Donald Trump

Samaris

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Out of curiosity, I looked up rates of adult obesity in each US state, then party affiliation in each state, and finally how many voted for Romney in 2012.

Er, can we also look up how many people express a preference for Apple over PC compared to party affiliation and voting for Obama too?

PopePalpatine

Samaris wrote: »

Er, can we also look up how many people express a preference for Apple over PC compared to party affiliation and voting for Obama too?

The difference is no-one's saying Hillary's policies will lead to people doing reckless things to their computers/Apple products because the government will take care of any consequences of that.

InTheTrees

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

I'll oppose any kind of socialised healthcare, because people are too stupid and self absorbed to exercise the self responsibility required to make it work.

Its a very old and tired argument that reforming US healthcare equals (dreaded) socialism.

Its got to be reformed. Preferably expanding on the Obamacare system already implemented.

Trump's just rehashing McCains ideas.

Save

Billy86

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

I mean. Trump raped a 13 year old. It doesn't get much worse than that, in fairness. So why isn't it all over the media?

It's because of the right wing, pro Trump media bias in basically every news channel and media outlet in the world, they're all in his pocket. Nothing you link to or say will prove otherwise, all the media outlets belong to Trump.

Samaris

Billy86 wrote: »

It's because of the right wing, pro Trump media bias in basically every news channel and media outlet in the world, they're all in his pocket. Nothing you link to or say will prove otherwise, all the media outlets belong to Trump.

Er...this may be true on Planet Zog, but on Earth, it's ...pretty not...true. Trump's spent the last week blasting the media for being mean to him (they have the outright gall to write down down what he's saying, I mean, who does that, right?). The media have been mostly responding asking in op-eds if the guy is actually certifiable.

The only way one could call the media pro-Trump (bar outliers) is by suggesting that they're focussing on Trump and not bothering to talk as much about Clinton because frankly, Trump is way more interesting in his sheer bat**** craziness. Clinton's just a politician.

Billy86

Samaris wrote: »

Er...this may be true on Planet Zog, but on Earth, it's ...pretty not...true. Trump's spent the last week blasting the media for being mean to him (they have the outright gall to write down down what he's saying, I mean, who does that, right?). The media have been mostly responding asking in op-eds if the guy is actually certifiable.

The only way one could call the media pro-Trump (bar outliers) is by suggesting that they're focussing on Trump and not bothering to talk as much about Clinton because frankly, Trump is way more interesting in his sheer bat**** craziness. Clinton's just a politician.

Nah, was just applying the Trump fan base no-logic, no-reason approach in reverse.

It's interesting how they claim the media will jump on Trump over 'anything' are eager to 'get at him' etc, yet... they haven't reported on the case for raping a 13 year old child. Typically the 'anti Trump' media bias amounts to... them repeating what he said. Trump fans don't typically seem very fond of the media repeating what Trump says.

Ericdravancrow

Anyone ever read Stephen king's "The Dead Zone" ... Trump reminds me of the politician in it, he is destined to bring the world into war.

KingBrian2

Billy86 wrote: »

It's because of the right wing, pro Trump media bias in basically every news channel and media outlet in the world, they're all in his pocket. Nothing you link to or say will prove otherwise, all the media outlets belong to Trump.

Yeah but they are calling him deranged, unfit to govern the country and a scumbag. Not the sort of media attention anyone would court.

B_Wayne

KingBrian2 wrote: »

Yeah but they are calling him deranged, unfit to govern the country and a scumbag. Not the sort of media attention anyone would court.

He clearly has courted such attention....

Exeggcute

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdYRN8Clddw

CMOTDibbler

Exeggcute wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdYRN8Clddw

Oh the horror!

Rainman16

Trump has crossed the line. Finally republicans are turning their back on him.

B0jangles

Donald Trump Spokeperson Katrina Pierson said on CNN yesterday that Barack Obama brought the US into Afghanistan.

(For those with short memories, that happened while GW Bush was president.)

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/trump-spox-katrina-pierson-we-werent-in-afghanistan-until-obama-decided-to-go-in/

Skip forward to 2:15 in the embeddded video to hear her clearly say this.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/katrina-pierson-attributes-false-afghanistan-comment-to-audio-disruptions-and-echoes/

A few hours later she blames what she said on "audio disruptions and echoes".

remember, she's not some random Trump-supporter, she's his bloody spokesperson.

B_Wayne

I'm sure we'll get somebody who will claim there was some logic to her point...

