Danger for democrats (take 2) (1 Viewer)

[mrdeltoid]

What is more dangerous for the democrats:

 

[Verax]

Option 3: Trump getting away with colluding with Russia.

 

[Amelia]

Option 4: 42% of the population not caring if Trump colluded with Russia.

 

[Born Free]

Trump not colluding with Russia. The libs hair will be on fire, they all thought Crooked Hillary was a shoe in to win. They got that dead wrong and for the last two years they have bet the farm on Trump colluding with Russia. And they'll get that one wrong, making asses out of the themselves. Could be they just roll over and die knowing they lost to Trump and there was no collusion. You never know.

 

[Born Free]

Option 3: Trump getting away with colluding with Russia.

Trump getting away with colluding with Russia, now Mueller is not doing his job?

I know you can't get over Crooked Hillary losing to Trump. How do you deal with that?

 

[Phys251]

What is more dangerous for the democrats:

No, THIS:

 

[Amelia]

Trump getting away with colluding with Russia, now Mueller is not doing his job?

I know you can't get over Crooked Hillary losing to Trump. How do you deal with that?

Gloat while you can. There is no one crookeder than Trump. Theoretical physicists had to introduce 8 new spatial dimensions to model how crooked Trump is.

 

[Verax]

Trump getting away with colluding with Russia, now Mueller is not doing his job?

I know you can't get over Crooked Hillary losing to Trump. How do you deal with that?

Mueller is doing a fantastic job, 33 people indicted. Trump's personal lawyer, National Security Advisor, and campaign manager all guilty, 2 of them going to prison.

We should have a report very soon detailing Trump's Russian dealings. What more could we ask for?

 

[Born Free]

Gloat while you can. There is no one crookeder than Trump. Theoretical physicists had to introduce 8 new spatial dimensions to model how crooked Trump is.

All I can say is your hair will on fire, soon as you get the word there is no collusion. You libs will be crying and whimpering Trump beat Crooked Hillary and now there is no collusion, :boohoo:

 

[Born Free]

Mueller is doing a fantastic job, 33 people indicted. Trump's personal lawyer, National Security Advisor, and campaign manager all guilty, 2 of them going to prison.

No Collusion.

We should have a report very soon detailing Trump's Russian dealings. What more could we ask for?

Using your own words: "Trump getting away with colluding with Russia." That could only happen by Mueller not doing his job.

 

[Verax]

No Collusion.

Using your own words: "Trump getting away with colluding with Russia." That could only happen by Mueller not doing his job.

There's been quite a bit of evidence of collusion in the press for a couple of years now.

If there isn't enough evidence to nail Trump and Mueller isn't able to put together a strong enough case, he still may have done his job. We won't know until all this is over and all the facts come out. Could still be years to learn everything.

 

[Born Free]

There's been quite a bit of evidence of collusion in the press for a couple of years now.

If there isn't enough evidence to nail Trump and Mueller isn't able to put together a strong enough case, he still may have done his job. We won't know until all this is over and all the facts come out. Could still be years to learn everything.

If there isn't enough evidence to nail Trump by Mueller, you'll claim "Trump got away with colluding with Russia." But you will not have a shred of evidence to prove your claim.

 

[Xelor]

What is more dangerous for the democrats:

Trump colluding with Russia portends greater danger to Democrats than his not doing so because his collusive actions thus augur to be more dangerous for the country as a whole, and Democrats are but a part of the country as a whole. Things a POTUS does/doesn't do need to be good for the USA before it even matters whether they're good/bad for Democrats, Independents or Republicans. There is no collusion with Russia that a POTUS or candidate may undertake and that also is good for the USA.

 

[haymarket]

What is more dangerous for the democrats:

I do not understand the question nor what the choice is suppose to mean? Its rather a silly question to begin with since we already have long standing very clear evidence that Trump did indeed collude with the Russians.

 

[mrdeltoid]

Option 3: Trump getting away with colluding with Russia.

Never happen. Mueller is the greatest, most meticulous, honorable prosecutor in the history of the universe. Haven't you heard?

 

[JasperL]

What's the "democrat" party?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Trump not colluding with Russia. The libs hair will be on fire, they all thought Crooked Hillary was a shoe in to win. They got that dead wrong and for the last two years they have bet the farm on Trump colluding with Russia. And they'll get that one wrong, making asses out of the themselves. Could be they just roll over and die knowing they lost to Trump and there was no collusion. You never know.

Liberals are big into groupthinks, they will never admit anything. They have already been programmed to believe Trump is a Manchurian candidate/president. Now if there’s overwhelming need to change the story then the Ministry of Truth will update the story, the left will receive the new programming and proceed as if they never believed Trump was a Russian plant, but the point remains, their philosophy comes from central leadership and dissent is quelled Orwellian style in the party.

 

[Verax]

If there isn't enough evidence to nail Trump by Mueller, you'll claim "Trump got away with colluding with Russia." But you will not have a shred of evidence to prove your claim.

Was OJ guilty?

 

[DiAnna]

The wording of this poll is troublesome. Instead of "danger to Democrats", why isn't it a danger to Americans? If the president of the United states is colluding (or conspiring) with a hostile foreign power to advance the interest of said foreign power over the interest of the United States, that isn't a partisan problem; it's an American problem.

 

[Xelor]

I do not understand the question nor what the choice is suppose to mean? Its rather a silly question to begin with since we already have long standing very clear evidence that Trump did indeed collude with the Russians.

Red:
Really?

 

[haymarket]

Red:
Really?

Yes - the questions are predicated on the false premise that there is not already evidence of Trump and Russian collusion. Which there is.

 

[Xelor]

Yes - the questions are predicated on the false premise that there is not already evidence of Trump and Russian collusion. Which there is.

That doesn't matter. One of the phenomena from which one may choose carries with it an endogenous existential threat to the whole of the US, without regard to party or whether Trump has or hasn't colluded with the Russians/Kremlin, and the other doesn't.

 

[lwf]

If you're talking about partisan political danger, then strictly speaking, Trump not colluding with Russia is more dangerous to the democratic party than Trump colluding with Russia since the latter would be considered a huge political win for the democrats. If you're talking about the United States of America, Trump colluding with Russia would be a terrible loss to the American people and an embarrassing demerit on the effectiveness of a democratic government.

In this case, I desperately hope republicans win this partisan contest and that Trump is found to have not been in any way compromised by the Russian government. But, with the mounting evidence I've been seeing, I suspect this is a fool's hope.

 

[The Mark]

What is more dangerous for the democrats:

Option 1, unquestionably, because it would mean more harm caused to the country.

 

[johndylan1]

Option 3: Trump getting away with colluding with Russia.

Can anyone tell me what "colluding with Russia" means? How much contact, over what issues, and with what intent does collusion occur? What do you suspect Trump did in that regard?