Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

autumn2018

Beto o rourke foe example is trending on twitter

Pelvis

Good Christ there aren't enough facepalm pictures on the internet that could possibly come close to expressing how I feel after reading the last couple of pages.

2 Scoops

I'd trust Warren's DNA test results about as much as you lot trust Trump's doctor results.

everlast75

2 Scoops wrote: »

I'd trust Warren's DNA test results about as much as you lot trust Trump's doctor results.

Why?

Did she write her DNA results up?

Professor Moriarty

2 Scoops wrote: »

I'd trust Warren's DNA test results about as much as you lot trust Trump's doctor results.

Perhaps if the President of the United States didn't continuously and churlishly mock a Senator then we wouldn't be having this conversation. I trust my eyes and ears. Trump is a disgrace to the Office of POTUS and the USA.

2 Scoops

everlast75 wrote: »

Why?

Did she write her DNA results up?

Did Trump write up his doctors results? What's your point.

pixelburp

2 Scoops wrote: »

I'd trust Warren's DNA test results about as much as you lot trust Trump's doctor results.

"You lot"?

I don't think anyone here trusts or distrusts the DNA results. No, I'll go one further: I doubt anyone actually cares whether Warren is part Native American or not. The story is in what it means, or what it is could be saying from a political POV - ie, she may be making attempts to close possible doors or angles as part of housekeeping towards a shot at the 2020 nomination.

If it is just a hit back at Trump's jibes, then it's showing a weird pettiness and thin skin I'd hitherto not ascribe to the woman (even if I think it was unwise to do the test at all). So if not that, it makes sense outlets are going to be all over any news involving Warren, Booker, Harris, Sanders etc. and what 2020 implications they might have.

Even though it's down to Trumps nicknames, this story isn't about Trump as such.

everlast75

2 Scoops wrote: »

Did Trump write up his doctors results? What's your point.

Yes.

My point is simple enough. He lied through his teeth and got his "doctor" to as well.

"Actually, his blood pressure, 110/65, and laboratory results were astonishingly excellent. His physical strength and stamina are extraordinary," the letter said. "If elected, Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency."

Only an utter idiot would believe that.

Franz Von Peppercorn

I’m probably 1/1024 Native American and I’ve never even visited.

If this worked the other way, had trump claimed Native American heritage and had a dna result given a result like this the partisan belief system would go the other way. Statistically he’s likely to have that much Native American heritage. That’s standard in the US. There was a small amount of intermarriage.

Warren is ok, I think from what I’ve read or seen from her. But this was just stupid of her.

Franz Von Peppercorn

I mean you wouldn’t even get onto the jack charlton Irish team with 1/1024 Irish ancestry.

(Well, maybe Tony Cascarino)

dr.fuzzenstein

2 Scoops wrote: »

I'd trust Warren's DNA test results about as much as you lot trust Trump's doctor results.

Can please post up your research on how the tests where flawed or incorrect, oh wise old sage and not at all some 15 year old internet troll?
If you're not 15 I apologise, just going by your general reasoning and quality of your posts.

pixelburp

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

I’m probably 1/1024 Native American and I’ve never even visited.

If this worked the other way, had trump claimed Native American heritage and had a dna result given a result like this the partisan belief system would go the other way. Statistically he’s likely to have that much Native American heritage. That’s standard in the US. There was a small amount of intermarriage.

Warren is ok, I think from what I’ve read or seen from her. But this was just stupid of her.

IIRC, the Trump family didn't arrive in the US 'til the 1880s or thereabouts, so by American standards they're probably quite 'pure', so to speak.

On the DNA test, Warren had been needled by Trump for ages before today, it had been a pretty consistent nickname for the longest time. Assuming she hasn't finally snapped as some grand "I'll put you in your place" move, then it's a more interesting story as a potential 2020 manoeuvre.

2 Scoops

pixelburp wrote: »

I don't think anyone here trusts or distrusts the DNA results. No, I'll go one further: I doubt anyone actually cares whether Warren is part Native American or not.

I didn't until I looked into her past.

https://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/05/fordham-piece-called-warren-harvard-laws-first-woman-of-color-123526

Fordham piece called Warren Harvard Law's 'first woman of color'

"There are few women of color who hold important positions in the academy, Fortune 500 companies, or other prominent fields or industries," the piece says. "This is not inconsequential. Diversifying these arenas, in part by adding qualified women of color to their ranks, remains important for many reasons. For one, there are scant women of color as role models. In my three years at Stanford Law School, there were no professors who were women of color. Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

She pulled the same stunt during her time at Pennsylvania law school, winning awards for being a "minority".

