For those that Ha ha'd

[Dill]

(10-19-2018, 05:13 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Hahaha ok he can't be the worst, otherwise he wouldn't have beat Hillary?
So, he's 2nd worst.
Really? What was my reason as to why Trump won???
I want to hear it from you, I'm willing to bet you are going to be WRONG, but let's see it.

I believe you said  "you should be mad that the Democrats candidate was so bad that they lost to one of the worst people in the world during the election... oh and hey, I hear she's gearing up for 2020. Go Hillary. Trump will eat her alive this time."

Didn't Trump identify Clinton as "the worst" during the election? And according to a recent tweet, "Crooked" Hillary Clinton "is the worst (and biggest) loser of all time. She just can’t stop, which is so good for the Republican Party. Hillary, get on with your life and give it another try in three years!" https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-challenges-hillary-clinton-us-presidential-election-2020-twitter-latest-a8062501.html

Where do you see the differences between your views and Trump's here? Like him, you even urge her to run again. Show me where I am WRONG.

Also, all this talk of "worst" begs the question of how that is defined. The candidate who was most civil, who know most about government and world politics, and who won the popular vote is somehow "the worst"; while the the most uncivil candidate who knew the least about government and lost the popular vote is only "2nd worst."  

(10-19-2018, 05:13 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Stormy Daniels that's a mess, she's recanted, recanted the recant, lost a case and now her STFU and leave me alone money is going to pay Trumps Lawyer. Her credibility is shot, as far as I know she hasn't bothered to prove it, Show me a Timeline??

Can you prove to me that she did with evidence and not just her word? Pics, witnesses? anything?

I still don't blindly follow Trump, I like the direction our economy is going in, I also understand his mentality.

He called Stormy a horse to get his name back into the Spotlight and in regards to her Losing the Defamation case. You know no one wants to cover it for more than a paragraph or run it more than once cause it favors Trump, but not they have to (remember, you have to understand his mentality and way he thinks).

I certainly understand the "mentality" of a man who publicly calls women "horseface" and "pig" and "Pocahantas" to "get his name back in the spotlight."  It is the mentality of a misogynist.

The real issue here is the mentality of people who say they are also not ok with the misogyny--then blink and shake their heads and support Trump anyway. That is why he is public office shaming the country.

Wikipedia has a decent timeline of the Trump-Daniels affair.

You claim that Daniel's "credibility" is shot because she "recanted the recant."  Trump denied that Cohen was his lawyer, then "recanted," then denied that he paid her 130,000 dollars, then "recanted."  If "recanting" the standard for Daniel's credibility, why not for him too, if you don't "blindly follow Trump"?

And if Trump paid Daniels 130,000 to keep silent, then it is Trump who has to "prove it,"  not her.

Also, you might step back a moment to take in the big picture. You are defending a President who may have violated campaign laws to pay off a porn star through his "fixer" whose job was to kill scandals for that president and his friends--a man whose MO is to deny deny deny deny until he has to admit charges against him. 

Part of the picture is that you and others claims to "understand how he thinks" and still want him for president.