...and still partnering with that loony kook, Glenn Beck.
Posted on 04/02/2016 7:07:48 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
(Source: www.EthicsScoreboard.com)
Thanks MinuteGal.
It's interesting to mention some other items:
Donald's father, Fred Turmp, died in 1999.
Trump Tower at 725 Fifth Avenue, New York City, NY was completed in 1983.
Forbes valued the building at $318 million.
Donald has stated that his father gave him $1 million to chase commercial real estate business in Manhattan.
I have not read nor heard anyone refute that statement and back it up with substantiating documentation. Perhaps 2nddivisionvet can shed some light on Donald's personal business, since he purports to be an expert on the topic.
“If my dad left me $200 million I’m pretty sure I’d be a “billionaire” today.”
There are only a few choices that would impel you to make that statement. Ignorance, a willingness to believe anything anyone says, or outright lying.
When Trump’s dad died, Trump was way wealthier than him. And, when he died, the money had to be split four ways, at least.
With all that has been going on, have ny of the "Cruz or Lose" folks bothered to wonder why so may of the same folks who initially called him "a too hard-core and fanatical right-wing nut-job", now work very hard to help him play spoiler to trump? Do they believe that if Trump goes down that the love for Cruz will keep on?
They see Trump as the main impediment to maintaining the status quo and they believe it will be easier to manipulate things if Trump is out of the way and there is no clear winner - remember that Cruz doesn't have a chance to be declared winner - just congratulated as spoiler. They are as pro-Cruz as he's pro-Trump - they just find him .......useful for now.
...and still partnering with that loony kook, Glenn Beck.
Why don’t you give the ugly language a rest. Go post on a board where they think using the term “jackass” is clever.
The name calling is infantile. And don’t give me the “he stated it” pablum. That’s equally infantile.
Post your articles, make your reasoned arguments, but the name-calling and ugly language just drive away reasonable people.
Good thing he has no chance at winning.
Trump should be upset with his big mouth. He should just stop talking about women altogether.
Why don’t you give the ugly language a rest....That’s equally infantile.
Weighty words, thanks for your adult intervention.
But then, within the first 10 or so of your most recent posts, you state this:
FR is becoming home to a bunch of souls [I think you meant soulless, dear] vampires.I find the idea that a woman is so without compassion for another woman as to keep posting about a private moment of distress in a public forum downright despicable.
Don’t confuse them with facts.It’s unkind, insensitive and boorish and doesn’t say much about conservatives.
You are lower than low [Question: is lower than low worse than being a jackass? Just curious.]
Unkind, insensitive, boorish and just plain stupid.
So yes, you are indeed a paragon of reasoned discourse and civil debate.
NOT.
The Cruz cultists and their incessant need to jump into any thread to disrupt the conversation, to insult and to post lies and distortions, is what has made FR difficult lately. Much of the opprobrium directed back at the cultists is because of their use of such Alinskyite tactics--ridicule, harassment, repetition. Since the numbers are small, the posts must be constant. Most of us here at FR have lost all respect for such cultists and their posts for a guy who is playing spoiler for the GOPe without any chance of winning.
Support that sniveling weasel if you want, but don't pretend that he will ever be President, or that you aren't working to make Hillary President. Because you are. And that makes you and those who understand that and don't care, or those who don't understand it at all and dream of Prophet Ted, jackasses. Or worse. Lower than low?
You’ve made a couple of assumptions:
1. That I’ve decided who I will vote for. I am still praying over that.
2. That your post is the kind of response that I will find persuasive.
I don’t know if Ted Cruz is the right person but this crap of dragging the fact that his wife had a bad time into a public forum every time someone wants to take a shot at Cruz really pisses me off. Dragging wives and kids into the politics is pretty low. Stick to the issues, truthfully, no Twitter, no NE or the like, no innuendo or weasel words, no “his kid made a face once”, and you have an opportunity to persuade me. Make your case without resorting to trashing people and assuming they are idiots because they do not agree with you.
I know you Trump folks don’t want to hear it, but Trump has BIG problem with women in the real world. If you wish to be an asset to your candidate, then quit contributing to that problem.
My granddaughter needs to visit a political site for a school assignment. I can’t recommend FR because there is too much ugliness here. I don’t want her to think this represents conservatives. Not too long ago I could have done so without reservation. Pretty sad.
Wasn't Hidey the one who was out campaigning with Carly Fiorina the other day?
When a Cruz pac used a naked picture of Trump's wife in an ad on election day in Utah, did you post about your outrage? It sure was nice of Ted to wait a day or two and then say how wrong that was.
I am not aware of anyone dragging Cruz's kids into anything, but if they have, that would be wrong. They are just little kids. There is that one little clip of a daughter who doesn't want to kiss Ted, but that was at a campaign event, and it is not about the kid, it's about Ted. Anyone says mean things about the kids and I will join you in condemnation.
Ever notice that no one says much about Trump's kids? I wonder if it's because they are all so well raised, smart and nice. If any of them were drug addicts, that would probably come up a lot. That doesn't happen in Trump's family. He doesn't even drink alcohol.
Trump will need to address a lot of lies told about him in the general. In the end, women, and men, will have to decide between a pseudo-marxist with corrupt fascist leanings and a man who loves his country and hates what has been done with it. If they want to vote for a future of muslim rape and job stealing and a bleak future for their children, they can vote for the democrat. Or they can vote for Trump after hearing from him unfiltered for a few months. I suspect they will prefer not to be raped, whether figuratively or literally.
I double counted a state... To make a correction above scenario Trump gets 1,408 delegates. I thought it was a little high.
I think he was surprised by the utter corruption of the GOP process. Silly Trump thought that whoever got the most votes would get the delegates that were promised. He didn't plan on being cheated so blatantly with the full approval of the party and Cruz supporters. Fortunately he wised up a hired a wrangler to counter act the cheating.
I know for a fact that Trump was advised of the need for a ‘ground game’ for delegates before he even announced his candidacy. He chose the strategy of rallies and media instead.
He’ll win, but he’s made winning a lot harder than it needed to be. Oddly, Trump may learn the lesson at the wrong time. Rallies and media are far more effective in a general election, but some ‘strategists’ will snooker money from the Trump campaign for a less-effective ‘ground game’.
Thanks for the update! :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.