Total Posts:92|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

What does Trumps top strategist think of him?

twocupcakes
Posts: 2,750
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 12:48:57 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
http://www.xojane.com...

Here is an open letter to Trump supporters from his top strategist. What are your thoughts about it? Some highlights of the letter are below.

"I'll say it again: Trump never intended to be the candidate. But his pride is too out of control to stop him now."

"The hard truth is: Trump only cares about Trump."

"The man does not know policy, nor does he have the humility to admit what he does not know " the most frightening position of all."

"And he has no problem abusing your support the same way he cheated hard-working men and women out of millions of dollars, for which he is now being sued."

"He refused to take responsibility for his actions while frequently demanding apologies from others."

"He would be the best at something, though. He is the best at looking out for Donald Trump " at all costs."
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,313
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 1:05:11 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 12:48:57 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
http://www.xojane.com...


Here is an open letter to Trump supporters from his top strategist. What are your thoughts about it? Some highlights of the letter are below.


"I'll say it again: Trump never intended to be the candidate. But his pride is too out of control to stop him now."

"The hard truth is: Trump only cares about Trump."

"The man does not know policy, nor does he have the humility to admit what he does not know " the most frightening position of all."

"And he has no problem abusing your support the same way he cheated hard-working men and women out of millions of dollars, for which he is now being sued."

"He refused to take responsibility for his actions while frequently demanding apologies from others."

"He would be the best at something, though. He is the best at looking out for Donald Trump " at all costs."


All part of the master plan. (polls go up)
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,313
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 1:07:56 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
This person was never employed by the Trump campaign. Evidently she worked for a Super PAC which Mr. Trump disavowed and requested the closure of via the FEC. She knows nothing about Mr. Trump or the campaign and her disingenuous and factually inaccurate statements in no way resemble any shred of truth. This is yet another desperate person looking for their fifteen minutes. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump is running for President because he is the only one who will Make America Great Again.

-Trump campaign spokeswoman, Hope Hicks.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,313
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 1:24:31 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 12:48:57 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
http://www.xojane.com...


Here is an open letter to Trump supporters from his top strategist. What are your thoughts about it? Some highlights of the letter are below.

Also, that woman is an ugly dog. There is zero chance Trump would select her for anything.
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,750
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 1:44:52 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 1:07:56 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
This person was never employed by the Trump campaign. Evidently she worked for a Super PAC which Mr. Trump disavowed and requested the closure of via the FEC. She knows nothing about Mr. Trump or the campaign and her disingenuous and factually inaccurate statements in no way resemble any shred of truth. This is yet another desperate person looking for their fifteen minutes. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump is running for President because he is the only one who will Make America Great Again.

-Trump campaign spokeswoman, Hope Hicks.

I am sure as the Communications Director for the Trump-aligned "Make America Great Again" Super PAC, she has more insight into Trumps true intentions than you.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,313
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 2:05:59 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 1:44:52 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
At 3/29/2016 1:07:56 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
This person was never employed by the Trump campaign. Evidently she worked for a Super PAC which Mr. Trump disavowed and requested the closure of via the FEC. She knows nothing about Mr. Trump or the campaign and her disingenuous and factually inaccurate statements in no way resemble any shred of truth. This is yet another desperate person looking for their fifteen minutes. Meanwhile, Mr. Trump is running for President because he is the only one who will Make America Great Again.

-Trump campaign spokeswoman, Hope Hicks.

I am sure as the Communications Director for the Trump-aligned "Make America Great Again" Super PAC, she has more insight into Trumps true intentions than you.

1) She is ugly, so likely not a Trump employee.
2) The timing is just typical political games.
3) Can't stump the Trump.
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,750
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 2:15:10 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
1) She is ugly, so likely not a Trump employee.

If the President chooses his advisers based on attractiveness, do you not see that as a problem

3) Can't stump the Trump.

I am not arguing. As the saying goes "No one goes broke betting on human stupidity"
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,313
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 2:17:33 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 2:15:10 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
1) She is ugly, so likely not a Trump employee.

If the President chooses his advisers based on attractiveness, do you not see that as a problem

nope, at least he is consistent though.

3) Can't stump the Trump.

I am not arguing. As the saying goes "No one goes broke betting on human stupidity"
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,750
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 2:25:08 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 2:17:33 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/29/2016 2:15:10 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
1) She is ugly, so likely not a Trump employee.

If the President chooses his advisers based on attractiveness, do you not see that as a problem

nope, at least he is consistent though.
Why is consistently hiring based on attractiveness good?
3) Can't stump the Trump.

I am not arguing. As the saying goes "No one goes broke betting on human stupidity"
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,313
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 2:43:16 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 2:25:08 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
At 3/29/2016 2:17:33 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/29/2016 2:15:10 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
1) She is ugly, so likely not a Trump employee.

If the President chooses his advisers based on attractiveness, do you not see that as a problem

nope, at least he is consistent though.
Why is consistently hiring based on attractiveness good?
Attractive people are less likely to be recruited by victim warriors.
vortex86
Posts: 571
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 2:50:31 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 2:25:08 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
At 3/29/2016 2:17:33 AM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 3/29/2016 2:15:10 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
1) She is ugly, so likely not a Trump employee.

If the President chooses his advisers based on attractiveness, do you not see that as a problem

nope, at least he is consistent though.
Why is consistently hiring based on attractiveness good?

http://www.businessinsider.com...

"Beautiful people tend to bring in more money for their companies, and are therefore seen as more valuable employees and harder workers"

I think that about sums it up.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,313
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 3:12:58 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
Hope Charlotte Hicks a former model and Lacrosse player was a graduate of Greenwich High School and in 2010 with a Bachelor"s degree in English from Southern Methodist University. She started her work with the Trump family more than a year ago, she was part of Ivanka Trump"s PR team; after her amazing job Donald hired her as his communications director, ascending to the position of media handler, corporate aide

Before landing a job with the Trump Organization, Hope Hicks did PR at the New York City firm, Zeno Group.

http://dailyentertainmentnews.com...
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 4:15:34 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
"when he answered questions in an overtly controversial fashion, he would claim that he did not properly hear the question"

This entire article should be required reading for Rom---"I ignore mainstream media and listen to what people who know the real Trump say"----anii.

In fact this should be required reading for every single Trump supporter out there. I'm glad at least one person finally saw through the farce that is Donald Trump.

The Fvck-the-establishment people will hopefully realize that Trump is not going to fix the establishment and there are more constructive ways to do it than vote for a reality TV gimmick in a childish tantrum and start acting like adults.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 4:27:04 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 4:15:34 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
"when he answered questions in an overtly controversial fashion, he would claim that he did not properly hear the question"

This entire article should be required reading for Rom---"I ignore mainstream media and listen to what people who know the real Trump say"----anii.

In fact this should be required reading for every single Trump supporter out there. I'm glad at least one person finally saw through the farce that is Donald Trump.

The Fvck-the-establishment people will hopefully realize that Trump is not going to fix the establishment and there are more constructive ways to do it than vote for a reality TV gimmick in a childish tantrum and start acting like adults.

The anti-trump blinders are strong with this one.

So strong that he's forgotten how PACs work. Or that the PAC for which this woman worked was disowned by Trump and ceased operations in October, when he attempted to prohibit them from using his image or slogan.

Confiiiiirmation biaaaaaas.....
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 4:32:34 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 4:27:04 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
The anti-trump blinders are strong with this one.

So strong that he's forgotten how PACs work. Or that the PAC for which this woman worked was disowned by Trump and ceased operations in October, when he attempted to prohibit them from using his image or slogan.

Confiiiiirmation biaaaaaas.....

Everytime I see you post something like this, I wonder if you are trolling just for laughs. I mean, do you really want this guy as president of the United States? I don't know how better to put it but - what the hell is wrong with you?
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 4:48:43 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 4:32:34 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 3/29/2016 4:27:04 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
The anti-trump blinders are strong with this one.

So strong that he's forgotten how PACs work. Or that the PAC for which this woman worked was disowned by Trump and ceased operations in October, when he attempted to prohibit them from using his image or slogan.

Confiiiiirmation biaaaaaas.....

Everytime I see you post something like this, I wonder if you are trolling just for laughs. I mean, do you really want this guy as president of the United States? I don't know how better to put it but - what the hell is wrong with you?

(1) You dodged Skep's refutation of the point you were trying to make...

(2) Who tf cares if he insults people he has personal grudges with? You act as if it's self-evident that such behavior is atrocious... it's really not. Moreover, not everyone perceives the POTUS as being some sort of sacrosanct position which can only be filled by morally immaculate individuals. To me, all that matters is the practical consequences, and Trump is fully capable of projecting a diplomatic persona where it actually counts (e.g. interactions with foreign dignitaries).
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 4:52:18 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 4:32:34 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Everytime I see you post something like this, I wonder if you are trolling just for laughs. I mean, do you really want this guy as president of the United States? I don't know how better to put it but - what the hell is wrong with you?



I don't know about you, but for me, presidential endorsements rest on a lot more than the candidate's opinion on random women from popcult.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 5:09:19 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 4:48:43 AM, Romaniii wrote:
(1) You dodged Skep's refutation of the point you were trying to make...

(2) Who tf cares if he insults people he has personal grudges with? You act as if it's self-evident that such behavior is atrocious... it's really not. Moreover, not everyone perceives the POTUS as being some sort of sacrosanct position which can only be filled by morally immaculate individuals. To me, all that matters is the practical consequences, and Trump is fully capable of projecting a diplomatic persona where it actually counts (e.g. interactions with foreign dignitaries).

No, of course I didn't address Skep. I've lost all hope for you guys. Every single piece of evidence against Trump, Trump supporters find a way to justify.

He calls for a ban on Muslims -> He just says stupid things sometimes.
He calls Mexicans rapists -> He didn't actually mean that, he just said it for ratings.
He says Mexico will pay for the wall -> Strong opening negotiating position. Lol...
He calls a woman a fat, disgusting slob -> Policy is more important
His top strategist gives a massive wakeup call to everyone -> She didn't work closely enough with him.
He says he would date his daughter -> It was simply an awkward compliment by a doting father.
Prestigious newspapers point out that he condoned the attack on a homeless Latino man -> The newspaper is lying and the media is biased.
He refuses to disavow the KKK -> The microphone wasn't working properly.
His top strategist SPECIFICALLY tells you that he feigned not hearing questions properly -> snhgljs gj;lg She is biased too and is ugly so can't possibly be a Trump strategist.
He set up a bogus University -> I don't know what the typical Trumpling's response here is but something to effect of the University was actually good?
He has zero political experience -> Fvck it, who cares? Fvck the establishment. Fvck the politicians. Fvck everything! Upend the existing government and put a literal child in the White House, gamble away the nations security and hope for the best! Make America Great Again!

It's beyond hopeless. It's almost like you guys are brainwashed.
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,848
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 5:21:49 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 12:48:57 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
http://www.xojane.com...


Here is an open letter to Trump supporters from his top strategist. What are your thoughts about it? Some highlights of the letter are below.


"I'll say it again: Trump never intended to be the candidate. But his pride is too out of control to stop him now."

"The hard truth is: Trump only cares about Trump."

"The man does not know policy, nor does he have the humility to admit what he does not know " the most frightening position of all."

"And he has no problem abusing your support the same way he cheated hard-working men and women out of millions of dollars, for which he is now being sued."

"He refused to take responsibility for his actions while frequently demanding apologies from others."

"He would be the best at something, though. He is the best at looking out for Donald Trump " at all costs."


I think he's a God-Emperor.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 5:43:21 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 5:09:19 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:

No, of course I didn't address Skep. I've lost all hope for you guys. Every single piece of evidence against Trump, Trump supporters find a way to justify.

Hmm... why do you think it's so easy to "find a way to justify" every time anti-Trumpers throw a hissy-fit?
Perhaps it's because supporting a Trump presidency isn't necessarily an absurd position, and is -- in fact -- justifiable? :O
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 5:45:57 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 5:43:21 AM, Romaniii wrote:
At 3/29/2016 5:09:19 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:

No, of course I didn't address Skep. I've lost all hope for you guys. Every single piece of evidence against Trump, Trump supporters find a way to justify.

Hmm... why do you think it's so easy to "find a way to justify" every time anti-Trumpers throw a hissy-fit?
Perhaps it's because supporting a Trump presidency isn't necessarily an absurd position, and is -- in fact -- justifiable? :O

If it were easy, you would be able to do it without jumping through the most absurd mental hoops to do it. The only thing I can think of is that you've been brainwashed (or you are trolling).
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 6:18:52 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 5:45:57 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:

Hmm... why do you think it's so easy to "find a way to justify" every time anti-Trumpers throw a hissy-fit?
Perhaps it's because supporting a Trump presidency isn't necessarily an absurd position, and is -- in fact -- justifiable? :O

If it were easy, you would be able to do it without jumping through the most absurd mental hoops to do it. The only thing I can think of is that you've been brainwashed (or you are trolling).

Absurd mental hoops? Let's go through this...

He calls for a ban on Muslims -> He just says stupid things sometimes.
Oh no. A single misguided policy suggestion. The world is gonna end.
He calls Mexicans rapists -> He didn't actually mean that
Slip-up. Even your beloved Bernie slips up sometimes.
He says Mexico will pay for the wall -> Strong opening negotiating position. Lol...
Posturing. All politicians do it. He does it more strategically than most.
He calls a woman a fat, disgusting slob -> Policy is more important
Mhm... why shouldn't matters of practical consequence take precedence?
His top strategist gives a massive wakeup call to everyone -> She didn't work closely enough with him.
Is that not something which should be taken into consideration?
He says he would date his daughter -> It was simply an awkward compliment by a doting father.
Once again, I fail to grasp the alleged "absurdity" of that justification.
Prestigious newspapers point out that he condoned the attack on a homeless Latino man -> The newspaper is lying and the media is biased.
Any objective reading of the events reveals that he condemned the attack: http://www.debate.org...
He refuses to disavow the KKK -> The microphone wasn't working properly.
He explicitly disavowed the KKK at a press conference a couple days before then >_>
He set up a bogus University -> I don't know what the typical Trumpling's response here is but something to effect of the University was actually good?
There's more than enough ambiguity and uncertainty surrounding that particular issue: http://www.politifact.com...
He has zero political experience -> Fvck it, who cares? Fvck the establishment. Fvck the politicians. Fvck everything! Upend the existing government and put a literal child in the White House, gamble away the nations security and hope for the best! Make America Great Again!
Except there's no reason to believe that his lack of political experience or personality flaws would actually cause any real harm...
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 6:22:38 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 5:09:19 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
Every single piece of evidence against Trump, Trump supporters find a way to justify.
That's how refutes work. It's particularly easy when the "evidence" consists of mere tantrums from our Reliable Informers.

He calls for a ban on Muslims -> He just says stupid things sometimes.
Only problems with the plan are potential backlash (from the global Islamic community). And that's assuming the whole thing wasn't a ploy to have the media give him more free air time (likely). Otherwise, no major problems.

He calls Mexicans rapists -> He didn't actually mean that, he just said it for ratings.
Some are. Last I checked, they're more likely than American nationals to be so too.

He says Mexico will pay for the wall -> Strong opening negotiating position. Lol...
He wrote a whole book on it.

He calls a woman a fat, disgusting slob -> Policy is more important
Correct. Would you really rather argue that a candidate's comments on a woman are more important than their actual platform?

His top strategist gives a massive wakeup call to everyone -> She didn't work closely enough with him.
Skep already went over the "top strategist" bull. And don't pretend it was a "but he just said media bias!" type of thing out; we can all see what he said.

He says he would date his daughter -> It was simply an awkward compliment by a doting father.
Such a pressing concern. Automatic disqualification!

Are we supposed to care? Really?

Prestigious newspapers point out that he condoned the attack on a homeless Latino man -> The newspaper is lying and the media is biased.
No, he didn't condone it. Was the response absolutely ideal? No. Politics isn't about being righteous 100% of the time.

He refuses to disavow the KKK -> The microphone wasn't working properly.
Strategically sound either way. What is it with the asinine assumption that anything but total angelic purity from political candidates is an instant lose?

His top strategist SPECIFICALLY tells you that he feigned not hearing questions properly -> snhgljs gj;lg She is biased too and is ugly so can't possibly be a Trump strategist.
"Top strategist" see above

He set up a bogus University -> I don't know what the typical Trumpling's response here is but something to effect of the University was actually good?
It's still disputed. Not that I'd care either way - there's too much at stake.

He has zero political experience -> Fvck it, who cares? Fvck the establishment. Fvck the politicians. Fvck everything! Upend the existing government and put a literal child in the White House, gamble away the nations security and hope for the best! Make America Great Again!
That's funny. Is having political experience supposed to be a good thing now?

There's a case to be made against Trump, given his policies/general ideology. Why don't we do that instead of grasping at straws over whatever off-colour thing he said last week? That anti-Trumpers think bringing these things up will help their stance at all is cause for laughter. They simply DO NOT understand how it works. No wonder they're losing.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 6:27:01 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 6:18:52 AM, Romaniii wrote:

a) You seemed to have missed that his top strategist specifically said that "when he answered questions in an overtly controversial fashion, he would claim that he did not properly hear the question."

b) Why are you citing politifact? Don't all you conservatives claim that it is biased and not to be trusted?
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 6:39:12 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 6:27:01 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 3/29/2016 6:18:52 AM, Romaniii wrote:

a) You seemed to have missed that his top strategist specifically said that "when he answered questions in an overtly controversial fashion, he would claim that he did not properly hear the question."

Skep already refuted the "top strategist" bullsh!t. But on top of that, Trump had already disavowed the KKK a couple days prior, so there's literally no reason to believe that whatever confusion ensued during the interview was a result of him being hesitant to disavow.


b) Why are you citing politifact? Don't all you conservatives claim that it is biased and not to be trusted?

(1) I'm not a conservative, dammit -.-
(2) I don't judge evidence on the basis of its source alone (although the source can certainly make me more likely to closely examine it for bias). In that particular article, I don't detect any blatant media spin, out-of-context quoting, or rhetorical skew... do you?
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 6:44:36 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 6:39:12 AM, Romaniii wrote:
At 3/29/2016 6:27:01 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 3/29/2016 6:18:52 AM, Romaniii wrote:

a) You seemed to have missed that his top strategist specifically said that "when he answered questions in an overtly controversial fashion, he would claim that he did not properly hear the question."

Skep already refuted the "top strategist" bullsh!t. But on top of that, Trump had already disavowed the KKK a couple days prior, so there's literally no reason to believe that whatever confusion ensued during the interview was a result of him being hesitant to disavow.

Skep didn't "refute" sh1t. Forgot to mention, the circle-jerking among Trump's supporters is so ridiculous it's like they can't even form their own arguments +1'ing and backslapping each other like crazy.

(1) I'm not a conservative, dammit -.-

Perhaps you don't identify as "conservative." I only use the word because typically, people with your worldviews are classified as "conservative" so for the purpose of this discussion, it is accurate. I can use "Trumpling" or "Trumplet" if you prefer.

(2) I don't judge evidence on the basis of its source alone (although the source can certainly make me more likely to closely examine it for bias). In that particular article, I don't detect any blatant media spin, out-of-context quoting, or rhetorical skew... do you?

I see. So, a news article is only biased if it calls out Trump/Republicans on their bullsh1t. If you agree with it, even the much maligned politifact is a good source of information. I rest my case.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 6:54:23 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
I really shouldn't be responding because today is the day after seeing people's responses to this article that I lost all hope for Trump supporters and instead of continuing to point out the problems with their position, have completely written them off. They can't be saved. They don't want to be saved. They have permanently lost touch with reality.

The strategist points out some very insightful things - Trump's campaign was never meant to be serious. It was a narcissistic show-off move to help him further in business. This entire campaign was a joke and you guys have been the monkey-butt of it by taking it seriously.
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 7:01:27 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 6:54:23 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
I really shouldn't be responding because today is the day after seeing people's responses to this article that I lost all hope for Trump supporters and instead of continuing to point out the problems with their position, have completely written them off.

Please. Don't flatter yourself.

That's exactly what you've been doing this entire time. Don't try blocking out the sun with your thumb.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
Romaniii
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/29/2016 7:04:10 AM
Posted: 8 months ago
At 3/29/2016 6:44:36 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 3/29/2016 6:39:12 AM, Romaniii wrote:
At 3/29/2016 6:27:01 AM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 3/29/2016 6:18:52 AM, Romaniii wrote:

a) You seemed to have missed that his top strategist specifically said that "when he answered questions in an overtly controversial fashion, he would claim that he did not properly hear the question."

Skep already refuted the "top strategist" bullsh!t. But on top of that, Trump had already disavowed the KKK a couple days prior, so there's literally no reason to believe that whatever confusion ensued during the interview was a result of him being hesitant to disavow.

Skep didn't "refute" sh1t. Forgot to mention, the circle-jerking among Trump's supporters is so ridiculous it's like they can't even form their own arguments +1'ing and backslapping each other like crazy.

Sooo... no substantive response to anything that either me or Skep brought up? Kewl.


(1) I'm not a conservative, dammit -.-

Perhaps you don't identify as "conservative." I only use the word because typically, people with your worldviews are classified as "conservative" so for the purpose of this discussion, it is accurate. I can use "Trumpling" or "Trumplet" if you prefer.

That would be wonderful :)


(2) I don't judge evidence on the basis of its source alone (although the source can certainly make me more likely to closely examine it for bias). In that particular article, I don't detect any blatant media spin, out-of-context quoting, or rhetorical skew... do you?

I see. So, a news article is only biased if it calls out Trump/Republicans on their bullsh1t. If you agree with it, even the much maligned politifact is a good source of information. I rest my case.

No lol. In each case that I've called an article biased, I've specifically highlighted where the media spin, out-of-context quoting, rhetorical skew, etc. took place. I can just as easily point out bias in pro-Trump articles, but there's no impetus for me to do so -- I keep getting anti-Trump articles thrown at me, so that's what I end up working with most of the time.