Jump to content

The Slow Painful Death of the Trump Administration


Iznogoud

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, taxme said:

It would appear as though you would prefer to have a bunch of buffoon democrat baboons running America, hmmm? I prefer to have a smart and intelligent and say it as it is leader like Trump. Keep trying but you are not going to win me over with your leftist liberal bull chit. I am like Trump. Too smart and intelligent for you to try to deal with. Just saying. :lol:

You can love trump all you like. Just keep in mind he claims to love murderous dictators. There is that old saying though about "the company you keep" to consider.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Realitycheck said:

I feel you are being too generous. In my opinion if Trump walked into a room of Nobel Prize winners, the collective IQ would drop below zero.

Even if Trump did not walk into a room full of Nobel Prize winners, the room would still be full of a collection of low IQ people in it. Most people who receive Nobel prizes are dumber than a door knob. Sorry to all those doorknobs out there. Doorknobs are at least useful. But if Trump did enter a room full of Nobel Prize winners their IQ would go up.  Trump has this thing about bringing out the best in people. :D

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Owly said:

You can love trump all you like. Just keep in mind he claims to love murderous dictators. There is that old saying though about "the company you keep" to consider.

Where has Trump said anything where he has said that he loves murderous dictators? Hey, did not Teflon Don Trudeau say once that he admired China, a country that imprisons or shoots it's people for their politically incorrect opinions that the Chinese communist government does not want to hear.

I am still waiting for you to tell me as to when has Trump had someone shot for not agreeing with him?

Trudeau likes to be in company with communist globalist George Soros who is one of the biggest threats to freedom to all of the western countries of the world. Soros sponsors many leftist/communist groups that have committed murder against his enemies. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, taxme said:

Even if Trump did not walk into a room full of Nobel Prize winners, the room would still be full of a collection of low IQ people in it. Most people who receive Nobel prizes are dumber than a door knob. Sorry to all those doorknobs out there. Doorknobs are at least useful. But if Trump did enter a room full of Nobel Prize winners their IQ would go up.  Trump has this thing about bringing out the best in people. :D

Clearly, not proven. How many in jail now? How many awaiting their indictments? I think Mueller is said to have some 80+ in his voluminous files.  Every one of these is more intelligent than Chump: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates. Hell their nail cuttings are more intelligent than Trump.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, taxme said:

Where has Trump said anything where he has said that he loves murderous dictators? Hey, did not Teflon Don Trudeau say once that he admired China, a country that imprisons or shoots it's people for their politically incorrect opinions that the Chinese communist government does not want to hear.

I am still waiting for you to tell me as to when has Trump had someone shot for not agreeing with him?

Trudeau likes to be in company with communist globalist George Soros who is one of the biggest threats to freedom to all of the western countries of the world. Soros sponsors many leftist/communist groups that have committed murder against his enemies. 

I thought anyone who follows trump like you would have heard him say "we fell in love" when referencing Kim Jung Un, who is in fact a murderous dictator. He also is good buddies with Vladi Putin, trusts him more than his entire intell community, and enjoys dancing waving a sword with the likes of MBS in Saudi. Don't know how much more evidence you need.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Owly said:

I thought anyone who follows trump like you would have heard him say "we fell in love" when referencing Kim Jung Un, who is in fact a murderous dictator. He also is good buddies with Vladi Putin, trusts him more than his entire intell community, and enjoys dancing waving a sword with the likes of MBS in Saudi. Don't know how much more evidence you need.

You and that tag team buddy of yours unreality sure do have a tough time of not seeing and getting a bit of the sense of humor that Trump had said to Kim. Your communist buddy Teflon Don Trudeau has supported many communist and dictatorship regimes already. Did you forget already when I told you that Trudeau once said that he admired communist China whose leader is a murderous communist dictator. Again Trudeau is a good friend of G. Soros who supports murderous communist and dictatorship regimes. I don't know as to how much more evidence you need to see that you are a communist supporter. Shocking indeed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, taxme said:

You and that tag team buddy of yours unreality sure do have a tough time of not seeing and getting a bit of the sense of humor that Trump had said to Kim. Your communist buddy Teflon Don Trudeau has supported many communist and dictatorship regimes already. Did you forget already when I told you that Trudeau once said that he admired communist China whose leader is a murderous communist dictator. Again Trudeau is a good friend of G. Soros who supports murderous communist and dictatorship regimes. I don't know as to how much more evidence you need to see that you are a communist supporter. Shocking indeed. 

I see so it's just "humor" when your buddy trump kisses fat kim's arse, but it's a serious problem (for you) when our PM deals with one of our largest trading partners. Go to your dictionary under the letter "H", follow along until you find the word "hypocritical" and try to comprehend how your comments are completely that.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Owly said:

I see so it's just "humor" when your buddy trump kisses fat kim's arse, but it's a serious problem (for you) when our PM deals with one of our largest trading partners. Go to your dictionary under the letter "H", follow along until you find the word "hypocritical" and try to comprehend how your comments are completely that.  

So it's okay when Trudeau does it, but not when Trump does it? Or do you shit on Trudeau just has hard for the same thing?

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

So it's okay when Trudeau does it, but not when Trump does it? Or do you shit on Trudeau just has hard for the same thing?

I don't recall Trudeau saying he "fell in love" with fat kim. But here's a little reality check question for ya: how much does the US rely on trade with North Korea compared to how much trade do both Canada and the US do with China?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Owly said:

I don't recall Trudeau saying he "fell in love" with fat kim. But here's a little reality check question for ya: how much does the US rely on trade with North Korea compared to how much trade do both Canada and the US do with China?

It's called negotiation dude. If you want to negotiate with someone, you don't talk mad shit about them before you have a sit down, that will get you less of what you want. That's why Trump praises dictators, it's not because he actually loves them. Here you go again focusing on a politicians tone and rhetoric as opposed to their actions. Why are all your big beefs with Trump entirely focused on his words and not his actions?

You call Trump a liar, then believe him when he says things that make him look bad in your estimation, why don't you assume he's just lying when he praises dictators?

Your line of reasoning makes no sense, you basically just assume the worst about Trump no matter what. If lying makes Trump look worse in your mind, then you assume he's lying. If Trump telling the truth makes him look worse in your mind, then you assume he's telling the truth. 

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

It's called negotiation dude. If you want to negotiate with someone, you don't talk mad shit about them before you have a sit down, that will get you less of what you want. That's why Trump praises dictators, it's not because he actually loves them. Here you go again focusing on a politicians tone and rhetoric as opposed to their actions. Why are all your big beefs with Trump entirely focused on his words and not his actions?

You call Trump a liar, then believe him when he says things that make him look bad in your estimation, why don't you assume he's just lying when he praises dictators? Your line of reasoning makes no sense.

So what in your mind do you think Trump needs from kimmy that makes him suck up to him? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Owly said:

So what in your mind do you think Trump needs from kimmy that makes him suck up to him? 

He wants to be seen as willing to talk, to appeal to his isolationist supporters, while not actually caving to NK in negotiations, to not piss off the Neocons too much. When negotiations eventually fall through, he has an excuse to get tough with North Korea that didn't previously exist in the mind of isolationists, Trump can claim, he tried, and then pivot to a more classically neocon stance with NK, while getting the boost in 2020 in the meantime.

It's all political theater, and that would be pretty apparent to you, if you didn't always assume the worst about Trump, by only assuming Trump is telling the truth when it makes him look dumb to you. 

Edited by Yzermandius19
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

He wants to be seen as willing to talk, to appeal to his isolationist supporters, while not actually caving to NK in negotiations, to not piss off the Neocons too much. When negotiations eventually fall through, he has an excuse to get tough with North Korea that didn't previously exist in the mind of isolationists, Trump can claim, he tried, and enough of them will buy it.

So just more bogus bullshit from Trump. His base may well buy it. Those with higher education probably not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Owly said:

So just more bogus bullshit from Trump. His base may well buy it. Those with higher education probably not.

Sometimes Trump's lies serve a political purpose that is beneficial to him, you may want to consider that, from time to time. Even if he's only fooling the rubes, the rubes constitute most of electorate, so that's smart politics.

Going high brow just for the sake of going high brow, is not how you win elections, you got to tell the rubes what they want to hear, in the language they want to hear it in. That's how you win elections, being the smartest guy in the room certainly isn't. Obama didn't win because he was super smart, he won because he blew more sunshine up the voters butts than the Republicans he faced did.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Sometimes Trump's lies serve a political purpose that is beneficial to him, you may want to consider that, from time to time. Even if he's only fooling the rubes, the rubes constitute most of electorate, so that's smart politics.

 

Agreed...Obama and many previous presidents employed the same technique for political objectives...Trump is just better at leveraging media coverage by doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Sometimes Trump's lies serve a political purpose that is beneficial to him, you may want to consider that, from time to time. Even if he's only fooling the rubes, the rubes constitute most of electorate, so that's smart politics.

Going high brow just for the sake of going high brow, is not how you win elections, you got to tell rubes what they want to hear, that's how win elections.

No I don't think rubes do constitute most of the electorate, which is why Trump lost the election in terms of popular vote. Oh but the EC came to his gerrymandered rescue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Owly said:

No I don't think rubes do constitute most of the electorate, which is why Trump lost the election in terms of popular vote. Oh but the EC came to his gerrymandered rescue.

The Republicans didn't lose the house because the electorate was informed. They lost because the opposition party who doesn't have a sitting POTUS, gets more fired up about mid-terms than the opposition, in almost every instance, no matter how well the sitting POTUS does. Assuming that people voting Democrat means most voters are informed, is both ridiculously partisan, and utterly laughable.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Obama won because he blew more sunshine up the voters butts than McCain or Romney, not because he rallied the well informed to drown out the rubes. The only folks who think differently are wishful thinking Republican haters.

Obama won the popular vote as well as the EC. Even blew the rubes into the ditch. And he did it two terms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

The Republicans didn't lose the house because the electorate was informed. They lose because the opposition party gets more fired up about mid-terms than the opposition. Assuming that people voting Democrat means most voters are informed, is both ridiculously partisan, and utterly laughable.

 

Indeed....Trump actually out-performed Obama for first mid-terms, only losing the House and gaining seats in the Senate.   Obama and his party were destroyed in 2010 mid-terms, starting a deep decline in Democrat seats held at the federal and state levels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Owly said:

Obama won the popular vote as well as the EC. Even blew the rubes into the ditch. And he did it two terms.

Winning the popular vote isn't proof that rubes didn't elect him. Neither is winning two-terms. Most voters are rubes, on both sides of the aisle, be real. Trump lost less ground in the house in 2018 than Obama did in 2010, and Obama got easily re-elected, assuming the republicans will lose because of the mid-term results is wishful thinking, it didn't spell doom for Obama at all, and he did far worse.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

The Republicans didn't lose the house because the electorate was informed. They lose because the opposition party gets more fired up about mid-terms than the opposition. Assuming that people voting Democrat means most voters are informed, is both ridiculously partisan, and utterly laughable.

They are more highly educated and therefore very likely more informed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Owly said:

They are more highly educated and therefore very likely more informed.

Even if they have a higher percentage of informed voters, that isn't most of the voters, not even close, most voters on both sides of aisle are ill informed, just because a higher percentage of highly educated folks voted against Trump, does not mean that most of them are politically well informed. Them not voting for Trump is not proof of being informed. 

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

Even if they have a higher percentage of informed voters, that isn't most of the voters, not even close, most voters on both sides of aisle are ill informed, just because they didn't vote for Trump is not proof of being informed.

 

Yes, and this is why the current Democratic leadership is seeking to find a candidate that can engage and defeat trump, not a debate about virtue signaling.

Or they will be so smart and better informed..and still lose again...to Trump

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Yes, and this is why the current Democratic leadership is seeking to find a candidate that can engage and defeat trump, not a debate about virtue signaling.

Or they will be so smart and better informed..and still lose again...to Trump

How did playing the high brow finger wagger card work for Hillary Clinton? Not very well, so go ahead and double down on that obviously failed strategy, silly Democrats. Chastising voters for not being informed enough to vote for you, basket of deplorables style, isn't a winning hand.

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...