CMOTDibbler

B_Wayne wrote: »

I'm sure we'll get somebody who will claim there was some logic to her point...

No, we'll get some whataboutery link to a spurious article about Hillary Clinton which on reading will turn out to be completely unfounded at which point the poster will run away only to resurface about twenty posts later with some other dodgy piece of journalism.

Rinse and repeat...

Samaris

Back when Bush was in charge, Trump, on air, on the record, blamed him for ISIS too. :pac:

Billy86

B_Wayne wrote: »

I'm sure we'll get somebody who will claim there was some logic to her point...

Nah, after the election this at least gives the perfect excuse for MRAs everywhere, "f***ing dumb c**t woman opens her mouth just once, and costs Donald Trump his presidency to another c**t b*tch".

Renegade Mechanic

Exeggcute wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdYRN8Clddw

Just remember, you're not posting to convince anyone here - there's literally no point - but anything you post might cause anyone else wandering by to read and start questioning things. That's the aim. Aim for the others. You'll only lose your mind aiming at the regulars

Billy86 wrote: »

Nah, after the election this at least gives the perfect excuse for MRAs everywhere, "f***ing dumb c**t woman opens her mouth just once, and costs Donald Trump his presidency to another c**t b*tch".

Clinton lacks the depth and warmth to be one and dogs are considerably friendlier than whatever she'll achieve in the other so "c**t b*tch" is something of a compliment.

Billy86

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

Just remember, you're not posting to convince anyone here - there's literally no point - but anything you post might cause anyone else wandering by to read and start questioning things. That's the aim. Aim for the others. You'll only lose your mind aiming at the regulars



Clinton lacks the depth and warmth to be one and dogs are considerably friendlier than whatever she'll achieve in the other so "c**t b*tch" is something of a compliment.

Hahaha, 'just focus on swaying those who might not have seen the common talking points thoroughly debunked already... we can still get to them!!'

Classic.

Donald Trump

Fup the fup off

Renegade Mechanic

Billy86 wrote: »

Hahaha, 'just focus on swaying those who might not have seen the common talking points thoroughly debunked already... we can still get to them!!'

Classic.

Right back at ya
No matter what ye say/deny/ignore, Clinton is worse. If i was a big enough bollox, I'd actually hope she got in, just so you'd learn the hard way, when your taxes go up to facilitate the law suits leveled at the Irish govt for losses sustained by tobacco companies by forcing them to ruin their packaging with warnings and banning advertisements/sponsorships.
Or, you know, when your taxes go up to facilitate the increasing costs of healthcare due to the Irish govt stepping around legal action by allowing tobacco companies the same liberties as, say, alcoholic companies.

B0jangles

Every 'point' you've raised thus far has been easily and swiftly debunked with what most of us like to call 'facts' and 'evidence'; the last thing you talked about was healthcare in the US, which you clearly know nothing about. TBH I'd be embarassed if I was had been shown so repeatedly to be ignorant of the basic facts under discussion but I guess a brass neck is the strongest form of armour.

TL/DR : Scarlet for you RM

Edit: Latest news from The Donald's twitter account is that he's super-cross that the media keep reporting the words that he says:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/764803159692836864

:mad::mad::mad:

The first response is just great though:

https://twitter.com/jackschofield/status/764809459440967680

PopePalpatine

Does anyone hear a shrieking frog while reading those Tweets?

Renegade Mechanic

B0jangles wrote: »

Every 'point' you've raised thus far has been easily and swiftly debunked with what most of us like to call 'facts' and 'evidence'; the last thing you talked about was healthcare in the US, which you clearly know nothing about. TBH I'd be embarassed if I was had been shown so repeatedly to be ignorant of the basic facts under discussion but I guess a brass neck is the strongest form of armour.

TL/DR : Scarlet for you RM

You said the US spends about 9 grand per head on healthcare, without going into where that money comes from. Top tip, if it comes from the government, you're paying. Which is fine - society is held by the contributions of it's members. But the contributions need to go to more responsible places.

You can "be scarleh" all you want, you cannot deny that forcing down the healthcare cost isn't going to alleviate the problem of irresponsible people. You cannot deny that forcing down the amount of money health care professionals charge will simply make them leave.

You need to adress the people and the environment (food additives) causing the health problems. You are right to be scarlet. But over your own beliefs that you can simply keep caring for people without ever telling them to cop on to themselves.

