Colorado Supreme Court bans Trump from ballot

[KansasTiger 3,256]

Just now, auburnatl1 said:

You’ve said it before. Just wanted to avoid that for both of us. 

Ok, so you're not better than that. Got it.

Forcing me to defend myself on a completely different topic I didn't bring up and talked about maybe 8 months to a year ago. One where I don't even remember exactly what I said. I can tell you what I believe now. It's not feasible without bloodshed, which no one wants.

If you want to elect someone who comprises, you do it. If I want to elect someone that doesn't, that's also democracy. Refusing to compromise isn't a lack of democracy. 

I was trying to have a conversation with you. But screw this.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

1 hour ago, KansasTiger said:

On the GOP side I'd only consider supporting Vivek or Trump. I dont see the other options you speak of.

Edit: and honestly I don't know a single Trump supporter that watches Hannity.

Trump does. Consults with him, too.

[auburnatl1 5,060]

Just now, KansasTiger said:

Ok, so you're not better than that. Got it.

Forcing me to defend myself on a completely different topic I didn't bring up and talked about maybe 8 months to a year ago. One where I don't even remember exactly what I said. I can tell you what I believe now. It's not feasible without bloodshed, which no one wants.

If you want to elect someone who comprises, you do it. If I want to elect someone that doesn't, that's also democracy. Refusing to compromise isn't a lack of democracy. 

I was trying to have a conversation with you. But screw this.

Please understand trump for many people causes a reaction. It’s not about politics - it’s white vs black hat stuff. What you might see as someone who’s flawed but fighting the good fight of challenging the status quo/ establishment, others see as a manipulative/ends justifies the means threat to the republic itself. A change agent vs a traitor.

The reality is I probably agree with you on several policy issues (ie the border) but on broader issues such as what KIND of leader the country needs - we don’t. 

I think it’s important for myself and others to understand the thinking of those that would support Trump - and though I hate your thinking, I respect you have having the guts to express it.

[KansasTiger 3,256]

1 minute ago, TexasTiger said:

Trump does. Consults with him, too.

Trump probably does alot of things he thinks might get him to viewers and curry support.

Most trump supporters I know are more Tucker fans. From what I've seen. And none of them watch Fox News anymore. Just my observation. 

[KansasTiger 3,256]

4 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Please understand trump for many people causes a reaction. It’s not about politics - it’s white vs black hat stuff. What you might see as someone who’s flawed but fighting the good fight of challenging the status quo/ establishment, others see as a manipulative/ends justifies the means threat to the republic itself. A change agent vs a traitor.

The reality is I probably agree with you on several policy issues (ie the border) but on broader issues such as what KIND of leader the country needs - we don’t. 

I think it’s important for myself and others to understand the thinking of those that would support Trump - and though I hate your thinking, I respect you have having the guts to express it.

Knowing us, we'll approach it again sometime in the near future. I got upset by where you took this because I approach the conversation differently with you than I might with others on here. It's a compliment. But I wasn't a fan of quick you spun up. It happens to the best of us (me included), so we'll try again some other time.

[auburnatl1 5,060]

15 minutes ago, KansasTiger said:

Knowing us, we'll approach it again sometime in the near future. I got upset by where you took this because I approach the conversation differently with you than I might with others on here. It's a compliment. But I wasn't a fan of quick you spun up. It happens to the best of us (me included), so we'll try again some other time.

My 2 cents. @TexasTigerand @homersapien are more liberal (and even they disagree on things), you seem libertarian, and I’m a right of center “neocon” (using your brand). There is no way we will agree on … anything. So either the country goes winner takes all AOC vs mjt smackdown, switching back and forth and undoing each other every 4 years - or we go manchin compromise, where no one is totally happy but there is stability and things actually progress. 

Maybe I’m in la la land but analytically which approach is best for the long term health of the country? Happy wife, happy life or every 4 yrs adversarial my way or the highway divorce court?

[KansasTiger 3,256]

31 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

My 2 cents. @TexasTigerand @homersapien are more liberal (and even they disagree on things), you seem libertarian, and I’m a right of center “neocon” (using your brand). There is no way we will agree on … anything. So either the country goes winner takes all AOC vs mjt smackdown, switching back and forth and undoing each other every 4 years - or we go manchin compromise, where no one is totally happy but there is stability and things actually progress. 

Maybe I’m in la la land but analytically which approach is best for the long term health of the country? Happy wife, happy life or every 4 yrs adversarial my way or the highway divorce court?

I remember now, we've had this discussion before. Because the left didn't let compromise be the end of it. Because of the left's constant pulling, compromise led to the center stability moving one direction, left with each compromise. It was a short term solution that was going to reach a breaking point eventually. My beliefs on many subjects have not changed since 2009, but in that time, I went from right of center moderate to extremist right in less than 15 years. So alot of people see that and say, we should probably stop compromising. We don't have much more room to keep going left anymore and keep living in a country we recognize.

