that is ass backwards.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1.10  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.9    one month ago
You start from the point that it is up to the Democrats to show you that you shouldnt vote for Trump

No, I start from the point that the Democrats have to put forth a better candidate then they have for the past several years.  As I said right at the beginning of this conversation, I believe Trump was elected because a lot of people (myself included) are just tired of the same ol type of politician elected to Washington, someone who talks but does nothing if it is not to better his chances of re-election.  We've had politician after politician elected and things have not gotten better. So people looked at a businessman who was different from the politicians and took a chance on him. And like him or hate him, things did change and a lot of things changed for the better.

Then Biden was elected and things have started going downhill again. So find better candidates.  I don't care which side they come from but due to the stranglehold the Republicans and Democrats have on national elections we will never see a 3rd party take over. So this is what we have to deal with.

And your bitching about how Trump was a criminal, so are most other Washington politicians.  That is how most of America looks at Washington. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Junior Quiet
3.1.11  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.7    one month ago
He's a fucking criminal.

If and when he is ever actually convicted, I will agree with this statement.  Until then, it's hysteria. 

He tried to have the election results overthrown for his personal benefit. 

Wouldn't be the first and won't be the last.

I'm done cutting Trump voters any slack unless they denounce him right now. 

I'm sure they're positively quaking at their keyboards.  I'm fascinated by what causes you to think any of them would care one iota.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.12  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.1.10    one month ago

So now you equate "most other politicians" with someone who literally tried to and wanted to steal the election.  We are getting into "I could shoot someone in the middle of 5th Avenue" territory.  I'm through. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.13  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.11    one month ago
He tried to have the election results overthrown for his personal benefit. 
Wouldn't be the first and won't be the last.

I hope you have some mental health checkups pending. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.1.14  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.12    one month ago

John, I give up. There's just no talking with you. You are so locked into your partisan mindset that  you cannot see anything outside of it. I come to this board to have a discussion and maybe learn something but you do not want to have a conversation. You continue to circle back to the same old stuff and refuse anything else. I'm done.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Junior Quiet
3.1.15  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.13    one month ago
I hope you have some mental health checkups pending.

The irony is hilarious.

The fact is that he's not the first person to attempt to have election results overturned, and if Trump didn't live rent-free in your head, you'd know that.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
Professor Guide
3.1.16  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.7    4 weeks ago

There were 1,212 candidates who filed to run in the Presidential race for 2020, including:

  • 323 Democratic candidates
  • 164 Republican candidates
  • 65 Libertarian candidates
  • 23 Green candidates

323 Dem candidates - and Biden was the winner?

164 Republican candidates - and Trump was their choice?

1,212 total Presidential candidates and look what we got.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.17  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.15    4 weeks ago

Jack, Trump's premise was a known lie (that the results in 7 states were "contested")  . A contested electoral result is a legal action. To the contrary all 7 of the states had certified their electoral counts and were done with the process) 

Which other "contested" elections were premised on known lies? 

======================================

Competing sets of election returns and electoral votes were sent to Congress to be counted in January 1877

NO competing sets of election returns and electoral votes were sent to Congress in 2020. Rather, Eastman instructed Pence to declare that there were competing results in 7 states (which was not true) and say for that reason he could not count count the electoral votes from those 7 states. Leaving the results from those 7 states out of the count would have made Trump the winner. 

The other 3 times there were contested election results , 1888, 1960 and 2000, bear no factual similarity to 2020 and are irrelevant to whether or not Trump tried to steal the election. 

Four Times the Results of a Presidential Election Were Contested | History | Smithsonian Magazine

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.1.18  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.13    4 weeks ago

They are mental health professionals, not magicians.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.19  TᵢG  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.15    4 weeks ago
The fact is that he's not the first person to attempt to have election results overturned,  ...

Disregarding the balance of your 'discussion' with JR, and focusing on this one point, I have this question.

Do you consider the actions taken by Trump:

  • Lying during the rest of his term (and to the present) that the election was a fraud and that our electoral system cannot be trusted
  • Filing 61+ (failed) lawsuits (with help of his minions) to challenge the election
  • Attempted to coerce officials and state legislatures to change the results of the election
  • Worked his supporters up into a frenzy telling them that their votes have been disenfranchised
  • Attempted to coerce the V.P. to engage in an unethical and arguably unconstitutional denial of the certified results from 7 states
  • ...

... to have any parallel in USA presidential election history?

Trump is not the first person to attempt an overturn but he is by light-years way beyond the scale of any presidential candidate — especially beyond presidents who lost their reelection bid.

Do you disagree with this observation?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.20  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.19    4 weeks ago

Trump would have been excited and ecstatic had he been able to disenfranchise millions of voters across 7 states, which is exactly what he hoped would happen. 

He is demented. 

 
 
 
Gazoo
Sophomore Silent
3.1.21  Gazoo  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.7    4 weeks ago

“I'm done cutting Trump voters any slack unless they denounce him right now.”

