Politics
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 3453 comments are related to the topic:
trump
trump
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 3,453
|
By:
Problem is, even if beaten he is entitled to a Secret Service detail for the rest of his life. So wait for lots of bookings at Doral & Mar a Lago.
 |
|
By:
This is all over, the final countdown`s on, the flip flop approaches, biden greens, BAIL!!!
|
|
By:
Ah Tim, have you bailed out of your Trump bets yet or are you going to let them ride?
|
|
By:
good evidence above for the normalisation of the abnormal.
it's very difficult to argue against the idea of symmetrical dishonesty on both sides of (in this case) American politics. It's probably best not to bother; if someone cannot see what's been done to their mind they're lost to reasonable discourse or soon will be. Trump and his propaganda machine are different because they lie about facts in a way which isn't done symmetrically by the other side. Johnson is learning it here. 24 hour news and the speed with which the conversation changes allows it to go unpunished. There's a lot of examples from Trump. interesting times but not long now until a little sanity is restored in the US. He wont go quietly and the 'all sides lie' brigade will have to make an interesting choice. Are they democrats (who simply lost an election) or are they prepared to say they won when they actually lost because they believe their side should be in power more than they believe the side with the most votes should be in power. A dilemma  |
|
By:
When you have an individual who is prepared to lie about whether or not it rained on the day of his inauguration, the game has really changed. And not in a good way.
|
|
By:
They can lie because they have selected their base on the basis they are receptive to lies.
Go see a hypnotist show, first part is selection. Conspiracy sites are ripe recruiting grounds, for trump, and other far right groups. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
faux news rancid with the rona
https://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-panic-election-night-coverage-coronavirus-exposure-quarantine-2020-10?r=US&IR=T € |
|
By:
Why is Kamala Harris not 1000 when Simple Joe is 1.5?
|
|
By:
Might be to do with the deadly virus that disproportionally kills the over 70s mate.
|
|
By:
Quite right bigpop, don't let those nasty Trumpists mislead you.
Stay in that nice warm comfort zone, you know it makes sense. |
|
By:
Do you think Trumpists or people who aren't Trumpists are, on average, more in dire need of their safe space and news/opinion bubbles?
|
|
By:
Don't stereotype edy, some do some don't regardless of who they would like to see win the election.
|
|
By:
pffft, you radical centrists with your constant virtue-signalling.
Ima stereotype whoever I want. |
|
By:
You're a chameleon, not a lot of people know that.
|
|
By:
Harris is a chameleon too, it's just that her dad couldn't spell.
|
|
By:
Or maybe she was named after the Duchess of Cornwall but they are keeping it quiet.
|
|
By:
biden is a chameleon too with his stances on war, m4a, fracking etc. not at all what he makes out he is. has a nasty temper too, he get's angry real quick, not a good trait for president.
|
|
By:
His fracking comment really stood out in the 2nd debate. I was expecting him to say the opposite. Maybe fossil fuels and earthquakes are more acceptable over there
 |
|
By:
74,000 cases US 1050 Deaths
 disaster capitalists.. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
Quite right bigpop, don't let those nasty Trumpists mislead you.
Stay in that nice warm comfort zone, you know it makes sense.  that I wont debate with people who lost their connection to reality isn't from fear; it's because it's pointless. Good faith debate requires both sides to accept certain objective truths as real. Trump doesn't do that. There's no conversation to be had. You cannot debate with these people because they have no commitment to objective truth. They dive immediately into this sort of argument (which itself is further use of the 'symmetrical' they-all-lie cynicism). Trump isn't the disease, he's a symptom. The disease is a long running anti-public service belief that all politicians are the same. Trump is a criminal, Trump will be in a world of trouble the minute he's out of office. All of his entourage from the 2016 campaign are serving time as felons and he was the head of that enterprise. That's just not true of the other side. you have one side literally serving time after real world criminal trials. And the other side are accused online of deep state conspiracy nonsense but for which there's no basis in fact. If there were, there would be real world consequences. |
|
By:
Trump is an internet troll who the world failed to ignore. you cannot debate a troll, prove it wrong, and it goes away. The attention itself, the argument, feeds it. Right wing conspiracy nutters feed off the attention of rational people debating (in good faith) with facts. If someone will just choose their own 'facts' you cannot debate them because they just spin away as soon as you approach a resolution which doesn't suit them. You literally only have the choice of ignoring them. Their fate, I assume, is a future of frustration born of the cognitive dissonance that reality will eventually cause.
It's interesting to watch. |
|
By:
Ukraine remains a battleground, both sides accusing the other. The impeachment was never going to succeed, only one Republican, Romney, broke ranks. We might not have long to wait to see if your prediction comes true depending on the election result.
Interesting to watch, indeed. |
|
By:
Trump was impeached for bribing a foreign country to fabricate an investigation into Joe Biden.
he was Impeached. There's no success or failure of an Impeachment. The Senate found him not guilty without hearing witnesses. The House Impeached him. now you can interpret these facts as you choose, but they are facts. |
|
By:
The House was expected (by Mueller) to Impeach for 12 acts of Obstruction of Justice in Trump's attempt to cover up his campaign's role in Russia's 2016 election interference. Clearly the House chose not to do that; presumably because it was a more complicated conspiracy than the easier to understand Ukrainian one. Thus the TV news media, for which complexity doesn't work, bore a direct influence over those decisions to the benefit of Trump.
No symmetry here by the way - there's no equivalent process or investigation of the other side in relation to election crimes, or tax fraud or whatever. Just folk on the internet with their weak versions of 'they're all the same' etc etc |
|
By:
People are accused of all sorts of crimes, they are held to be innocent or guilty on the outcome of a trial. What you or I believe is of no consequence.
|
|
By:
if we get to vote, then there are consequences for the actions (or crimes) of public figures.
I don't 'believe' Trump was impeached. He was. Bizarre that an adult (I assume you are?) thinks this is a matter of faith? It's really not - it happened. |
|
By:
you provide more evidence by the way, for my point earlier, about good faith debate and its impossibility if both sides do not accept objective reality.
|
|
By:
people with good faith conservative values defending Trump are in a difficult position. I don't envy you.
|
|
By:
Impeached, yes, it's the same as being charged with a crime. There is a hearing and a verdict, in this case, Trump was cleared by the Senate. I use belief in the sense of whether you believe the allegations or not regardless of the Senate's conclusion.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Yes but it’s well past the point where good faith conservative views are terribly compatible with defending him. To be fair to Foinavon, he avows that he isn’t, he’s just not got to the (in my view fairly obvious) conclusion that no matter how much you might prefer his politics to say Biden’s, as a man and as a politician, he’s so obviously playing a different game that you can’t run the both sides line without contorting yourself really rather uncomfortably.
The Lincoln Project stuff is interesting on this. I don’t by any means assume good faith from them either but a lot of what they say is sensible. |
|
By:
That's true,FS, he is a rather despicable human being, I wouldn't defend him on that. I don't think the Biden's are squeaky clean either, that remains to be seen.
|
|
By:
There is a hearing and a verdict, in this case, Trump was cleared by the Senate. I use belief in the sense of whether you believe the allegations or not regardless of the Senate's conclusion.
I think it's unfortunate the Senate refused to hear the witnesses to the events for which Trump was impeached (including members of Trump's own government). It would have been better for his good name (lol) to have been cleared after a full trial. I assume we agree trials have witnesses? It - impeachment - is a political process. Trump got a partisan acquittal after no witnesses were heard. That's a fact feller. Unfortunately that (partisan acquittal) doesn't clear his name. As you know (but are unlikely to admit). Please can you point me towards the symmetrical corruption, investigations and trials of the other side? I believe I may have missed them... |
|
By:
In 2019 Trump Paid $2 Million to 8 Charities for Misuse of his Foundation Under a settlement, the president admitted he had used his charity to bolster his campaign and settle business debts.
He literally stole $2m from a charity. Please point me towards the symmetrical case on the other side of the aisle |
|
By:
Donald Trump is currently under investigation by the SDNY for Tax Fraud
please can you point me towards the symmetrical case ? of course you cannot. There isn't one. There's the internet with it's pizza parlour peado ring nonsense... if you're a good faith conservative you should hate Trump more than the democrats do!! He's burning it all down and taking reasonable people with him. |
|
By:
Trump's legal dire position is an objective fact.
'people are accused of all sorts of things' isn't going to be used in court by his defence team |
|
By:
as an aside - the Senate hearing was a good watch. The defence consisted entirely of different versions of 'the House rushed their investigation'. There were no witnesses to the events in Ukraine allowed; and there was no character defence. 'Do you really think a man of Donald Trump's previously unblemished character would do such a thing?' were not words used by his lawyers
|
|
By:
They are still allegations, I don't dismiss them, wait for the court case
|