Trump in France w world leaders

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive and even Trump's presence there cannot ruin it. It was their way before Trump came along and it will be there way after he is long gone.

See? What did I just say? Always try to find something negative to say.

It's not negative. It's positive. This day is about Notre Dame and the restoration. This day is not about Trump. Pope Francis had it right. Let the cathedral be the center of attention.

So why say that his presence could not ruin the day and mention his mortality. That's pretty negative to me. You could have just stopped at "Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive"

I didn't start this thread about Trump at Notre Dame. Blame that on the op.

Why should I blame the OP? The thread is in the political forum so of course it's appropriate to discuss Trump at Notre-Dame ceremony. You were negative about Trump when you wrote that he couldn't ruin the day (why would you think he could ruin the day in the first place unless you have a pre-conceived negative opinion about him?). Then you proceeded to mention his mortality. Sure, everyone dies, but why mention it during a happy occasion? I'm sure you don't go around at a wedding and say the happy couple will outlive their parents, right? You do have more common sense than that, right?

You act like there was some secret message here. I don't think Trump's presence at this ceremony elevates him or this country or the cathedral. I think it's blatant pandering because that's how you get what you want from this guy. You think it's impressive in some way. We disagree and that's allowed. It's a forum.

You're allowed to say whatever you want but just don't deny that the original comment was negative. We see respect, you see pandering. That's fine. But that's negative.

And T is a fount of positivity? He's pledged retribution and dictatorship, and has indicated he won't hire anyone who won't pledge blind loyalty to him at the expense of our nation's constitution. How dare you chide us to be positive. Your leader and (sadly) our future President isn't. At all.

Why do you have to answer everything with what about Trump? We're talking about you people always trying to find something negative to say about Trump and then denying it. That was the point of that convo. I guess, deep down you want just to be like him since you keep on trying to be as "negative" as he is.

And, how dare you accuse me of pledging blind loyalty to Trump at the expense of our constitution? I have my reason to support him and you have your reasons to support someone else. That doesn't make me naive/stupid and you enlightened. Sick of hearing your holier than thou rhetoric that you hold the Universal truth while people who don't agree with you are stupid.

People who voted for Trump are as corrupt and evil as Trump. He wants to dismantle the US Constitution and do do you. So spare us your faux outrage and Holier than thou rhetoric!

Democrats (Obama) protect the constitution by putting a senile man in office and pulling his puppet strings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could he be any more tacky and embarrassing? I hope Jill Biden sends him a cease and desist letter.

No, and that’s why his classless supporters voted for him. They think that they are finally going to get back at the people that mocked them for so long.

Didn’t work, though, we are still laughing at them, and now for also being such clueless fools that they believed him.

It's okay dear. We're also laughing at you for being such clueless idiots to have believed that Biden was still in top form until the debate showed you otherwise and that word-salad Harris had a chance (ooh she was leading in Iowa, remember that one, lol?)

We are also laughing at you for voting for someone that wouldn’t be hirable at any company.

He doesn't need to be hired. He has his own company and now has the highest job in the nation. LOL at people who thought just a few months ago that Biden could still be commander in chief. That tells us all we need to know about your foolishness

Trump would never get security clearance based on his record. Yet, you think he is qualified to be president? 🙄

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could he be any more tacky and embarrassing? I hope Jill Biden sends him a cease and desist letter.

No, and that’s why his classless supporters voted for him. They think that they are finally going to get back at the people that mocked them for so long.

Didn’t work, though, we are still laughing at them, and now for also being such clueless fools that they believed him.

It's okay dear. We're also laughing at you for being such clueless idiots to have believed that Biden was still in top form until the debate showed you otherwise and that word-salad Harris had a chance (ooh she was leading in Iowa, remember that one, lol?)

We are also laughing at you for voting for someone that wouldn’t be hirable at any company.

He doesn't need to be hired. He has his own company and now has the highest job in the nation. LOL at people who thought just a few months ago that Biden could still be commander in chief. That tells us all we need to know about your foolishness

Trump would never get security clearance based on his record. Yet, you think he is qualified to be president? 🙄

The electorate decided he was qualified to be president, that’s the only thing that matters. Not a bunch of fake crap democrats threw at Trump because they couldn’t beat him with fake joy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could he be any more tacky and embarrassing? I hope Jill Biden sends him a cease and desist letter.

No, and that’s why his classless supporters voted for him. They think that they are finally going to get back at the people that mocked them for so long.

Didn’t work, though, we are still laughing at them, and now for also being such clueless fools that they believed him.

It's okay dear. We're also laughing at you for being such clueless idiots to have believed that Biden was still in top form until the debate showed you otherwise and that word-salad Harris had a chance (ooh she was leading in Iowa, remember that one, lol?) :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

We are also laughing at you for voting for someone that wouldn’t be hirable at any company.

He doesn't need to be hired. He has his own company and now has the highest job in the nation. LOL at people who thought just a few months ago that Biden could still be commander in chief. That tells us all we need to know about your foolishness

Trump would never get security clearance based on his record. Yet, you think he is qualified to be president? 🙄

The electorate decided he was qualified to be president, that’s the only thing that matters. Not a bunch of fake crap democrats threw at Trump because they couldn’t beat him with fake joy.

You missed the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive and even Trump's presence there cannot ruin it. It was their way before Trump came along and it will be there way after he is long gone.

See? What did I just say? Always try to find something negative to say.

It's not negative. It's positive. This day is about Notre Dame and the restoration. This day is not about Trump. Pope Francis had it right. Let the cathedral be the center of attention.

So why say that his presence could not ruin the day and mention his mortality. That's pretty negative to me. You could have just stopped at "Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive"

I didn't start this thread about Trump at Notre Dame. Blame that on the op.

Why should I blame the OP? The thread is in the political forum so of course it's appropriate to discuss Trump at Notre-Dame ceremony. You were negative about Trump when you wrote that he couldn't ruin the day (why would you think he could ruin the day in the first place unless you have a pre-conceived negative opinion about him?). Then you proceeded to mention his mortality. Sure, everyone dies, but why mention it during a happy occasion? I'm sure you don't go around at a wedding and say the happy couple will outlive their parents, right? You do have more common sense than that, right?

You act like there was some secret message here. I don't think Trump's presence at this ceremony elevates him or this country or the cathedral. I think it's blatant pandering because that's how you get what you want from this guy. You think it's impressive in some way. We disagree and that's allowed. It's a forum.

You're allowed to say whatever you want but just don't deny that the original comment was negative. We see respect, you see pandering. That's fine. But that's negative.

And T is a fount of positivity? He's pledged retribution and dictatorship, and has indicated he won't hire anyone who won't pledge blind loyalty to him at the expense of our nation's constitution. How dare you chide us to be positive. Your leader and (sadly) our future President isn't. At all.

Why do you have to answer everything with what about Trump? We're talking about you people always trying to find something negative to say about Trump and then denying it. That was the point of that convo. I guess, deep down you want just to be like him since you keep on trying to be as "negative" as he is.

And, how dare you accuse me of pledging blind loyalty to Trump at the expense of our constitution? I have my reason to support him and you have your reasons to support someone else. That doesn't make me naive/stupid and you enlightened. Sick of hearing your holier than thou rhetoric that you hold the Universal truth while people who don't agree with you are stupid.

NP. If you support Trump, we know you have no intelligence and/or no integrity. He is an absolutely awful human being who is not remotely qualified to be POTUS. If you don't realize that, you are a fool. If you do, and you voted for him anyway for some batshit reason, then no one owes you or your opinions any respect. Period.

It's not holier than thou rhetoric. It's facts you don't want to face.

We all know that you think your sh*t don't stink, but it does like anyone else. You're the one missing a few nuts, dear. The simple fact that you thought just a few months ago that Biden was up to lead our country for another 4 years tells me everything I need to know about your intelligence. The fact is you're a stupid whiny loser who can't accept that people of United States have spoken. Insisting that you know better will not make it a fact.

Did you miss where is says "NP"? It says nothing in my post about Biden or anything else other than that Trump is not qualified (he's not) and that anyone who voted for him is a fool or batshit (also true). If you supported him, you don't get to cast aspersions about anyone's intelligence. Your post is a whole lot of typical MAGA-whiner projection. Every accusation is a confession. Reread your entire paragraph and apply to yourself, sweetheart.

Some of us are realists who can see that the country is going down the toilet, because too many people (like you, dear) were either hoodwinked by Trump or are just as much a POS as he is. We don't have to follow you down into the gutter.

Why does it matter that you are NP? My "you" refer to "Dems in general" not just "you specifically". You, people (to make it clear for you, dear) act like you hold the universal truth (you don't) and know better than others (you don't). Dems (like you, dear) were sheep believing blindly your party that Biden was fine until the reality came and bit you in the a** at the debate so don't talk to me about being a fool. If you couldn't even see that the poor guy was no longer lucid, you can't call yourselves "realists". Your holier than thou attitude is showing. Keep on believing you are the "realists" while others who disagree are "hoodwinked" or "POS". You call them facts. We call them delusions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Could he be any more tacky and embarrassing? I hope Jill Biden sends him a cease and desist letter.

No, and that’s why his classless supporters voted for him. They think that they are finally going to get back at the people that mocked them for so long.

Didn’t work, though, we are still laughing at them, and now for also being such clueless fools that they believed him.

It's okay dear. We're also laughing at you for being such clueless idiots to have believed that Biden was still in top form until the debate showed you otherwise and that word-salad Harris had a chance (ooh she was leading in Iowa, remember that one, lol?)

We are also laughing at you for voting for someone that wouldn’t be hirable at any company.

He doesn't need to be hired. He has his own company and now has the highest job in the nation. LOL at people who thought just a few months ago that Biden could still be commander in chief. That tells us all we need to know about your foolishness

Trump would never get security clearance based on his record. Yet, you think he is qualified to be president? 🙄

When obtaining a clearance is mandatory, come back and discuss. Do you think Hillary Clinton would get clearance? Do you think Biden would qualify with his sons history and all?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive and even Trump's presence there cannot ruin it. It was their way before Trump came along and it will be there way after he is long gone.

See? What did I just say? Always try to find something negative to say.

MAGA is king of negative and ugly things to say so stuff it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump constantly throws small ugly hateful comments out into the world with his speech and his Twitter and everything else. I wish such a thing wasn't part of this day for the cathedral, but I don't think it will have much of an impact in the long scheme of things.

Yup MAGA are hypocrites through and through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive and even Trump's presence there cannot ruin it. It was their way before Trump came along and it will be there way after he is long gone.

See? What did I just say? Always try to find something negative to say.

It's not negative. It's positive. This day is about Notre Dame and the restoration. This day is not about Trump. Pope Francis had it right. Let the cathedral be the center of attention.

So why say that his presence could not ruin the day and mention his mortality. That's pretty negative to me. You could have just stopped at "Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive"

I didn't start this thread about Trump at Notre Dame. Blame that on the op.

Why should I blame the OP? The thread is in the political forum so of course it's appropriate to discuss Trump at Notre-Dame ceremony. You were negative about Trump when you wrote that he couldn't ruin the day (why would you think he could ruin the day in the first place unless you have a pre-conceived negative opinion about him?). Then you proceeded to mention his mortality. Sure, everyone dies, but why mention it during a happy occasion? I'm sure you don't go around at a wedding and say the happy couple will outlive their parents, right? You do have more common sense than that, right?

You act like there was some secret message here. I don't think Trump's presence at this ceremony elevates him or this country or the cathedral. I think it's blatant pandering because that's how you get what you want from this guy. You think it's impressive in some way. We disagree and that's allowed. It's a forum.

You're allowed to say whatever you want but just don't deny that the original comment was negative. We see respect, you see pandering. That's fine. But that's negative.

Well Trump and trumpettes are negative people and spew hatred....hatred and ugliness gets hatred and ugliness right back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive and even Trump's presence there cannot ruin it. It was their way before Trump came along and it will be there way after he is long gone.

See? What did I just say? Always try to find something negative to say.

It's not negative. It's positive. This day is about Notre Dame and the restoration. This day is not about Trump. Pope Francis had it right. Let the cathedral be the center of attention.

So why say that his presence could not ruin the day and mention his mortality. That's pretty negative to me. You could have just stopped at "Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive"

I didn't start this thread about Trump at Notre Dame. Blame that on the op.

Why should I blame the OP? The thread is in the political forum so of course it's appropriate to discuss Trump at Notre-Dame ceremony. You were negative about Trump when you wrote that he couldn't ruin the day (why would you think he could ruin the day in the first place unless you have a pre-conceived negative opinion about him?). Then you proceeded to mention his mortality. Sure, everyone dies, but why mention it during a happy occasion? I'm sure you don't go around at a wedding and say the happy couple will outlive their parents, right? You do have more common sense than that, right?

You act like there was some secret message here. I don't think Trump's presence at this ceremony elevates him or this country or the cathedral. I think it's blatant pandering because that's how you get what you want from this guy. You think it's impressive in some way. We disagree and that's allowed. It's a forum.

You're allowed to say whatever you want but just don't deny that the original comment was negative. We see respect, you see pandering. That's fine. But that's negative.

And T is a fount of positivity? He's pledged retribution and dictatorship, and has indicated he won't hire anyone who won't pledge blind loyalty to him at the expense of our nation's constitution. How dare you chide us to be positive. Your leader and (sadly) our future President isn't. At all.

Why do you have to answer everything with what about Trump? We're talking about you people always trying to find something negative to say about Trump and then denying it. That was the point of that convo. I guess, deep down you want just to be like him since you keep on trying to be as "negative" as he is.

And, how dare you accuse me of pledging blind loyalty to Trump at the expense of our constitution? I have my reason to support him and you have your reasons to support someone else. That doesn't make me naive/stupid and you enlightened. Sick of hearing your holier than thou rhetoric that you hold the Universal truth while people who don't agree with you are stupid.

People who voted for Trump are as corrupt and evil as Trump. He wants to dismantle the US Constitution and do do you. So spare us your faux outrage and Holier than thou rhetoric!

Ok we're all gonna believe it because you said it. LOL. Remember a few weeks ago, before the election, you Dems were warning/whining that this presidential election might be the last because if Trump won, there wouldn't be another election? The day after he won, you people started several threads on which Democrats should run in 4 years. LOL. That tells me you people don't even believe in your own claims.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive and even Trump's presence there cannot ruin it. It was their way before Trump came along and it will be there way after he is long gone.

See? What did I just say? Always try to find something negative to say.

It's not negative. It's positive. This day is about Notre Dame and the restoration. This day is not about Trump. Pope Francis had it right. Let the cathedral be the center of attention.

So why say that his presence could not ruin the day and mention his mortality. That's pretty negative to me. You could have just stopped at "Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive"

I didn't start this thread about Trump at Notre Dame. Blame that on the op.

Why should I blame the OP? The thread is in the political forum so of course it's appropriate to discuss Trump at Notre-Dame ceremony. You were negative about Trump when you wrote that he couldn't ruin the day (why would you think he could ruin the day in the first place unless you have a pre-conceived negative opinion about him?). Then you proceeded to mention his mortality. Sure, everyone dies, but why mention it during a happy occasion? I'm sure you don't go around at a wedding and say the happy couple will outlive their parents, right? You do have more common sense than that, right?

You act like there was some secret message here. I don't think Trump's presence at this ceremony elevates him or this country or the cathedral. I think it's blatant pandering because that's how you get what you want from this guy. You think it's impressive in some way. We disagree and that's allowed. It's a forum.

You're allowed to say whatever you want but just don't deny that the original comment was negative. We see respect, you see pandering. That's fine. But that's negative.

Well Trump and trumpettes are negative people and spew hatred....hatred and ugliness gets hatred and ugliness right back.

Ok but then don't deny it like the PP upthread? LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive and even Trump's presence there cannot ruin it. It was their way before Trump came along and it will be there way after he is long gone.

See? What did I just say? Always try to find something negative to say.

MAGA is king of negative and ugly things to say so stuff it.

Well, from the look of this forum, Dems are right up there fighting for that title so stuff it yourself also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive and even Trump's presence there cannot ruin it. It was their way before Trump came along and it will be there way after he is long gone.

See? What did I just say? Always try to find something negative to say.

MAGA is king of negative and ugly things to say so stuff it.

Well, from the look of this forum, Dems are right up there fighting for that title so stuff it yourself also.

LOL....I know you are but what am I. That is what MAGA's sound like every day and your orange god.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive and even Trump's presence there cannot ruin it. It was their way before Trump came along and it will be there way after he is long gone.

See? What did I just say? Always try to find something negative to say.

MAGA is king of negative and ugly things to say so stuff it.

Well, from the look of this forum, Dems are right up there fighting for that title so stuff it yourself also.

LOL....I know you are but what am I. That is what MAGA's sound like every day and your orange god.

And I know you are too, dear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive and even Trump's presence there cannot ruin it. It was their way before Trump came along and it will be there way after he is long gone.

See? What did I just say? Always try to find something negative to say.

It's not negative. It's positive. This day is about Notre Dame and the restoration. This day is not about Trump. Pope Francis had it right. Let the cathedral be the center of attention.