First off, biden won’t run in ‘24. His brain is gone. That was crystal clear during the primaries and it’s only getting worse. Second, no way in hell will dems nominate someone with better policies than trump. So, trump runs again he’s got my vote.

let’s go brandon!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Junior Quiet
3.1.22  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.17    4 weeks ago
Jack, Trump's premise was a known lie (that the results in 7 states were "contested").

It was indeed far-fetched.

A contested electoral result is a legal action. To the contrary all 7 of the states had certified their electoral counts and were done with the process) 

Correct.  A legal challenge was made and the Trump campaign lost.  Similar to how Gore lost his legal challenge. 

Which other "contested" elections were premised on known lies? 

John, we have a system for this, and that's not how the system works. 

The Trump campaign made their allegations.  They had their day in court and the full chance to prove their claims... as any candidate should.  The allegations were dismissed and the election was confirmed.  Job done.

That's how the system is supposed to work, and it worked exactly according to plan.  The COURTS decide what is a valid objection or allegation and what isn't. 

Now, for reasons I don't understand, you have a personal objection to Trump that exceeds everyone else I've ever met or heard of.  Lots of people dislike Trump (including me), and lots of people don't want to ever see his face or hear his voice again (also including me).  Lots of people refuse to vote for him (still including me), lots of people were upset that we elected him and hated every day of his presidency.  

But this alarm you continually try to raise that Trump will reappear and the world will end is a bit crazy.  Trump was defeated.  Enjoy it a little.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.23  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.22    4 weeks ago
A contested electoral result is a legal action. To the contrary all 7 of the states had certified their electoral counts and were done with the process)  Correct.  A legal challenge was made and the Trump campaign lost.  Similar to how Gore lost his legal challenge. 

There is no similarity at all between Gore's challenge in 2000 and what Trump and Eastman wanted Pence to do. 

You dont seem to understand what happened. Maybe someone else here will take the patience to explain it to you. 

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Junior Quiet
3.1.24  Jack_TX  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.19    4 weeks ago
Disregarding the balance of your 'discussion' with JR, and focusing on this one point, I have this question.

Do you consider the actions taken by Trump:

  • Lying during the rest of his term (and to the present) that the election was a fraud and that our electoral system cannot be trusted
  • Filing 61+ (failed) lawsuits (with help of his minions) to challenge the election
  • Attempted to coerce officials and state legislatures to change the results of the election
  • Worked his supporters up into a frenzy telling them that their votes have been disenfranchised
  • Attempted to coerce the V.P. to engage in an unethical and arguably unconstitutional denial of the certified results from 7 states
  • ...
... to have any parallel in USA presidential election history?

Not to my knowledge, no.  

Trump is not the first person to attempt an overturn but he is by light-years way beyond the scale of any presidential candidate — especially beyond presidents who lost their reelection bid. Do you disagree with this observation?

Meh.  Yes and no.

If we limit the discussion to the challenge of already cast votes, then yeah, I'd probably agree it's in a league of its own.

But if we broaden the scope of the discussion to include outrageous acts by presidents in attempts to win or keep office, then I'm not sure it's that far over the top, really.

Nixon hired burglars and plotted to kill journalists.  Truman courted votes from the KKK.  The list is long and illustrious.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Junior Quiet
3.1.25  Jack_TX  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.23    4 weeks ago
There is no similarity at all between Gore's challenge in 2000 and what Trump and Eastman wanted Pence to do. 

I'm sure you think that.

You dont seem to understand what happened. Maybe someone else here will take the patience to explain it to you. 

I understand fully what's happening, John.  You can't bring yourself to let go.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.26  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.25    4 weeks ago
I'm sure you think that.

I know that.

Judging by your comments you dont seem to have been paying attention to whats going on, but that is your choice. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.27  TᵢG  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.24    4 weeks ago
If we limit the discussion to the challenge of already cast votes, then yeah, I'd probably agree it's in a league of its own.

That is what I am talking about — his actions after his election loss.   I did not bring up anything about Trump's attempts to dig up dirt on Biden via the Ukraine, etc.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
3.1.28  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.20    4 weeks ago
Trump would have been excited and ecstatic had he been able to disenfranchise millions of voters across 7 states, which is exactly what he hoped would happen. 

I agree.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.29  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Jack_TX @3.1.24    4 weeks ago
Truman courted votes from the KKK. 

...

 He summoned the messenger, renounced his membership, and demanded his ten dollars back. That is the known extent of Harry Truman’s involvement with the Ku Klux Klan, a brief use of their influence to burnish his credentials, quickly disposed of, and never revisited ...

=================================

and you think that is comparable to Trump's willingness to disenfranchise millions of voters across seven states?  You are burying your credibility. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
3.1.30  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.4    4 weeks ago
I doubt that the people who vote for him have any problems with it.

Especially after the last few that the democrats have run with.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.31  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @3.1.23    4 weeks ago

They know what happened.  They want it all to be forgotten as the trumpturd inspired mob attempted coup/insurrection failed miserably like their hero.  Just forgot what they attempted.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.1.32  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  TᵢG @3.1.19    4 weeks ago

Also, no other POTUS has had the record number of arrests, imprisonments, and indictments of members of an administration.

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
3.2  Sparty On  replied to  Snuffy @3    one month ago
With that said, you want Trump defeated then IMO the Democrats need to put forth a better choice.

