Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A New Definition of 'Trump Derangement Syndrome'?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Snowshoveler View Post

    I remember the same thing was being said about the elections in 2004 with Bush the US checks and balances system makes it nearly impossible for a dictatorship to take over in their country.
    Similar also said about Obama, whom had the support of our "riot and plunder in the streets(AntiFa, etc.)" Left-wing fanatics.
    TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Massena View Post
      This is from way out in left field. Delusions of grandeur just doesn't cover it:

      https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartandhp

      'President Trump on Sunday floated the possibility of staying in office longer than two terms, suggesting in a morning tweet that his supporters might “demand that I stay longer.”'

      'The president, who will kick off his reelection campaign on Tuesday with an event in Orlando, has previously joked about serving more than two terms, including at an event in April, when he told a crowd that he might remain in the Oval Office “at least for 10 or 14 years.”'

      'The 22nd Amendment of the Constitution limits the presidency to two terms.'

      Trump couldn't care less about the Constitution...
      Delusions from Left-wing field is more the case, especially since they give more credibility to tongue-in-cheek than it deserves.

      The Constitution is not a self applying system of Laws, as George Washington said " ...it's only keepers, the people." FWIW, this "people" doesn't support over-ride or abolish of the 22nd Amendment. I'd also like us to find a more conservative alternate to Trump whom could also garner enough support and votes to win. No way in heck can I support anything coming out of the socialist-Left fascists of the Democrat Party.

      Counter point to this is Left-wing/Democrat efforts to remove Electoral College, undermining an essential concept and checks-n-balance intended by out Founders. Clinton and her campaign did finance and solicit foreign sources to find, or fabricate "dirt" on Trump and along with their collusion with "the Russians" also colluded with unprincipled "Deep State" members of Federal Agencies to deflect serious investigation and/or prosecution efforts to deal with these seditious actions.

      For fifty years now, the repeated and larger threat to the Constitution, and the security of our Nation has come from the Left~Democrats and they are the ones for which to have great concern and alarm. Clinton and DNC collusion's garnered a few million more on the popular vote, but they and "the Russians" failed to effectively impact the Electoral College system. With prospects of swaying the EC in 2020 looking just as slim, they are now seeking to remove the EC and that is the greater danger we face.
      TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

      Comment


      • #18
        More Trump TDS by himself:

        https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartandhp

        Egomania knows no bounds with this one.

        'President Trump was so bothered by his chief of staff's coughing during an interview in the Oval Office with ABC News that he asked his top aide to leave the room.'

        'Trump was in the middle of answering a question from ABC's George Stephanopoulos about his financial records when he abruptly asked to do another take.'

        President Bone-Spur has enough problems without doing this nonsense.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by G David Bock

          If you can make unsubstantiated claims of "right-wing", Trumpster, denigration of Conservatives, and similar towards those whom don't agree with your perspective/views, than not only can we do similar, but such proves you on the other-side of the political divide.

          TDS now means trump Diet syndrome" . It is when you have UNCONTROLLABLE cravings for Fried chicken....
          The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

          Comment


          • #20


            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by G David Bock

              If you can make unsubstantiated claims of "right-wing", Trumpster, denigration of Conservatives, and similar towards those whom don't agree with your perspective/views, than not only can we do similar, but such proves you on the other-side of the political divide.

              It doesn't prove anything except that I don't care for fanatics or ideologues of either political stripe. That's why I'm an independent.

              Comment


              • #22
                IMO a POTUS should be able to run for as many terms as he or she wants. And no it wont lead to a so called dictatorship, thats what the naysayers would say. In addition it can be argued that a POTUS would be able to do a better job with more time to operate.

                Prime example of why we should not have term limits for a POTUS, its obvious,

                FDR...

                Ask any American ages 80+ They all love FDR.. And the voting numbers show that Americans of all backgrounds heavily supported FDR whom never lost the Popular vote.

                Our country may never come back to the greatness it experienced in the WW2 era and a few decades beyond. In those days the middle class was strong, many from the lower class would get jobs right out of high school, and if one choose they could go on to college to perhaps become a doctor or lawyer. Unfortunately the world itself is not what it used to be. In our age today we have a # of challenges to face head on to make the world a better place.