This response isn't even getting into my belief that there is little difference in parties when it comes to key issues on capitol hill. When they want something, like say, MORE funding for Ukraine, or MORE support for Israel, or passing the next NDAA that renews three letter agencies' ability to spy on American citizens, or a giant Omnibus spending bill that no one knows whats in it, they always put aside their made up differences and pass it. And in my eyes, those massive bills should be the ones we're arguing about, they're often HIGHLY controversial, but somehow, they often get the least amount of buzz. I want someone in office that will put up a stop sign when those things come to the floor.

Edited January 3 by KansasTiger

[I_M4_AU 8,004]

10 minutes ago, KansasTiger said:

Because of the left's constant pulling, compromise led to the center stability moving one direction, left with each compromise. It was a short term solution that was going to reach a breaking point eventually. My beliefs on many subjects have not changed since 2009, but in that time, I went from right of center moderate to extremist right in less than 15 years. So alot of people see that and say, we should probably stop compromising. We don't have much more room to keep going left anymore and keep living in a country we recognize.

Exactly this. Trump stopped the nonsense in 2016 and we need more of that.  whether it’s Trump or another conservative doesn’t matter.  Left is too dangerous to go unchecked.

[auburnatl1 5,060]

1 hour ago, I_M4_AU said:

Exactly this. Trump stopped the nonsense in 2016 and we need more of that.  whether it’s Trump or another conservative doesn’t matter.  Left is too dangerous to go unchecked.

I do believe some of the left went from liberal to progressive to socialist - I fault mainly Bernie for this (who sounds well meaning until he gets into the details). And I support balance. More accurately - moderation. However, the right’s immune system reaction has been to embrace many people who probably shouldnt have drivers licenses. IMO trump didn’t stop anything - again, everything he did has been undone - and created the brand that conservatism is now solely for the scorched earth unhinged.

Other than chaos and legal fees, I can’t figure out what trump actually accomplished in the long term - it’s like he never happened.

 

[I_M4_AU 8,004]

17 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

IMO trump didn’t stop anything - again, everything he did has been undone - and created the brand that conservatism is now solely for the scorched earth unhinged.

Other than chaos and legal fees, I can’t figure out what trump actually accomplished in the long term - it’s like he never happened.

You’re just not really looking.  We had a secure border, peace in the Middle East and our Allies respected up (maybe not like, but respect).  No wars, not even a hint of one and the economy was good.

There was no good reason to abandon that except it was Trump’s policies that got us there and Biden couldn’t stand that.  The fact that Biden is governing by doing the opposite of what Trump did (and you can see the results) should tell you Biden in not a leader, just an ego driven plagiarist without an original thought in his brain.

Could you imagine where we would be now if Trump didn’t stop the continuous socialist march had Hillary gotten in?

[KansasTiger 3,256]

51 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

I do believe some of the left went from liberal to progressive to socialist - I fault mainly Bernie for this (who sounds well meaning until he gets into the details). And I support balance. More accurately - moderation. However, the right’s immune system reaction has been to embrace many people who probably shouldnt have drivers licenses. IMO trump didn’t stop anything - again, everything he did has been undone - and created the brand that conservatism is now solely for the scorched earth unhinged.

Other than chaos and legal fees, I can’t figure out what trump actually accomplished in the long term - it’s like he never happened.

 

So we're just going to ignore the fact that the left has been using litigation as a weapon against Trump and many of his staff? Those legal fees are expensive, and the left has been shelling out lawsuits to drain him, his staff and supporters. And it doesn't matter if they're successful or not. Probably the reason behind a few flips. Alot of people might flip when facing financial ruin.

[auburnatl1 5,060]

48 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

There was no good reason to abandon that except it was Trump’s policies that got us there and Biden couldn’t stand that.  The fact that Biden is governing by doing the opposite of what Trump did (and you can see the results) should tell you Biden in not a leader, just an ego driven plagiarist without an original thought in his brain.

Again, the reason that Trump has no legislative legacy is that he couldn’t get laws passed. All temporary executive orders. And he had a Republican Congress for his 1st 2 years. From a wall, tax reform, to the deficit. Failures. Midterms - failures.  As for the economy - it was cratering his last year (but Covid and the fed impacted the economy more than he or Biden’s policies).

IMO Positioning trump as a winner is being… incredibly kind. And for his zillion screwups - I know I know, it’s the Dems fault.

[I_M4_AU 8,004]

14 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

All temporary executive orders.

Who passes laws anymore?  EOs are so much easier.  You can say the same about Biden.  Biden gets turned down on his student loan foregiveness by the SCOTUS and he is still trying to pay student loans.  The man does not respect the rule of law.

What laws have Joe passed in his first two years of having the Senate and House on his side?  Hasn’t even brought up gun legislation. 

[auburnatl1 5,060]

10 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Who passes laws anymore?  EOs are so much easier.  You can say the same about Biden.  Biden gets turned down on his student loan foregiveness by the SCOTUS and he is still trying to pay student loans.  The man does not respect the rule of law.

What laws have Joe passed in his first two years of having the Senate and House on his side?  Hasn’t even brought up gun legislation. 