Trump wasn't the first distasteful vote i've made and he won't be the last.  

It's unrealistic to expect that one politician is going to meet all your specific platform needs and a bit narcissistic as well.   Best one can do is pick the candidate who best fits the bill for you and yours.   I'd vote for Trump again in heartbeat if he was that person.   This isn't a HS popularity contest it's a national election.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.2.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @3.2    one month ago
It's unrealistic to expect that one politician is going to meet all your specific platform needs and a bit narcissistic as well.   Best one can do is pick the candidate who best fits the bill for you and yours.   I'd vote for Trump again in heartbeat if he was that person.  

He tried to overthrow the US government.  If you vote for him again then you are a traitor too. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
3.2.2  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @3.2.1    one month ago

Yeah right and how long did you volunteer to serve in the US military?   Not a day is my guess.

Your comment is nothing more than just TDS driven, sophomoric nonsense.

Nothing more.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.2.3  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @3.2.2    one month ago

A lot of vets took part in Jan 6.  No? 

Donald Trump wanted Pence to declare him (Trump) the winner of the election on Jan 6.  They were operating this intention on a plan the far right lawyer John Eastman submitted to Trump in the OVAL OFFICE on Jan 4.  Trump approved of the plan and asked Pence to follow the plan. 

Even after Pence told Trump he couldnt do that, both Trump and Eastman told the rally crowd on Jan 6 that if only Pence would "do the right thing" Trump would be back in as president. 

Now we have recently learned that while the riot/insurrection was going on, and pence was in hiding from the mob, Eastman was still texting Pence berating him for not following the plan and after the riot stopped Eastman suggested a procedural way that they could still stop the electoral count. 

Trump, Eastman, Bannon and Giuliani, belong in jail. 

Conservatives should be calling for Trump's arrest, not saying they will vote for him again. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
3.2.4  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @3.2.3    one month ago
A lot of Vets took part in Jan 6.  No? 

Sure did and some Mothers.   Some of those were Vets as well.   And some Fathers, some of those were Vets as well.   And some brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles, aunts, grandparents, friends, etc and some of those were Vets as well.

You wait long enough and the people who are secretly biased towards the military show their true colors.   I can usually flesh them out directly but it's nice seeing it happen online directly.

John, we are all just people like you.   Some are good people, some are bad.   The expectation that just because someone is a Vet, that they won't do something stupid, is just plan ridiculous and uninformed.   Stop trying to negatively stigmatize Vets please.   It is not appreciate and i can promise you, most of us WERE NOT in DC in Jan 6th.   We were home, working, taking care of our families, etc.   Just like most everyone else.

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
3.2.5  Snuffy  replied to  Sparty On @3.2    one month ago
It's unrealistic to expect that one politician is going to meet all your specific platform needs and a bit narcissistic as well.   Best one can do is pick the candidate who best fits the bill for you and yours.  

Agreed.  So if the Democrats don't want Trump to win again they need to bring out a better candidate.  They cannot keep recycling the same ol and expect different results. If the best the Democrats can push out there is Biden or Harris then it's guaranteed that the Republican candidate gets my vote.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.2.6  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Snuffy @3.2.5    one month ago
If the best the Democrats can push out there is Biden or Harris then it's guaranteed that the Republican candidate gets my vote.  

Anyone who votes for Donald Trump, for any reason, from here on out, is a traitor. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.2.7  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @3.2.4    one month ago
because someone is a Vet, that they won't do something stupid, is just plan ridiculous and uninformed.   Stop trying to negatively stigmatize Vets please.  

i didnt even mention vets to start, you did. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.2.8  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @3.2.6    one month ago
Anyone who votes for Donald Trump, for any reason, from here on out, is a traitor. 

That is one person's misguided opinion.

Everyone has one..................................

 
 
 
Sparty On
PhD Principal
3.2.9  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @3.2.7    one month ago

I didn't mention Vets.   I asked if you served.   A question that remains unanswered but no matter.   I know what the answer is now.

And you have the temerity to call me a traitor.

Unbelievable.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.2.10  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @3.2.7    one month ago

I just hope the JAG is planning to court martial and throw any active vet that participated in the riot out with a dishonorable discharge.  Every one of them violated their oath and should have the regs book thrown at them.  If they were retired vets, they should lose any and all of their retirement pay and benefits.  You are bound by an oath even if you are no longer on active duty just as I am bound to do so.  Every vet that day, retired or not imo are now enemies of the people.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.2.11  Tessylo  replied to  JohnRussell @3.2.3    4 weeks ago
Conservatives should be calling for Trump's arrest, not saying they will vote for him again. 

jrSmiley_98_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
3.2.12  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JohnRussell @3.2.1    4 weeks ago

Referring to Trump as being a bit narcissistic is like referring to Octomom as being a bit pregnant.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6  Tessylo    4 weeks ago

How anyone could vote for that idiot/moron/loser is so beyond me.  He is in it for himself and no one else and whoever can't see that is so beyond me.  This is is just a never ending campaign to line his pockets.  The suckers continue to fall for it.  

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online