President 'The Donald' Trump and Surprising Consequences - Mod warning in OP

Leroy42

What if they manage to damage Trump using the truth? What will you say then? Like making him look like a liar by showing him lying. Or pointing out his claims to not take any holidays when he gets to elected yet taking every weekend off so far. Or repeating the show of himself he made when lying abou his EC victory in terms of historical victories?

And care to answer my question regarding the riots in Sweden? Do you think it is the fact that they are immigrants that is causing the riots or possibly something else?

Amerika

Leroy42 wrote: »

What if they manage to damage Trump using the truth? What will you say then?

I'd say they were playing political darts. Throw a bunch of darts (mostly fake ones, of course) and hope at least one of them sticks.

Christy42

Amerika wrote: »

I wonder if CNN (dubbed the Clinton News Network during the Trump/Clinton campaign) is about to be exposed for the anti-Trump biased media source they have become? Will O’Keefe show that the organization is not interested in the truth or facts, or that their primary goal is to damage Trump? Hopefully the truth will come out as it’s time to drain the media swamp. This could get interesting.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-21/james-okeefe-about-smoke-cnn-tells-hannity-hes-set-release-hundreds-hours-newsroom-f

I'll believe it when I see it. Zerohedge is after a publication that fell hook line and sinker for the 4chan created the Steele dossier rumour. Which was hilarious given how unbelievable it was (you had multiple intelligence agencies who couldn't disprove it so at least some serious effort went into it).

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-11/how-4chan-mcfooled-john-mccain-buzzfeed-and-cia-believing-trumps-golden-showers

But hey cnn is fake news am I right?

Leroy42

Amerika wrote: »

The idea of one out of many darts sticking implies the one instance to be true.

And would that make any difference to your view of Trump? I mean, we already know his NSA lied to the VP. We already know that Trump had a history of lying (Trump university) so the probablility is that it will happen again.

All I am asking is that if CNN managed to show Trump had, yet again lied, would you pass this off as fake simply because CNN reported it or would you be able to be unbiased?

You keep claiming that CNN are biased but it seems to me that you carry the exact same issue

Amerika

Leroy42 wrote: »

And would that make any difference to your view of Trump? I mean, we already know his NSA lied to the VP. We already know that Trump had a history of lying (Trump university) so the probablility is that it will happen again.

All I am asking is that if CNN managed to show Trump had, yet again lied, would you pass this off as fake simply because CNN reported it or would you be able to be unbiased?

You keep claiming that CNN are biased but it seems to me that you carry the exact same issue

I expect Trump to tell untruths or stretch the truth again. All presidents do. But it depends on its magnitude, I guess... or in other words... It depends on what your definition of the word is, is.

Nody

Amerika wrote: »

Hmmm.... Riots erupt in Sweden’s capital just days after Trump comments. Can you spell V-I-N-D-I-C-A-T-I-O-N?

Can you spell the Police ramping up their local presence in the so called "no go" areas that the right like to throw around as "proof" to push back the development in them? Or do you prefer that they do it US style and let the lunatics run their own property without allowing entry for federal workers such as post men etc.? And since I doubt you've heard it yet but the total number of bullets fired where 1. Yes, you read that right during this "violent" riot a whopping total of 1 bullet was fired by the rioters and the police; how does that compare to your average low income riot in the US such as the LA riots again?

Leroy42

Amerika wrote: »

You ignore the elephant in the room... The rioting erupted in a immigrant-dominated Swedish suburb. Or was it Japanese tourists that did the rioting?

I'm not ignoring anything. You are the one putting immigrants and riots together and coming up with a single answer, without any research done to try to understand why it is happening or what caused it.

Again, you seem to be of the opinion that it is the very status if 'immigrant' that is the underlying reason. But they why where they not rioting last week? And why do other immigrants not riot? And why do non-immigrants riot?

You are making it out to be a simple linear relationship and I am stating that whilst immigrants appear to be involved, it is not the fact that they are immigrants that is the cause.

But it fits in with your worldview that everyone of a group is the same as everyone else in that group.

We have had immigrants in Ireland for years and yet very little trouble from them, certainly no more than our own citizens try to get away with.

ancapailldorcha

Low quality and off topic posts deleted. Raise the standard and keep on topic please.

26000 Elephants

Amerika wrote: »

I expect Trump to tell untruths or stretch the truth again. All presidents do. But it depends on its magnitude, I guess... or in other words... It depends on what your definition of the word is, is.

As usual verbal gymnastics is all you can offer.

He is a liar. He has deliberately defrauded people. He discriminated against minorities. He is a failed business man, humiliatingly needing his father to write him a cheque to save his ass.

Have you absolutely no regrets about hitching your wagon to someone so contemptuous?

Christy42

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN161243

Never understood things like this. In fairness to Trump kit was already in the courts but I still find the position baffling.

Who does it hurt to let people use a different bathroom? Seems like a victory for the Bannon wing over the Kushner/ Ivanka wing.

Zubeneschamali

Republicans generally have been freaking out over Trans people using toilets for some time.

This is a signal to the base rather than anything - the President doesn't actually have the power to do anything about toilets in schools.

Professor Moriarty

demfad wrote: »

Would you mind stopping posting junk from conspiracy theory websites?
If you have any substantiation to the claim it would help for instance CNN broadcasting something patently untrue or exagerrating greatly.
I think you will find as with all networks that a disproportionate amount of time was spend investigating staggerred Wikilinks email dumps and not Trumps Russian and dodgy business connections.

