Wall Street Journal Hits Republicans With The Harsh Truth About Donald Trump

[BeaverFever]

Wall Street Journal Hits Republicans With The Harsh Truth About Donald Trump
 

The editorial board of the conservative, Rupert Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal has urged its readers to take heed of William Barr’s recent warning about Donald Trump, and the former attorney general’s caution about what would happen if the former president won a second term in the White House.

Barr last week described Trump’s first term as a “horror show. He predicted Trump would fail to deliver on conservative policies, even if he did win the 2024 election.

The Journal wholeheartedly agreed.

“The rebuttal from the Trump establishment will be to cite his first term, but that record supports Mr. Barr’s point,” it wrote. “We also agree with many of Mr. Trump’s policies, and we backed them during his Presidency. But his most important policy victories were conventional GOP priorities delivered by people he now denounces as “RINOs.”

. ..

Read the full WSJ editorial here.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/wall-street-journal-hits-republicans-055134704.html

[bush_cheney2004]

Donald Trump currently has a slightly higher polled approval rating than President Joe Biden...much higher amongst Republicans, of course.  Both have unfavorable ratings above 50%.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/

The "harsh truth" doesn't always matter, especially in partisan politics.

[Deluge]

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

Wall Street Journal Hits Republicans With The Harsh Truth About Donald Trump
 

The editorial board of the conservative, Rupert Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal has urged its readers to take heed of William Barr’s recent warning about Donald Trump, and the former attorney general’s caution about what would happen if the former president won a second term in the White House.

Barr last week described Trump’s first term as a “horror show. He predicted Trump would fail to deliver on conservative policies, even if he did win the 2024 election.

The Journal wholeheartedly agreed.

“The rebuttal from the Trump establishment will be to cite his first term, but that record supports Mr. Barr’s point,” it wrote. “We also agree with many of Mr. Trump’s policies, and we backed them during his Presidency. But his most important policy victories were conventional GOP priorities delivered by people he now denounces as “RINOs.”

. ..

Read the full WSJ editorial here.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/wall-street-journal-hits-republicans-055134704.html

Don't waste your breath. Any bad that Trump can do, the Left will do worse - it's a no-win situation for you sociopaths. 

[robosmith]

2 hours ago, Deluge said:

Don't waste your breath. Any bad that Trump can do, the Left will do worse - it's a no-win situation for you sociopaths. 

"The left" NEVER incited an insurrection despite ^your fantasy.

[Deluge]

4 minutes ago, robosmith said:

"The left" NEVER incited an insurrection despite ^your fantasy.

Neither did Trump, or the Right. 

What the Left did/does is start riots and destroy public/private property. 

[robosmith]

5 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Neither did Trump, or the Right. 

What the Left did/does is start riots and destroy public/private property. 

There is STRONG EVIDENCE that Trump did despite YOUR IGNORANCE.

You would KNOW IT, IF you watched or read the Jan 6th committee final report about the SWORN TESTIMONY of WH INSIDERS.

The full January 6 committee report text

[Dougie93]

I would agree that Trump doesn't deliver on conservative policies

because he doesn't use the levers of government effectively

there was no Ron DeSantis available in 2016

but now that there is a Ron DeSantis, I favour DeSantis

 

[Deluge]

35 minutes ago, robosmith said:

There is STRONG EVIDENCE that Trump did despite YOUR IGNORANCE.

You would KNOW IT, IF you watched or read the Jan 6th committee final report about the SWORN TESTIMONY of WH INSIDERS.

The full January 6 committee report text

There is ZERO evidence. It's why Trump is free today and getting ready to take back the White House.

Edited May 9, 2023 by Deluge

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, Contrarian said:

I think DeSantis would have been a better choice, however, I went and did some digging. 

Not looking good for the Florida governor:


 
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-primary-r/2024/

yeah, I know

the Democrats weaponizing the law against Trump

there's no way DeSantis can compete with that

the Democrats are the ones who enable Trump

 

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, Deluge said:

There is ZERO evidence. It's why Trump is free today and getting ready to take back the White House.

Trump is still facing CHARGES. IDK about Canada, but in the US sworn testimony is considered SOLID EVIDENCE.

And Trump will likely be INDICTED by Smith and Willis in time for the PRIMARY.

I have to wonder if you've even HEARD the TAPED phone call of Trump demanding and threatening the GA SoS to change the vote count. LMAO

Have you?