                Its possible we need a POTUS whom serves 4 + terms, whether or not its Trump there can be no denying our country is not as successful as we used to be. So we might as well try something different when it comes to Presidential term limits. The jobs are not what they used to be so there is work to be done.
                Long live the Lionheart! Please watch this video
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=jRDwlR4zbEM
                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3DBaY0RsxU
                Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.

                George S Patton

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post
                  IMO a POTUS should be able to run for as many terms as he or she wants. And no it wont lead to a so called dictatorship, thats what the naysayers would say. In addition it can be argued that a POTUS would be able to do a better job with more time to operate.

                  Prime example of why we should not have term limits for a POTUS, its obvious,

                  FDR...

                  Ask any American ages 80+ They all love FDR.. And the voting numbers show that Americans of all backgrounds heavily supported FDR whom never lost the Popular vote.

                  Our country may never come back to the greatness it experienced in the WW2 era and a few decades beyond. In those days the middle class was strong, many from the lower class would get jobs right out of high school, and if one choose they could go on to college to perhaps become a doctor or lawyer. Unfortunately the world itself is not what it used to be. In our age today we have a # of challenges to face head on to make the world a better place.

                  Its possible we need a POTUS whom serves 4 + terms, whether or not its Trump there can be no denying our country is not as successful as we used to be. So we might as well try something different when it comes to Presidential term limits. The jobs are not what they used to be so there is work to be done.
                  Sorry, but there is now a constitutional amendment prohibiting more than two terms for president of the United States.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Massena View Post

                    Sorry, but there is now a constitutional amendment prohibiting more than two terms for president of the United States.
                    And another Amendment perhaps can override the 22nd. Remember the 22nd Amendment only came into being in 1951. History has shown us that proper and just societies had Kings or Emperors whom ruled for decades. And the USA has been influenced by the past, even the idea of a President reminds us of the idea of a King or some sort of key leader. In the modern USA we can not have a King or an Emperor, that was not the vision of the USA. But we can see that the vision of the USA as outlined by the founders did technically allow for a President to serve more then two terms for example FDR. I feel even with a new Amendment to again allow a President to serve 2 + terms, that we would have to wait decades maybe longer to actually see a President serve 2 + terms. And I dont think that getting rid of Presidential term limits would lead to disaster, so I disagree with having Presidential term limits as do others in our country. Just look at history. Even in his 3rd and 4th term FDR faced opposition from GOP and within his own party, no one was jailed for that and the US society was at its best in history IMO.
                    Last edited by Stonewall_Jack; 19 Jun 19, 19:25.
                    Long live the Lionheart! Please watch this video
                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=jRDwlR4zbEM
                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3DBaY0RsxU
                    Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.

                    George S Patton

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post

                      And another Amendment perhaps can override the 22nd. Remember the 22nd Amendment only came into being in 1951. History has shown us that proper and just societies had Kings or Emperors whom ruled for decades. And the USA has been influenced by the past, even the idea of a President reminds us of the idea of a King or some sort of key leader. In the modern USA we can not have a King or an Emperor, that was not the vision of the USA. But we can see that the vision of the USA as outlined by the founders did technically allow for a President to serve more then two terms for example FDR. I feel even with a new Amendment to again allow a President to serve 2 + terms, that we would have to wait decades maybe longer to actually see a President serve 2 + terms. And I dont think that getting rid of Presidential term limits would lead to disaster, so I disagree with having Presidential term limits as do others in our country. Just look at history. Even in his 3rd and 4th term FDR faced opposition from GOP and within his own power, no one was jailed for that and the US society was at its best in history IMO.
                      The way the Constitutional system works, no new Amendment altering or invalidating the 22nd could be applied to a POTUS currently serving when that Amendment would be ratified and go into effect.
                      TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        A series of posts containing comments about posters and not posts and contributing nothing to sensible discussion were removed. Further comments of this type will result in thread lock and curtailment of posting privileges to those who continue to repeat this behaviour despite numerous staff warnings to cease it.
                        thank you

                        ACG Staff

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

                          Says the fanatic supporter of Left-wing, socialist agendas.
                          Bocker, have you been in contact with -Vlad Lenin?