Sweetemotion

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Can please post up your research on how the tests where flawed or incorrect, oh wise old sage and not at all some 15 year old internet troll?
If you're not 15 I apologise, just going by your general reasoning.

Ahh C'mon. Even if the tests are correct. It's still a load of BS, you probably have more Indian DNA than Warren.

batgoat

2 Scoops wrote: »

I didn't until I looked into her past.

https://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/05/fordham-piece-called-warren-harvard-laws-first-woman-of-color-123526

Fordham piece called Warren Harvard Law's 'first woman of color'

"There are few women of color who hold important positions in the academy, Fortune 500 companies, or other prominent fields or industries," the piece says. "This is not inconsequential. Diversifying these arenas, in part by adding qualified women of color to their ranks, remains important for many reasons. For one, there are scant women of color as role models. In my three years at Stanford Law School, there were no professors who were women of color. Harvard Law School hired its first woman of color, Elizabeth Warren, in 1995."

She pulled the same stunt during her time at Pennsylvania law school, winning awards for being a "minority".

She declared that she was a part of a minority because grandparents told them as much. It happens in lots of families, particularly with older family members, sometimes they are inaccurate but in this instance, it turns out they were accurate.

There's no indication that the native American thing ever gave her an advantage in terms of getting her a job and this has been looked into. Can you provide a source for these minority awards that you're claiming she won? Here's my sources, including politifact looking at credibility of test.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2018/oct/15/elizabeth-warrens-dna-test-what-it-can-and-cant-te/

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2018/09/01/did-claiming-native-american-heritage-actually-help-elizabeth-warren-get-ahead-but-complicated/wUZZcrKKEOUv5Spnb7IO0K/story.html

pixelburp

2 Scoops wrote: »

I didn't until I looked into her past.

https://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/05/fordham-piece-called-warren-harvard-laws-first-woman-of-color-123526

Honestly, I'm not defending or contesting that Warren's claims of Native American heritage might be stretching credulity, merely responding to the initial suggestion from others that it was some attempt to curry votes - not least of which, this theory is a bit daft in a state 538 says is as good as a safe bet can ever be. Or glib talk about "you lot". Looking beyond the obvious farce of it all - though the results do still show a heritage, however minuscule - there's a motive to read that isn't simply some Trump rebuttal (cos clearly, it'd be a rank terrible one, against a man who doesn't care about 'truth' - see the earlier 60 Minutes exchange, or his opining on the Saudi assassination for that). And that other motive is far more interesting than quibbling over DNA tests.

Christy42

Anthracite wrote: »

Trump already rolling over for the Saudis. Quelle surprise.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-45863334

Mr Trump addressed snatched questions from reporters over helicopter engine noise at the White House, describing King Salman's denial as "very, very strong".

"It sounded to me like maybe these could have been rogue killers," he added. "Who knows?"

My 2 year-old's denials that he was eating the icecream that was all over his face were very, very strong. Clearly someone else put it there.

Trump is an idiot, or thinks his fans or idiots. It has to be one or the other.

Ah yeah. Sure they already rolled over in the recent UN resolution on the death penalty.

And when he overturned a ban on selling arms to Saudi Arabia. A state he had promised to be hard on (that one was dropped pretty quick and quietly).

MikeyTaylor

What is Trump's political background?

2 Scoops

batgoat wrote: »

There's no indication that the native American thing ever gave her an advantage in terms of getting her a job and this has been looked into. Can you provide a source for these minority awards that you're claiming she won?

The only way we'll truly know if she gained an advantage is to travel back in time and get inside the heads of the people hiring and promoting her. ( The earlier link I posted promoted her as "Harvard's Law School first woman of color" so you cannot say with certainty that there wasn't any benefits, clearly from a diversity and social standpoint there was in the eyes of others. )

I'll recant that she won the award for solely being a minority, rather she was listed as a minority when she won it. It's entirely unethical to list yourself as a minority without any evidence. With all that said, she has no hope in 2020, Biden is up like 20 points in opinion polls compared to anyone else.

https://www.politico.com/story/2012/05/warren-cited-as-minority-at-u-penn-076200

"Facing a flap over her past claims of Native American ancestry, Elizabeth Warren was identified as a minority faculty member at the University of Pennsylvania, where the Massachusetts Senate candidate worked from 1987 to 1995, according to the Associated Press.

