• 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.

The Trump Presidency: Part 17

Status
Not open for further replies.
Upchurch said:
Oh, you're talking about the distraction rather than anything actually important. My bad.
Click to expand...

Because with the big things he can't play "Whatabout."

Fine a Democrat used the term "lynching" in some context in the last 200 years. As long as he's talking about that he can pretend that also means Democrats have also been Russian Sleeper Agents.

If he can Whatabout anything, to him that means he's Whatabouting everything.
 
Ziggurat said:
Have you forgotten what accusation we're talking about here? Because no, that's not the issue. Nobody disputes that Trump used the word "lynch". The accusation is true in that sense. The question is whether that's some terrible offense. And I'm saying that people's past behavior indicates that no, actually, it's not. Nobody really cares about the figurative use of the word, it's the fact that Trump used it which people can't countenance.
Click to expand...

Lindsey Brownnose said that it was actually a lynching in every way. That takes it out of the hyperbole or analogy bucket. Do you think that this is something that is A) true and B) acceptable?
 
Ziggurat said:
Have you forgotten what accusation we're talking about here? Because no, that's not the issue. Nobody disputes that Trump used the word "lynch". The accusation is true in that sense. The question is whether that's some terrible offense. And I'm saying that people's past behavior indicates that no, actually, it's not. Nobody really cares about the figurative use of the word, it's the fact that Trump used it which people can't countenance.
Click to expand...

just don't complain when Democrats run Ads telling Black votes that Trump calls an investigation into him 'Lynching".
After all, it's no big deal according to you.
 
Ziggurat said:
I didn't bring up the subject. Go complain to dudalb.
Click to expand...

Step 1. Demand we show that Trump's action are uniquely bad.
Step 2. Wait until someone makes a comparison to do that.
Step 3. Latch onto the comparison and talk about nothing else.
Step 4. When someone ask you go to back to topic do a faux-innocent "I'm not the one who started the hijack..."

Grow up. You're not starting the hijacks, but you are demanding them.
 
Belz... said:
Lindsey Brownnose said that it was actually a lynching in every way. That takes it out of the hyperbole or analogy bucket. Do you think that this is something that is A) true and B) acceptable?
Click to expand...

No, that's still in the hyperbole bucket. And I'm not a fan of hyperbole, it's generally over-used. But the accusation wasn't that this was unnecessary or inappropriate hyperbole (which most people also don't object to, they only object when the wrong people do it), but that the specific term was offensive. And it's not, not really.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Step 1. Demand we show that Trump's action are uniquely bad.
Step 2. Wait until someone makes a comparison to do that.
Step 3. Latch onto the comparison and talk about nothing else.
Step 4. When someone ask you go to back to topic do a faux-innocent "I'm not the one who started the hijack..."

Grow up. You're not starting the hijacks, but you are demanding them.
Click to expand...

You participated. You only complain now because it hasn't gone your way. You've got now grounds to complain.
 
Ziggurat said:
No, that's still in the hyperbole bucket. And I'm not a fan of hyperbole, it's generally over-used. But the accusation wasn't that this was unnecessary or inappropriate hyperbole (which most people also don't object to, they only object when the wrong people do it), but that the specific term was offensive. And it's not, not really.
Click to expand...

You're not a fan of anything that isn't "Anything but the actual fact and point of the discussion."

Everything is hyperbole if you're a pedant trying to stall out the discussion.
 
I predicted:
newyorkguy said:
The latest is the Trump administration's effort to claim Ukraine didn't even know there was an aid package that Trump was supposedly "withholding."...Expect to hear this repeated by Trump supporters.
Click to expand...

Now it sounds like Team Trump are backing off that claim to float a new one. The Ukrainians knew an aid package had been approved but weren't aware it was being withheld.
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets
Neither he (Taylor) or any other witness has provided testimony that the Ukrainians were aware that military aid was being withheld. You can’t have a quid pro quo with no quo.” Congressman John Ratcliffe @foxandfriends...
Click to expand...

Among many news sources, the Wall Street Journal reports that they were aware:
When news broke that Mr. Trump had blocked hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid for Ukraine, stunned officials in Kyiv frantically called contacts in the State Department and the Pentagon to learn the reason. Some Ukrainian officials surmised that there may have been a technical budgetary reason for the holdup. Others thought it could be that the U.S. is halting foreign aid in general. And some thought it was a personal decision of Mr. Trump. Link
Click to expand...

.
 

Attachments

  • Backhoe.jpg
    Backhoe.jpg
    115.6 KB · Views: 7
Next we'll be arguing:

Can you be aware of something without consciously knowing it? Of course you can. I was aware it looked like rain but it just didn't register. Didn't bring my umbrella! :(
 
Trump thinks that the Russian Army moving in to positions previously held by the US and the Kurds being forced out is somehow a big success.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump thinks that the Russian Army moving in to positions previously held by the US and the Kurds being forced out is somehow a big success.
Click to expand...

I do wonder to what degree Trump thinks his connection to Russia is a good look for him.

Trying to figure out how self aware Trump is a fruitless task, but I can't help but wonder if even Trump is clueless enough to think this is still playing well in Peoria so to speak.
 
TofuFighter said:
I'm not sure that I see goalpost-moving, so can I ask you to point out where you see it, please?
Click to expand...

Happy to oblige.

I read the first take at outrage being “Using the term ‘lynching’ is horribly offensive”. I took that as universally bad.

Then, whataboutism set in, where it was pointed out how many others have used the term in the past, including the newly outraged Democrats.

So the first take was modified to read “Using the term ‘lynching’ is especially horribly offensive when President does it”.

That seems to me to have moved the goalpost. But these things are never black-and-white, so I appreciate some may view it differently.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
Happy to oblige.

I read the first take at outrage being “Using the term ‘lynching’ is horribly offensive”. I took that as universally bad.

Then, whataboutism set in, where it was pointed out how many others have used the term in the past, including the newly outraged Democrats.

So the first take was modified to read “Using the term ‘lynching’ is especially horribly offensive when President does it”.

That seems to me to have moved the goalpost. But these things are never black-and-white, so I appreciate some may view it differently.
Click to expand...

The question then becomes, is the POTUS to be held to a different standard than your average forum member or citizen? If you believe the answer is yes, then the goalposts weren't moved. He's just an exception because of his stature. If you believe the answer is no, then you're right. It's goalpost moving. I'm of the former mindset, it's the reason I don't believe my father should be POTUS...or at least I didn't until now. He couldn't be much worse.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom