Quote Originally Posted by KeyElement:
.
Wow. Amazingly poor logic. I tried but cannot fathom how anything in this can be said with any amount of rational thinking. It is another anti-Trump rant that was woefully written.
Only in a crack pipe dream world can you think that, because you have not yet seen sleepy, creepy Jo in that position.
This absolute makes no sense. Why go straight to a ‘crack pipe dream’ analogy? There are WAY too many people that think this way to make this comparison.
I have not seen you or me in that position either, so, should I assume because of that we would do fine? Of course not!
You can only analyze the recent pass and the present.
This doesn’t even make sense. You can absolutely analyze the distant PAST as well. You liberals have done a great job of this with Trump and with his judge appointments. There is no statute of limitations on verifying someone’s qualifications and actions.
Unless you are clairvoyant you do not have the slightest idea who is or is not "qualified" to be the next president.
No one is clairvoyant. So, by this logic — none of us can judge anyone to be ‘qualified’ to be the next president. This of course makes no sense. We judge by recent past, distant past, and the current — then we use this as a part of our determination.
Comparing Trump to recent presidents, or even those of documented history, he comes up woefully short in most important areas.
Actually he doesn’t come up ‘woefully short’ at all. That is simply your irrational bias talking. Compare what Trump has accomplished and done for the country to those you think did more. You may not agree with what he had done but you cannot say that he hasn’t done it — that would just be a you problem.
He is a narcissistic, belligerent blowhard that lacks mos, if not all, leadership skills. Have a nice day
This is the classic copout that the Liberals use to bellyache about Trump. Just simply say you don’t like him. You cannot say someone that has done as much and gone as far as he has in life does not have leadership skills. It simply makes you look like you are scrambling for something to grasp onto and say that is your big point. Whether you like it or not — he has been very successful in life and accomplished a lot. So, he has to have leadership skills. They may not be what you like — not as tactful, polite, and diplomatic. But that is a whole different issue. Meek and mild was not what the electorate voted for this time.
So sorry. Get you a better candidate that might actually accomplish something than a vice-president from an administration that accomplished very little. There are many more qualified Democratic leaders — choose one of them.
And if you are going to comment on a political forum, please make more sense than ranting and raving. We have enough of that from these liberals on here already.
I know you are more eloquent than this from MLB.
By the way what are we going to do about America’s Pasttime?