Poll: Even if Russia collusion proven, Trump voters want him to stay

[JA]

democrats are so full of hate. they talking about "russian" collusion, like every single russian was involve in that. imagine if republicans do that for africans or latinos. dems can't even say radical islam when their lovely muslim terrorists are in question.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Why waste poll on something like this?

American politics is like sports. It's only pass interference when the other team does it.

[SNJ1985]

1. Collusion is not a federal crime.

''Collusion, even if it were to be established, isn’t a crime. You have to find something that actually violates the federal criminal statutes. I don’t think they’re even close to that.” - liberal Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz in a recent appearance on Fox News

2. History is full of examples of people colluding with foreign powers to defeat domestic opposition. The idea that it is unpatriotic to get another country to help you defeat people you consider damaging to the country is certainly a strange one, especially in a country that only exists because a bunch of rebels got France and Spain to help them drive out the forces of the country that established the colonies from which it was formed. If Hillary had enlisted a foreign power to help her win, I would have at least understood the motivation behind it; and I would have considered her an enemy of the nation because of her ideology (as I do now), not because another country helped her.

I say all of this as someone who supported a right-wing third-party candidate last year and didn't vote for Trump, but now supports him and wants the forces opposing him (i.e. the coalition of liberals, leftists and globalist ''conservatives'') to lose.

[Beet]

1. Collusion is not a federal crime.

''Collusion, even if it were to be established, isn’t a crime. You have to find something that actually violates the federal criminal statutes. I don’t think they’re even close to that.” - liberal Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz in a recent appearance on Fox News

Aiding and abetting (18 USC 2) a foreign national to contribute any “thing of value” to a campaign would be a crime (52 USC 30121).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sure but no one would have labeled the founding fathers as patriotic members of the British Empire; they were rebelling against it. No matter what you think of whether that rebellion was justified, it was a rebellion and in the eyes of the British the revolutionaries were rightly not considered loyal citizens. Nor would the founding fathers have wanted to be labeled themselves as such. Now if the Trump group wants to split itself off from the United States and form their own country that can be discussed; but that’s not what they are claiming to want. They claim to be nationalistic Americans and this is wrong.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Wait, so you can’t disagree on what’s best for the nation without being an enemy of the nation? You realize that the entire premise of democratic politics is that not everyone has to have the same opinion to be a loyal citizen right? Otherwise, what’s the point of the First Amendment?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What positions you took in the past or take today are immaterial. All that matters is whether your arguments hold up to reason.

[Inmate Trump]

So disgraceful that some would support a president who has conspired against the United States and committed treason (as in this scenario, collusion has been proven).

[SNJ1985]

Wait, so you can’t disagree on what’s best for the nation without being an enemy of the nation?

Everyone views their opposition that way, but only some people are honest enough to admit it. I would not expect a leftist to view me as ''just somebody who has different ideas about what's best for the nation'' as opposed to an enemy.

[Beet]

Wait, so you can’t disagree on what’s best for the nation without being an enemy of the nation?

Everyone views their opposition that way, but only some people are honest enough to admit it. I would not expect a leftist to view me as ''just somebody who has different ideas about what's best for the nation'' as opposed to an enemy.

I don’t view the opposition that way. If what you said were true, anyone who controls the military could just stage a coup and take over the country. After all, everyone who disagrees with them is an enemy, so they don’t deserve any rights. The entire basis of settling disputes via elections in the first place doesn’t logically coexist with your worldview. My hope is for a less polarized politics where people come together more as one nation.

[SNJ1985]

My hope is for a less polarized politics where people come together more as one nation.

Sorry, but that is never going to happen. There is no reason for people who have nothing in common to ''come together as one''. Conservative America and liberal America should just split into two countries.

[AtorBoltox]

An opposing political party is not an internal enemy you dunce

Are you telling me that you don't view Republicans as enemies? Why wouldn't you?

They're political opponents, they're not enemies of the nation. Good god, what is wrong with you?

[SNJ1985]

Conservative Americans and liberal Americans aren't merely people who disagree with each other. They're people who despise each other and view each other as threats.

Breaking America up into two countries is wiser than trying to force two halves of a population who have nothing in common to share the same state while being locked in perpetual conflict.

[AtorBoltox]

Evolution of GOP spin on Russiagate
Step 1- "It's fake news!"
Step 2-"Collusion isn't even illegal!"
Step 3-"Let's split up the country??"

[heatcharger]

Conservative Americans and liberal Americans aren't merely people who disagree with each other. They're people who despise each other and view each other as threats.

Breaking America up into two countries is wiser than trying to force two halves of a population who have nothing in common to share the same state while being locked in perpetual conflict.

This is your brain on Mark Dice and Alex Jones.

[pbrower2a]

1. Collusion is not a federal crime.

''Collusion, even if it were to be established, isn’t a crime. You have to find something that actually violates the federal criminal statutes. I don’t think they’re even close to that.” - liberal Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz in a recent appearance on Fox News

No, but conspiracy  to commit a crime even if the crime does not happen is itself a crime.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

War involves alliances. In a war involving conflicting  authorities claiming legitimacy, then the question is usually who wins the war. It's clear that had the Axis won the war, Pierre Laval and his clique would have executed Charles de Gaulle. Completed war often defines who is right. It is a rarity that the winning side gives a general amnesty to the losing side (as in the American Civil War).

