Beefed up debate: A loser for democrats
President Trump has been offering help with policing in the city of Chicago. The Governor of Illinois has responded with angry rhetoric and threats of lawsuits. Gov Pritzker may be on solid ground with lawsuits. Chicago is not a federal district like DC, and the President really has no right to put National Guard troops there. Trump has already pointed out to everyone that Gov Pritzker doesn't want the help.
So, what should Trump do?
I say do nothing and take the win.
Courtesy of the AP:
Most say crime is a major problem in America’s cities, but few support a federal takeover of police departments - AP-NORC
Donald Trump has an incredible intuition for what Americans are feeling. The democrats seem to be completely out of touch with working class America or to put it the way Biden once did: you people should have learned code.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
88 visitors
Trump is concentrating on sanctuary cities.
He can continue to win without doing a thing.
Crime is the only issue where Trump is not underwater ( and badly) with independents. But since he is president and can do "whatever I want" I guess his widespread unpopularity doesnt matter.
Really?
How does he stand on border security?
According to the poll in the article, 63% of independents disapprove of how he is handling immigration.
LOL. YOU posted a poll with 5 categories and Trump is badly underwater in four of them, and with independents moreso. Your "answer" is to jump back to the only category he isnt. He is ahead one point on crime with independents. Hardly a ringing endorsement.
We will find out in the midterms, won't we.
Thus far the polls have been geared against Trump going back to 2016.
Gov. JB Pritzker says he won’t “bend the knee to a wannabe dictator."
I doubt he can bend a knee PERIOD.
No word yet on the condition of his ankles and hands.
Compared to trump, he looks skinny.
It is simply a case of shaking a lot of hands and being on his feet all day.
We need him for 3 and a half more years.
Only in the eyes of the dissatisfied.
Ha
he seems to unpopular among the criminal element and those who support the criminal element, you know, Democrats and the left. But then again they've been crying nonstop about Trump since 2016.
I do love the rationalizations you hear from people who say crime is not a problem:
Sure, you can't walk by yourself at night on the Main Street close to my house, leave anything in your car or even lock your car door when you park on the street, ever, ever go the neighborhood 3/4 of the mile to the west of me, or go to a shop where things aren't behind lock and key, make eye contact with strangers or be bothered when people masterbate/piss on public streets in front of kids.
But other than that, if you completely ignore the car jackings and murder it's awesome.
It is fairly easy for the elites who don't have to travel those streets.
The vast majority of people, even in "bad" big city neighborhoods , do not walk around in fear all day. Have you ever been to one?
Yes, I have John. The fear is always there.
About a month ago there was a shooting outside a nightclub in Chicago. The next day there were hundreds of people out partying at clubs and restaurants in the same area.
I used to live in a neighborhood that was 2/3 black. I never felt afraid walking down the street.
God bless you.
Not everyone shares your feelings.
I'm sure Pritzker only come to make a stop at this place:
But Pritzker has a security detail!
And when those elites do walk the street, their security clears the area before their arrival.
That's right!
Chicago style hot dog, Chicago Italian beef, and Chicago Maxwell St. Polish. It doesnt get any better than that.
You're just teasing me.
I think sometimes it's easy to overlook the fact that fear is a choice. We all choose when and what we will fear.
Like you, I'm not afraid to walk the streets. In the last 12 months, I've been out in both DC and Chicago after dark. Never worried about it.
But I'm also not afraid of the Trump presidency.
Now, ask me to drive in to Mexico? Cartel country?? Oh hell no.
Can confirm.
I dunno WTF they're doing there, but let's get more people doing it.
Fat, salt, and sugar. Tastes great, but easily unhealthy.
Once you turn 60, you must give it up.
over 60 , and im not giving up sausage or bacon .....
Some of us are blessed by genetics.
That's nothing new. The country has known that for quite a while now.
Imagine foreign tourist coming for the first time to the US and visiting the nation's capital. They see homeless people in the streets and may have a mugging as their lasting memory. I suppose they can take some solace in knowing that Marx's oppressed don't get punished for crimes.
So the billionaires have the pulse of the working class? Are you fucking serious? LOL
They elected Kim Foxx to keep criminals out of jail. They’d rather have crime than criminals in jail.
And Michele Obama gave her a phone call.
Smollett fooled them all. I never figured out how he cellphone in one hand his sandwich and the other while fighting off the two "MAGA" brutes.
Proof? Or just partisan BS?
No, he doesn't, according to the poll you posted.
How so? The implication here is that the poles are somehow "rigged". The AP gives the questions asked with the poll. What about the questions is leading?
The 2016 presidential polls were actually quite accurate. A slim victory was predicted for Clinton and she won the popular vote by 3 million, I believe.
First of all, my purpose in presenting that Poll was to show that the democrats had backed themselves into a corner on the issue of crime, which was a losing issue for them. John did what he typically does and used the poll to gauge Trump's popularity and take us all off the topic of crime.
To the point of how badly polling was in the last three elections one only need to follow the polling:
Why the polls got it wrong on Trump — again | The Independent
As for 2016 few believed Trump would ever win.
BTW in the last election when so many polls projected a Harris win on the eve of the election, the internal polls (You know, when pollsters are hired by a campaign to tell the truth) of the Harris campaign showed that at no point was Harris ever ahead of Trump:
Kamala Harris advisers: VP was never ahead in internal polling
You implied that the polls were rigged, not incorrect. By your own admission, you said that you would or had lied to pollsters, so would that not be evidence of your rigging the polls?
I said none of that.
You do more zigging and zagging than that street in San Francisco
Well John, clearly, I never said polling was deliberately rigged, nor did I say that I would lie if I was polled.
Evidently 4 of you are seeing what you want to see.
Your words:
Define "geared against".
I am not going to waste my time in going back and finding the post in which you bragged about either wanting to or actually lying to a pollster sometime before the election. But you did say it.
An inaccurate partisan-based survey.
Must it be rigged? Not when Trump supporters are reluctant to be polled.
I am not going to waste my time in going back and finding the post in which you bragged about either wanting to or actually lying to a pollster sometime before the election. But you did say it.
It would be nice to have the context of when I said such a thing.
Try and counter what I say, rather than attacking me personally. It might make things easier.
I was stating fact, not attacking you. There is a difference.
Lombard St., I have driven up it...
Rode down it once on a bicycle as a kid and experienced brake fade about halfway down. Got off of it and walked the rest of the way down. They make bikes, brakes and pads much better these days.
Dude. Seriously. You sound like a Millennial woman gushing over Taylor Swift.
Trump is less clueless than the Democrats. That's an extremely low bar.
Let's not get carried away.
You just think about everything they did to stop him. Look where he is.
Yes. But they are slightly less effective than a group of 5 year olds, and certainly more clueless.
I think that Paul Manafort, Peter Navarro, Steve Bannon, and Roger Stone would disagree. All got huge sentences for minor process infractions. Their real crime was simply being Trump associates. The 93 faux charges against Trump in the midst of the last election or the Russia hoax carried out by the Mueller team during Trump's first term would have destroyed most mortal men.
I'll say it again: The more they did to him, the stronger he got.
So they should have been given lesser sentences for being trumpers?