[Deluge]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Trump is still facing CHARGES. IDK about Canada, but in the US sworn testimony is considered SOLID EVIDENCE.

Wrong. It is evidence given by a witness under oath, so it's just evidence, not SOLID evidence. 

SOLID evidence would be physical evidence and sworn testimony combined. 

Get it right. 

Edited May 9, 2023 by Deluge

[robosmith]

25 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Wrong. It is evidence given by a witness under oath, so it's just evidence, not SOLID evidence. 

SOLID evidence would be physical evidence and sworn testimony combined. 

Get it right. 

A LOT of people have been CONVICTED SOLELY by SWORN TESTIMONY, so it IS SOLID.

[Rebound]

2 hours ago, Contrarian said:

I think DeSantis would have been a better choice, however, I went and did some digging. 

Not looking good for the Florida governor:


 
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-primary-r/2024/

It’s much too early to tell.

I think the Big Donors on both sides are waiting in the wings. Sadly, it’s mega-donors who decide who will bend the ear of mass media on both sides of the aisle.  

27 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Wrong. It is evidence given by a witness under oath, so it's just evidence, not SOLID evidence. 

SOLID evidence would be physical evidence and sworn testimony combined. 

Get it right. 

Eight Hundred Convictions including seditious conspiracy. It was an attempted coup. 

[bush_cheney2004]

2 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

the Democrats are the ones who enable Trump

 

 

Agreed...the Democrats are their own worst enemy.   Politico sees them making the same mistake as in 2016...

 

Quote

...Back in 2016, Trump was supposed to have been the perfect opponent: too crude and way too outrageous to win a general election. As Hillary Clinton’s campaign geared up for that November’s race, many were rooting for Trump to be the GOP nominee, believing that he’d be the easiest Republican to beat.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/04/trumps-scandal-plagued-run-dem-anxiety-00090268

 

[robosmith]

43 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Agreed...the Democrats are their own worst enemy.   Politico sees them making the same mistake as in 2016...

 

 

Just because Trump "beat" Hillary (with help from Putin), does not mean he was NOT the easiest Republican to beat.

After all, he only "won" by less than 1% of the vote in 3 swing states. And Hillary did not campaign very hard due to over confidence and exhaustion.

[bush_cheney2004]

17 minutes ago, robosmith said:

...And Hillary did not campaign very hard due to over confidence and exhaustion.

This is exactly the point that Politco is making.   The Democrats have underestimated Trump many times and should have learned from the 2016 beat down, no matter how small his victory margin.

 

 

 

[robosmith]

23 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

This is exactly the point that Politco is making.   The Democrats have underestimated Trump many times and should have learned from the 2016 beat down, no matter how small his victory margin.

 

 

 

The TINY margin means it was NOT a "beat down."

[BeaverFever]

1 hour ago, robosmith said:

Just because Trump "beat" Hillary (with help from Putin), does not mean he was NOT the easiest Republican to beat.

After all, he only "won" by less than 1% of the vote in 3 swing states. And Hillary did not campaign very hard due to over confidence and exhaustion.

Don’t forget despite the Republican conspiracies the FBI actually helped Trump win by publicly announcing “new evidence” in the Hillary nothingburger email investigation right before voting, which turned out to not even be new evidence 

[bush_cheney2004]

4 hours ago, robosmith said:

The TINY margin means it was NOT a "beat down."

 

The looks on these Clinton supporters said otherwise...Trump destroyed their delusion of a Clinton presidency..also reported by the Wall Street Journal as the "harsh truth".

 

 

[NYLefty]

10 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

I would agree that Trump doesn't deliver on conservative policies

because he doesn't use the levers of government effectively

there was no Ron DeSantis available in 2016

but now that there is a Ron DeSantis, I favour DeSantis

 

Desantis is a sniveling pusswad. Besides he's too busy having it out with Mickey Mouse

[robosmith]

3 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

The looks on these Clinton supporters said otherwise...Trump destroyed their delusion of a Clinton presidency..also reported by the Wall Street Journal as the "harsh truth".

Disappointment over a very close loss and a truth being "harsh" does NOT MEAN it was a "beat down." Duh.

beatdown (plural beatdowns) (slang) a severe beating.

Edited May 10, 2023 by robosmith

[Americana Antifa]

On 5/9/2023 at 8:05 AM, Contrarian said:

I see, more material for @Americana Antifa to think about, however, I am certain a loophole will be found to say that even The Wall Street Journal is "Nazi".

Stop being an NPC for the Right.