President Pelosi

Grugore said:
Learn to read. I said he found nothing on Trump. And even if he did, he can do nothing unless whatever he finds happened while Trump was in office that is a high crime or misdemeanor. Then you need two thirds of the Senate to impeach. Good luck with that. Also, you cannot indict a sitting President. Trump is bullet proof. Get used to it. You'll have 6 years to do that. Lol.
Click to expand...

dutch tapes
 
The most handsome/prettiest presidential candidate will win. Trump is proof that intelligence is of little importance.

It's the single most important quality in a political candidate. Pelosi is smart as hell but an albatross around the neck of the Dem party. I can't stress that too much to you American wankers!
 
Grugore said:
Learn to read. I said he found nothing on Trump. And even if he did, he can do nothing unless whatever he finds happened while Trump was in office that is a high crime or misdemeanor. Then you need two thirds of the Senate to impeach. Good luck with that. Also, you cannot indict a sitting President. Trump is bullet proof. Get used to it. You'll have 6 years to do that. Lol.
Click to expand...

Learn to read, yourself.

You need exactly ZERO of the Senate to Impeach.
 
montgomery said:
The most handsome/prettiest presidential candidate will win. Trump is proof that intelligence is of little importance.

It's the single most important quality in a political candidate. Pelosi is smart as hell but an albatross around the neck of the Dem party. I can't stress that too much to you American wankers!
Click to expand...

the people didn't pick TRUMP
 
montgomery said:
The most handsome/prettiest presidential candidate will win. Trump is proof that intelligence is of little importance.

It's the single most important quality in a political candidate. Pelosi is smart as hell but an albatross around the neck of the Dem party. I can't stress that too much to you American wankers!
Click to expand...

I agree with you on lots of things, Monty...but you are dead wrong on this.

Pelosi is an asset for the Democratic Party...and my guess is she will become the next Speaker of the House.

I may be wrong.

If I am...and if she is not the next speaker...the Democrats can kiss their collective asses good-bye. They are done.
 
Frank Apisa said:
I agree with you on lots of things, Monty...but you are dead wrong on this.

Pelosi is an asset for the Democratic Party...and my guess is she will become the next Speaker of the House.

I may be wrong.

If I am...and if she is not the next speaker...the Democrats can kiss their collective asses good-bye. They are done.
Click to expand...

Frank, we don't disagree in the least. Pelosi is hugely intelligent; is and will be an asset to the Democratic party. But please try to also understand how she is going to be a liability. It just might be that the people who oppose her in the party are aware of the problem.

The fact that good looks bears so much weight can't be overlooked? Don't!

But I will defer to you and ask you how much it's important to have a super intelligent leader such as Pelosi. I very much suspect that the harm will outdo the good.

As to her being the house leader, the negative impact could be negligible and worth the downside effect. As for a candidate for president, that's just not possible. And fwiw, isn't going to be anyway.

It's not Pelosi's fault and in fact I don't personally see her as ugly. She's just older now and has lost the looks that it takes in the US. As opposed to Hillary losing because of her looks that were her own fault because of her weight problem. Did you know that was one of the main criticisms of Hillary by those who chose Trump. A younger and prettier Hillary would have beaten Trump easily.
 
Pelosi has been attacked by the Repubs for a long time because they have learned that constantly harping on someone works. It worked on Hillary and Pelosi, using the same propaganda techniques. People hate them, but cannot tell you why. The Repubs hate them because they are women, intelligent and very good at their jobs. The reds know getting rid of Pelosi as speaker, will make the Dems weaker. That is what it is about.
 
montgomery said:
Frank, we don't disagree in the least. Pelosi is hugely intelligent; is and will be an asset to the Democratic party. But please try to also understand how she is going to be a liability. It just might be that the people who oppose her in the party are aware of the problem.

The fact that good looks bears so much weight can't be overlooked? Don't!

But I will defer to you and ask you how much it's important to have a super intelligent leader such as Pelosi. I very much suspect that the harm will outdo the good.

As to her being the house leader, the negative impact could be negligible and worth the downside effect. As for a candidate for president, that's just not possible. And fwiw, isn't going to be anyway.

It's not Pelosi's fault and in fact I don't personally see her as ugly. She's just older now and has lost the looks that it takes in the US. As opposed to Hillary losing because of her looks that were her own fault because of her weight problem. Did you know that was one of the main criticisms of Hillary by those who chose Trump. A younger and prettier Hillary would have beaten Trump easily.
Click to expand...

Allow me to focus on one aspect of your response for now, Monty...because I see it as the CENTRAL problem of this issue.

You said, "It just might be that the people who oppose her in the party are aware of the problem."

I STRONGLY suspect the major impetus for the "opposition" to Pelosi...is NOT that she may have qualities that are a liability to the party...or that age has caused her to be less attractive than a younger person might be...but rather an election dynamic that I will get to in a second. I also suspect that the "we need new leadership" is nothing more than a rationalization for what I see to be the "major impetus."

