Trump Plays the Birther Card on Nikki Haley

[Rebound]

No blow is too low for Donald Trump, who this week began peddling the claim that Nikki Haley is Constitutionally ineligible to serve as President, because her immigrant parents were not yet citizens at the time of Haley’s 1972 birth in South Carolina.  
 

Trump, who is himself Constitutionally ineligible to serve as President, has also falsely claimed that Barack Obama and Ted Cruz were born overseas and Constitutionally ineligible to serve as President.  
 

Meantime, I await for the day when the MAGA wake the F up and realize that Donald Trump is a conman who’s been lying to them for years about practically everything.  
 

https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111721484609384209

Edited January 10 by Rebound

[impartialobserver]

this is nothing but elementary school playground gossip. Those who take it seriously and react vehemently to it are simply giving it life. 

[Perspektiv]

2 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Those who take it seriously and react vehemently to it are simply giving it life. 

Exactly.

Trump is a master at this.

He lights the fire, and people keep working up a storm around it, turning it into a raging inferno.

Paying him no mind, literally takes away his main weapon and then forces him to debate, where he would be picked apart and eaten for lunch.

[robosmith]

23 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

this is nothing but elementary school playground gossip. Those who take it seriously and react vehemently to it are simply giving it life. 

Those who see/hear lies and don't refute them are the ones "giving it life."

Cause way too many believe whatever they're told without rebuttal.

That's why advertising works and businesses spend $Bs on it.

[impartialobserver]

2 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Those who see/hear lies and don't refute them are the ones "giving it life."

Cause way too many believe whatever they're told without rebuttal.

That's why advertising works and businesses spend $Bs on it.

and you think that your rebuttals are going to be taken seriously? Who knew that you were such a comedian. When is your next stand up gig? Next thing that you will tell us is that Trump is self aware. 

Edited January 10 by impartialobserver

[Moonlight Graham]

Ted Cruz was indeed born in Canada.  In Calgary, which is shocking.

[robosmith]

43 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

and you think that your rebuttals are going to be taken seriously? Who knew that you were such a comedian. When is your next stand up gig? Next thing that you will tell us is that Trump is self aware. 

Why would you believe rebuttals are taken less seriously than the initial FALSE claims?

Esp those with cited EVIDENCE in response to mere OPINION.

[robosmith]

1 minute ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Ted Cruz was indeed born in Canada.  In Calgary, which is shocking.

It's been 9 years since that fact was widely distributed during the 2016 election, so shocking no more.

[Rebound]

4 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Ted Cruz was indeed born in Canada.  In Calgary, which is shocking.

Canada can have Ted Cruz back, but because Cruz was born to an American citizen mother, he was born a US citizen under US law.

[impartialobserver]

3 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Why would you believe rebuttals are taken less seriously than the initial FALSE claims?

Esp those with cited EVIDENCE in response to mere OPINION.

Prior experience... Evidence is not enough. Folks will believe what they want to. This forum is proof of that. Your crusade falls on deaf ears. Day after day, you respond to them and yet nothing changes. Hmm... but you did not ignore the lies and presented the "truth" and yet they continue. Seems like you are getting no bang for your buck. 

[robosmith]

5 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Prior experience... Evidence is not enough. Folks will believe what they want to. This forum is proof of that. Your crusade falls on deaf ears. Day after day, you respond to them and yet nothing changes. Hmm... but you did not ignore the lies and presented the "truth" and yet they continue. Seems like you are getting no bang for your buck. 

I'm getting at least as much bang for the bucks I am NOT spending. AKA, ZERO.

And we really don't know how much bang is received by all those who read what is written without responding.

Don't know about this site, but the prior one I posted on had a lot of lurkers.

The relatively small percentage who post here unaffected by what they read, tend to be those who are HARD SELLING their own POV. AKA, they're the ones who ignore everything other than the OPINIONS they post.

[impartialobserver]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

I'm getting at least as much bang for the bucks I am NOT spending. AKA, ZERO.

And we really don't know how much bang is received by all those who read what is written without responding.

Don't know about this site, but the prior one I posted on had a lot of lurkers.

The relatively small percentage who post here unaffected by what they read, tend to be those who are HARD SELLING their own POV. AKA, they're the ones who ignore everything other than the OPINIONS they post.

Well, from reading the responses to your opponents.. it seems like you have made zero headway. Hours spent posting and no payoff of any kind. Your impassioned posts are not changing their views even the slightest. 

"The relatively small percentage who post here unaffected by what they read, tend to be those who are HARD SELLING their own POV. AKA, they're the ones who ignore everything other than the OPINIONS they post."

 

And you do not think that most politicos (politicians and their supporters) do not fit this? If so, you are hilarious and need to quit your day job. 

[robosmith]

6 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Well, from reading the responses to your opponents.. it seems like you have made zero headway. Hours spent posting and no payoff of any kind. Your impassioned posts are not changing their views even the slightest. 

Do you not know the meaning of lurkers? Or just believe that means Unicorns?

6 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

"The relatively small percentage who post here unaffected by what they read, tend to be those who are HARD SELLING their own POV. AKA, they're the ones who ignore everything other than the OPINIONS they post."

And you do not think that most politicos (politicians and their supporters) do not fit this? If so, you are hilarious and need to quit your day job. 

I have recently come to understand that people who have ZERO background in science, have ZERO respect for evidence.

I had previously thought that was just because they HAD NONE, but now understand it is a completely foreign concept to the scientifically ILLITERATE.

As someone who has plenty of both, and friends who share that perspective, completely ignoring evidence has been a foreign concept to me which MAKES NO SENSE. AKA akin to religious fervor and CULT like behavior; of which I am very familiar.

Like I said, investment in correcting LIES probably has a much wider impact than among the staunch right wingers here who are more often than suspected on the payroll of right winger campaigns. Like Trump confirmed when he thanked his "keyboard warriors" a couple of years ago.

[suds]

Trump has such a wide margin on all GOP contenders what's to worry about (other than a surprise ruling by the Supreme Court)? And actually, according to RCP poll averages, Haley is further ahead of Biden (if they ran head to head) than either Trump or DeSantis. It could make a good ticket with Trump and Haley as VP.

[impartialobserver]

55 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Do you not know the meaning of lurkers? Or just believe that means Unicorns?

I have recently come to understand that people who have ZERO background in science, have ZERO respect for evidence.

I had previously thought that was just because they HAD NONE, but now understand it is a completely foreign concept to the scientifically ILLITERATE.

As someone who has plenty of both, and friends who share that perspective, completely ignoring evidence has been a foreign concept to me which MAKES NO SENSE. AKA akin to religious fervor and CULT like behavior; of which I am very familiar.

Like I said, investment in correcting LIES probably has a much wider impact than among the staunch right wingers here who are more often than suspected on the payroll of right winger campaigns. Like Trump confirmed when he thanked his "keyboard warriors" a couple of years ago.

So If I was to make up some stuff now.. you would waste your time correcting me even though you would know that I am just manipulating you? And being toyed with makes you feel righteous. 

you also know that behind a keyboard.. no one actually has to be honest. You could prove that that 4^4 = 16 and they would defy you.. just because they can. 

[robosmith]

26 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

So If I was to make up some stuff now.. you would waste your time correcting me even though you would know that I am just manipulating you? And being toyed with makes you feel righteous. 

you also know that behind a keyboard.. no one actually has to be honest. You could prove that that 4^4 = 16 and they would defy you.. just because they can. 

Yes, I am well aware that several people who post here are completely dishonest, which is why I often cajole them into providing evidence for their OPINIONS even though they almost never HAVE ANY. 

I should probably just hit the laugh emoji and stop wasting my time with them, but I post for other readers who might believe their BULLSHIT.

[impartialobserver]

35 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Yes, I am well aware that several people who post here are completely dishonest, which is why I often cajole them into providing evidence for their OPINIONS even though they almost never HAVE ANY. 

I should probably just hit the laugh emoji and stop wasting my time with them, but I post for other readers who might believe their BULLSHIT.

So you know that they are dishonest and yet you respond them every time.. reflexively. I would hate to think that I am being toyed with in such a way. I find that most do not come onto forums for information.. they want affirmation. Hence, the lack of objective, factual thinking. 

