• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

President Trump: Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
bruto said:
I apologize if I missed the indignation when opponents of Trump actually making arguments were called libtards and shillaries and snowflakes, or when suggestions that the insulting double-entendre nickname applied to the first lady by a dope-addled radio huckster might be racist were met with incredulous derision, and so forth, and on and on, but we must move with the times. Catcalls from the balcony are the price of power. Boo hoo pobrecito, pull out your crying towel. Don't like that the playbook has fallen into the wrong hands? Suck it up, buttercup.
Click to expand...
Whether or not someone else was childish should have nothing to do with whether or not you choose to be.
 
I thought it was childish and worthy of reproach when Trump began the juvenile name-calling about a year and a half ago.

I simply feel the same about the juvenile name-calling going on now.

Speaking only for myself, the minute I see "The Hair" or "tinyhands" or whatever, any argument the person might be making is slightly diminished by the childish presentation.

But I'm getting somewhat used to it. Only occasionally do I feel the need to speak out and condemn the behavior. As I did back then.

But carry on if it makes you feel good!
 
Last edited:
Civet said:
I just found out about @Trump_Regrets on Twitter. It would be kind of funny if it wasn't really, really sad.
Click to expand...

Second tweet right now is a complaint that Trump is supposed to be for law and order, but Berkeley's riots happened. (Implicitly) A real law and order guy would have stamped those protests[1] out before they began.

Anyway, not everyone who claims they regret their Trump vote is on "our" side. For that matter, not everyone who claims to regret their Trump vote actually voted for Trump, obviously. Posing is easy.

[1] When I call them protests, I'm certainly not trying to legitimize them.
 
Last edited:
bruto said:
I apologize if I missed the indignation when opponents of Trump actually making arguments were called libtards and shillaries and snowflakes, or when suggestions that the insulting double-entendre nickname applied to the first lady by a dope-addled radio huckster might be racist were met with incredulous derision, and so forth, and on and on, but we must move with the times. Catcalls from the balcony are the price of power. Boo hoo pobrecito, pull out your crying towel. Don't like that the playbook has fallen into the wrong hands? Suck it up, buttercup.

There has been plenty of analysis and discourse about why it would be a bad idea to elect a reckless xenophobic misogynistic lying psychopath as president, but here we are, and if you don't like the way the social warriors and feminazis characterize the lunatic who can stand in the rain and say God stopped it for his speech, or who threatens to invade Mexico, well cry us a river.
Click to expand...


The constant use of derogatory nicknames in this place reflects very poorly on both sides. I do wish that we, here, could stop it.

I understand that, out there, it's par for the course, but I'd rather just stick to discussing stuff rather than coming up with ever more inventive names to vilify our political opponents. It's like a bloody schoolyard.
 
bruto said:
I apologize if I missed the indignation when opponents of Trump actually making arguments were called libtards and shillaries and snowflakes, or when suggestions that the insulting double-entendre nickname applied to the first lady by a dope-addled radio huckster might be racist were met with incredulous derision, and so forth, and on and on, but we must move with the times. Catcalls from the balcony are the price of power. Boo hoo pobrecito, pull out your crying towel. Don't like that the playbook has fallen into the wrong hands? Suck it up, buttercup.

There has been plenty of analysis and discourse about why it would be a bad idea to elect a reckless xenophobic misogynistic lying psychopath as president, but here we are, and if you don't like the way the social warriors and feminazis characterize the lunatic who can stand in the rain and say God stopped it for his speech, or who threatens to invade Mexico, well cry us a river.
Click to expand...

It's quite simple. When one's opponents behave badly, that's a shame for them. When one's allies behave badly, that's a shame for us, and we should call it out.

Obviously, the term "libtard" is a sad reflection of the state of discourse for those who use it. They look like insensitive and juvenile morons. It's okay to point that out.

But when our allies use similarly (if less extreme) juvenile terms, then we have an interest in pointing this out and distancing ourselves from such puerile nonsense, so that we are not lumped in with this behavior.

We may as well call him President Trump, as that is who he is. Nicknames do us no good.
 
Archie Gemmill Goal said:
Donald Trump went to Wharton and yet seems to have the literacy level of a ten-year-old. That's one of the many things I find puzzling about the 'man'
Click to expand...

Another of Trump's exaggerations. He doesn't have an MBA, which is what Wharton is famous for. He transferred to the U. of Pennsylvania (possibly admitted as a favor to Dad) after two years at Fordham and graduated with a BS.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/wharton-donald-trump_us_57b2371be4b0a8e15024e6b8
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/donald-trump-2016-wharton-pennsylvania-214425
http://www.thedp.com/article/2015/08/donald-trump-wharton-classmates

Have you ever noticed how genuinely intelligent people don't keep saying "I'm, like, a really smart person."
https://www.salon.com/2017/01/30/im...iggest-lie-is-about-his-intelligence_partner/
 
Bob001 said:
Worse than that. Apparently Trump is threatening to invade Mexico:

http://time.com/4657474/donald-trump-enrique-pena-nieto-mexico-bad-hombres/
Click to expand...


If you had bothered to read past the headline, you would have seen this-

Eduardo Sanchez, spokesman for Mexico's presidential office, denied the tone of the conversation was hostile or humiliating, saying it was respectful.

"It is absolutely false that the president of the United States threatened to send troops to Mexico," Sanchez said in an interview with Radio Formula on Wednesday night.
 
willim said:
If you had bothered to read past the headline, you would have seen this-

Eduardo Sanchez, spokesman for Mexico's presidential office, denied the tone of the conversation was hostile or humiliating, saying it was respectful.

"It is absolutely false that the president of the United States threatened to send troops to Mexico," Sanchez said in an interview with Radio Formula on Wednesday night.
Click to expand...

Of course he did, like the Australian spokesman denied Trump hung up on the PM after twenty five minutes.

They are being diplomatic and trying to smooth things over.
 
willim said:
If you had bothered to read past the headline, you would have seen this-

Eduardo Sanchez, spokesman for Mexico's presidential office, denied the tone of the conversation was hostile or humiliating, saying it was respectful.

"It is absolutely false that the president of the United States threatened to send troops to Mexico," Sanchez said in an interview with Radio Formula on Wednesday night.
Click to expand...

That's what Trump told them to say if they didn't want to get invaded.
 
I read some comments by a Mexican journalist, someone who has worked for various Mexican print media companies for about thirty years. She said the one constant in covering Mexican politics is, you can't believe anything the leadership says. It's usually safer to assume that the opposite of what they say is probably closer to the truth.
 
phiwum said:
It's quite simple. When one's opponents behave badly, that's a shame for them. When one's allies behave badly, that's a shame for us, and we should call it out.

Obviously, the term "libtard" is a sad reflection of the state of discourse for those who use it. They look like insensitive and juvenile morons. It's okay to point that out.

But when our allies use similarly (if less extreme) juvenile terms, then we have an interest in pointing this out and distancing ourselves from such puerile nonsense, so that we are not lumped in with this behavior.

We may as well call him President Trump, as that is who he is. Nicknames do us no good.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this assessment. Only calling out one's own side when both sides do it, or when the other side is doing it to a much greater degree, doesn't give one the high ground. It actually makes one's own side look worse to a casual observer to be called out for a trivial thing that the other side is allowed to do with impunity. I think this sort of thing played into Trump's win, actually, because the press was far more interested in reporting on/calling out Clinton than Trump.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Were I Nieto or Turnball, I'd have a tape recorder going with the next call. And I might just let it accidentally leak.
Click to expand...

Both of these people want their country to have good relations with the US. Making a big deal of Trumps behavior would help sour relations since then they are supposed respond in kind.

Modern international relations are built upon the notion of reciprocity: if you treat me badly I'll treat you badly. By denying, at least officially, that they were treated badly it lowers the desire for retaliation and save face if they choose to deal with America in good faith despite Trumps rudeness.
 
Arcade22 said:
Both of these people want their country to have good relations with the US. Making a big deal of Trumps behavior would help sour relations since then they are supposed respond in kind.

Modern international relations are built upon the notion of reciprocity: if you treat me badly I'll treat you badly. By denying, at least officially, that they were treated badly it lowers the desire for retaliation and save face if they choose to deal with America in good faith despite Trumps rudeness.
Click to expand...
Except Trump doesn't understand nor even attempt to practice diplomacy. He's a school yard bully. Give him what he wants and he will only want more.
 
wareyin said:
I disagree with this assessment. Only calling out one's own side when both sides do it, or when the other side is doing it to a much greater degree, doesn't give one the high ground. It actually makes one's own side look worse to a casual observer to be called out for a trivial thing that the other side is allowed to do with impunity. I think this sort of thing played into Trump's win, actually, because the press was far more interested in reporting on/calling out Clinton than Trump.
Click to expand...

It does give you the higher ground. If the casual observer is that stupid, then they have no right to my side's superior approach and will suffer the consequences of it.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Yep, it greatly increases your negotiation position if you go about breaking prior agreements and promise left and right.
Mister "Art of the Deal" will be lucky if any country besides Russia is willing to sign any deal with him.
Click to expand...

A lot of people are quoting the first chapter of Trump's ghost written book
Art Of The Deal where he says that insulting and belittleing someone you are nogotaiting with is a horrible first move.....
 
BobTheCoward said:
It does give you the higher ground. If the casual observer is that stupid, then they have no right to my side's superior approach and will suffer the consequences of it.
Click to expand...
Seems to me that we are all suffering the consequences of the myopic tactic of only calling out one's own side when the other side is far worse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom