• 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.

Cont: The Trump Presidency X: 10-10 'til we do it again

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ziggurat said:
You're the reason we have Trump.
Click to expand...

That theory makes no sense. What do you think of the theory that the reason we have Trump is that about 40% of us don't care how dishonest, incompetent and obnoxiously self-obsessed he is as long as he hates the same people they do?
 
WilliamSeger said:
That theory makes no sense. What do you think of the theory that the reason we have Trump is that about 40% of us don't care how dishonest, incompetent and obnoxiously self-obsessed he is as long as he hates the same people they do?
Click to expand...

That about sums it up.
 
Craig4 said:
I applaud the Democratic efforts with the acting AG. They are slandering him, from before he even sat down in the chair. Maybe they learned something from Kavanagh; you have to start the character assassination early and hit it often. It weakens the incumbent and gives pause to the potential candidates. Staffing is a critical vulnerability in this administration. You have to be on message here, take a job with Trump and a buzz saw is coming for you and it will make life for you and your family a living hell.
Click to expand...

Something is only slander if it's untrue. I don't think you can slander someone by quoting them.
 
The Big Dog said:
Acosta clearly pushed that interns arm away, based on CNN's own video.

Bye bye Acosta
Click to expand...

There is no bending of reality you won't engage in to support your "side". This partisan nonsense has poisoned your mind beyond hope.

At this point why should anyone ever believe anything you say?

The Big Dog said:
Ugh, so much TBDDS...
Click to expand...

Stop being such a stooge for liars and totalitarians and people might have a modicrum of respect for you.
 
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Something is only slander if it's untrue. I don't think you can slander someone by quoting them.
Click to expand...


Truth is "Fake News!". Pointing out someone's actual public statements is "Fake News!".

None of that counts. Using it to impugn the integrity of any Republican is underhanded political mudslinging. It isn't like they should be expected to stand by their own remarks.

If they did that they'd be Democrats.

Duh.
 
Stacko said:

Why the **** would you bypass members of the DoJ approved by the senate to appoint someone you don't know? Could it be that you are actually well aware of his position of the Mueller investigation and wanted a stooge?

ETA:

Click to expand...


Whitaker probably went unnoticed in the Oval Office, lost in the crowd of all the other covfefe boys.
 
Belz... said:
Are you joking? Considering the unapologetic lies of Trump and his supporters here just to score political points, to the point of altering videos to make their opponents look worse?

You're in the same boat as TBD.
Click to expand...

Yeah, about that altered video...

And really, you should be trying to burn any bridges between you and Craig4, not rallying to his defense with a tu quoque.
 
Ziggurat said:
Yeah, about that altered video...

And really, you should be trying to burn any bridges between you and Craig4, not rallying to his defense with a tu quoque.
Click to expand...

it is definitely, unambiguously doctored. And it should be scary as hell to every American that their President is blatantly manipulating evidence.
 
The number of discussions going on right now, from practical to esoteric, from big to little, across a dozen different highly disparate topics that can be boiled down to...

"Okay here's what literal, objective reality says."
"Well I disagree."

... should bother me more than it does.
 
Ziggurat said:
Steve King has been elected. So there must be quite a number who agree with him.
Click to expand...
Agree about what?

It is never the case that all voters for a candidate vote for them for the same reason.
Click to expand...
In a normal, rational environment, it is certainly possible to vote for a candidate even if you don't agree with all their policies, or for 2 candidates to vote for someone for different reasons.

I believe racism is different. When a politician is explicitly racist (as Steve King and President Stubby McBonespurs are), their racism takes on a certain priority or importance that should override all other considerations. You cannot vote for either of them (regardless of how much you like their economic, foreign or other policies) without acknowledging that you are giving political authority to a racist, and you are A-OK with that.

Its like if someone said they "really liked that hitler guy. But they're not racist... they just like the fact that they really liked the VW Beetle." In that case, that person's reasoning should be seen as questionable at best, a lie at worst.
 
Segnosaur said:
In a normal, rational environment, it is certainly possible to vote for a candidate even if you don't agree with all their policies, or for 2 candidates to vote for someone for different reasons.

I believe racism is different.
Click to expand...

So if someone thinks racism isn't fundamentally different than other issues, does that itself make them racist, even if they don't have any other beliefs that would qualify?

If so, that's a pretty dramatic expansion of the traditional definition of racism. I don't think that expansion is actually productive to the cause of anti-racism.
 
Ziggurat said:
Yeah, about that altered video...

And really, you should be trying to burn any bridges between you and Craig4, not rallying to his defense with a tu quoque.
Click to expand...

"Converting a video to gif reduces the frame rate" is a reasonable statement. "Converting a video to gif reduces the frame rate and therefore speeds portions of the video up while duplicating frames in other portions" isn't. The latter is the argument that that article is really making.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom