Liberals don't need Trump to stop talking to defame Republicans if they can find a Republican willing to do it for them.
Like it or not (and I know you don't like it), Donald Trump is in all likelihood going to be the GOP nominee. By wishing him dead, you crapped on the hopes of more than half the country wanting desperately to be delivered from the disaster that is Joe Biden. The tens of millions of people in America who plan to vote for him, rather than sulk on Election Day, know he isn't perfect. But they also believe he genuinely loves this nation, whether or not he speaks as eloquently as some preferred he did. On Trump's worse day, he's still far and away better than Biden. And he has an even greater mandate for finishing the wall you are so bitter he didn't build. You can be a lot more helpful to him if you are kind and gracious, as I know you are capable of being. Your smile lights up the entire room and you are disarmingly charming when you want to be.
Wishing he was dead was just bad form. You're great at being a shock jock to emphasize points that need to be made but that was not a point worth hearing and uncalled for. Would you prefer being left with Nimrod Nikki? How about the cackling moron Harris?
I still love you, (and I mean that with all my heart) but you ought to apologize. Publicly.
She made her post to X at 10:40 pm on February 3rd, 2024. She replied in response to a post, making the following comment and follow-up question: "Ann Coulter has been right about Trump in the past. I'd love to hear what he needs to do, in her opinion to help us take America back."
Ann's post to X blew up and she was roasted for it, with over 8k replies. Many of the comments replying to her were equally or more uncharitable.
I love you, Ann, and genuinely understand how upset you are. I'm upset too. But we have to work with what we have. I think you could get a lot more accomplished for our cause if you used your considerable influence and intellect to help us rather than adding gasoline to the Democrat fire trying to wipe this country out. We're all fighting for the same goal: to end the invasion and preserve America. The comment just makes you sound like a typical unhinged Democrat.
What Ann meant is that Trump will most likely be once more pressured by the Deep State into not fulfilling most if not all of his promises; thus in order to swiftly save the moribund republic, it would be preferable to have a Republican president that will truly implement radical changes at the federal level so as to stop the invasion and start the mass deportations.
She answered in jest that with the obvious meaning that if he were to die and he was no longer candidate someone better would have a chance to become President and steer the Ship of State.
She did not wish him dead; she used hyperbolic wit to imply that Trump cannot and will not take America back.
Sadly, it's a waste of time explaining the obvious to people like Abram. They lack the intelligence to recognize when a person (like Ann in this example) is joking & using hyperbolic wit. Instead, their overly-literal minds get all their "information" from fake-news websites pushing crackpot conspiracy-theories...
Oh, I thought you had a legitimate source or proof, as in that she seriously (not flippantly) "wished" him to be unalive in one of her articles. Your "example" hardly qualifies as such. ("The Gateway Pundit," which Wikipedia refers to as "an American far-right fake news website," one that "is known for publishing falsehoods, hoaxes, and conspiracy theories." Yep, sounds like a real credible source, all right...) And for all your verbosity, I guess you lack the perspicacity to tell the difference between Ann being serious & Ann making a joke. A lack of sense of humour being a sign of low intelligence, one concludes you're not as intelligent as you think you are. More to the point however, her comment was NOT made within the body of this article to which you were responding directly. (In other words, if you had a beef with her obvious joke, then wouldn't it make more sense to make your objection elsewhere if it's not relevant to this article?)
Please. The Gateway Pundit derived the comment from Coulter's own "X" account. Another reply to me tried to spin her words to suggest she meant other than what she said. You can believe Ann was joking. Even jesting, the comment was crude and uncharitable, and another example of her bitterness.
And yet you'd no doubt defend your beloved Orange Messiah's crude comments about grabbing a woman's private parts, right? That was "joking," right? So it's acceptable/excusable when Orange Man "jokes" but not when Ann does it? Can you say "double standard"?
Please. Take your double-standards, your fake-news website crackpottery & your sad, pathetic devotion to the Narcissistic manbaby, take 'em all & stuff 'em.
It is a long time to November and there are still many obstacles to a clear path to election day for Trump.
Real political people should be using at least an equal amount of grey matter planning the next move if Trump isn't in the running prior to election day as they do assuming his candidacy is a fete accompli.
There are still plenty of potential shitshows on the horizon.
I'm not wishing on rainbows, but don’t count a DeSantis or, God forbid, a Nikki Nitwit candidacy out.
How does that work if they manage to convict Trump in any of these “crimes”, does DeSantis just get ushered in like Michelle O will be if the democrat’s situation is dire enough?
I believe that after the first ballot, the pledged delegates are not any longer bound by party rules to vote for any specific candidate so it would seem to open things up for a brokered convention if the Trump delegates become “orphans” by convention day…not certain if they can nominate an undeclared candidate which DeSantis might now be since he ended his candidacy.
Here is a link to a Cliff Notes type of explanation…any Republican Party rules rocket scientists out there…..
You misquoted him as many have but he was stating a general fact. Sorry if it offended your rated-G ears. The whole point of the secret tape was to get folks to pearl clutch.
Reminds me of the little blonde girl you use to use with your Wednesday Twitter posts. I kept that in my phone in case I wanted to preemptively post the article before you.
Liberals don't need Trump to stop talking to defame Republicans if they can find a Republican willing to do it for them.
