Let’s talk Donald Trump

Discuss everything else: politics, society, culture, science, philosophy, ideas, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
blackg
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1347
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1854

Re: Let’s talk Donald Trump

Post by blackg » 2 weeks ago

Anti Mexican sentiment existed way before the Trump presidency.
Maybe, just maybe it has something to do with inhabitants of small border towns feeling under siege by immigrants from Mexico and elsewhere in South America.

Maybe they are tired of hearing phrases like "Hey gringo!" directed at them on daily basis.
They could also feel like strangers in their own towns.
But, of course once the "gringo" expresses these concerns he is immediately branded a racist in an attempt to shut him (or her) up.

When you deny people a voice, don't be surprised if violence follows.
Just look at the Palestinian situation.
Ringo, said the gringo

nameless
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 475
Joined: 9 months ago
Reputation: 131
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: None at this time.

Re: Let’s talk Donald Trump

Post by nameless » 2 weeks ago

blackg wrote:
2 weeks ago
Anti Mexican sentiment existed way before the Trump presidency.
Maybe, just maybe it has something to do with inhabitants of small border towns feeling under siege by immigrants from Mexico and elsewhere in South America.

Maybe they are tired of hearing phrases like "Hey gringo!" directed at them on daily basis.
They could also feel like strangers in their own towns.
But, of course once the "gringo" expresses these concerns he is immediately branded a racist in an attempt to shut him (or her) up.

When you deny people a voice, don't be surprised if violence follows.
Just look at the Palestinian situation.
"Anti-Mexican sentiment existed before Trump but not to the extent of mass-murdering them. You do not debate in good-faith. You know that the anti-Mexican sentiment has worsened a lot since Trump took office but you pretend like it's the same as it was before Trump came along. You debate dishonestly because you can't HONESTLY defend your position. You have to lie to make your position sound OK.
Last edited by nameless 2 weeks ago, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
rclark
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1144
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1257
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: Finasteride 1 mg daily, Progesterone 2% (22mg daily), Minoxidil 15% hair growth only).
Using 1.5 mm needle on all bald/balding areas weekly.

Re: Let’s talk Donald Trump

Post by rclark » 2 weeks ago

JLBB wrote:
2 weeks ago
Those feels when someone writes three tiny lines in a post, and to cover everything wrong with it you could spend a full page on it.
I don't like Trump because I'm going to have another unpaid government shutdown in September 2019. We already had the longest
one ever in December of 2018, and January 2019.

The other thing is, Trump is a master manipulator. Already he is preparing for his reelection by pardoning a Democrat, which Obama
put behind bars. It is Trump's hate for Obama, for getting revenge after Trump lied about him having a fake birth certificate.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump ... atest_news

Trump weakened Universal Healthcare (Affordable Care Act, or "Obamacare" for the sole purpose he wanted to humilate Obama, for
roasting Trump after Trump lied about his birth certificate.

To put another sentence about it, the stupid citizens of the United States who have already had him for four years, are going to
get him another four.

They might as well elect his appointed daughter, who no ever President of either party ever appointed his family members to high
positions of power.

nameless
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 475
Joined: 9 months ago
Reputation: 131
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: None at this time.

Re: Let’s talk Donald Trump

Post by nameless » 2 weeks ago

Man who broke boy's skull for not taking hat off during anthem did it for Trump.

The man who threw a kid down and broke his skull because the kid wouldn't take his hat off during the anthem did it because he believed it is what the POTUS wanted him to do.

Like I said these people committing violent right-wing acts are doing so because Trump makes them feel like it's OK to do this crap.

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2019/0 ... /23790426/

User avatar
blackg
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1347
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1854

Re: Let’s talk Donald Trump

Post by blackg » 2 weeks ago

I'm not the first person in life to be suspicious of the reasoning coming from a defence lawyer.
Ringo, said the gringo

User avatar
Rudiger
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 994
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2637
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: Finasteride, Dutasteride, minoxidil, Biotin, Dermarolling, Nizoral

Re: Let’s talk Donald Trump

Post by Rudiger » 2 weeks ago

nameless wrote:
2 weeks ago
Man who broke boy's skull for not taking hat off during anthem did it for Trump.

