Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Who thinks Trump will win?
Options
Comments
-
Tell me how wrote: »If you cannot see how the words 'And IS THERE A WAY WE CAN DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT by injection, inside, or almost a cleaning....' from Trump in the absolute context of which he delivered those press briefings day after day was not interpreted as advocating somehow for the use of disinfectant/bleach, then that is on you.
And, the content you have shown above specifically indicates that if had ineed used sarcasm (which I don't believe he had) that it was for some bizarre reason in realation to using medical Dr's like someone had just clarified for him off camera that a Phd in History or something would not be an adequate qualification for such a task. And even with this in mind, it still doesn't reflect his comment at the debate where he said he was using sarcasm specifically in relation to the bleach statement.
And if it was sarcasm, where was the evidence of that on Dr Birx's face? Her demeanor changed to as if she had just seen a ghost.
You're trying to dig yourself/him out of a hole. Nobody is buying it.
Personally I thought it was more the face of someone who realised that they are working with a moron.0 -
His response was "Sure." That's only slightly different than saying "Yes." He wasn't forceful, and it was dragged out of him, basically. If he meant it, he would've been more forceful.
If he instead said, "Absolutely, completely in every form" which he may have said in the past at least once, or even referenced himself saying it, people would have more confidence in him on this issue. "Stand by" is absolutely "Hey, I may call on you later."
I wouldn't be surprised if the Proud vermin weren't printing shirts with "We're standing by, Mr. President!" by now.
„Sure“ is usually the answer, if someone asks you to do something and you know you wont be doing it, but want to get that someone off your case... you then simply answer with an indifferent „sure“. It has no meaning, if there is no appropriate action that follows it.0 -
There is another aspect you may want to consider that when US president Trump wins re-election on November 3rd and the Senate stays in republican control, the Democratic Party will fracture along the lines of its various factions that are utterly incompatible with one another.
The Democrats are the party of the elites, why would billionaires like Michael Bloomberg give them a hundred million to buy the American congress if not to control its platform with positions that are in-congruent with the wing of the party that has socialists represented by Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Alexandria Occasio Cortez (AOC). When Biden loses there will be no nationally recognisable name to lead the DNC with the younger generations of Americans aside from AOC and her even more ignorant squad members. The Obamas are too cozy with the pursuit of the building themselves towards a billionaire lifestyle with contacts in California to spend time in political trench warfare with Trump. The names currently in Democratic influence positions are too old: the Clintons, Pelosi, Bloomberg, Schumer, Sanders. The very fact that the Democrats in congress have held onto 80 year old Pelosi as their leader for so long is testament that there is no younger energy able to lead the Democrats out of the wilderness they will find themselves in.
The elites in the Republican party also have an identity problem, you will notice they have defected for this election cycle to the Biden campaign, while the social conservatives who make up the working class have taken to the Republican party and that cuts across racial and ethnic divides. It is not uncommon to find that the spouses of the commentators you see on the mainstream news media in the United States are consultants or public relations to the political parties in Washington DC or work for lobby groups. This is why much the media are isolated within their own bubble and know very little about the goings on outside the Beltway.
There is essentially a cultural war going on in the United States, much like what happened in Britain between the social conservatives and social liberals, the conservatives are represented by the people you see waving the American flag, while the liberals are represented by the people pulling down statues, burning and looting. This elites still have not learned from "the deplorables" comments made in the last election cycle, this time they have substituted "white supremacy" and alienated a significant part of their electoral base. That is why president Trump wins, the DNC is the party of the elites.Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.
0 -
Pa ElGrande wrote: »There is another aspect you may want to consider that when US president Trump wins re-election on November 3rd and the Senate stays in republican control, the Democratic Party will fracture along the lines of its various factions that are utterly incompatible with one another.
The Democrats are the party of the elites, why would billionaires like Michael Bloomberg give them a hundred million to buy the American congress if not to control its platform with positions that are in-congruent with the wing of the party that has socialists represented by Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Alexandria Occasio Cortez (AOC). When Biden loses there will be no nationally recognisable name to lead the DNC with the younger generations of Americans aside from AOC and her even more ignorant squad members. The Obamas are too cozy with the pursuit of the building themselves towards a billionaire lifestyle with contacts in California to spend time in political trench warfare with Trump. The names currently in Democratic influence positions are too old: the Clintons, Pelosi, Bloomberg, Schumer, Sanders. The very fact that the Democrats in congress have held onto 80 year old Pelosi as their leader for so long is testament that there is no younger energy able to lead the Democrats out of the wilderness they will find themselves in.
The elites in the Republican party also have an identity problem, you will notice they have defected for this election cycle to the Biden campaign, while the social conservatives who make up the working class have taken to the Republican party and that cuts across racial and ethnic divides. It is not uncommon to find that the spouses of the commentators you see on the mainstream news media in the United States are consultants or public relations to the political parties in Washington DC or work for lobby groups. This is why much the media are isolated within their own bubble and know very little about the goings on outside the Beltway.
There is essentially a cultural war going on in the United States, much like what happened in Britain between the social conservatives and social liberals, the conservatives are represented by the people you see waving the American flag, while the liberals are represented by the people pulling down statues, burning and looting. This elites still have not learned from "the deplorables" comments made in the last election cycle, this time they have substituted "white supremacy" and alienated a significant part of their electoral base. That is why president Trump wins, the DNC is the party of the elites.
So the Democratic party is the party of the elites because it is backed by billionaires, and the Republican party has elites (also backed by billionaires) but they've temporarily absconded or gone quiet but it isn't the party for the elites. For every Bloomberg there is a Koch- don't pretend otherwise. Both parties have been serving the interests of the 1% for decades now.
Also, being liberal means you by definition represent people that pull down statues etc., but being conservative means you represent people that wave flags. There is a slight chance here that you are somewhat caricaturing reality to suit your worldview. Armed militias intimidating elected representatives inside legislative buildings has to be counted as "flagwaving" if statue-pulling is your illustration of what liberals represent.
You do understand there are a lot of us here in the middle who would consider ourselves patriotic (in terms of being invested in our country, metaphorically flagwaving), but may also want to see some aspects of civil society run differently. I find that the people that keep talking about culture wars are the people that want culture wars.
I wouldn't agree with most of your views I think, but you normally post more cogently than this nonsense.0 -
Pa ElGrande wrote: »The Democrats are the party of the elites...
Are Trumptards still trying to push this shite? after everything about Trump's taxes have come out in the past week?
For fuck sake. This bogus angle ain't working no more and it never did to anybody with any sense.
The guy you're shilling for is part of the "elite" and doing everything for the "elite".0 -
Advertisement
-
nolivesmatter wrote: »There's two things we're talking about.
1 is the question "Do you condemn white supremacists'?". To that he answered yes twice. So that can't be disputed and shouldn't be questioned anymore, he clearly denounced white supremacy.
2 is the proud boys. He told them to "stand back and stand by". Like I said, he seemed to be specifically looking for the words "stand down".
The question was "Would you?" not "Do you?"
He said he would and then failed to do so.0 -
Outlaw Pete wrote: »No, he said there were good people on both sides of a protests to take down a statue. He did not say the "side of White Supremacy" just as he didn't say the "side of scum Antifa". He did what a good leader should do and condemned the scum on both sides and praised those who were peaceful.
The protest against the removal of the statue was explicitly organised by white supremacists.
Anyway, if somebody defends confederate monuments, I would view them as being at the very same least a useful idiot for the cause of white supremacy.0 -
The question was "Would you?" not "Do you?"
He said he would and then failed to do so.
He didn't fail, he answered the question he was asked. You're reaching.