So why say that his presence could not ruin the day and mention his mortality. That's pretty negative to me. You could have just stopped at "Notre Dame it's quite beautiful. The restoration is impressive"

I didn't start this thread about Trump at Notre Dame. Blame that on the op.

Why should I blame the OP? The thread is in the political forum so of course it's appropriate to discuss Trump at Notre-Dame ceremony. You were negative about Trump when you wrote that he couldn't ruin the day (why would you think he could ruin the day in the first place unless you have a pre-conceived negative opinion about him?). Then you proceeded to mention his mortality. Sure, everyone dies, but why mention it during a happy occasion? I'm sure you don't go around at a wedding and say the happy couple will outlive their parents, right? You do have more common sense than that, right?

You act like there was some secret message here. I don't think Trump's presence at this ceremony elevates him or this country or the cathedral. I think it's blatant pandering because that's how you get what you want from this guy. You think it's impressive in some way. We disagree and that's allowed. It's a forum.

You're allowed to say whatever you want but just don't deny that the original comment was negative. We see respect, you see pandering. That's fine. But that's negative.

And T is a fount of positivity? He's pledged retribution and dictatorship, and has indicated he won't hire anyone who won't pledge blind loyalty to him at the expense of our nation's constitution. How dare you chide us to be positive. Your leader and (sadly) our future President isn't. At all.

Why do you have to answer everything with what about Trump? We're talking about you people always trying to find something negative to say about Trump and then denying it. That was the point of that convo. I guess, deep down you want just to be like him since you keep on trying to be as "negative" as he is.

And, how dare you accuse me of pledging blind loyalty to Trump at the expense of our constitution? I have my reason to support him and you have your reasons to support someone else. That doesn't make me naive/stupid and you enlightened. Sick of hearing your holier than thou rhetoric that you hold the Universal truth while people who don't agree with you are stupid.

People who voted for Trump are as corrupt and evil as Trump. He wants to dismantle the US Constitution and do do you. So spare us your faux outrage and Holier than thou rhetoric!

Democrats (Obama) protect the constitution by putting a senile man in office and pulling his puppet strings.

Biden was not "senile" when he was elected. By the American people, not Obama, who had been out of office for four years at that point. He was not even the favorite to get the nomination by the party, but he did too well in Southern states for anyone else to overcome him. If you talk to actual Democratic voters you would learn that the reason most Dems voted for Biden in the primaries is that they felt he was the safe choice (old, white, familiar) and would be best positioned to defeat Trump. People also generally liked Biden and thought he'd done a good job as VP and respected his career in the Senate.

Even as he was elected, Dems were nervous about his age but believed it was more important to get Trump out of office. A belief that was prescient given that Trump handled his loss by trying to demand the governor of Georgia "find" extra votes for him, having his lawyers try and seat "alternate electors" from multiple states to steal the election, ordering Mike Pence to refuse to certify the election, encouraging a crowd of angry protesters to go march on the Capital and "stop the steal", and sitting idly in the White House as those protesters broke windows, ran over cops, threatened law makers, and ran amok in the Capital building.

Democrats as a group did not decide to have Biden run for re-election -- he decided that on his own. And he was facilitated by people in his family and White House who absolutely should have recognized that he was not in any condition to run and had him step down. I have a lot of resentment towards Jill and his closes advisors who obviously interacted with him regularly and should have recognized what was happening but chose to cover it up instead. But you can't blame "Democrats." I truly did not know that Biden was so far gone until the debate, which was devastating. I basically reconciled myself to Trump winning the election that night. Even when Biden finally stepped down and Harris got the nomination, I thought our odds were long. She exceeded my expectations but couldn't pull it off and that's unsurprising given how little time she had, the fact that she didn't have the benefit of a primary campaign, and the overall sentiment in the country (and world) which was frustration, dissatisfaction, and unhappiness with incumbents.

When you sit there and blame me, a rank and file Democrat, for "forcing" Biden on anyone or misleading anyone as to his condition. Or try to claim Biden was installed in the presidency by Obama, you sound like a crackpot conspiracy theorist. This whole thing unfolded int he public eye for us all to see. You just glide past the actual elections and the fact that no one outside Biden's inner circle had seen what he was like until that debate, and act like all Democrats are in some kind of grand conspiracy to defraud you, a person who was always going to vote for Trump anyway.

Just stop.