Jump to content

The Trump Administration 2017-


Recommended Posts

I'm just waiting on his running mate announcement, which is bound to come in the next two weeks or so. I'm a little anxious about it, because whoever he picks will be viewed as the heir apparent in 2024, whether Joe wins this year or not. I don't know who I want him to pick.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

As a third party voter, and hearing "wasted vote" on the daily, I am loving that both Clinton and Trump were caught rigging the election (Clinton in the primaries and Trump in the general).   Granted,

I don't know about dishonest but you're definitely fucking exhausting.

Zerimar is an anarchist. The first one Ive ever known who is older than 20.

Posted Images

Its going to be either Susan Rice or Kamala Harris. Too bad Michelle Obama isnt interested, because that would pretty well guarantee a win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it strange the media is the boogieman now but honestly the ones throwing the media finger pointing and shaming are people who have tuned into Fox News and get information from Brietbart...

Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact, Biden is mostly avoiding interviews period. Which is super smart, because he mostly just needs to shut up and let Trump kill himself. Keep 2020 about Trump and hide under the bed, Joe. Thats your winning strategy.

This is absolutely a winning strategy in 2020. The Biden campaign is being very smart. All the negative attention on Trump mismanaging COVID is exactly what he needs. Funny, because most elections are about getting the attention and putting yourself out there. If he hadn't been VP for a popular administration and a household name, I'm not sure this would've worked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah here's how I see it. Biden is definitely a scum bag (AKA typical politician). But what is our option? Re-elect Trump? Let's get that joker out of office, then we can tackle the me too stuff later. The ABSOLUTE wrong answer no matter how you slice it is Trump for another 4 years as president. Pick your battles. This literally is a choice between Boss Hogg and Hitler.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about Val Demings? Certainly, as others elsewhere note, her career would be good and bad for the campaign... however I gotta believe that would be the case for anyone at this stage. She quite obviously does not like Trump, her positions during the Impeachment were that hes abused his position, but in recent times in regards to police issues she has walked a tighter line. If Biden is looking for more centrist support, perhaps pulling more centrist GOP, maybe Val could be the VP nom. At the very least it would be intriguing to see how the GOP side of the Thin Blue Line crowd decides to attack or side with her. Although I would hazard a guess it would probably be similar to the treatment Vindman got from the GOP side of the Support Our Soldiers/Vets crowd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I still don't get how "grab em by the *****" didn't end it all.

For the same reason voters ignored something as incredibly serious like Paula Jones' sexual harassment allegations against Bill Clinton revealed during his first term, yet voters skipped right over that to give him a second term.

 

Deflection 101.

 

Bull. The question was "I still don't get how "grab em by the *****" didn't end it all". A relevant example of negative sexual matters not hurting a candidate was posted. If some refuse to see how the examples point to voters not caring about negative sexual matters, then that is a case of some wanting to paint Trump as Satan who should have been hurt by the recording, when it did not work with him, nor did it work with Clinton, who had far worse accusation pinned on him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's still deflection. We're not talking about Clinton. This thread isn't titled The Clinton Administration. We're talking about Donald Trump and the shit he's said and done. Bringing literally anyone else (aside from Trump's victims) into the conversation is a form of deflection. If you want to talk about the sexual assaults and other various wrongs that Clinton has done, start a thread for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dude, can we NOT talk about the Clintons anymore? It's been 20 years since Bill was in office. And while we are at it, can we stop blaming Obama for every thing, too? At some point, the GOP needs to just own Trump and all his screw ups, and decide if they want to go down with Trump or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Side Note: I wish I had video editing skillz because I have wanted to edit in a compilation of every time Threepio says thank the maker except with a voice over impersonation that replaces that with thanks obama. Pretty sure itd spread like covid.

 

Afterthought: Now I want to make a commercial for margarine or peanut butter with the tag line that it spreads like covid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's still deflection. We're not talking about Clinton. This thread isn't titled The Clinton Administration. We're talking about Donald Trump and the **** he's said and done. Bringing literally anyone else (aside from Trump's victims) into the conversation is a form of deflection. If you want to talk about the sexual assaults and other various wrongs that Clinton has done, start a thread for it.

Sorry, not buying that. Relevant historical comparisons is only a deflection to those who live in an echo chamber of only-one-side-committed-some-wrongdoing. Thankfully, the real world does not live in said echo chamber, so for anyone wondering why Trump's Access Hollywood recording did not hurt his chances, look to a serious charge of sexual assault not preventing a second Clinton term. All relevant about what voters are willing to ignore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Compare:

 

Statement: The plane crashed.

Question: Why?

Answer: It ran out of fuel.

 

Statement: The plane crashed.

Question: Why?

 

Answer: A plane crashed last month, that plane ran out of fuel. But a plane crashed a month before that because it sucked up a bird into its engine. Planes can crash for a lot of reasons.

 

 

Both conversations answer a question-- one directly, one gets muddy due to trying change the questions from WHY DID THIS PLANE CRASH to WHY DO PLANES CRASH.

 

Both valid questions, but only one of them was asked. That's not to say one can't lead to the next, but when you answer the first question indirectly as the first answer, you're twisting the discussion.

 

Which is... Deflection 101.

 

Or you're just a know-it-all that doesn't like to answer questions within the parameters they were asked to either change the point or how off how much stuff you know.

 

That's Asshole 101.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yikes. My wife is convinced he has some form of dementia or mental impairment that makes him say these deluded things. It's hard not to agree.

 

"We're lower than the world". Ummm what?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your wife is a by far not the only person to think so. That's why he kept talking about that "Person, Woman, Man, Camera" test that he of course did better than everyone else ever, it's a common dementia test... and he was not describing it accurately at all.

 

The look on Trump's face when he couldn't even read his own chart, and then the guy told him that the data on his own chart made the US look terrible. I'd laugh if he wasn't the leader of the free world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Compare:

 

Statement: The plane crashed.

Question: Why?

Answer: It ran out of fuel.

 

Statement: The plane crashed.

Question: Why?

 

Answer: A plane crashed last month, that plane ran out of fuel. But a plane crashed a month before that because it sucked up a bird into its engine. Planes can crash for a lot of reasons.

 

 

Both conversations answer a question-- one directly, one gets muddy due to trying change the questions from WHY DID THIS PLANE CRASH to WHY DO PLANES CRASH.

 

Both valid questions, but only one of them was asked. That's not to say one can't lead to the next, but when you answer the first question indirectly as the first answer, you're twisting the discussion.

 

Which is... Deflection 101.

 

Or you're just a know-it-all that doesn't like to answer questions within the parameters they were asked to either change the point or how off how much stuff you know.

 

That's ***hole 101.

More bull. Not a surprise when you deliberately ignore how relevant historical comparisons answers the question. Ahh, but that is crazy talk when you live n that aforementioned echo chamber where being ignorant of history and its effect is a substitute for facts. Some remind me of Charlamagne Tha God telling Biden, "I really wish Joe Biden would shut the eff up forever.." after the Democratic nominee claimed Trump was the "first racist president." Anyone knowing even one moment of American history knows that is absolute BS and an astoundingly offensive statement (yeah, he should look a part of my family in the face and repeat that), but history does not matter--its all about the "Trump = Satan" story, so facts be damned--exactly what is happening here.

 

Individuals are free to live in a fantasy world if they choose to, but that does not prevent anyone else from pointing out the ideological gymnastics performed to continue selling a story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:spit:

Sure, dude.

 

As per usual, you've completely made up a narrative for me that isn't close to true... and continue to deflect... and use fictional parables as if they are making some grand point. Justus 101.

 

I'm shocked you didn't whip out the ol "those who do not know history and destined to repeat it." That's a great one to hide behind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Compare:

 

Statement: The plane crashed.

Question: Why?

Answer: It ran out of fuel.

 

Statement: The plane crashed.

Question: Why?

 

Answer: A plane crashed last month, that plane ran out of fuel. But a plane crashed a month before that because it sucked up a bird into its engine. Planes can crash for a lot of reasons.

 

 

Both conversations answer a question-- one directly, one gets muddy due to trying change the questions from WHY DID THIS PLANE CRASH to WHY DO PLANES CRASH.

 

Both valid questions, but only one of them was asked. That's not to say one can't lead to the next, but when you answer the first question indirectly as the first answer, you're twisting the discussion.

 

Which is... Deflection 101.

 

Or you're just a know-it-all that doesn't like to answer questions within the parameters they were asked to either change the point or how off how much stuff you know.

 

That's ***hole 101.

More bull. Not a surprise when you deliberately ignore how relevant historical comparisons answers the question. Ahh, but that is crazy talk when you live n that aforementioned echo chamber where being ignorant of history and its effect is a substitute for facts. Some remind me of Charlamagne Tha God telling Biden, "I really wish Joe Biden would shut the eff up forever.." after the Democratic nominee claimed Trump was the "first racist president." Anyone knowing even one moment of American history knows that is absolute BS and an astoundingly offensive statement (yeah, he should look a part of my family in the face and repeat that), but history does not matter--its all about the "Trump = Satan" story, so facts be damned--exactly what is happening here.

 

Individuals are free to live in a fantasy world if they choose to, but that does not prevent anyone else from pointing out the ideological gymnastics performed to continue selling a story.

 

WHAT?

 

"when you deliberately ignore how relevant historical comparisons answers the question" in this case, 'historical' comparisons do not answer the question.

 

"when you live n that aforementioned echo chamber where being ignorant of history and its effect is a substitute for facts." Please tell us how any of this pure supposition is at all relevant to why the plane crashed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple version:

 

Somebody said WTF TRUMP IS A PREDATOR

 

Justus said: SO WAS CLINTON

 

I said: that is conservative deflection 101 to dodge the topic by citing a case of the opposition doing something similar

 

No one is denying Clinton was/is a creep. No one is saying it didn't happen.

 

Talking about the long history of men in power abusing their privilege is a legit conversation... if that was the topic. It is not.

 

There's a difference between a treatise on that topic versus trying to distract from calling out Trump's dirtbaggery by attempting to normalize it because it happened before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In fact, Biden is mostly avoiding interviews period. Which is super smart, because he mostly just needs to shut up and let Trump kill himself. Keep 2020 about Trump and hide under the bed, Joe. Thats your winning strategy.

This is absolutely a winning strategy in 2020. The Biden campaign is being very smart. All the negative attention on Trump mismanaging COVID is exactly what he needs. Funny, because most elections are about getting the attention and putting yourself out there. If he hadn't been VP for a popular administration and a household name, I'm not sure this would've worked.

 

The guy must've hired one hell of an advisor. Biden is known for his big mouth and stupidity, really not unlike Trump at all.

 

I can't wait to sit back and watch the country vote on which sexual predator should be commander-in-thief. I will not be participating.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel like we need Justus so we can have that feel of the old Lyceum. Sometimes I miss it.

I find it more entertaining, the discourse/arguments versus having beliefs reinforced via agreement all round.

 

That said, locking heads can get tiresome when you're one of the parties involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...