Not everyone that calls out bulls**t claims against Trump are pro-Trump. A lot us don't like the manipulation of the truth. People should criticize him for what he actually is.0 -
The protest against the removal of the statue was explicitly organised by white supremacists.
Anyway, if somebody defends confederate monuments, I would view them as being at the very same least a useful idiot for the cause of white supremacy.
Well there's a big difference between being a white supremacist/supporting white supremacy and being a "a useful idiot for the cause of white supremacy". Though I completely disagree with your premise there anyway.0 -
nolivesmatter wrote: »Well there's a big difference between being a white supremacist/supporting white supremacy and being a "a useful idiot for the cause of white supremacy". Though I completely disagree with your premise there anyway.
It doesn't matter in the case of Charlottesville because the rally was explicitly organised by white supremacists and neo Nazis. There were no very fine people on that side.
Speaking more broadly, if you defend monuments for a cause as vile as the confederacy, you're at best a useful idiot.0 -
Advertisement
-
This is the part Trumpers don't get (or willfully ignore).It doesn't matter in the case of Charlottesville because the rally was explicitly organised by white supremacists and neo Nazis. There were no very fine people on that side.
Speaking more broadly, if you defend monuments for a cause as vile as the confederacy, you're at best a useful idiot.
If someone who believed in a united Ireland went to a rally calling for a united Ireland that was organised by dissident Republicans would we be calling them very fine people?
My guess is no.0 -
Outlaw Pete wrote: »Are you kidding me?
You've been running around Boards for three days saying Trump refused to denounce White Supremacy.
It's true though... Pete you engage in constant propaganda and do a terrible effort at attempting to warp reality.0 -
The portrayal of Donald Trump as someone who believes in white supremacy and dog whistles at Neo-Nazis is where the propaganda is.
It's amazing how you folks can so casually lie about Trump as much as you all do and yet then see others as the ones not grounded in reality.0 -
Billy Mays wrote: »This is the part Trumpers don't get (or willfully ignore).
If someone who believed in a united Ireland went to a rally calling for a united Ireland that was organised by dissident Republicans would we be calling them very fine people?
My guess is no.
Anyone who went to that rally knew it would be full of racist thugs. They don't deserve any sympathy.0 -
Deleted User wrote: »It's true though... Pete you engage in constant propaganda and do a terrible effort at attempting to warp reality.
He's what the ignore button was made for. I think we can stick fork in this election, Trump getting hospitalised with Covid is about the worse thing that could have happened for his re-election chances. Even Fox news reporters and anchors are getting pissed off with his Covid and White Supremacy responses. Chris Wallace and John Roberts both visibly angry on air, Chris about the former, and John about the latter.0 -
milli milli wrote: »It can’t matter that much to you when you support a pathological liar.
Multiple times now I have asked people to list Trump's biggest lies and more often than not that they will cut and paste that now infamous Atlantic article that was so popular with the left, and which I have easily shown to be the biggest load of shite ever to waste bandwidth whenever it's cited.
But I'll ask you the same: post up his top five worst lies which you feel warrant him being called a "pathological liar" and I don't mean link to a propaganda piece on the WaPo, but five actually lies that you feel were incredulous and not merely something like him exaggerating crowd sizes.0 -
Outlaw Pete wrote: »Multiple times now I have asked people to list Trump's biggest lies and more often than not that they will cut and paste that now infamous Atlantic article that was so popular with the left, and which I have easily shown to be the biggest load of shite ever to waste bandwidth whenever it's cited.
But I'll ask you the same: post up his top five worst lies which you feel warrant him being called a "pathological liar" and I don't mean link to a propaganda piece on the WaPo, but five actually lies that you feel were incredulous and not merely something like him exaggerating crowd sizes.
Here's a few just from the debate
https://www.politico.com/states/new-jersey/story/2020/10/02/trump-looked-100-percent-normal-during-bedminster-fundraiser-attendee-says-13197440 -
Outlaw Pete wrote: »Multiple times now I have asked people to list Trump's biggest lies and more often than not that they will cut and paste that now infamous Atlantic article that was so popular with the left, and which I have easily shown to be the biggest load of shite ever to waste bandwidth whenever it's cited.
But I'll ask you the same: post up his top five worst lies which you feel warrant him being called a "pathological liar" and I don't mean link to a propaganda piece on the WaPo, but five actually lies that you feel were incredulous and not merely something like him exaggerating crowd sizes.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/31/politics/fact-check-donald-trump-top-lies-of-2019-daniel-dale/index.htmlA month-by-month look at Donald Trump's top lies of 2019
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidmarkowitz/2020/05/05/trump-is-lying-more-than-ever-just-look-at-the-data/Trump Is Lying More Than Ever: Just Look At The Data
...
As of early April, Trump has told 23.3 lies per day in 2020, a 0.5-lie increase since 2019. What’s more, Trump has averaged 23.8 lies per day since the first case of COVID-19 was reported in the US — another 0.5-lie increase. Even during a pandemic, when the public needs to trust and rely on him the most, deception remains a core part of the president’s playbook.
What’s unusual about Trump is not just how often he lies, but what he lies about...
I evaluated Trump’s 18,000 reported lies organized by topic.
Where does one even start?0 -
Outlaw Pete wrote: »Multiple times now I have asked people to list Trump's biggest lies and more often than not that they will cut and paste that now infamous Atlantic article that was so popular with the left, and which I have easily shown to be the biggest load of shite ever to waste bandwidth whenever it's cited.
But I'll ask you the same: post up his top five worst lies which you feel warrant him being called a "pathological liar" and I don't mean link to a propaganda piece on the WaPo, but five actually lies that you feel were incredulous and not merely something like him exaggerating crowd sizes.
Ten here for you from 20190 -
Outlaw Pete wrote: »Multiple times now I have asked people to list Trump's biggest lies and more often than not that they will cut and paste that now infamous Atlantic article that was so popular with the left, and which I have easily shown to be the biggest load of shite ever to waste bandwidth whenever it's cited.
But I'll ask you the same: post up his top five worst lies which you feel warrant him being called a "pathological liar" and I don't mean link to a propaganda piece on the WaPo, but five actually lies that you feel were incredulous and not merely something like him exaggerating crowd sizes.
Also
Lock her up
Build the wall
Drain the swamp.
No
No
No0 -
Advertisement
-
Billy Mays wrote: »This is the part Trumpers don't get (or willfully ignore).
If someone who believed in a united Ireland went to a rally calling for a united Ireland that was organised by dissident Republicans would we be calling them very fine people?
My guess is no.
Sorry but its plain to see in this thread that it's the anti-Trump brigade that specialize in willful ignorance.0 -
Billy Mays wrote: »This is the part Trumpers don't get (or willfully ignore).
If someone who believed in a united Ireland went to a rally calling for a united Ireland that was organised by dissident Republicans would we be calling them very fine people?
My guess is no.
He never called them "very fine people" , the likes of Ryan Tubridy keep pushing this lie.
https://youtu.be/xS_cJivB9Yg?t=807
This changes the context completely ....0 -
-
Outlaw Pete wrote: »Both the video AND the quote you used were entirely out of context and you did that for a reason: so you could make it appear as if Trump was just saying "Supposing you brought the light..." etc etc out of the blue but again that is NOT what happened at all.
As I explained in my post which I linked you to, Trump was in fact referencing a conversation that he already had with Bryan [timestamped with verbatim quotes below]:
So, you see: at no stage did he tell (or suggest that) anyone should use bleach to treat Covid.
The truth matters and if you want to condemn him for asking those questions of Bryan and telling us all about it, so be it, do that - but lying about him saying stuff he didn't just screams desperation.
Oh and by the way, while such questions in the context of bleach and Isopropyl alcohol weren't the brightest, merely wondering if the qualities of disinfectants could be harnessed in some way, so that they could be of benefit inside the body, is likely what first led to people to placing essential oils in hot water so that they could then inhale the steam.
This could be believable if he hadn't come out to say he was being sarcastic.
Just as the tax returns could be believed as fake if they hadn't said they were illegally obtained.
If/When the next debate occurs, will be interesting to SEE which PARTS of the transcipt YOU will highlight to try and get LITTLE donny out OF trouble.0 -
TomSweeney wrote: »He never called them "very fine people" , the likes of Ryan Tubridy keep pushing this lie.
https://youtu.be/xS_cJivB9Yg?t=807
This changes the context completely ....
It absolutely does not.
If a group of white nationalists have marched carrying Tiki torches through a US city, you don't try to suggest some on the fringes weren't doing such things. Doing so is projecting sympathy towards people involved in such a march and allowing them to use the excuse, 'Oh I wasn't one of those people, I was just standing peacefully at the back admiring them'
You leave no room for ambiguity.0 -
Tell me how wrote: »Also
Lock her up
Build the wall
Drain the swamp.
No
No
No
He and his are the swamp.0 -
Outlaw Pete wrote: »The portrayal of Donald Trump as someone who believes in white supremacy and dog whistles at Neo-Nazis is where the propaganda is.
It's amazing how you folks can so casually lie about Trump as much as you all do and yet then see others as the ones not grounded in reality.
Pete did you ever talk to someone from England about Irish politics? It often involves them confusing salient points such as to whether the DUP represent the Republic of Ireland and whether Sinn Fein are the same as Fine Gael. Well you're exemplifying the Irish version of this. You're an Irish Trump supporter who makes points about US politics that suggest you never stepped foot in the place.
An obvious example of this is when you have hit out at specific criticisms of Trump by referring to them as "propaganda from the left" even when the critics are from the Republican party. You have referred to some of the most right wing figures in US politics as "being on the left". It's cringe worthy to read at times.
Furthermore, the post I quoted seems to suggest that allegations of Trump's racism stem from recent backing of the proud boys or from other events during his presidency. I work a lot in American and Americans considered Trump racist long before he became president.
Trump and his father were involved in a lot of real estate dealings prior to his political career. It is in this capacity that the idea that Trump is a racist took hold when he was accused of refusing to rent apartments to African Americans. This led to Trump and his father being sued by the Nixon administration of all things!
These allegations came from potential tenants and even former employees.She seemed like the model tenant. A 33-year-old nurse who was living at the Y.W.C.A. in Harlem, she had come to rent a one-bedroom at the still-unfinished Wilshire Apartments in the Jamaica Estates neighborhood of Queens. She filled out what the rental agent remembers as a “beautiful application.” She did not even want to look at the unit.
There was just one hitch: Maxine Brown was black.
Stanley Leibowitz, the rental agent, talked to his boss, Fred C. Trump.
“I asked him what to do and he says, ‘Take the application and put it in a drawer and leave it there,’” Mr. Leibowitz, now 88, recalled in an interview. “His father was his idol,” Mr. Leibowitz recalled. “Anytime he would come into the building, Donald would be by his side.”
The Justice Department undertook its own investigation and, in 1973, sued Trump Management for discriminating against blacks. Both Fred Trump, the company’s chairman, and Donald Trump, its president, were named as defendants. It was front-page news, and for Donald, amounted to his debut in the public eye.
We get a further insight of Donald's views on African Americans from his interactions with a Justice Department lawyer, Elyse Goldweber.I went to a place called Operation Open City. What they had done was send “testers”—meaning one white couple and one couple of color—to Trump Village, a very large, lower-middle-class housing project in Brooklyn. And of course the white people were treated great, and for the people of color there were no apartments. We subpoenaed all their documents. That’s how we found that a person’s application, if you were a person of color, had a big C on it.