52% of Americans trust the media more than Trump while 37% trust Trump more than the media. Got to get that 37% figure down so that we Lizard People can take over the world.

johnnyskeleton

Mod note:

I've had to delete a number of posts that were discussing moderation or were simple link dumps.

Mr.Micro

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Republicans generally have been freaking out over Trans people using toilets for some time.

This is a signal to the base rather than anything - the President doesn't actually have the power to do anything about toilets in schools.

When it comes to legislation that is progressive and normal like EPA regulations, climate change, Trans gender toilet use etc, laws that protect the environment, pollution control, and the current case of trans gender toilet use, it can be guaranteed that Trump will repeal it. So he is intent on going backwards instead of forward.

demfad

Amerika wrote: »

I expect Trump to tell untruths or stretch the truth again. All presidents do. But it depends on its magnitude, I guess... or in other words... It depends on what your definition of the word is, is.

Magnitude?

Trump has made 132 false or misleading claims in 33 days: 4 a day.
Would that meet your definition of excessive lying?
Source

Zubeneschamali

Mr.Micro wrote: »

When it comes to legislation that is progressive and normal like EPA regulations, climate change, Trans gender toilet use etc, laws that protect the environment, pollution control, and the current case of trans gender toilet use, it can be guaranteed that Trump will repeal it.

As president, Trump does not have the power to repeal laws.

Mr.Micro

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

As president, Trump does not have the power to repeal laws.

I should have put that better. No you are right, good thing too. His administration has currently revoked Obama guidelines on transgender toilet use.

Zubeneschamali

Mr.Micro wrote: »

No you are right, good thing too. His administration has currently revoked Obama guidelines on transgender toilet use.

Yes, and Obama similarly had no way to change the law, he just issued "guidance" which was appealed to the courts, and which Trump has now revoked. This stuff is signalling, not law.

Don't get me wrong, I like Obama's signals, and Trump's are abhorrent - but no actual laws or rights are being changed.

demfad

<snip - we already have a thread about President Trump>

This was a thread about how he was elected which is an important distinction. Ill leave my contribution there.

the_pen_turner

demfad wrote: »

<snip>

Trump had muted going for president since the 1980's. Many took it is a joke but somehow the conditions were right or made right in 2016 for him to successfully win the Republican primaries and then defeat Hilary Clinton for the presidency. By any count his victory was an historical moment in US politics.
What were the conditions that made this possible? Who were the people behind him and how did they influence and shape his route to victory? What type of people voted for him and why? Useful to have a comprehensive discussion on all aspects that made this stunning win in the electoral college possible.

He said all the right things to the right voters at the right time.
He was IP again at a very poor opponent. She did herself no favors.

demfad

the_pen_turner wrote: »

He said all the right things to the right voters at the right time.
He was IP again at a very poor opponent. She did herself no favors.

But is this 'Trump was the best of two poor candidates' view really accurate?
Hillary Clinton had to defend herself from daily dumps of hacked and leaked emails from wikileaks that really shed no light on her in a bad way. The media tied itself up with trawling through these. In the last month Donald Trump himself mentioned wikileaks over 140 times. The killer blow of the re-opening of the FBI email inquiry was outside her control. What could she have done here?

the_pen_turner

demfad wrote: »

But is this 'Trump was the best of two poor candidates' view really accurate?
Hillary Clinton had to defend herself from daily dumps of hacked and leaked emails from wikileaks that really shed no light on her in a bad way. The media tied itself up with trawling through these. In the last month Donald Trump himself mentioned wikileaks over 140 times. The killer blow of the re-opening of the FBI email inquiry was outside her control. What could she have done here?

Not a lot she could do.
These elections are about who can fling the most dirt.
Trump won that battle because Hilary was getting it from all side. All he had to do was keep pointing it out.

The leaks made Hilary look like she was betraying her country

Professor Moriarty

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Yes, and Obama similarly had no way to change the law, he just issued "guidance" which was appealed to the courts, and which Trump has now revoked. This stuff is signalling, not law.

Don't get me wrong, I like Obama's signals, and Trump's are abhorrent - but no actual laws or rights are being changed.

While the President can't directly enforce the policy Obama threaten sanction if public schools didn't adhere to the policy. Specifically, it was implied that funding would be cut. No doubt Trump could apply similar pressure.

Mr.Micro

the_pen_turner wrote: »

Not a lot she could do.
These elections are about who can fling the most dirt.
Trump won that battle because Hilary was getting it from all side. All he had to do was keep pointing it out.

The leaks made Hilary look like she was betraying her country

Everyone knew what they were getting with Trump....brash, vulgar, common, bigot, racist, sexist etc. Clinton on the other hand promoted this quite arrogance and correctness, when she is anything but. She had a few skeletons in her cupboard.

NoCrackHaving

Also the lowest voter turnout since 1996 probably played a role.

the_pen_turner

Trump is a lot of things but he is open about all his shortcomings. What you see is what you get.

Hilary is false and all for the camera

realitykeeper

The only reason Trump did not win the popular vote was because his supporters were rural where things are not nearby whereas Clinton`s were urban where everything is within easy reach. I would have supported neither.

Yourself isit

NoCrackHaving wrote: »

Also the lowest voter turnout since 1996 probably played a role.

That's a symptom not a cause. It was people who didn't like Trump but had no time for hillary.

They probably voted for Obama previously.

the_pen_turner

NoCrackHaving wrote: »

Also the lowest voter turnout since 1996 probably played a role.

What's the breakdown of voters.
Did more lower class vote or higher class over other years

Ash.J.Williams

NoCrackHaving wrote: »

Also the lowest voter turnout since 1996 probably played a role.

yes if all the people crying in the streets about trump actually voted....