Many, perhaps most (perhaps even, all) of the Democrats who were elected from previously red districts (who form the core of the dissonance) were almost obligated to promise opposition to Pelosi...as a campaign tactic. They had to do it. They would not have been elected had they not done so.

Now, they are fearful that going back on that promise will be a form of attempted political suicide.

It is not.

Most voters, Americans and throughout the world, realize that politicians must say some things they realize will probably not get done...and I hope that most of those people feel as I do: Once a campaign is over, DO WHAT IS BEST FOR THE COUNTRY...and fuck the promises you made to get elected.

I understand and acknowledge that for some people that is an unforgivable political heresy.

So be it. I am iconoclastic to the core.

I want the dissidents to vote "present." That will allow Pelosi to be elected without the need for Republican votes...which would prove to be a disaster.

I hope the dissidents are willing to do so.

If they do not...and if Pelosi is denied the Speakership...it is my opinion the Democratic Party will be inflicting a grievous wound on itself. They will, in effect, be allowing total novices in the process to be calling the shots. It will be like interns deciding the scope and nature of brain surgery...with experienced surgeons beings asked to step aside.

I get that other will disagree.
 
evince said:
the GOP doesnt own the American government anymore


Mueller will soon rock the party with what he knows



Trumpy has now been able to look at what Mueller has on him because of Whitaker

He is freaking out because he knows he fucked himself and all his cohorts and family


there is a reason some in the congress dont want to protect Mueller
Click to expand...

So once again you favor Soviet Style one party Leftist control. Completely shutting out the Conservative majority in the US. How Stalinist of you.
 
Frank and Nordberg, you're both smart people and I don't care to argue with you any further. Fwiw is just exactly what it's worth. I have no hidden motive in saying what I said about Pelosi. So making her the speaker is likely negligible in the negative damage. To try to make her president would be fatal. Take if for what it is.

And for fuk sake, don't I know myself as a Canadian that Trudeau is not likely to be beaten by any pussy faced Conservative who looks a lot like Harper. Harper, who had the good looks but was beaten by better!

It's the sad truth gentlemen!
 
montgomery said:
Frank and Nordberg, you're both smart people and I don't care to argue with you any further. Fwiw is just exactly what it's worth. I have no hidden motive in saying what I said about Pelosi. So making her the speaker is likely negligible in the negative damage. To try to make her president would be fatal. Take if for what it is.

And for fuk sake, don't I know myself as a Canadian that Trudeau is not likely to be beaten by any pussy faced Conservative who looks a lot like Harper. Harper, who had the good looks but was beaten by better!

It's the sad truth gentlemen!
Click to expand...

I will ask you. Do you favor permanent one party Leftist rule and why?
 
Boris The Animal said:
I will ask you. Do you favor permanent one party Leftist rule and why?
Click to expand...

I am definitely a leftist. But I favour the downfall of both US major parties because of the ill effects the US status quo has on the rest of the world. I couldn't care less about Americans in general. Chris Hedges has my message pretty well down pat so check him out if you want to discuss it further with me.
 
montgomery said:
Frank and Nordberg, you're both smart people and I don't care to argue with you any further. Fwiw is just exactly what it's worth. I have no hidden motive in saying what I said about Pelosi. So making her the speaker is likely negligible in the negative damage. To try to make her president would be fatal. Take if for what it is.

And for fuk sake, don't I know myself as a Canadian that Trudeau is not likely to be beaten by any pussy faced Conservative who looks a lot like Harper. Harper, who had the good looks but was beaten by better!

It's the sad truth gentlemen!
Click to expand...

I understand your position completely.

Nancy Pelosi WILL NEVER be president...nor will she be seriously considered for nomination. My guess is she WILL be elected Speaker...even if some votes come from the Republicans. (How sad that would be!)

I suspect the presidential nomination in 2020 will go to one of the attractive Democratic woman...someone like Kirsten Gillibrand, Kamala Harris or Tulsi Gabbard. At very least, one of those women will on the ticket in the second spot. (I'm hoping it will be at the head of the ticket.)

I'm gonna wish the Dem nominee lots of luck...and if America manages to screw up again and re-elect that clown now in office...I will be grateful for the fact that I am an octogenarian...and probably will be dead before the country gets too screwed up to come back.
 
montgomery said:
Frank and Nordberg, you're both smart people and I don't care to argue with you any further. Fwiw is just exactly what it's worth. I have no hidden motive in saying what I said about Pelosi. So making her the speaker is likely negligible in the negative damage. To try to make her president would be fatal. Take if for what it is.

And for fuk sake, don't I know myself as a Canadian that Trudeau is not likely to be beaten by any pussy faced Conservative who looks a lot like Harper. Harper, who had the good looks but was beaten by better!

It's the sad truth gentlemen!
Click to expand...

Dems don't make her president. If Trump and Pence are gone, she is next in the order of secession. But that has not happened in our history, so an improbable possibility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top