                          I thought the old fanatic died decades ago...…
                          The trout who swims against the current gets the most oxygen..

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by marktwain View Post

                            Bocker, have you been in contact with -Vlad Lenin?

                            I thought the old fanatic died decades ago...…
                            Twainer, last I knew, Vlad had no monopoly on socialist ideology and systems.

                            Edited. Please discuss the topic. A fellow forum member is not the topic - ACG staff

                            In our last POTUS election the two major, viable candidates and their parties were rather polarized and constant denigration of the conservative one and little denigration of the socialist one tends to underscore the observation.
                            Last edited by Skoblin; 19 Jun 19, 20:01.
                            TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Stonewall_Jack View Post

                              And another Amendment perhaps can override the 22nd. Remember the 22nd Amendment only came into being in 1951. History has shown us that proper and just societies had Kings or Emperors whom ruled for decades. And the USA has been influenced by the past, even the idea of a President reminds us of the idea of a King or some sort of key leader. In the modern USA we can not have a King or an Emperor, that was not the vision of the USA. But we can see that the vision of the USA as outlined by the founders did technically allow for a President to serve more then two terms for example FDR. I feel even with a new Amendment to again allow a President to serve 2 + terms, that we would have to wait decades maybe longer to actually see a President serve 2 + terms. And I dont think that getting rid of Presidential term limits would lead to disaster, so I disagree with having Presidential term limits as do others in our country. Just look at history. Even in his 3rd and 4th term FDR faced opposition from GOP and within his own power, no one was jailed for that and the US society was at its best in history IMO.
                              Just as the 17th Amendment (Direct election of Senators-- can you say "popular vote?") took power away from the states and turned the Senate into a second House. That Amendment probably has had more affect on the now common dysfunction of the Senate than anything else. Had it not been passed, the Senate today would not be at the horrid impasse on everything and anything it is. Under the original concept of the Founders, the Senate would represent the individual states in Congress, while the House would represent The People.
                              That would mean today, that the Senate would likely be close to 60 Republicans with a small Democrat minority. That's because in 25 states, Republicans control the legislature and governor's positions meaning these states alone would represent 50 Republicans in the Senate, with more appointed from states where power is divided. There are only 8 states where the Democrats have clear control of the state like that so they'd have a lock on just 16 Senators.



                              So, the 17th by going to direct election of Senators has ruined the Senate for the purpose it was originally intended. Now the Democrats are calling for similar ruination of the Presidential vote to concentrate even more power in the hands of the few Democrat controlled states and the federal government.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                                Just as the 17th Amendment (Direct election of Senators-- can you say "popular vote?") took power away from the states and turned the Senate into a second House. That Amendment probably has had more affect on the now common dysfunction of the Senate than anything else. Had it not been passed, the Senate today would not be at the horrid impasse on everything and anything it is. Under the original concept of the Founders, the Senate would represent the individual states in Congress, while the House would represent The People.
                                That would mean today, that the Senate would likely be close to 60 Republicans with a small Democrat minority. That's because in 25 states, Republicans control the legislature and governor's positions meaning these states alone would represent 50 Republicans in the Senate, with more appointed from states where power is divided. There are only 8 states where the Democrats have clear control of the state like that so they'd have a lock on just 16 Senators.



                                So, the 17th by going to direct election of Senators has ruined the Senate for the purpose it was originally intended. Now the Democrats are calling for similar ruination of the Presidential vote to concentrate even more power in the hands of the few Democrat controlled states and the federal government.
                                Thats based on the modern times. But its interesting and worthy work on your part. I get that the Democrats are not what they used to be, but I would say the same of the GOP. In 2016 Karl Rove the longtime GOP contributor said Trump did not have a chance...but here we are. Though Trump did lose the popular vote in 2016...how does that tie into the alternate timeline? If the 22nd amendment did not come into place, perhaps Truman or JFK(maybe somehow he would not have been clipped in this alternate timeline you lay out), or LBJ would have served longer leading to today having a majority dem senate and house. And maybe today Trump would not be POTUS had the 22nd amendment not passed.

                                Long live the Lionheart! Please watch this video
                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=jRDwlR4zbEM
                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3DBaY0RsxU
                                Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.

                                George S Patton

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X