The infrastructure bill among others. Obama, Obamacare (both laws I have issues with). Laws are proteins. They last. EO’s are cheap carbs. Trump does not have the ability, temperament, or muscle to negotiate real change. Just talk, blame, and rally’s. Hell he won’t even debate.

Again, supporting trump isn’t about defeating Biden. The gop has options which are better Biden matchups. But if some people are going all in with the buffalo horned guys, at least pick someone who’s marginally good at doing stuff.

[KansasTiger 3,256]

2 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

Hell he won’t even debate.

Again a mischaracterization. He won't debate because the GOP demand he pledge loyalty to the nominee and he give up his biggest positional strength that ensures they don't screw him (the ability to run third party). Because they would if they could. 

[auburnatl1 5,060]

3 minutes ago, KansasTiger said:

Again a mischaracterization. He won't debate because the GOP demand he pledge loyalty to the nominee and he give up his biggest positional strength that ensures they don't screw him (the ability to run third party). Because they would if they could. 

Ok. So the real reason trump won’t debate is there’s yet another group out to get him. Gracious, is there anybody on the planet (who’s not a supporter) who isn’t? 

[KansasTiger 3,256]

1 hour ago, auburnatl1 said:

Ok. So the real reason trump won’t debate is there’s yet another group out to get him. Gracious, is there anybody on the planet (who’s not a supporter) who isn’t? 

Are you calling Biden out for not debating his opponents either, or just Trump? Biden wouldn't even consider a debate with RFK back when he was a nominee cause it didn't benefit him, he's way up in the dem party nominee polls. Why would he?

Well Trump doesn't have to debate either, cause he's beating everyone by 40+. Combine that with what I mentioned above, and why would he? 

[auburnatl1 5,060]

1 minute ago, KansasTiger said:

Are you calling Biden out for not debating his opponents either, or just Trump? Biden wouldn't even consider a debate with RFK back when he was a nominee cause it didn't benefit him, he's way up in the dem party nominee polls. Why would he?

Well Trump doesn't have to debate either, cause he's beating everyone by 40+. Combine that with what I mentioned above, and why would he? 

I’ll buy that logic  more. My 2 cents: Biden might not be able to finish a thought and Trump would probably purger himself with one of his cases.

[homersapien 11,453]

On 1/2/2024 at 8:51 PM, Aufan59 said:

"We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore,"
 

 

I think attacking Pence was more damning.  Trump clearly indicated his intent with that.

That and his refusal to ask the mob to stand down.  He clearly wanted to subvert the process, one way or the other.

Edited January 4 by homersapien

[Leftfield 2,665]

One thing I'm surprised hasn't been pointed out:

Section 3 Disqualification from Holding Office

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Understandably the focus is Trump's attempt to overturn the election and all the events that were led or caused by his actions. I think anyone who can divorce themselves of bias (I understand many can't) can agree his actions disqualify him. However, even without that, he clearly gave aid and comfort to anyone involved in the attack: Taking no steps whatsoever to stop it, praising the people who carried it out when he finally did say something, assuring he would pardon many of those who were convicted, and continuing to repeat lies that he knows foster distrust in our institutions (lies which continue to this day) for his personal gain. To me, this should disqualify him on its own.

[homersapien 11,453]

On 1/3/2024 at 12:05 PM, auburnatl1 said:

Your logic seems to be: sure Trump is flawed but Biden is worse, more corrupt, more toxic, possessed by Satan, whatever than trump and therefore they’re making republicans vote for him. A bad man vs a worse man argument I guess.

Question: but there are candidates now in the Republican Party who have a far better chance to beat Biden in the general that the majority of the populace wants, and yet Trump, the weakest candidate,  is curb stomping them. Why? 

Respectfully, picking Trump has nothing to do with Biden in the primaries. Absolutely nothing. Trump isn’t about policy, what’s best for the majority/country, or even logic - it’s something else that’s way over my head.

Remember Jim Jones?  It's the same thing.

(Too bad Trump is not telling them to drink poisonous kool aid. )

[I_M4_AU 8,004]

14 hours ago, Leftfield said:

I think anyone who can divorce themselves of bias (I understand many can't) can agree his actions disqualify him

Where is the due process that is mentioned in the same amendment?  Or does the narrative supersede everything else?

[Leftfield 2,665]

13 minutes ago, I_M4_AU said:

Where is the due process that is mentioned in the same amendment?  Or does the narrative supersede everything else?

Where did I say he should be denied due process?

[I_M4_AU 8,004]

4 minutes ago, Leftfield said:

Where did I say he should be denied due process?

Where you say his actions disqualify him, not should disqualify him, but disqualify him.  Just like the AG of Maine, a one person arbiter of truth.

[AU9377 5,043]

On 1/3/2024 at 2:28 PM, KansasTiger said:

Trump probably does alot of things he thinks might get him to viewers and curry support.

Most trump supporters I know are more Tucker fans. From what I've seen. And none of them watch Fox News anymore. Just my observation. 

Carlson and others already cost Fox $800 million.  More settlements or trials are coming in 2024, all related to the blatant unfounded lies they spread to appease their audience.  The fact that so many trust people like Tucker Carlson and Alex Jones is more than a little concerning.