The man who threw a kid down and broke his skull because the kid wouldn't take his hat off during the anthem did it because he believed it is what the POTUS wanted him to do.

Like I said these people committing violent right-wing acts are doing so because Trump makes them feel like it's OK to do this crap.

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2019/0 ... /23790426/
I bet he would've allowed it if it was a MAGA hat racist bigot
~get 1k likes and party~ 8-)

nameless
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 475
Joined: 9 months ago
Reputation: 131
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: None at this time.

Re: Let’s talk Donald Trump

Post by nameless » 2 weeks ago

blackg wrote:
2 weeks ago
I'm not the first person in life to be suspicious of the reasoning coming from a defence lawyer.
Great! You think all lawyers are a bunch of liars. Thanks for sharing but that's not the point. The point is that the man's defense is that he interpreted Trump's public statements to mean that Trump wanted him to crack that 13-year old boy's skull because he didn't take his hat off for the anthem.

And sure lawyer's can be dishonest. So what? No one is 100% honest all of the time so everyone is dishonest. I've seen a lot of disingenuous posts by you as well. So what? Even your post above that I'm responding to now is disingenuous. You're basically saying,

"I've seen where lawyers have lied in the past so this means that, unlike the rest of us, lawyers are liars. And this means the perp isn't really saying he cracked that 13-year old kids skull because he thought Trump wanted him to."

But that is false. In fact, the man's defense really is that he cracked that 13-year old's skull for not taking his hat off during the anthem because he believed President Trump wanted him to do that.

Notice that he attacked a 13-year old boy for disrespecting the flag not an NFL football player. What a coward.

User avatar
blackg
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1347
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1854

Re: Let’s talk Donald Trump

Post by blackg » 1 week ago

nameless wrote:
1 week ago
Great! You think all lawyers are a bunch of liars. Thanks for sharing but that's not the point. The point is that the man's defense is that he interpreted Trump's public statements to mean that Trump wanted him to crack that 13-year old boy's skull because he didn't take his hat off for the anthem.

And sure lawyer's can be dishonest. So what? No one is 100% honest all of the time so everyone is dishonest. I've seen a lot of disingenuous posts by you as well. So what? Even your post above that I'm responding to now is disingenuous. You're basically saying,

"I've seen where lawyers have lied in the past so this means that, unlike the rest of us, lawyers are liars. And this means the perp isn't really saying he cracked that 13-year old kids skull because he thought Trump wanted him to."

But that is false. In fact, the man's defense really is that he cracked that 13-year old's skull for not taking his hat off during the anthem because he believed President Trump wanted him to do that.

Notice that he attacked a 13-year old boy for disrespecting the flag not an NFL football player. What a coward.
I'm saying that it's a defence lawyer/attorney's job to present their clients in the most favorable light, and that often includes introducing extraneous circumstances.
This one very dubious.
Ringo, said the gringo

nameless
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 475
Joined: 9 months ago
Reputation: 131
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: None at this time.

Re: Let’s talk Donald Trump

Post by nameless » 1 week ago

blackg wrote:
1 week ago
I'm saying that it's a defence lawyer/attorney's job to present their clients in the most favorable light, and that often includes introducing extraneous circumstances.
This one very dubious.
To hear you tell it, the idea that Trump's rhetoric drives his supporters to commit violence is ludicrous. Why would a lawyer bother with a ludicrous defense? After all, judges and juries aren't going to go along with a ludicrous defense, right? And if the judge and jury accepts the lawyer's defense then doesn't that mean that the judges and juries agree with the defense...that Trump's rhetoric is driving right-wing violence?

