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

What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

Options
11481491511531541190

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    briany wrote: »
    I do wonder what happens to these people because it's like some weird Invasion of the Bodysnatchers type thing. That woman who climbed through the inner doors at the Capitol building, only to be shot dead by a secret service man, had posted a video of herself ranting before that incident took place, and she just sounds unhinged. :eek::eek:






    And here's another charmer.






    And then you have people like that lad wearing the furry headdress at the Capitol Riot. American politics has allowed reasoned discourse to go out the window because of their unregulated news media sectors and proliferation of utter b*ll**** on various social media outlets, but what's shocking is some people's apparent lack of critical thinking skills to sort through some of this.

    Hmmm... I guess they should have worn pink vagina hats and outfits if they wanted to partake in reasoned discourse.

    offensive-morons.jpg

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Hmmm... I guess they should have worn pink vagina hats and outfits if they wanted to partake in reasoned discourse.
    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR7vntlUVZIrOwMk7r0kYztO2JVCbMljEv22imLM5VloBAt9ICBg3_N80xU7TxcIU78fyE&usqp=CAU

    Ya, the hat wasn't the issue which is the thing. It was idiots invading a federal building on the basis of a conspiracy theory. Pretty dishonest to ignore the actual point the poster was making.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,037 ✭✭✭Smee_Again


    At some point Trump is going to have to show his (tiny) hand but until then any reasonable person will ignore his statements, while the unreasonable among us will lap them up.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,929 ✭✭✭randd1


    notobtuse wrote: »
    On Monday former President Donald Trump said he has not conceded the November 2020 election. He went on to say "No, I never, the word is 'concede,' [and] I have not conceded."

    He also said "You know, we were always known for free and fair elections." "Well, it turns out they weren't free, and they weren't fair, and the world is watching.”

    So apparently Trump is using the current events I was discussing regarding the forensic election audits going on and in discussion in several states to keep himself and the forensic audits in the news and in the forefront of people's minds. I guess for some odd reason "the world" here can only watch these current events in the Conspiracy Theory section.

    https://news.yahoo.com/trump-says-not-conceded-november-210600776.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3



    RE the bit in bold.


    According to his own laywers, in Court under oath, they have no proof to the contrary. So it must have been, like numerous agencies, and members from both parties involved in the vote counting have agreed it was, a free and fair election. In fact, the only attempt to manipulate the vote came from Trump and his acolytes, it just didn't work.


    Trump is man-baby whining because America told him no and the poor man-baby, and his moron conspiracy theorist supporters, just can't accept that reality. And they want to waste money on audits that will eventually only confirm they are morons (either by reality slapping them hard in the face and they realise their moronic behaviour or, far more likely, they delve deeper into the conspiracy and because more insane).


    And as I said earlier, only a moron would waste money to prove they're a moron.


    But then again, we are dealing with hardcore Trump supporters, the type of people who think IQ is a t-shirt slogan for support of an online conspiracy nut.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Smee_Again wrote: »
    At some point Trump is going to have to show his (tiny) hand but until then any reasonable person will ignore his statements, while the unreasonable among us will lap them up.

    So the mainstream media aren't reasonable people according to you, because they lap up and report on every one of his statements.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    randd1 wrote: »
    RE the bit in bold.


    According to his own laywers, in Court under oath, they have no proof to the contrary.


    So it must have been, like numerous agencies, and both parties involved in the vote counted have agreed it was, a free and fair election. In fact, the only attempt to manipulate the vote came from Trump and his acolytes.


    Trump is man-baby whining because America told him no and the poor man-baby, and his moron conspiracy theorist supporters, just can't accept that reality. And they want to waste money on audits that will eventually only confirm they are morons (either by reality slapping them hard in the face and they realise their moronic behaviour or, far more likely, they delve deeper into the conspiracy and because more insane).


    And as I said earlier, only a moron would waste money to prove they're a moron.


    But then again, we are dealing with hardcore Trump supporters, the type of people who think IQ is a t-shirt slogan for support of an online conspiracy nut.

    Ah... he's referring to the actual current events going on in several states.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Ya, the hat wasn't the issue which is the thing. It was idiots invading a federal building on the basis of a conspiracy theory. Pretty dishonest to ignore the actual point the poster was making.

    Perhaps your issue should be with the poster who made a point of the hat thing.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,037 ✭✭✭Smee_Again


    notobtuse wrote: »
    So the mainstream media aren't reasonable people according to you, because they lap up and report on every one of his statements.

