Weezer
VolNation Dalai Lama , VN Most Beloved Poster
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
- Messages
- 85,923
- Likes
- 251,723
Serious question, do you understand a similar argument about wrong doing and a bases willingness to ignore it is easily turned around and made about Hillary, the left's choice for President in 2016? Both parties act with this behavior, but each side seems to want us to believe that only the other side does it. Why is each side so quick to accept it in their own while condemning it in the other? I think it's hard to make an argument about the wrongness of the other side's actions until you're willing to argue about the wrongness of the actions of your own side. (General you, not specific you) You can't do the same things then turnaround and expect to be taken seriously when arguing about the other side doing it.
All politicians leave with more than they started. I am not ok with that and nobody else should be but Trump is literally more worthless than tits on a bullLol. Yea that’s it. A billionaire that’s lost money by being president is looking on how to profit after office. Maybe he’ll be able to buy a $15 million dollar house in Martha’s Vineyard.
Fair, but I don't for a minute believe Hillary's aspirations were altruistic either. Yet just as the right doesn't want to own up about certain truths when it comes to Trump, the left doesn't want to own up to certain truths about Hillary. Or to anyone on their side of the aisle. People are willingly allowing themselves to be blinded by party loyalty, and that does nothing to help fix the problem.I'm thinking it's always a possibility,.and one way or another a president will profit from the office.
Yet, I feel with Donald's history of risky investments and highly leveraged loans, the presidency would more likely be viewed as financial vehicle.