The courts are the finders of fact in civilized countries. If the courts (judges and juries) start agreeing with defense lawyers claims that Trump's rhetoric is driving right-wing violence will you accept it as truth then? My point is that I think you will always find some phony rational to reject the truth.

if more defendants allege Trump is motivating them to commit violent acts will you call all of those defendants liars? If the judges say Trump's rhetoric is motivating right-wing violence then will you still deny it? If the juries say Trump's rhetoric is motivating right-wing violence will you still deny it? Will you reject the truth just because the truth is not what you want it to be? It's starting to look that way to me. And if that's the case then that means you're a dishonest debater. And if you're a dishonest debater that eliminates your value as a debater. Why debate with someone who's just going to present dishonest arguments to defend his positions no matter how strong the proof is against his arguments? If you're not going to go along with judges or juries even though those people are the triers of fact in the civilized world then there's no point in debating with you.

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1478
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3655
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Let’s talk Donald Trump

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 1 week ago

Rudiger wrote:
2 weeks ago
you do deliberately avoid topics that aren't easy to answer.
That's obviously incorrect. I tackle *a lot* of challenging topics.

I have even tackled the flat-Earth and holocaust-denial conspiracy theories that have been posted on here. In hindsight, that was a waste of time, and it's really better for me to not invest any time or effort dismantling garbage. I should just ignore it.

There's also some additional information that you're not aware of, that I cannot post here. If you'd like to know, feel free to PM me.

You have a tendency to make irrational assumptions. In the other thread, you speculated that the NY meetup didn't happen because of @rlcark (WTF?), and here, you speculated that I took a few days off because of you (WTF?). In both cases: No lol.

Added in 7 minutes 52 seconds:
nameless wrote:
1 week ago
the idea that Trump's rhetoric drives his supporters to commit violence
It's interesting how male losers with a predisposition to violence so strongly gravitate to Trump.

It's also unfortunate. These people should be focused on fixing their lives, but they don't want to lift a finger. So they're instead choosing to live a power fantasy via their avatar / totem: Trump. He is a weak man's idea of a strong man, a dim man's idea of a genius, a poor man's idea of a rich person, and an incel's idea of a chad. He's kind of an addictive narcotic for those people. But perhaps we should not expect them to get better: if they had the will to live, to improve their lives, they'd have done so already.

At this point, the only useful thing that he has done is initiate the trade war with China, and even there it's not clear that he's implementing things properly. Meanwhile, he abandoned his campaign promise of infrastructure spending to instead squander that money on tax cuts while the country's roads and sewers are collapsing, there are more and more mass shootings, there is renewed looting of the environment, nuclear weapons technology is proliferating, and the military falls further and further behind. Is the F-35 ever going to safely fly?

I have driven to and from a nearby major city several times in recent months. There were traffic jams every single time. It's time for the country to build more and better roads. Trump was actually going to do this. He campaigned on that promise. It would have made the country more efficient, and it would have employed a lot of people in the process. However, he did not do it, because his chief economic adviser Gary Cohn convinced him to instead squander that money on tax cuts.

nameless
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Hair Loss Enthusiast
Posts: 475
Joined: 9 months ago
Reputation: 131
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: None at this time.

Re: Let’s talk Donald Trump

Post by nameless » 1 week ago

blackg wrote:
1 week ago
I'm saying that it's a defence lawyer/attorney's job to present their clients in the most favorable light, and that often includes introducing extraneous circumstances.
This one very dubious.
But you're dodging my point. What about the judges and juries? If they agree with the defendant's position will you accept that Trump's rhetoric is a driver of the right-wing violence taking place?

Judges and juries decide what's true in our civilized nations. They're the trier of facts in civilized nations, including both Australia and the USA. So I'm asking you, what if the judges and juries say the defense is correct that Trump's rhetoric is driving the right-wing violence? Will you accept that it's true or will you reject the civilized world's way of determining the truth?

Added in 4 hours 59 minutes 4 seconds:
Afro_Vacancy wrote:
1 week ago


It's interesting how male losers with a predisposition to violence so strongly gravitate to Trump.

It's also unfortunate. These people should be focused on fixing their lives, but they don't want to lift a finger. So they're instead choosing to live a power fantasy via their avatar / totem: Trump. He is a weak man's idea of a strong man, a dim man's idea of a genius, a poor man's idea of a rich person, and an incel's idea of a chad. He's kind of an addictive narcotic for those people. But perhaps we should not expect them to get better: if they had the will to live, to improve their lives, they'd have done so already.

At this point, the only useful thing that he has done is initiate the trade war with China, and even there it's not clear that he's implementing things properly. Meanwhile, he abandoned his campaign promise of infrastructure spending to instead squander that money on tax cuts while the country's roads and sewers are collapsing, there are more and more mass shootings, there is renewed looting of the environment, nuclear weapons technology is proliferating, and the military falls further and further behind. Is the F-35 ever going to safely fly?

I have driven to and from a nearby major city several times in recent months. There were traffic jams every single time. It's time for the country to build more and better roads. Trump was actually going to do this. He campaigned on that promise. It would have made the country more efficient, and it would have employed a lot of people in the process. However, he did not do it, because his chief economic adviser Gary Cohn convinced him to instead squander that money on tax cuts.
It's sad that male losers gravitate to Trump. I think they're looking for scapegoats to blame their own failings on. They would be better served by trying to improve themselves but scapegoating others is easier than taking one's own inventory and trying to improve one's own self.

They express machismo attitudes but they choose their fights carefully. Notice that the guy who threw that kid to the ground chose a 13-year old boy to bully and that same guy pulled a gun on a couple in a car. Even if the couple had a gun on them the bully already had his gun displayed so he got the drop on them and the couple never had a chance. Trump supporters don't appear to be strong men. They talk tough but they pick easy targets.

But I still think that some of them may be able to learn. I think Mr. MAGA, who threw the 13 year old boy to the ground, may pass through the court turnstile a little different than he entered it, and I think a few others like him may learn something from his public court process. I don't think any of them care what democrats say but I do think a few of them care what the court says.

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1478
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 3655
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: Let’s talk Donald Trump

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 1 week ago

nameless wrote:
1 week ago
But you're dodging my point. What about the judges and juries? If they agree with the defendant's position will you accept that Trump's rhetoric is a driver of the right-wing violence taking place?

Judges and juries decide what's true in our civilized nations. They're the trier of facts in civilized nations, including both Australia and the USA. So I'm asking you, what if the judges and juries say the defense is correct that Trump's rhetoric is driving the right-wing violence? Will you accept that it's true or will you reject the civilized world's way of determining the truth?

Added in 4 hours 59 minutes 4 seconds:


It's sad that male losers gravitate to Trump. I think they're looking for scapegoats to blame their own failings on. They would be better served by trying to improve themselves but scapegoating others is easier than taking one's own inventory and trying to improve one's own self.

They express machismo attitudes but they choose their fights carefully. Notice that the guy who threw that kid to the ground chose a 13-year old boy to bully and that same guy pulled a gun on a couple in a car. Even if the couple had a gun on them the bully already had his gun displayed so he got the drop on them and the couple never had a chance. Trump supporters don't appear to be strong men. They talk tough but they pick easy targets.

But I still think that some of them may be able to learn. I think Mr. MAGA, who threw the 13 year old boy to the ground, may pass through the court turnstile a little different than he entered it, and I think a few others like him may learn something from his public court process. I don't think any of them care what democrats say but I do think a few of them care what the court says.
See also this guy. A 29 year old man and loser got angry when he found out that there are people who don't worship Trump, so he got out of his red pickup truck and started bearing up a 61 year old.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/beta.washi ... utType=amp

I didn't agree with your post when I started reading it, but by the end of it I was agreeing. I buy that. Trump supporters want to assign blame and hate to compensate for their own failings.

Meanwhile, the country is falling apart. It'd be great to have an actual President right now.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Admin, Bing [Bot] and 3 guests