The Department of Justice brings the case and we name Fred Trump, the father, and Donald Trump, the son, and Donald hires Roy Cohn, of Army-McCarthy fame. [Cohn, a Trump mentor, had served as Senator Joe McCarthy’s chief counsel during his investigations of alleged Communists in the government and was accused of pressuring the Army to give preferential treatment to a personal friend.] Cohn turns around and sues us for $100 million. This was my first appearance as a lawyer in court. Cohn spoke for two hours, then the judge ruled from the bench that you can’t sue the government for prosecuting you. The next week we took the depositions. My boss took Fred’s, and I got to take Donald’s. He was exactly the way he is today. He said to me at one point during a coffee break, “You know, you don’t want to live with them either.”
Unsurprisingly considering the wealth of evidence against him he settled outside of court. Under the terms of the settlement, reached in 1975, the Trumps did not admit to any wrongdoing. But soon, according to the government, they were back at it. In 1978, the Justice Department alleged that Trump Management was in breach of the agreement.
So Pete I suggest you read some background on this. You keep saying that the racism allegations are because he refused to condemn white supremacists. In reality it's because was successfully sued by the Nixon administration for discrimination against African Americans.0 -
Outlaw Pete wrote: »But I'll ask you the same: post up his top five worst lies which you feel warrant him being called a "pathological liar"
I don't think Trump is a pathological liar, as pathological lying means lying even when there is no reason or benefit to doing so. It's something that is done without logic, something almost involuntary.
Whereas Trump's lies seems to have a logic behind them, in that they paint him in a better light than the truth would.
You asked for 5 - here's my top 5:
Trump on April 24 2020: "5.1 million tests, that's more than all countries combined...all countries combined."
Trump on April 25 2020: [the United States has tested] “more than any other country in the World, and even more than all major countries combined.”
Trump on April 28 2020: “We’ve tested more than every country combined”.
Trump on May 11 2020: "More than all other countries together."
Trump on May 18 2020: "Over 11 million tests, and going up fast. More than all countries in the world, combined."
Now, he might be forgiven the first time, for just misunderstanding what he had read or heard. And despite the fact that these incorrect claims are dissected and highlighted almost as soon as they leave his mouth/twitter feed, he might even be forgiven the second time - it was just the next day after all.
But to still be spouting the same lie 24 days later on May 18? No way on earth can it still be explained away as confusion or misunderstanding. It's nothing other than deliberately lying to the American people to make himself and his administration look better. Nothing short of the fake news he likes to portray himself (with a fair degree of justification) as a victim of.
And it is relying on two things to make it work. Firstly, that a cohort of people in the US will blindly accept whatever he says as truth, and dig no deeper into it.
Secondly, that if and when his claims/stats are questioned, he has an army of online disciples, such as yourself Pete, who have welded themselves and their identity to Trump and his success, and who will defend and deflect and contort his claims way way beyond the point where anybody, including themselves, can actually believe what they are saying.0 -
Outlaw Pete wrote: »Multiple times now I have asked people to list Trump's biggest lies and more often than not that they will cut and paste that now infamous Atlantic article that was so popular with the left, and which I have easily shown to be the biggest load of shite ever to waste bandwidth whenever it's cited.
But I'll ask you the same: post up his top five worst lies which you feel warrant him being called a "pathological liar" and I don't mean link to a propaganda piece on the WaPo, but five actually lies that you feel were incredulous and not merely something like him exaggerating crowd sizes.
The fact that him lying- repeatedy, about the size of the crowd at his inauguration is not even a qualifier for you shows just how far down the rabbit hole you have really gone. Think about it- a demonstrably false, silly claim on his first day in the job nd that doesn't register with you as being significant.0 -
Advertisement
-
steddyeddy wrote: »You're an Irish Trump supporter who makes points about US politics that suggest you never stepped foot in the place. "
I'd be surprised if most Irish Trump supporters had ever even left their own village, never mind set foot in America.0
![[Deleted User]](/applications/dashboard/design/images/defaulticon.png)
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement