Real World Event Discussions

TRUMP - Just because.....................Naw, I just can't say it!

POSTED BY: SHINYGOODGUY
UPDATED: Monday, March 9, 2026 20:06
VIEWED: 244478
PAGE 19 of 170

JEWELSTAITEFAN

Thursday, June 23, 2016 4:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by second:

The Trump Files: Watch Donald Not Be Able to Multiply 17 By 6
(Neither could his kids)
Still, he insists his wrong answer is correct.

Alec Baldwin told him there is an app for that.
Regarding his current waste of time, somebody should tell Alec that instead of reciting questions to celebrity idiots, there is and app for that, and it's much better than Alec.

I can't get sound - what were their answers? Did they explain their reasoning for their wrong answers?

SECOND

Thursday, June 23, 2016 6:06 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:

I can't get sound - what were their answers? Did they explain their reasoning for their wrong answers?

"That's not a practical question!" said the daughter. They went into guessing mode. "96!" "94!" Daddy guesses 112. They're all talking very fast, like the Trumps are at a cocktail party. To me, they either had a couple of drinks each before going on the air or there is less going on inside their heads than there should be.

Literally a framed picture on the wall of Trump and a porn star, now in prison for drug smuggling, as major evangelical leader Jerry Falwell Jr endorses Trump. If you think Trump has the sense to take down that picture while running for President, you would be wrong. The right answer is 102 = 17 * 6.
https://twitter.com/nathanlino/status/745351032390049797

www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/06/jerry-falwell-jr-poses-miss-oct
ober-1987-and-evangelicals-are-not-amused

1KIKI

Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:59 AM

"All you have to do is point out the real truth." If you believe that, then you have misunderstood all of recorded history.

"If you believe that, then you have misunderstood all of recorded history." You made that claim about the truth.

I asked if - given your position that truth doesn't work, HASN'T worked for all of recoded history - lies become the only pragmatic solution. And if you had an equal problem when lies came from different directions.

Your rather long-winded post didn't address my questions. Chalk up one in the 'evasion' column on second's score card of dishonest arguments.

Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:

If truth doesn't suffice then the only thing to do is resort to lying. So ... you must approve when Donald - or Hillary - lie. Because they're both doing the only thing that works. Or are your standards different depending on WHO does it?
An editorial by a Republican who hates Hillary and yet he won't vote, as mentioned in one of his previous editorials because he has his public reputation to protect, for Trump. I believe Krauthammer will vote for Trump on his secret ballot, since that secret can't change his public reputation, but I will never know for sure, which is Krauthammer's advantage in his public life. Unlike Krauthammer, I don't play games of saying one thing publicly and doing in secret something else:

Trump won’t be running as anyone but himself

Charles Krauthammer says while some hoped he’d turn ‘presidential,’ the candidate is staying on the path that helped him clinch the GOP nod.
www.nationalreview.com/article/436717/donald-trump-wont-get-presidenti
al

When in his 1964 GOP acceptance speech Barry Goldwater declared that “extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice,” a reporter sitting near journalist/historian Theodore White famously exclaimed: “My God, he’s going to run as Barry Goldwater!”

Six weeks into Donald Trump’s general election campaign, Republicans are discovering that he indeed intends to run as Donald Trump. He has boasted that he could turn “presidential” — respectful, respectable, reticent, reserved bordering on boring — at will. Apparently, he can’t.

GOP leaders who fell in line behind Trump after he clinched the nomination expected, or at least hoped, that he would prove malleable, willing to adjust his more extreme positions and tactics to suit a broader electorate.

Two problems. First, impulse control: Trump says what he actually feels, whatever comes into his head at any moment. Second, a certain logic: Trump won the primaries Sinatra-style, his way —against the odds, the experts and the conventional rules. So why change now? “You win the pennant,” Trump explained, “and now you’re in the World Series — you gonna change?”

Hence his response to the Orlando terror attack. Events like these generally benefit the challenger politically because any misfortune that befalls the nation gets attributed, fairly or not, directly or indirectly, to the incumbent party (e.g., the 2008 financial collapse). And Hillary Clinton is running as the quasi-incumbent.

The textbook response for the challenger, therefore, is to offer sympathy, give a general statement or two about the failure of the incumbent’s national security policy, then step back to let the resulting national fear and loathing, amplified by the media, take effect.

Instead, Trump made himself the (political) story. First, he offered himself unseemly congratulations for his prescience about terrorism. (He’d predicted more would be coming. What a visionary.) Then he went beyond blaming the president for lack of will or wisdom in fighting terrorism, and darkly implied presidential sympathy for the enemy. “There’s something going on,” he charged. He then reiterated his ban on Muslim immigration.

Why? Because that’s what Trump does. And because it worked before. It was a

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

SECOND

Thursday, June 23, 2016 7:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:

Your rather long-winded post didn't address my questions. Chalk up one in the 'evasion' column on second's score card of dishonest arguments.

Address your questions to Trump. He gave a speech yesterday and he was dishonest.
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a0eecb48c6c84aaa9cdad9141fbcd09c/ap-fac
t-check-trumps-distortions-clinton

two short examples from the article:

TRUMP: "We are the highest-taxed nation in the world."

THE FACTS: Closer to the opposite is true.

The U.S. tax burden is actually one of the lowest among the 34 developed and large emerging-market economies that make up the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Taxes made up 26 percent of the total U.S. economy in 2014, according to the OECD. That's far below Sweden's tax burden of 42.7 percent, Britain's 32.6 percent or Germany's 36.1 percent. Only three OECD members had a lower figure: Chile, South Korea and Mexico.
___
TRUMP: "We will repeal and replace job-killing Obamacare. It is a total disaster."

THE FACTS: Job growth has been solid by historical standards since Obama's health care overhaul was signed into law in March 2010. Since then, employers have added nearly 14 million jobs and businesses have been on the longest hiring streak in the post-World War II era. And 2014 and 2015 were the two best years of private-sector hiring since the late 1990s. The unemployment rate, meanwhile, has fallen to 4.7 percent, an 8 ½ year low, from 9.9 percent when the law was passed.

THGRRI

Friday, June 24, 2016 5:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"All you have to do is point out the real truth." If you believe that, then you have misunderstood all of recorded history.

Your rather long-winded post didn't address my questions. Chalk up one in the 'evasion' column on second's score card of dishonest arguments.

Speaking of avoiding the question 1kiki. There are many questions on the other threads for you to address. We have been waiting with bated breath to see what bullshit you will post in response to our queries.

1KIKI

Friday, June 24, 2016 10:57 AM

"Address your questions to Trump."

So, you bailed on supporting, or even discussing, your own assertion that truth has never worked in all of recorded human history.

Going back and recapping, you claimed that your comics were TRUE. I pointed out that Trump never actually said the things they claimed he said. (And, fwiw, I think Tina Fey's lampooning of Palin was brilliant - and Tina Fey didn't even need to claim that Palin ACTUALLY said she could see Russia from her house, in order to get her point across.) I proposed that you didn't need to invent lies and then try to claim they were true in order to lodge a criticism, you could simply state the truth. IN DEFENSE OF THE LIES YOU POSTED AND YOUR CLAIM THEY WERE TRUE, you made a general statement that truth has never worked as a criticism in all of recorded human history. (And what a ridiculous overblown piece of bullshit THAT was!) And since then you've failed to support of even discuss your assertion, preferring to derail the focus from your argument.

So noted.

Let me just point out that the author left out vital relevant facts in the opinion piece. Doing that is known as cherry-picking. And whether you do that in the news, in discussion, in debate or in opinion, when you distort the facts, you've changed the nature of your communication into propaganda. But WE don't have any of THAT in the US, do we?!

SECOND

Thursday, June 30, 2016 1:50 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:

IN DEFENSE OF THE LIES YOU POSTED AND YOUR CLAIM THEY WERE TRUE...

Deceptive Tactics: A Look Inside the Trump Institute
www.nytimes.com/2016/06/30/us/politics/donald-trump-institute-plagiari
sm.html?_r=0

As with Trump University, the Trump Institute promised falsely that its teachers would be handpicked by Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump did little, interviews show, besides appear in an infomercial — one that promised customers access to his vast accumulated knowledge. “I put all of my concepts that have worked so well for me, new and old, into our seminar,” he said in the 2005 video, adding, “I’m teaching what I’ve learned.”

Reality fell far short. In fact...extensive portions of the materials that students received after forking over their seminar fees, supposedly containing Mr. Trump’s special wisdom had been plagiarized from an obscure real estate manual published a decade earlier.

Together, the exaggerated claims about his own role, the checkered pasts of the people with whom he went into business and the theft of intellectual property at the venture’s heart all illustrate the fiction underpinning so many of Mr. Trump’s licensing businesses: Putting his name on products and services — and collecting fees — was often where his actual involvement began and ended.

....Asked about the plagiarism, which was discovered by the Democratic “super PAC” American Bridge, the editor of the Trump Institute publication, Susan G. Parker, denied responsibility....Ms. Parker, a lawyer and legal writer in Briarcliff Manor, N.Y., said that far from being handpicked by Mr. Trump, she had been hired to write the book after responding to a Craigslist ad. She said she never spoke to Mr. Trump, let alone received guidance from him on what to write. She said she drew on her own knowledge of real estate and a speed-reading of Mr. Trump’s books.

In a nutshell, Trump sought out a couple of late-night hustlers who had already been in trouble with the law, taped an infomercial for them, and then pocketed the licensing fee. (They were the "best in the business," said the Trump executive who brokered the deal.) Later, he opened up Trump University. He had learned all he needed and was ready to start pushing the hard-sell conference business on his own.

1KIKI

Thursday, June 30, 2016 11:39 AM

Did Trump lie? Yes. Did you lie? Yes?

Not seeing how Trump's lies negates your lies.

SECOND

Thursday, June 30, 2016 5:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:

Not seeing how Trump's lies negates your lies.

Here's what the world thinks of Donald Trump: Trump does poorly pretty much everywhere. His top ratings come from China, where authoritarian bullies are taken for granted, and Italy, which probably figures Trump looks positively presidential compared to Silvio Berlusconi.
www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/06/donald-trump-vs-world

SIGNYM

Thursday, June 30, 2016 5:44 PM

I've gotten to the point where I'm just plain ornery and oppositional. The more the establishment DNC, RNC, and media hate Trump, the more I want to vote for him. "More of the same" has gotten us all to an entirely untenable point socially, economically, environmentally, militarily, and financially. We've been slow-walked to the brink of a cliff. One more step, and who the fuck cares what comes after that?

TPTB have FUBARed (fucked up beyond all recognition) the situation so badly, there is no point in voting for an establishment candidate of any sort. Short of literally lining the 0.01% ... and their ass-licking political hacks ... up against a wall, voting for Trump is the next best thing.

The Dems made a point of burying Sanders, and he was the one candidate who might have made a real difference without pulling down this whole temple of moneychangers. Now its time for the Dems - and the Repubs- to reap what they've sowed. Fuck 'em all.

--------------
I'll tell you what I DON'T like about Trump: I think that he has never confronted either the international banking cartel, nor the CIA-State Dept multi-headed hydra, nor the military-industrial complex. The last person to confront them was JFK (BTW, ALL immigration was illegal under JFK) and look what happened to him.