The Donald Trump Thread

Donald-Trump-Chia-Freedom-of-Choice.jpg
 
Precisely my thoughts when I saw your post! :)

I was speaking about the guy who delivered the lecture. Didn't say anything about you or whether or not the lecture was interesting, which -- in its own twisted way -- it was. BTW, I won't pretend to good humour by adding a smiley.
 
I was speaking about the guy who delivered the lecture. Didn't say anything about you or whether or not the lecture was interesting, which -- in its own twisted way -- it was. BTW, I won't pretend to good humour by adding a smiley.

Your post brought about an interesting response in me, I was hoping you'd respond so that I could explain.

My first response was to make me quite angry, that wore off within a few minutes. My first action was to lash out and I posted the written response above. As I thought about Michael Larkin, my anger dissipated and I edited my post by adding the smiley face.

My indignance/frustration had totally left me a few minutes after when I cheerily drove my daughter to Kumon.

I never thought for a second that by insulting Mark Blyth, the insult extended to me. Don't you agree that by writing such a post, it invited a negative response? What would be more helpful, would be a explanation as to why you see him as a self abuser.

My own personal belief is that there are only two types of men, wankers and liars. After all, as Woody Allen said, masturbation is having sex with someone I love.

Smile. You grumpy old beggar! ;)
 
Last edited:
Your post brought about an interesting response in me, I was hoping you'd respond so that I could explain.

My first response was to make me quite angry, that wore off within a few minutes. My first action was to lash out and I posted the written response above. As I thought about Michael Larkin, my anger dissipating and I edited my post by adding the smiley face.

My indignance/frustration has totally left me a few minutes after when I cheerily drove my daughter to Kumon.

I never thought for a second that by insulting Mark Blyth, the insult extended to me. Don't you agree that by writing such a post, it invited a negative response? What would be more helpful, would be a explanation as to why you see him as a self abuser.

My own personal belief is that there are only two types of men, wankers and liars. After all, as Woody Allen said, masturbation is having sex with someone I love.

Smile. You grumpy old beggar! ;)

Okay. The reason I disliked what the guy had to say is that, despite his superficial pretence of even-handedness, he was transparently leftist, and that coloured everything he had to say. His stated opinion about climate change near the end sealed the deal for me. He's so convinced his views are right, it makes me want to puke. It is his smug intellectual leftism that I find so irritating. I much better appreciated the other video that someone posted where the leftist called out so-called progressives for their focus on insulting half the electorate and then expecting them to vote for Hillary. No discussion, no dialogue, simply label anyone who disagrees with them as racist, homophobic idiots and God knows what else.

I don't know, as a Brit, what I would have voted in the US presidential election. How a nation of over 300 million people can end up being offered a choice between Hillary and Trump is beyond me. Maybe in the end Trump is marginally preferable, and on that basis, he won. We'll all have to cross our fingers and wait and see what he does.

The electoral college is rather like the British electoral system, where a simple majority in different constituencies decides the outcome, resulting in the effective disenfranchisement of large numbers of electors. Aspects of the popular vote may not end up being represented -- witness the way that 4 million votes for UKIP ended up getting them only 1 seat in the house of commons.

If the president were to be elected by a simple statewide majority of electors, the result wouldn't have been the same. For a start, all the people in the coastal states who favoured Trump might have been more inclined to vote, but as things are, they probably didn't see the point. No point either in trying to suggest that the popular vote went to Hillary, because no one knows, in a popular vote system, who would have won. It might have been Trump, and by a significant majority, for all we know.

Hillary makes me laugh with the way she is doing everything she can to overturn the election result despite calling out Trump on not being willing to say in advance that he'd accept the result. I don't think she'll succeed, her sock puppet Jill Stein notwithstanding:

 
Last edited:
The reason I disliked what the guy had to say is that, despite his superficial pretence of even-handedness, he was transparently leftist, and that coloured everything he had to say.

Thanks Michael.

Does that mean your own bias colours everything you hear him say?

I have forgotten most of the video, but I remember enjoying his ideas. He and I are fellow Scots, maybe your not keen on us? I wouldn't blame you, I would only think that you were the same as all of us, we all have bias's, some arguably more reasonable than others.

As I've written on the forum quite recently, I find myself with nowhere to go. The lefty in me has become disillusioned by recent reactions by my (ex) buddies, I'm too left to ever become right. I guess I'll have to be my own party, one that doesn't stand for too much of anything? I think that we're basically in deep doodoo, but am not too concerned. It helps when you try to consider every day a bonus, a gift.

Maybe I'm turning to God because I feel that is our only way out? :eek: I'm using the Love word more frequently on Facebook, it doesn't seem to be working!
 
  • Like
Reactions: tim
Thanks Michael.

Does that mean your own bias colours everything you hear him say?

I have forgotten most of the video, but I remember enjoying his ideas. He and I are fellow Scots, maybe your not keen on us? I wouldn't blame you, I would only think that you were the same as all of us, we all have bias's, some arguably more reasonable than others.

As I've written on the forum quite recently, I find myself with nowhere to go. The lefty in me has become disillusioned by recent reactions by my (ex) buddies, I'm too left to ever become right. I guess I'll have to be my own party, one that doesn't stand for too much of anything? I think that we're basically in deep doodoo, but am not too concerned. It helps when you try to consider every day a bonus, a gift.

Maybe I'm turning to God because I feel that is our only way out? :eek: I'm using the Love word more frequently on Facebook, it doesn't seem to be working!

I try to be neither left nor right, which doesn't quite mean I'm centrist. As a young man, I tended to the left, but then I grew up and shifted a bit to the right, and now I've realised that I'm getting past politics, which is a load of bollocks, quite frankly, but unfortunately rules the world. I think that the shifting tides in politics -- mostly towards nationalism at the moment -- are a symptom of an underlying shift in...what? That's the question. I'd like to think it's towards increasing global spirituality, but that may be merely a shift in a few individuals of the type who frequent forums such as Skeptiko.

I suspect that we're headed as a species towards dangerous times. Am I alone in that, I wonder? I have this sense of foreboding. For most of my life, we in the West have been dominated by democracy, and I've thought it a good thing. But I see it beginning to dissolve, and I can only hope it's not going to be into chaos. Is there something better than democracy that isn't any of the alternatives such as theocracy, communism, plutocracy, and all the rest? Like Buckminster Fuller said, outcomes are usually at right angles to expectations. I can't foresee where we're going and whether the getting there won't prove to be very, very painful. And nor, I think, can anyone else.
 
https://www.facebook.com/DonaldTrump/posts/10158226484895725
The U.S. is going to substantialy reduce taxes and regulations on businesses, but any business that leaves our country for another country, fires its employees, builds a new factory or plant in the other country, and then thinks it will sell its product back into the U.S. ...... without retribution or consequence, is WRONG!

There will be a tax on our soon to be strong border of 35% for these companies wanting to sell their product, cars, A.C. units etc., back across the border. This tax will make leaving financially difficult, but.....these companies are able to move between all 50 states, with no tax or tariff being charged.

Please be forewarned prior to making a very expensive mistake! THE UNITED STATES IS OPEN FOR BUSINESS!

Can anyone explain how this is going to work? If other countries can build factories in Mexico, as Carrier wanted to, and sell the products in the US, how will US companies compete? Are we going to have 35% tariff on all imported goods?
 
https://theintercept.com/2016/12/09...onalities-spread-to-discredit-wikileaks-docs/
A Clinton Fan Manufactured Fake News That MSNBC Personalities Spread to Discredit WikiLeaks Docs
...
When Nance – MSNBC’s “intelligence analyst” – issued his “Official Warning,” he linked to a tweet that warned: “Please be skeptical of alleged #PodestaEmails. Trumpists are dirtying docs.” That tweet, in turn, linked to a tweet from an anonymous account calling itself “The Omnivore,” which had posted an obviously fake transcript purporting to be a Hillary Clinton speech to Goldman Sachs. Even though that fake document was never published by WikiLeaks, that was the entire basis for the MSNBC-inspired claim that some of the WikiLeaks documents were doctored.

But the person who created that forged Goldman Sachs transcript was not a “Trumpist” at all; he was a devoted supporter of Hillary Clinton. In the Daily Beast, the person behind the anonymous “The Omnivore” account unmasks himself as “Marco Chacon,” a self-professed creator of “viral fake news” whose targets were Sanders and Trump supporters (he specialized in blatantly fake anti-Clinton frauds with the goal of tricking her opponents into citing them, so that they would be discredited). When he wasn’t posting fabricated news accounts designed to make Clintons’ opponents look bad, his account looked like any other standard pro-Clinton account: numerous negative items about Sanders and then Trump, with links to many Clinton-defending articles.

In his Daily Beast article, published on November 21, Chacon describes how he manufactured the forged Goldman Sachs speech transcript. He says he did it prior to learning that the WikiLeaks releases of Podesta emails contained actual Clinton speech excerpts to Wall Street banks. But once he realized WikiLeaks had published actual Clinton transcripts, Chacon began trying to lure people he disliked – Clinton critics – into believing that his forged speeches were real, so that he could prove they were gullible and dumb.

Sadly for Chacon, however, the people who ended up getting fooled by his Fake News items were the nation’s most prominent Clinton supporters, including supposed experts and journalists from MSNBC who used his obvious fakes to try to convince the world that the WikiLeaks archive had been compromised and thus should be ignored. That it was pro-Clinton journalists who spread his Fake News as real now horrifies even Chacon:
 
Back
Top