A committee established to review the status of minorities on the faculty of the university produced a report which noted that only eight of the 112 awards given out during a 13-year span were given to minority teachers. Warren was listed among the eight minority teachers who had won a teacher award. The report was written in 2005, a decade after Warren had left the faculty at the University of Pennsylvania."

2 Scoops

Back to more pressing matters, Trump has gotten Stormy Daniels defamation suit thrown out.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1051970633133887489

Captain Obvious

2 Scoops wrote: »

I'd trust Warren's DNA test results about as much as you lot trust Trump's doctor results.

You could tell with your eyes that Trumps announced results were not accurate. Then the doctor got promoted to a nice cushy position in the VA didn't he?


If you can find some discounting information about the test Warren took then I'll gladly take a look.

2 Scoops wrote: »

Did Trump write up his doctors results? What's your point.

It would seem so.


https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2018/0502/959728-donald-trump/

pixelburp wrote: »

Honestly, I'm not defending or contesting that Warren's claims of Native American heritage might be stretching credulity, merely responding to the initial suggestion from others that it was some attempt to curry votes - not least of which, this theory is a bit daft in a state 538 says is as good as a safe bet can ever be. Or glib talk about "you lot". Looking beyond the obvious farce of it all - though the results do still show a heritage, however minuscule - there's a motive to read that isn't simply some Trump rebuttal (cos clearly, it'd be a rank terrible one, against a man who doesn't care about 'truth' - see the earlier 60 Minutes exchange, or his opining on the Saudi assassination for that). And that other motive is far more interesting than quibbling over DNA tests.

It's not like she was trying to gain favour with natives. This is something Republicans brought up from her past and Trump tried to mock her about. Her claim was based on family history. The DNA test merely confirms it. She's not applying for membership to a tribe or anything.

2 Scoops wrote: »

Back to more pressing matters, Trump has gotten Stormy Daniels defamation suit thrown out.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1051970633133887489

I wonder will it be appealed. It's not a great reason to dismiss it.

The Court agrees with Mr. Trump's argument because the tweet in question constitutes 'rhetorical hyperbole' normally associated with politics and public discourse in the United States. The First Amendment protects this type of rhetorical statement

A sad reflection of normality in politics.

RIGOLO

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Elizabeth Warren has provided proof of her native American heritage.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/elizabeth-warren-dna-test-results_us_5bc4648ce4b040bb4e840fd6

I wonder will Trump keep up the "Pocahontas" remarks.

Billy Mays wrote: »

I wonder will he give €1m to charity like he said he would

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Can please post up your research on how the tests where flawed or incorrect, oh wise old sage and not at all some 15 year old internet troll?
If you're not 15 I apologise, just going by your general reasoning and quality of your posts.

RIGOLO wrote: »

So while the left are trying to win votes by proving someone has between 0.1 and 1% native-American DNA, in a questionable test.

The DNA test was always questionable, and now that 24 hours have passed we can consign it to the waste paper basket. The test did not distinguish between North and South Native American, the Boston Globe had to issue 2 corrections on their own analysis, none of her results would pass even hte most basic test for membership of any tribe, the Cherokee Nation has come out and dismissed it , and even my rudimentary knowledge of DNA testing would judge that unless your tracking the mitochondrial from a mother to daughter lineage theres little chance of proving Native American descendancy 250 years out.

https://www.cherokee.org/News/Stories/20181015_Cherokee-Nation-responds-to-Senator-Warrens-DNA-test

So where does that leave us .

Elizabeth Warren can say goodbye to 2020 .
The Boston Globe has mired itself in a pathetic attempt at a potshot on its front page against Donald Trump.
The Boston Globe has demonstrated twice it cant bo basic maths.
Donald Trump will forever dine out on this, and it just adds rightly to his 'fake news' , unfair news treatment rhetoric.

The anti-Trump posters here have once again followed the other lemmings off a cliff in a discussion of a nothing story.

And meanwhile we are into Day Two of National Minority Enterprise Week
But you wont read many headlines or articles in the main stream media about the Trump Administration work in disadvantaged minority communities

Like I said ,
So while the left are trying to win votes by proving someone has between 0.1 and 1% native-American DNA, in a questionable test.

The Trump Adminsitration is winning votes by investing in distressed communities and incentivising business to do the same thru its tax program

Captain Obvious

RIGOLO wrote: »

The DNA test was always questionable, and now that 24 hours have passed we can consign it to the waste paper basket. The test did not distinguish between North and South Native American, the Boston Globe had to issue 2 corrections on their own analysis, none of her results would pass even hte most basic test for membership of any tribe, the Cherokee Nation has come out and dismissed it , and even my rudimentary knowledge of DNA testing would judge that unless your tracking the mitochondrial from a mother to daughter lineage theres little chance of proving Native American descendancy 250 years out.

https://www.cherokee.org/News/Stories/20181015_Cherokee-Nation-responds-to-Senator-Warrens-DNA-test

So where does that leave us .

Elizabeth Warren can say goodbye to 2020 .
The Boston Globe has mired itself in a pathetic attempt at a potshot on its front page against Donald Trump.
The Boston Globe has demonstrated twice it cant bo basic maths.
Donald Trump will forever dine out on this, and it just adds rightly to his 'fake news' , unfair news treatment rhetoric.

The anti-Trump posters here have once again followed the other lemmings off a cliff in a discussion of a nothing story.

And meanwhile we are into Day Two of National Minority Enterprise Week
But you wont read many headlines or articles in the main stream media about the Trump Administration work in disadvantaged minority communities

Like I said ,
So while the left are trying to win votes by proving someone has between 0.1 and 1% native-American DNA, in a questionable test.

The Trump Adminsitration is winning votes by investing in distressed communities and incentivising business to do the same thru its tax program

Again, Rigolo, nobody is trying to win votes. It was Republicans that brought up the issue to win votes. Warren just complied with Trumps challenge. She's not trying to join any tribe. And as pointed out before, it is simply another one of Trumps attempts to use racism to target someone, just as the birther stuff was.


But since you keep going on about National Minority Enterprise Week, what has Trump done that is so impressing you this year?

autumn2018

the only person who can beat president trump is taylor swift
100 million followers on instagram
+ the right love her and wouldn't attack her like they do all other of trumps opponents

everlast75

2 Scoops wrote: »

Back to more pressing matters, Trump has gotten Stormy Daniels defamation suit thrown out.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1051970633133887489

3 things.

1) its the defamation part of the NDA case. That NDA and its costs will be far in excess of the defamation case
2) an appeal has been filed
3) trump was an un-indicted co-conspirator in 2 felony charges

Leroy42

Eric Cartman wrote: »

They'll be able to get one of the many new jobs added during his tenure.

So I assume you are totally against the €12bn in welfare handouts that Trump provided for Farmers.

And how about the hurricane relief. Surely people should know better and it is nothing but socialist nonsense to be helping people that had bad luck.

And Vets. Didn't they already get paid for their service? And now we are supposed to provide them with healthcare and settling back into the community.

dr.fuzzenstein

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Again, Rigolo, nobody is trying to win votes. It was Republicans that brought up the issue to win votes. Warren just complied with Trumps challenge. She's not trying to join any tribe. And as pointed out before, it is simply another one of Trumps attempts to use racism to target someone, just as the birther stuff was.


But since you keep going on about National Minority Enterprise Week, what has Trump done that is so impressing you this year?

Trump issued a challenge and it was answered.
And now him and his supporters are writhing like maggots in a hot frying pan because they are, well, people of absolutely no honor or integrity and their word means absolutely bugger all.

everlast75

It's juvenile stuff.


Trump goes around, calling a person a name, laughing at their expense.

The person goes and proves Trump wrong.

His response?

"I can't believe they went and did that. How sad!!!"



You can't win with that type of idiot unfortunately.*





*For Trump supporters, please note that is not a compliment

autumn2018

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Trump issued a challenge and it was answered.
And now him and his supporters are writhing like maggots in a hot frying pan because they are, well, people of absolutely no honor or integrity and their word means absolutely bugger all.

sorry mate but your falling into trumps trap
don't be pissing your nappy about trivia
be positive about 2020 and 2024:D

Leroy42

autumn2018 wrote: »

sorry mate but your falling into trumps trap
don't be pissing your nappy about trivia
be positive about 2020 and 2024:D

Trumps trap? What trap would that be.

"If she takes a DNA test and shows Native American DNA I will donate €1m to ca charity of her choice"
"OK, here you go"
"Well, I meant, I mean, is DNA even reliable? I mean its probably like climate change, the scientist that invented it was a Democrat and anyway.....look over there"

So she has totally called him out and made him look like a total loser and a bad one at that. And now he, a billionaire, is refusing to give money to charity on a bet that he lost. On some made up technicality. That the 'greatest dealmaker in the world'tm forgot to mention when he made the bet.

There is plenty for people that support his type of policies to like about Trump.

But this is not one of them. It is of course meaningless in the overall scheme of things, but it gives a real insight into the type of person Trump is.