Yzermandius19

The media would have trashed his response no matter how well he responded, them attacking him is not a sign he's doing a bad job, it's a sign of the media's ever diminishing credibility and blatant partisanship.

Lots of countries have testing issues, pretending like it's only America is silly, as is blaming the free market.

Focusing on the tone and wording, instead of how a politician actually governs is asinine, you need to get real. Actions speak louder than words, yet you ignore actions and focus on words, if it means you can grasp at straws to attack a politician you don't like. You vastly overestimate the effect that Trumps tweets, speeches, insults and rallies have on how well he's doing his job, they are not an important factor whatsoever, and those who think they are a super important factor are Trump haters grasping at straws and clutching at pearls. Grow up. Stop focusing on the words of politicians, they are intentionally designed to mislead. Look at the actions behind the words, not the tone, not the words, focus on the actions and their results, do not focus on the bullshit justifications that the politicians give to explain their actions because that is just telling people what they want hear.

You are engaging in semantics. My statement is true, and it does not make the generalization you claim it does, you simply want to debate a strawman because you're argument won't hold up against anything else.

I said that anyone who thinks Trump is the most incompetent president ever clearly hates him, not anyone who doesn't like him hates him. You are the one filled with hatred for Trump while accusing Trump of being filled with hatred, quick to point fingers, not so quick to look in mirror to spot the same faults you project on others. You need to stop focusing on what he says and what you think he represents, and start focusing on his actual actions that matter, not the mere phrasing of a sentence with "bad language", get your priorities straight.

You really need to look in the mirror.

Your narrative is based on feelings, not facts. Not a single person who thinks he's the most incompetent president ever doesn't hate him, the only way to arrive at such an opinion is to be blinded out of hate. So you're lying to yourself and others, but you're only really fooling yourself and other Trump haters who think their hatred of him is rational when the exact opposite is the case.

Obvious fake news is obvious. Haters are focused on words instead of actions, otherwise they would see through the fake news.

Nuclear Hitler to be exact. He was going to start WWIII if America let him get his finger on "the button" because he'd get angry and overreact with nukes, all while deporting en masse and throwing Mexicans and Muslims into concentration camps. If you didn't hear any of that, it's because you weren't paying attention.

And that's why he won in 2016 and will win in 2020, sucker.

Yet another case of wishful thinking being a helluva of drug. Deja vu.

In 2016 the Democrats got to run against an imaginary Trump presidency that never happened and pretended he would be Literally Hitler. In 2020 if the Dems play the Literally Hitler card again voters can look at the actual results of his first term and see the Democrats nightmares are even more unfounded in 2020 than they were in 2016. That doesn't help Democrats, it hurts them. Their case was infinitely better when all there was to judge Trump on politically are his words taken out of context, with actual actions taken during his administration to compare him to instead of just wild imaginations fueled by Anti-Trump propaganda about what he might do in office, their case that Trump will be an evil racist dictator out to destroy America has been severely weakened by actual reality. The Democrats can cry Hitler as loud and as often as they want, but most voters already treat them as The Boy Who Cried Hitler because of it. That was the Democrats main weapon in 2016, being The Boy Who Cried Hitler, it failed miserably even back then, and it's going to be even less effective this time around. Simply put, Running against the way Trump talks doesn't work. They already tried that, and now doubling down on fail isn't going to yield a better result for them.

There are more advantages than disadvantages, it's called the incumbent advantage for a reason, the incumbent wins more often than not, and even when they lose their incumbency usually doesn't hurt them and they lose for very different reasons. Something also tells me you wouldn't be talking about the potential negatives of incumbency if we were discussing a politician you didn't hate, with other candidates you would easily admit to incumbency being an advantage, but with Trump you can't because you are that blinded by hate.

Fallacy of sunk costs is a helluva drug.

The Jem'Hadar Know.

He just wishes he lived in a world where the government can actually make the problem better by grabbing guns instead of worse, reality be damned. Wishful thinking is a helluva drug.

To Zeitgeist, the wants of Zeitgeist are more important than the rights of others who he disagrees with, hence the gun grabbing. His desire to feel safer is more important to him than himself and others actually being safer, and certainly more important than their freedoms.

The right is not protected, it is restricted. Your solutions make it harder for law abiding citizens to acquire guns, and don't effect criminals ability to acquire guns much whatsoever. You are literally increasing the percentage of bad guys who own guns compared to the good guys, and you think that protects the good guys? You gain nothing out of banning guns but huge downsides for little if any upside, and you still want the government to do it, because guns scare you and you put your wants ahead of the rights of others.

Gun grabbing has a silver lining for us, the more guns they grab, the more likely that Confederation is to collapse, but we still hate gun grabbers, they will reap what they sow.

Disarming law abiding citizens doesn't protect people from criminals who will get the guns no matter how bans you put on them, that protects them a lot worse. Banning guns leads to civil disorder, as criminals are a lot less likely to face consequences for their actions with less law abiding people armed. The assumption that people will be more safe from criminals if law abiding citizens are disarmed is laughable. All your gun grabbing proposals take more guns away from law abiding citizens and barely effect criminals at all, you are making Canadians less safe.

Except you are making people less protected and taking away their freedoms, not protecting people and their freedoms. So by trying to solve those problems with ineffective solutions like gun grabbing, you are actually making the problem worse and then you can use that bigger problem to justify even more gun grabbing. People's right to self defense is vastly more important than their right to hunt, the fact that you draw the line there, and say the more important right should be taken away and the much lesser right protected, that is just further proof you don't know anything about guns and yet want to ban them anyway because you are scared of them out of ignorance. Slap the term "hunting" on the gun and you are cool with it, slap the term "assault" on the gun and you shit your pants, even if the gun used for hunting is more lethal than the assault weapon. You are scared by buzzwords, because you don't know anything about the subject, which leads you to silly notions, like gun grabbing is about protecting people and their freedoms.

They keep saying he's botched preparations for something that hasn't even happened yet. That's what the media has been on about all day.

The democrats and the media sure as hell is.

The Indians know how to treat a POTUS, unlike Trudeau.

Normies are dumb. Smart people don't focus on a politicians words, they focus on their actions instead. The way a sentence or statement is phrased is not a high priority and those who put tons of weight on that, they are idiots.