Like it or not (and I know you don't like it), Donald Trump is in all likelihood going to be the GOP nominee. By wishing him dead, you crapped on the hopes of more than half the country wanting desperately to be delivered from the disaster that is Joe Biden. The tens of millions of people in America who plan to vote for him, rather than sulk on Election Day, know he isn't perfect. But they also believe he genuinely loves this nation, whether or not he speaks as eloquently as some preferred he did. On Trump's worse day, he's still far and away better than Biden. And he has an even greater mandate for finishing the wall you are so bitter he didn't build. You can be a lot more helpful to him if you are kind and gracious, as I know you are capable of being. Your smile lights up the entire room and you are disarmingly charming when you want to be.
Wishing he was dead was just bad form. You're great at being a shock jock to emphasize points that need to be made but that was not a point worth hearing and uncalled for. Would you prefer being left with Nimrod Nikki? How about the cackling moron Harris?
I still love you, (and I mean that with all my heart) but you ought to apologize. Publicly.
When and where did Ann "wish him dead?" Please provide the proof of that. Show receipts.
Easily supplied: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/ann-coulter-posts-disgusting-tweet-seemingly-supporting-president/
She made her post to X at 10:40 pm on February 3rd, 2024. She replied in response to a post, making the following comment and follow-up question: "Ann Coulter has been right about Trump in the past. I'd love to hear what he needs to do, in her opinion to help us take America back."
Ann's post to X blew up and she was roasted for it, with over 8k replies. Many of the comments replying to her were equally or more uncharitable.
I love you, Ann, and genuinely understand how upset you are. I'm upset too. But we have to work with what we have. I think you could get a lot more accomplished for our cause if you used your considerable influence and intellect to help us rather than adding gasoline to the Democrat fire trying to wipe this country out. We're all fighting for the same goal: to end the invasion and preserve America. The comment just makes you sound like a typical unhinged Democrat.
What Ann meant is that Trump will most likely be once more pressured by the Deep State into not fulfilling most if not all of his promises; thus in order to swiftly save the moribund republic, it would be preferable to have a Republican president that will truly implement radical changes at the federal level so as to stop the invasion and start the mass deportations.
She answered in jest that with the obvious meaning that if he were to die and he was no longer candidate someone better would have a chance to become President and steer the Ship of State.
She did not wish him dead; she used hyperbolic wit to imply that Trump cannot and will not take America back.
Sadly, it's a waste of time explaining the obvious to people like Abram. They lack the intelligence to recognize when a person (like Ann in this example) is joking & using hyperbolic wit. Instead, their overly-literal minds get all their "information" from fake-news websites pushing crackpot conspiracy-theories...
Oh, I thought you had a legitimate source or proof, as in that she seriously (not flippantly) "wished" him to be unalive in one of her articles. Your "example" hardly qualifies as such. ("The Gateway Pundit," which Wikipedia refers to as "an American far-right fake news website," one that "is known for publishing falsehoods, hoaxes, and conspiracy theories." Yep, sounds like a real credible source, all right...) And for all your verbosity, I guess you lack the perspicacity to tell the difference between Ann being serious & Ann making a joke. A lack of sense of humour being a sign of low intelligence, one concludes you're not as intelligent as you think you are. More to the point however, her comment was NOT made within the body of this article to which you were responding directly. (In other words, if you had a beef with her obvious joke, then wouldn't it make more sense to make your objection elsewhere if it's not relevant to this article?)
Why should I have to explain the obvious?
Please. The Gateway Pundit derived the comment from Coulter's own "X" account. Another reply to me tried to spin her words to suggest she meant other than what she said. You can believe Ann was joking. Even jesting, the comment was crude and uncharitable, and another example of her bitterness.
And yet you'd no doubt defend your beloved Orange Messiah's crude comments about grabbing a woman's private parts, right? That was "joking," right? So it's acceptable/excusable when Orange Man "jokes" but not when Ann does it? Can you say "double standard"?
Please. Take your double-standards, your fake-news website crackpottery & your sad, pathetic devotion to the Narcissistic manbaby, take 'em all & stuff 'em.
Ann wasn't joking.
Would be the end of our nation
Everybody should take a chill.
It is a long time to November and there are still many obstacles to a clear path to election day for Trump.
Real political people should be using at least an equal amount of grey matter planning the next move if Trump isn't in the running prior to election day as they do assuming his candidacy is a fete accompli.
There are still plenty of potential shitshows on the horizon.
I'm not wishing on rainbows, but don’t count a DeSantis or, God forbid, a Nikki Nitwit candidacy out.
How does that work if they manage to convict Trump in any of these “crimes”, does DeSantis just get ushered in like Michelle O will be if the democrat’s situation is dire enough?
I believe that after the first ballot, the pledged delegates are not any longer bound by party rules to vote for any specific candidate so it would seem to open things up for a brokered convention if the Trump delegates become “orphans” by convention day…not certain if they can nominate an undeclared candidate which DeSantis might now be since he ended his candidacy.
Here is a link to a Cliff Notes type of explanation…any Republican Party rules rocket scientists out there…..
https://ballotpedia.org/Republican_delegate_rules,_2024
TY
YW
Thank you Ann for update on border wall. At least Governor Abbott is fighting for his state’s safety.
The lesser of two Weevils.
You misquoted him as many have but he was stating a general fact. Sorry if it offended your rated-G ears. The whole point of the secret tape was to get folks to pearl clutch.
C’mon Ann he grunts for a lot of people- it’s too late stop the train. You don’t have to get on board but don’t help block the tracks. A Dem (any Dem)
Reminds me of the little blonde girl you use to use with your Wednesday Twitter posts. I kept that in my phone in case I wanted to preemptively post the article before you.