I expect that the legal process will resolve everything in the end even if that should imply nullification of the 2016 election. The Olympic Committee can strip a medal from someone who cheats to win a medal. The NCAA got the University of Michigan to forfeit wins that involved ineligible student-athletes on some of its basketball teams that seemed to have won championships.

In Michigan, people who get government jobs with the aid of forged or fraudulent educational credentials lose their jobs and any vesting of their pensions -- and may be imprisoned. So it is for claiming completion of a degree that one never achieved, or getting a degree from  a non-existent, unaccredited, or fraudulently-accredited institution. Resume fraud, once detected, is cause for immediate firing in most businesses.

If one gets illegal income, one can lose it. Accessing secreted funds from a crime once one completes a prison term is itself a crime.    

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A court of law, most likely the Supreme Court, could in theory nullify the result of a fraudulent election if the participants have cheated or allowed others to cheat on behalf of the winner.  This would be an extreme sanction. I do not predict this; such would be the result of a coup.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

As phrased, collusion by the campaign, then yes. If Trump himself were involved, then no.

[Frodo]

The fact that an overwhelming majority of Republicans throughout the country remain loyal to Trump despite the fact that he is a direct threat to American democracy (and they likely know it), and are perfectly fine with hostile foreign governments interfering in our elections so long as they benefit is far more disturbing than that we have a wannabe strongman at the head of our government with the nuclear trigger at his fingertips. 

What does that say about them? 

[Ye We Can]

Conservative Americans and liberal Americans aren't merely people who disagree with each other. They're people who despise each other and view each other as threats.

Breaking America up into two countries is wiser than trying to force two halves of a population who have nothing in common to share the same state while being locked in perpetual conflict.

Wow where are my projection memes

[NeederNodder]

These polls are redundant. Asking the people who voted for the guy in office less than a year since the election is like watching paint dry. It's meaningless at the moment.

[All Along The Watchtower]

All Republicans (and many Democrats) should be removed from office (normal)

[Badger]

Yes, he won the election. Who is going to let whiners steal the election?

Why would a President Pence, the Vice President chosen by over 300 Republican electors, be stealing the election?

There is no honor among thieves, and certainly none among attempted thieves of elections.

If the loser party of the 2014 and 2016 elections is permitted to steal an election, they are going to keep doing it again and again. So why would real America let them do it?

You're trolling ceased to be funny a long time ago.

Seriously. You haven't posted a remotely serious post in years. Do you honestly not have something better to do with your ample free time living in your mother's basement?

[Badger]

In the words of Game of Thrones' Yara Greyjoy, are you the dumbest c**t alive?

I don't think that all I have to do to win an argument is make a reference to a fantasy TV show that has no relevance to the topic at hand and/or hurl an ad hominem at my opponent, so no.

No, it's entirely appropriate considering your argument sucks THAT badly.

[8 Dems control senate]

Of course. Working with Russia was what we wanted.

At least as long as it is helping us. And btw, Lincoln was also "colluding" with Russia, since Russia supported Yankees in civil war (as did France). That whole Russia story is not as bad as many believe, it is made up by liberal media and a biased so-called special counsel.

But Trump would have won anyway, because enthusiasm was on our side and voters had enough of O.

[SNJ1985]

I don't think that all I have to do to win an argument is make a reference to a fantasy TV show that has no relevance to the topic at hand and/or hurl an ad hominem at my opponent, so no.

No, it's entirely appropriate considering your argument sucks THAT badly.

At least it actually qualifies as an argument.

[Sirius_]

Of course. Working with Russia was what we wanted.

At least as long as it is helping us. And btw, Lincoln was also "colluding" with Russia, since Russia supported Yankees in civil war (as did France). That whole Russia story is not as bad as many believe, it is made up by liberal media and a biased so-called special counsel.

But Trump would have won anyway, because enthusiasm was on our side and voters had enough of O.

Even though Trump lost the popular vote and Obama had high approval ratings by the end of his presidency...

[Badger]

I don't think that all I have to do to win an argument is make a reference to a fantasy TV show that has no relevance to the topic at hand and/or hurl an ad hominem at my opponent, so no.

No, it's entirely appropriate considering your argument sucks THAT badly.

At least it actually qualifies as an argument.

My bad. You're right. It qualifies as feverish ravings without an ounce of foresight, let alone love of country.

[RINO Tom]

Conservative Americans and liberal Americans aren't merely people who disagree with each other. They're people who despise each other and view each other as threats.

Breaking America up into two countries is wiser than trying to force two halves of a population who have nothing in common to share the same state while being locked in perpetual conflict.

There are tens of thousands of conservatives and liberals in every single state in this union, and most love the states they live in.  Your statement sounds small-minded and dumb.