    Reporting on it is one thing, he is and always will be a twice impeached former POTUS, but I would say anyone lapping it up is unreasonable as in no reasonable person could believe what he is saying.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,929 ✭✭✭randd1


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Ah... he's referring to the actual current events going on in several states.
    No, he's referring to things that he thinks are happening.


    In reality, he lost a free and fair election that he and his acolytes tried to tip in his favour, and since then him and his acolytes have spent the last 6 months denying basic reality, clawing to the most inane hope pulled out of their ass by QAnon (and the odd crazy congressman trying to rim his hole) as fact.


    There's really nothing more to be said than that. Trump and his acolytes have proven they're little more than a cult that deny reality that's passed crazy into just plain moronic. At least with crazy you could have some pity for them because they're crazy but it's gone on for so long they have to be classed as morons.


    All an audit of any sort would prove is what the normal world knew months ago, and would simply prove that Trumpists are actually morons denying reality. And as I said earlier, only a moron would waste money to prove they're a moron.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Smee_Again wrote: »
    Reporting on it is one thing, he is and always will be a twice impeached former POTUS, but I would say anyone lapping it up is unreasonable as in no reasonable person could believe what he is saying.

    Both impeachments processes by the Democrats were utter farces. Democrats in the House could have impeached him because they didn't like the color of his ties. Luckily the Senate has some semblance of reason.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,377 ✭✭✭✭duploelabs


    notobtuse wrote: »
    On Monday former President Donald Trump said he has not conceded the November 2020 election. He went on to say "No, I never, the word is 'concede,' [and] I have not conceded."

    He also said "You know, we were always known for free and fair elections." "Well, it turns out they weren't free, and they weren't fair, and the world is watching.”

    So apparently Trump is using the current events I was discussing regarding the forensic election audits going on and in discussion in several states to keep himself and the forensic audits in the news and in the forefront of people's minds. I guess for some odd reason "the world" here can only watch these current events in the Conspiracy Theory section.

    https://news.yahoo.com/trump-says-not-conceded-november-210600776.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3
    Except trump admitted that he lost in a fox interview recently

    https://www.mcclatchyd...rticle252177178.html

    “We got them by surprise in ‘16, and in ‘20 we did much better than we did in ‘16,” Trump told Hannity. “Shockingly, we were supposed to win easily at 64 million votes and we got 75 million votes. We didn’t win, but let’s see what happens on that. The whole thing was shocking.”


  • Registered Users Posts: 13,836 ✭✭✭✭briany


    duploelabs wrote: »
    Except trump admitted that he lost in a fox interview recently

    https://www.mcclatchyd...rticle252177178.html

    “We got them by surprise in ‘16, and in ‘20 we did much better than we did in ‘16,” Trump told Hannity. “Shockingly, we were supposed to win easily at 64 million votes and we got 75 million votes. We didn’t win, but let’s see what happens on that. The whole thing was shocking.”


    He didn't say he won, but didn't say he lost either, and was inferring that there was still a possibility that he won. I wonder if he has ever in his life just admitted to losing at something.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,278 ✭✭✭dinorebel


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Both impeachments processes by the Democrats were utter farces. Democrats in the House could have impeached him because they didn't like the color of his ties. Luckily the Senate has some semblance of reason.

    Now we know you're a troll.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,037 ✭✭✭Smee_Again


    dinorebel wrote: »
    Now we know you're a troll.

    Was there ever a doubt?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,918 ✭✭✭Tippex


    Tippex wrote: »
    Can you point to these fact articles that you are referring to please.

    Guess there is no chance they will respond with the facts lol


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,929 ✭✭✭randd1


    Tippex wrote: »
    Guess there is no chance they will respond with the facts lol
    In order for a fact to be a fact, it must first be based in actual reality.


  • Registered Users Posts: 83,094 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    WhomadeGod wrote: »
    Like the Dems after 2016?

    What about the 40% of voters who didn't trust honesty of elections back on 2009 when Donald trump wasn't even on the scene?

    What about the Dems after 2016? There was no insurrection and no efforts to reinstall Obama for a coup. There weren’t a bunch of hoax audits. We did, however, have confirmation from the US IC that Russia actively interfered in the election cycle.


  • Registered Users Posts: 83,094 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Don't forget, he also opened an investigation into the 2016 results as he couldn't believe he lost the popular vote!

    That’s true. The Trump WH opened its own investigation into fraud in the 2016 election and came up empty.


  • Registered Users Posts: 83,094 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    Every time we uncover actual evidence of voter fraud: a) that person is prosecuted, and b) they're Republican

    https://www.mediaite.com/election-2020/gop-officials-curious-explanation-on-why-he-voted-for-trump-on-behalf-of-his-dead-father/

    When you try to vote for a dead person, it's that simple to catch and arrest you for.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Tippex wrote: »
    Can you point to these fact articles that you are referring to please.


    Sure...



    From the article I quoted:



    "Alina Chan is one of 18 experts who signed a letter in May calling for a thorough exploration into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic. Although Chan voiced her support for an investigation into the possibility of a lab leak early in the pandemic, she told NBC that experts were careful not to lean too close to views linked to the former president."


    "At the time, it was scarier to be associated with Trump and to become a tool for racists, so people didn't want to publicly call for an investigation into lab origins"


    Also from NBC:

    "Chan said there had been trepidation among some scientists about publicly discussing the lab leak hypothesis for fear that their words could be misconstrued or used to support racist rhetoric about how the coronavirus emerged. Trump fueled accusations that the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a research lab in the city where the first Covid-19 cases were reported, was connected to the outbreak, and on numerous occasions he called the pathogen the "Wuhan virus" or "kung flu."

    "At the time, it was scarier to be associated with Trump and to become a tool for racists, so people didn't want to publicly call for an investigation into lab origins," she said."


    https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/lab-leak-theory-science-scientists-rcna1191


    If that isn't enough for you to consider her statements as fact then you would probably have to ignore 90% or more of all reporting from everywhere.... and probably 100% of reporting on Trump



    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,233 ✭✭✭Billy Mays




  • Registered Users Posts: 40,440 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail




  • Registered Users Posts: 83,094 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    They must be RINOs

    expect death threats to follow. thats how they do things now: 'tell us Trump won or we're coming for you and your family' https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-trump-georgia-threats/
    “Until Trump is guaranteed to be POTUS until 2024 like he should be, we will bring death and destruction to defend this country if needed and get our voices heard.”

    This is shyte al qaeda talk.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Billy Mays wrote: »

    Help me out here, as I haven't read everything... Did people here have an issue with the Michigan election? I know I didn't as there weren't reports of major issues and irregularities as there were in other states.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Registered Users Posts: 3,233 ✭✭✭Billy Mays


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Help me out here, as I haven't read everything... Did people here have an issue with the Michigan election? I know I didn't as there weren't reports of major issues and irregularities as there were in other states.
    Has the Michigan State Senate started their review of the Fraudulent Presidential Election of 2020 yet, or are they about to start? If not, they should be run out of office"
    Guess who???


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Help me out here, as I haven't read everything... Did people here have an issue with the Michigan election? I know I didn't as there weren't reports of major issues and irregularities as there were in other states.

    Yes there were sore losers in Michigan, as there were in every state that Trump lost. And yes, there were reports of made up nonsense by said sore losers in Michigan, as there were in every state that Trump lost. And no, there was no evidence found of anything in these reports by said sore losers in Michigan, as was the case in every state that Trump lost.


  • Registered Users Posts: 40,440 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Billy Mays wrote: »
    Guess who???

    I needed that laugh. Thanks.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,424 ✭✭✭notobtuse


    Yes there were sore losers in Michigan, as there were in every state that Trump lost. And yes, there were reports of made up nonsense by said sore losers in Michigan, as there were in every state that Trump lost. And no, there was no evidence found of anything in these reports by said sore losers in Michigan, as was the case in every state that Trump lost.
    Well, yeah there are always going to be sore losers in every state from the party that lost... but the major areas of concern that don't pass the smell test and deserve a forensic audit come from the states of Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and to a lesser extent Wisconsin.

    You can ignorantly accuse me of "whataboutism," but what it really is involves identifying similar scenarios in order to see if it holds up when the shoe is on the other foot!



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    notobtuse wrote: »
    but the major areas of concern that don't pass the smell test and deserve a forensic audit come from the states of Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and to a lesser extent Wisconsin.

    And why do they need audits? Provide sources.

    And you disagree with your dear leader that Michigan passed the smell test? You should donate $100 to him immediately in apology.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,304 ✭✭✭Cody montana


    notobtuse wrote: »
    Well, yeah there are always going to be sore losers in every state from the party that lost... but the major areas of concern that don't pass the smell test and deserve a forensic audit come from the states of Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and to a lesser extent Wisconsin.

    There is a difference between sore losers and claiming the election was stolen.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement