Trump Twitter rally goes hilariously/sadly wrong

[Dr. Keith]

Yeah but we're in the post-fact, alternative fact world, so I can say whatever I want.

You pretending this is a new thing is the most alternative fact I've heard all day!

 

[Trakar]

The people who claim we need to reduce human population significantly might get their wish.

Oh, I don't think we'll be lining all conservatives up against a wall anytime soon,...if that's what you were referring to.

That said, we have made significant advancements with enhanced neutron emission devices over the last few decades, we could probably reduce our ghg emissions to below 1950 levels relatively quickly, and it may even spare more lives than it takes, in the long run.

 

[Trakar]

Silly rabbit !

Don't you know that the only way to discourage a slut is to deny her easy access to sex education or contraception and then to force her to carry any pregnancy to full term.

Boys on the other hand are merely "sewing their wild oats", so there's no need to trouble them.....

"sowing" sorry, those oats don't get sewn

 

[Stacko]

Is there an agreed upon 'worst president in history' for Trump to be compared to?

Buchanan?

 

[Sabrina]

Is there an agreed upon 'worst president in history' for Trump to be compared to?

Depends on your measurement criteria. If you go by Gallup poll approval ratings (which admittedly don't go back to the beginning), Nixon, Truman, Carter, and G.W. Bush all ended their terms in office at between 30-35% approval ratings. Trump is setting a record for the lowest starting approval rating, at only 45% (he's the first US President to start below 50% approval since they first started tracking this with Dwight Eisenhower in 1953). If you rank them by scholarly surveys, the results tend to change from survey to survey, but Harrison, G.W. Bush, Harding, Johnson, Buchanan, and Pierce were listed as the lowest in a 2009 C-SPAN survey of quote "a group of presidential historians and "professional observers of the presidency"", unquote. Bush tends to be in there quite a bit, along with Nixon. There's also an online survey taken by members of the American Political Science Association’s Presidents & Executive Politics section that measured several different criteria and put Buchanan dead last (found here). Obama ranked 18th, for reference. So in a way yes, in a way no. It's still somewhat subjective, although there are objective criteria that you can rank Presidents on; the problem lies more in the subjective interpretation of those criteria.

 

[Belz...]

You pretending this is a new thing is the most alternative fact I've heard all day!

Pfft. Before I was bound by the laws of physics and logic. Now watch me soar!

Oh, I don't think we'll be lining all conservatives up against a wall anytime soon,...if that's what you were referring to.

No, and I don't know how you came to that conclusion. I'm refering to the right-wing policies that are going to get a lot of people killed.

 

[sunmaster14]

Policies are not Karma: you don't get free bad ones to balance out the good ones.

Of course they are. All policies have good and bad effects. You must net them to determine if they are worth pursuing or not. If you can net the effects intra-policy, you can certainly do it inter-policy. Especially in the political arena, which requires a rather large amount of horse trading and compromise, measuring a range of initiatives by their net effect is the only way to go.

Certainly you recognize that there were bad things in Obamacare, along with the parts you agreed with. Just as I recognize there were good things in Obamacare, although they were outweighed by the bad, in my opinion.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Remember, the only birth control a woman needs is an aspirin. She holds it between her knees and she doesn't get pregnant.

But not so tightly that she can't be grabbed by the pussy.

 

[sunmaster14]

Oh, I don't think we'll be lining all conservatives up against a wall anytime soon,...if that's what you were referring to.

That said, we have made significant advancements with enhanced neutron emission devices over the last few decades, we could probably reduce our ghg emissions to below 1950 levels relatively quickly, and it may even spare more lives than it takes, in the long run.

That you think this is even remotely plausible just shows how utterly brainwashed people have become about the interaction of humanity and the Earth. Although I'll admit that there are some people, perhaps hundreds of millions, who contribute negatively to humanity, on average I think it's clear that the net marginal value of a human being is greater than zero.

 

[Spindrift]

Buchanan?

Harding.

 

[NoahFence]

It is a strategy used by conservatives and mastered by Kellyanne Conway. Instead of answering questions or taking responsibility, toss out tons of other "issues" and questions to deflect and confuse. None of it is relevant, they know it.

"Whataboutism"

Oh yea, what about.... (fill in irrelevance here)

I wonder if they think they're being clever, or if they know they're just lazy?

 

[dudalb]

Harding.

Buchanan. Harding, as bad as he was, did not make decisions that led to the biggest bloodbath in American History.

 

[Trebuchet]

Sounds like a decent shot. He was good in Dr who though

Except he thought Melody/River was a boy....

Someone suggested Warren G Harding earlier or in another thread. But Trump has the potential of combining the vindictiveness of Nixon with the corruption of Harding.

 

[dudalb]

That seems very plausible.

Actually, both the individuals in question seem to have very skewed views of reality...just from different perspectives.

 

[dudalb]

Except he thought Melody/River was a boy....

Someone suggested Warren G Harding earlier or in another thread. But Trump has the potential of combining the vindictiveness of Nixon with the corruption of Harding.

The Irony of Harding is that most historians have concluded he was actually honest personally, he was just an incredibly bad judge of character in his appointments .
In terms of damage to the country, though, Buchanan was much worse.

 

[CynicalSkeptic]

Is there an agreed upon 'worst president in history' for Trump to be compared to?

Here's a nice comparison to Chávez? Or mabye Mugabe.

 

[Trakar]

The Irony of Harding is that most historians have concluded he was actually honest personally, he was just an incredibly bad judge of character in his appointments .
In terms of damage to the country, though, Buchanan was much worse.

don't forget the arrogant ignorance of GWB.

 

[PhantomWolf]

The executive order he signed shut down federal funding of foreign NGOs if they promote abortions.

This is not a proposed change. It is shutting down funding immediately.

This does not affect female citizens of the US, but people worldwide who rely on such services organized by NGOs (the funding is shut down if the NGO does even so much as referrals to abortion clinics or doctors, and probably even if it just offers counseling/information which happens to include information on abortion).

Not just abortion, but contraception as well. What that means is that woman in 3rd world countries will be more at risk to diseases such as AIDs because they will have nowhere to even discuss the benefits of Contraceptive measures such as condoms. Trump's version has gone beyond the Reagan/Bush version in that it bans ALL global health care funding, not just funding through USAID (United States Agency for International Development) or the State Department.

This is an action that could see the deaths of tens of thousands of women around the world, but I guess as sunmaster stated, who cases....

it's not even American women.

 

[psionl0]

Remember, the only birth control a woman needs is an aspirin. She holds it between her knees and she doesn't get pregnant.

Or even no asprin, then she can claim a headache.

The best oral contraceptive is still the word "no".

 

[PhantomWolf]

The best oral contraceptive is still the word "no".

Really?