Trump’s latest sinking ship

[Horace]

@George-K said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

@89th said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

at least one failed presidency BOOM!!!!

What is your standard for declaring a presidency "failed?"

The standard is whether one is greeted with giggles and collegial backslaps within one’s professional and social circles when one says the presidency was failed.

[Horace]

In fairness, staring a business is a matter of filing some paperwork. Whether that business ever does anything or has meaningful revenue is another matter.

[Larry]

Ah yes.. so he could have done it as a homework project.....

[Larry]

A few years ago I bought a 7 location chain of gas/convenience stores from bankruptcy court. All of them had fallen below the franchise standards, and the owner had gone broke trying to bring them up to spec. Since the franchise was no longer valid, I wasn't under its restrictions. I sold a couple off "as is" in a matter of weeks and used the cash to renovate the other 5. I then sold each one off as a stand alone business. All the inventory was "jobbed", I set up gas supply through a local distributor. All together it took about 7 months. . I never worked a day in any of them, and the last 2 were pure cash flow when sold. I never spent a dime of my own money, never lifted a hammer.

To 89th, that venture was a total failure...

[89th]

@George-K said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

@89th said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

at least one failed presidency BOOM!!!!

What is your standard for declaring a presidency "failed?"

Well I would say being impeached twice, and then being rejected by voters after 1 term aren't exactly checks in the "successful presidency" column.

Further, refusing to accept election results and not attending your successor's inauguration doesn't help the case either. That of course does not include whatever comes of the January 6th committee, nor does it include early fumbling of taking the pandemic seriously as well as kicking off inflation.

I'd imagine Trump will permanently reside in the "bottom 5" of most presidential ranking lists, btw...but I'm not using that argument because most are written by t3h liberal media.

[George K]

@89th said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

Well I would say being impeached twice, and then being rejected by voters after 1 term aren't exactly checks in the "successful presidency" column.

HW Bush was rejected after one term, and Clinton was impeached.

Further, refusing to accept election results and not attending your successor's inauguration doesn't help the case either. That of course does not include whatever comes of the January 6th committee,

That has nothing to do with his presidency, at least the first 99% of it.

nor does it include early fumbling of taking the pandemic

See Bill De Blasio and Nancy Pelosi (yeah whataboutism).

seriously as well as kicking off inflation.

Pandemic baby! We gotta save the mom and pop stores!

I'd imagine Trump will permanently reside in the "bottom 5" of most presidential ranking lists, btw...but I'm not using that argument because most are written by t3h liberal media.

You may or may not be right on that. Let's see how it looks 50 years from now.

[89th]

@Larry said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

@George-K said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

@89th said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

at least one failed presidency BOOM!!!!

What is your standard for declaring a presidency "failed?"

You can't believe anything this guy says. Not that long ago he was saying he voted for Trump but knew he would lose, then he said "I'm actually a Republican and wanted him to win" then he thought Trump did a good job as president he just didn't like his mean tweets.. he will say anything to "win" an argument. Now he claims he's started 2 businesses. He's as full of shit as a Christmas turkey.

Very odd where you come up with this. I have always said I didn't vote for Trump in 2016 (I voted for Johnson), and that I was trending towards voting for him as of the 2020 SOTU but his handling of the pandemic and upcoming election soured me, so I voted again for a Libertarian. You're welcome to use the search feature to prove me wrong.

And yes, I started 2 businesses. Both made money and had employees. One lasted from 2004-2012, the other from 2018-2020.

And your venture with the chain of gas/convenience stores sounds like it was successful to me, I'm not sure why you'd think I'd think otherwise? It's not like you started a company and it went bankrupt after 2 months.

[89th]

@George-K Sure, not being re-elected by itself isn't automatic failure, but add in 2 impeachments (half of all impeachments in USA history!!!!!111, ok dramatic effect), and WHILE PRESIDENT not accepting election results? Tsk tsk. Unless a few presidents come along in the next 50 years that really shit the bed (wouldn't surprise me), Trump is pretty safely in the bottom 5 section of presidential rankings, I would bet.

[taiwan_girl]

@George-K said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

@89th said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

at least one failed presidency BOOM!!!!

What is your standard for declaring a presidency "failed?"

Thats easy

If you are a Democrat, the following Presidents failed
Trump
Bush
Bush
Reagan
Ford
Nixon
etc

If you are a Republican, the following Presidents failed
Biden
Obama
Clinton
Carter
Johnson
Kennedy
etc

[Doctor Phibes]

@Jolly said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

@Larry said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

@Doctor-Phibes said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

So what you're saying is he doesn't actually do anything. He just stands around grinning inanely and doing the thumb's up at photo-ops.

I work with a couple of people like that. They're in marketing and drive fancy cars. Lucky bastards.

When I was at school they told me if I worked really hard I'd be successful. They lied. Obviously, I ignored them anyway, but still, they freaking lied!

No, thats not what im saying at all.

He knows what you're saying. He just doesn't want to admit that famous people sell their endorsements or name.

A more careful reading of what I wrote might have indicated that I wasn't being entirely serious.

Sheesh.

[Jolly]

@89th said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

@George-K Sure, not being re-elected by itself isn't automatic failure, but add in 2 impeachments (half of all impeachments in USA history!!!!!111, ok dramatic effect), and WHILE PRESIDENT not accepting election results? Tsk tsk. Unless a few presidents come along in the next 50 years that really shit the bed (wouldn't surprise me), Trump is pretty safely in the bottom 5 section of presidential rankings, I would bet.

Impeachment has now become a purely political event (thank you, Nancy). I suspect Biden will be impeached within 120 days, if a Republican Congress is elected.

Thin gruel to base a claim of failed presidency upon.

[Larry]

@89th said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

It's not like you started a company and it went bankrupt after 2 months.

See, this shows either a single minded stubbornness or an inability to learn. No matter how many times it gets poi Ted out to you that Trump didnt do that either, you continue to cling to your same old destroyed narrative.

Trump didn't start Trump Steaks. He didn't ruin Trump Steaks. He didn't do a fucking thing except sell a license to his name to The Sharper Image. But you don't understand that. It shows a serious lack of reasoning skills 9n your part. To the point of it being ridiculous. Trying to have an honest discussion with you is a total waste of my time.

[Larry]

@89th said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

@George-K Sure, not being re-elected by itself isn't automatic failure, but add in 2 impeachments (half of all impeachments in USA history!!!!!111, ok dramatic effect), and WHILE PRESIDENT not accepting election results? Tsk tsk. Unless a few presidents come along in the next 50 years that really shit the bed (wouldn't surprise me), Trump is pretty safely in the bottom 5 section of presidential rankings, I would bet.

The weak minded are always easily led using stupid logic. Both impeachment were totally political in nature, both have been proven beyond question to have been based on false claims.. as for the rest, given current events it is clear that had the media and the democrats not colluded to keep Biden's dirty laundry out of the news Trump would have won by a wide margin. It's really a shame to see someone capable of thinking being so stubbornly stupid.

[Jolly]

One-term Presidents of the last fifty years or so? Trump ranks well ahead of Carter. Maybe ahead of Bush41, I don't know, time will tell. Another that time will tell on, is JFK. Much of his Presidency was heavily romanticized, but when it comes down to nut-cutting, I don't think his ranking will be in the top half of all Presidents.

[jon-nyc]

@Larry

Both impeachment were totally political in nature, both have been proven beyond question to have been based on false claims..

That’s complete and total bullshit. As Jolly might say, unarguably false.

This is why you shouldn’t be able to vote.

[Jolly]

@jon-nyc said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

@Larry

Both impeachment were totally political in nature, both have been proven beyond question to have been based on false claims..

That’s complete and total bullshit. As Jolly might say, unarguably false.

This is why you shouldn’t be able to vote.

Uh, no.

The first impeachment was a result of the Russia! hoax and some really shaky Ukranian stuff, with much less validity than Biden's dealing in Ukraine. The second was related to January 6th and again, was purely political in nature.

Look at the bright side...When Trump is elected again, maybe y'all can impeach him some more...

[Larry]

@jon-nyc said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

@Larry

Both impeachment were totally political in nature, both have been proven beyond question to have been based on false claims..

That’s complete and total bullshit. As Jolly might say, unarguably false.

This is why you shouldn’t be able to vote.

Trump's first impeachment came after a formal House inquiry alleged that he had solicited foreign interference in the 2020 U.S. presidential election to help his re-election bid, and then obstructed the inquiry itself by telling his administration officials to ignore subpoenas for documents and testimony. This was proven to be completely false, and Trump was acquitted of all charges.

The second impeachment happened about a week before he left office, "House Democrats introduced just one article of impeachment against Trump: “incitement of insurrection.” The president “willfully made statements that encouraged—and foreseeably resulted in—imminent lawless action at the Capitol,” the resolution reads. “Incited by President Trump, a mob unlawfully breached the Capitol, injured law enforcement personnel, menaced Members of Congress and the Vice President, interfered with the Joint Session’s solemn constitutional duty to certify the election results, and engaged in violent, deadly, destructive, and seditious acts.”

All totally bull shit, no evidence has been found to back up the claim, lots of evidence that shows he did the exact opposite.

I stand by my statement, I understand that as a good little lemming you want to take my rights away, but as they say down south - fuck you and the horse you rode in on. It's not my fault you can't find you own ass.

[Larry]

I've said before that I can't figure out if being stupid causes one to be a democrat, or if being a democrat makes one stupid.

I just added 2 marks to the "being a democrat makes one stupid" column....

[jon-nyc]

Jesus you should at least Google before talking such complete shit. The impeachment had nothing to do with Russia, it was Trump’s threat to withhold military aid to Zalensky unless he dug up dirt on Biden.

The predicate charge was true. Reasonable people (and, in the event, partisans) could disagree on whether it was impeachable but even GOP ‘no’ votes conceded the underlying charge.

[Larry]

@jon-nyc said in Trump’s latest sinking ship:

Jesus you should at least Google before talking such complete shit. The impeachment had nothing to do with Russia, it was Trump’s threat to withhold military aid to Zalensky unless he dug up dirt on Biden.

The predicate charge was true. Reasonable people (and, in the event, partisans) could disagree on whether it was impeachable but even GOP ‘no’ votes conceded the underlying charge.

I did google. And I pulled both explanations from Wikipedia. Perhaps the problem here is that you don't know jack shit about this.