B0jangles

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Does anyone hear a shrieking frog while reading those Tweets?

I used to, but now I can't help hearing him as Zapp Brannigan:

http://kotaku.com/zapp-brannigans-voice-actor-reading-stupid-donald-trump-1785180841

Renegade Mechanic

B0jangles wrote: »

TL/DR : Scarlet for you RM

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/what-is-ttip-and-six-reasons-why-the-answer-should-scare-you-9779688.html

6 Democracy
TTIP’s biggest threat to society is its inherent assault on democracy. One of the main aims of TTIP is the introduction of Investor-State Dispute Settlements (ISDS), which allow companies to sue governments if those governments’ policies cause a loss of profits. In effect it means unelected transnational corporations can dictate the policies of democratically elected governments.

:pac:

Similar to how the EU works, only worse. I had myself a hearty chuckle at the irony of Brussels holding back a little from pushing through due to their perceive lack of transparency from the yanks, it must be said..

B0jangles

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

You said the US spends about 9 grand per head on healthcare, without going into where that money comes from. Top tip, if it comes from the government, you're paying. Which is fine - society is held by the contributions of it's members. But the contributions need to go to more responsible places.

You can "be scarleh" all you want, you cannot deny that forcing down the healthcare cost isn't going to alleviate the problem of irresponsible people. You cannot deny that forcing down the amount of money health care professionals charge will simply make them leave.

You need to adress the people and the environment (food additives) causing the health problems. You are right to be scarlet. But over your own beliefs that you can simply keep caring for people without ever telling them to cop on to themselves.

Do you understand why the $9000 per head of population is so grotesque? The US government is paying vast sums and the majority of the population receive no benefit from it.

The charges are artifically inflated by the for-profit hospitals so they can strike lucrative deals with health insurers. Uninsured people cannot negotiate like a big business so they get hit with insane medical bills.

Did you see the bit where Medicare would be billed $10,000 for a treatment whereas an uninsured person could be billed $120,000 for the same treatment in one hospital?

Do yourself a favour and google "chargemaster" to learn something about how medical bills are calculated by hospitals in the US. (It's pretty awful.)

Blaming irresponsible people for the cost of healthcare in the US is just really really ignorant.

RDM_83 again

B0jangles wrote: »

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/

Come on, you're just regurgitating the same aul crap that's been floating around for 30 years, try coming up with something even a litle bit original.

Snopes gets quiet a lot but I am curious how much of an ideological bias there is to the site, I'm not saying that they outright lie but reading that was interesting.
For example the the site says that

she did not claim she knew the defendant to be guilty

as a FALSE

however in the body of the article it states

rather musing about how elements of it that might ordinarily have supported the prosecution worked in the defendant's favor (i.e., observing that the defendant's passing a polygraph test had "forever destroyed her faith" in that technology):

If the person your defending passing a polygraph test destroys your faith in the technology thats clearly saying you very strong believe them to be guilty.

This is what I mean about a possible Bias of presentation, Yes she didn't know the defendant was guilty so they are technically correct with the FALSE thing there but a slight differences of phrasing to "she strongly believed the defendant was guilty,( enough to change her opinion on lie detector technology) " it would be true.
It seems a bit shifty the way they have presented at least that point.

B0jangles

I take your point about Snopes, but realistically so many people want to be able to say that Snopes is totally biased in one way or another that it would be completely self-destructive of them to actually show any overt bias. A single provable instance of them doing so would probably be the end of them.

Billy86

Renegade Mechanic wrote: »

Right back at ya
No matter what ye say/deny/ignore, Clinton is worse. If i was a big enough bollox, I'd actually hope she got in, just so you'd learn the hard way, when your taxes go up to facilitate the law suits leveled at the Irish govt for losses sustained by tobacco companies by forcing them to ruin their packaging with warnings and banning advertisements/sponsorships.
Or, you know, when your taxes go up to facilitate the increasing costs of healthcare due to the Irish govt stepping around legal action by allowing tobacco companies the same liberties as, say, alcoholic companies.

Yeah, about those two points...

Time for a quick reality check. Despite the hysteria from the political class and the media, smoking doesn't kill. In fact, 2 out of every three smokers does not die from a smoking related illness.
- Mike Pence, 2001

Alcohol is a much worse problem than cigarettes.
- Donald Trump, founder of Trump Winery, Trump Whisky and Trump Vodka.

Like you said, I'm a complete waste of your time. I know a con when I see one.