Love Each Other, Cherish Each Other, and Enjoy Success

That's nice of you to post memes done by retarded kids.

 

Why not just nominate the one who is winning period?

- - - Updated - - -

You mean like the left did to Bush?

Wake up and smell reality. Both sides do the same thing fella and both parties will destroy themselves and the country doing this.

 

Believe you are correct. The Republicans will try just as hard to cause Trump to fail as they did with Obama. Only difference will be that they will have the Democrat's help. But on the other hand there is the theory that the best government is a divided government. Only difference in a Trump presidency is that the government will be divided into three camps.

 

John McAfee would do well.

 

Because a winning President should either have a mandate or a coalition government.

 

Obama tried? I must have missed it. Each time I hear him speak he has been nothing but critical and judgemental towards those who don't believe the same or won't do things his way

 

Bush screwed himself with his endless and treasonous lies. See The Downing Street Memo.

- - - Updated - - -

Bush = "you're either with us or against us".

- - - Updated - - -

Nice of you to pay attention to it and to project your personal state of mind.

 

First, Obama has never uttered the word "love". He has earned his legacy as the "Great Divider". He has said all along he is about fundamental "change". Some would argue he has moved this country left in a remarkable way, and used hate tactics to encourage riots in the streets. The fall-out is that "left" doesn't work so well for the middle class. It removes our sense of peace and safety. It makes the 1% more rich and powerful and offers a free ride to losers, while the middle class keeps getting stiffed with the tab.

I have listened to Trump's speeches. I'm not ruling out that he's acting in his own best interests; I happen to perceive that Trump's best interests are aligned with the best interests of the vast middle class across America. I'm aware that in the past, when it came to business, he could be pretty ruthless when it comes to winning. I also understand the minds of thuggish dictators and Islamic hoards -- they respect ruthlessness and see it as a strength. Obama and Hillary have been dismal failures at understanding how to negotiate with our enemies.

Trump will be respected. Already his former neo-con enemies are turning into sycophants, and even Vincente Fox apologized for his comments and wants to be his new amigo.

It takes strength to bring peace to a nation.

 

As a Constitutionalist, I supported Ted Cruz who was basically thrown under the bus by the Republican base, particulary Trump supporters.

Now I'm willing to forgive and forget...with one caveat

The only, and I mean the only reason I'm supporting Donald Trump, the political equivalent to PT Barnum, is that the replacement of Justice Scalia, needs to be another Conservative.

That and the fact the Democratic party is no longer about the Union electrician or truck driver blue dog basically decent folks, and is all about class envy, unemployable occupy rejects looking for hand-outs.

What choice is there for people who believe in personal responsibility but to support the Conservative movement. Without the individual citizen taking effective control of one's life, the country is doomed...a great nation starts with the citizenry. Only the Republicans seem to care about that, the Democrats are no longer about hard working blue dog middle class values, they are strictly about hand-outs now.

What can the government do for me is basically the Leftist mantra.

 

90% of Trump's speeches are "I'll do this and this, and everybody will love me and respect me, but oh by the way, you can't know how I'll execute this wonderful plan out."
10% of Trump's speeches are "Yeah, you hear about this guy or gal? Yeah, he/she is so bad. They are a menace to this country."

Yes, those are really effective speeches. Trump might have tried to flirt with voters hearts with "love and cherish each other," but remember that Hillary said the same thing, talking about love and kindness. Just because it is Trump saying it doesn't make it any different than if Hillary were saying it.

 

Excluding the partisanship of the support for Donald Trump the fact is that Donald Trump does have a political ideology. His political ideology is "authoritarianism" because he's ignorant about how are our government was designed to work under the Constitution. In fact the stated reason that House Speaker Ryan Paul has refused to endorse Donald Trump is because Donald Trump has no concept about the division of power under the Constitution between Congress and the President.

Donald Trump wants to treat the Presidency like an authoritarian CEO would treat a corporation (and Trump has already bankrupted four corporations as the CEO). Seriously, we're talking about a person that's alleged to have quoted Mussolini, a tyrannical dictator, apparently as someone he idolizes.

 

Paul Ryan has no idea what his responsibilities as house speaker are. His job is not only to protect the work the republicans in congress have done to date, but include the goals of a new (supposed Trump) presidency and mediate the two so everyone is happy.

Ryan is being as divisive as all the rest, which has greatly diminished him in my estimation. He'll die away with the old doofases he sides with, just as the progressives will die away with their hateful crowd. The idea of life without strife is paralyzing.

The majority of Americans have already expressed their disgust with the two parties, and there is is a grand coming together in the middle of the road.
The establishment just can't believe it. Progressives and neo-cons are behaving like that pathetic person whose just been dumped but has to keep stalking.

 

Bush was talking to Democrats when he said that? Because my post was about how Obama talks about Republicans.

 

The blatant ignorance of the roles and responsibilities of the Speaker of the House of Representatives is obvious.

http://www.house.gov/leadership/

While the Speaker is typically from the majority party he/she is literally the "presiding officer" of the House of Representatives accountable to all members, regardless of political party. While also acknowledged as the leader of the majority party he/she is still responsible to both parties in attempting to secure bipartisan support for legislative issues of importance to the American people. The needs of the American people always take precedent over party agenda.

Any elected member of Congress that places party agenda ahead of the American people should be removed from office.

 

Then wouldn't the majority of them have to be removed from office?

 

LOL - With the blind partisanship of many in Congress that's probably accurate. Of course if we started "chopping heads" the others would quickly start addressing the needs of the American people. For example we wouldn't have had stupid crap like 60+ attempts to repeal Obamacare from the House when the Republicans knew is was never going to happen. That was stupid political BS that doesn't belong in Congress. Yes, I know, Democrats have also done it but it shouldn't be allowed by anyone serving in Congress and the Speaker of the House and the President (pro tempore) of the Senate need to prevent it from happening.

I can understand people associating with a political party based upon it's ideology and associating with that party when running for office but, assuming they're elected, the minute they're sworn in to office they become the representative of ALL THE PEOPLE they were elected to represent. The "party" hat needs to come off and the "American" hat needs to go on. I'm tired or Republicans only representing Republicans and Democrats only representing Democrats.

 

Yes. They have to keep their base happy to be reelected. I understand that. But at some point just do what is best for all of us. Of course the two sides hardly ever agree on what that is so we seem to stay stuck in this rut.

 

traitor Bush was talking to everyone who dared to disagree with him