I honestly don't see it as a failure, and I don't have buyer's remorse. If I could go back in time right now knowing everything I know now, I'd still cast the vote for Trump because of the two appointees to SCOTUS. That alone. Doesn't mean I have to like the guy I voted for. I'd have disliked Hillary as well.
Some of his tweets are hilarious, but threatening a federal investigation is over the top. And that's the issue - the man doesn't know where to draw the line. I'd prefer he just left Twitter once and for all and stuck to issues.
Two points. One, Trump seems far more concerned about a TV show satirizing him than he does about social media monopolists barring conservatives at an increasing rate. Where does he think his meme army came from? The left is rapidly removing them from the battlefield, and Trump doesn't seem to give a crap. He tweeted once or twice about it or Don Jr did, but like the executive order banning birthright citizenship for illegals, nothing. Two, the actual underlying issue here is very difficult. If Trump is to try to regulate political speech on the airwaves, how is he going to prevent the same regulation being used to take Rush off the air? Understand that non-media companies operate in a very different milieu, in which corporate political activities are strictly regulated. This may be another of those issues where conservatives and liberals end up switching their traditional policies.
lol what's over the top is that you'd be screaming for impeachment if Obama had done the same. People are waking up to the fact that Obama is nothing more than a small man behind a curtain, and not the great and powerful leader he portrayed himself as. His entire campaign, and Presidency for that matter, was and is built upon a foundation of lies.Barack Obama is a liar and fraud, and he must be impeached. Tsing Tao, 2014
Uh, you might want to re-read that post and thread. I didn't write that. I merely posted the article. Like I always do, I provide one or two lines of commentary before the articles. My one line commentary was: "Apparently, these silly articles work both ways." Everything after that one line was not mine. But I do appreciate you trying to catch me in something. I feel the love.
You quote and then don't. How is anyone to distinguish? So you don't believe that Obama should have been subject to impeachment proceedings?
You could have asked me first, but you're so eager to find fault in me because I don't share the same opinions as you on Trump - that's part of the problem. I think that thread is quite obvious that it isn't mine. It is labeled "I was poor and an Obama Die Hard". I was neither. The rest of it isn't even in my tone, and contains many links (typical to an article posting). No, of course I don't think Obama should have been subject to any impeachment proceedings.
Dude, you attribute and then you don't. I am not clairvoyant nor can I apply correct attributions 5 years later. You wrote it... You didn't agree with the tone that Obama should be impeached? https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/i-was-poor-and-an-obama-die-hard.285279/
Of course I didn't agree. That's why I posted that it was a silly article. Had you read the entire post, you'd have seen - quite obviously - that the post was about some disenfranchised Obama voter who thought she would get paid from Obama being elected. It's quite obvious in the quotes that the author is quoting someone they were interviewing. Whatever. It's my fault. I'm not going to argue with you, Dest. You're a good guy, but when people don't agree with you, you get angry. When you get angry, you get personal on the forum and I've no wish to go down that road with you so I'm just going to bow politely out of this conversation.