[WestCanMan]

4 hours ago, Rebound said:

Trump, who is himself Constitutionally ineligible to serve as President,

🤣

Thanks for your constitutionally illiterate opinion. 

[Rebound]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

🤣

Thanks for your constitutionally illiterate opinion. 

He has been legally deemed constitutionally ineligible in two states.

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

He has been legally deemed constitutionally ineligible in two states.

By a single leftard in one state, and by a group of activist judges in another. 2 states in the whole country. In other words, 4% of "states" are in agreement. 

I'll type this really slowly so that you can read it: if you have to go to great lengths to explain why you feel like there was an insurrection, and if your story about the origin of the rioting changes depending on whom you're accusing, there wasn't an insurrection. Go to bed. 

Edited January 11 by WestCanMan

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

By a single leftard in one state, and by a group of activist judges in another. 2 states in the whole country. In other words, 4% of "states" are in agreement. 

I'll type this really slowly so that you can read it: if you have to go to great lengths to explain why you feel like there was an insurrection, and if your story about the origin of the rioting changes depending on whom you're accusing, there wasn't an insurrection. Go to bed. 

And since NEITHER of ^these are true, there was an insurrection. Wake up!

1. No "lengths" are needed. All you have to understand is that Trump told his armed mob to "stop the steal" at the Capitol where the EC votes were being certified.

2. Only Trump invited the mob ("will be wild"), told them what to do, and they knew what it meant and did it. 

Guess what it means if the EC vote was NOT certified on that day. The ONLY length YOU have "go to" is understanding "contingent election."

Those of us US citizens who have been paying attention for 3 years know exactly what that means.

Of course you've been told several times here, so if you're not paying attention, that's ON YOU.

Of course the JURY which will hear the case will hear all the sworn testimony which make ^this a slam dunk case.

 

[Moonlight Graham]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

By a single leftard in one state, and by a group of activist judges in another. 2 states in the whole country. In other words, 4% of "states" are in agreement. 

I'll type this really slowly so that you can read it: if you have to go to great lengths to explain why you feel like there was an insurrection, and if your story about the origin of the rioting changes depending on whom you're accusing, there wasn't an insurrection. Go to bed. 

A giant angry mob storming the Capitol at the same time when the election was being confirmed was just enthusiastic tourists really.

[myata]

Who's looking for surprises or revelations here? The prolific lying clown will say anything; no bounds. He said one butcher tyrant was a genius, and the other, very honorable. He promised to dismantle NATO.

This is the last, final low in a populist deformed and mutilated quasi-democracy. No constraints, bounds or limits left. From that sort of politics, one can expect anything.

[Rebound]

10 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

By a single leftard in one state, and by a group of activist judges in another. 2 states in the whole country. In other words, 4% of "states" are in agreement. 

I'll type this really slowly so that you can read it: if you have to go to great lengths to explain why you feel like there was an insurrection, and if your story about the origin of the rioting changes depending on whom you're accusing, there wasn't an insurrection. Go to bed. 

I don’t need to go to any length to prove there was an insurrection. I saw it live on TV on January 6, 2021. You are in denial of basic facts, that’s all.  You saw the videos, and you deny what your eyes show you because it’s not useful for your “team,” as if there is a team. 
Heres the thing about being on a team: Teams win sometimes, and lose other times. If your team only accepts winning and lies every time it loses, then you aren’t competing any more.  This is why it is clear that Donald Trump wants a dictatorship. If he wins an election, great. If he loses an election, he lies and encourages people to resort to political violence.  
A normal human being would have been mortified that people were violent on January 6. Instead, the son of a bltch is calling those people “Hostages.”  He said he loves them and that he will pardon them if he’s put in power. He says he will be dictator on day one and he believes he can commit any crime he wants. I hope he drops dead and burns in Hell for it. 

Edited January 11 by Rebound

[Perspektiv]

18 hours ago, robosmith said:

have ZERO respect for evidence.

I think we both know even evidence can fall victim to bias, tampering and being put well out of context. 

IE a cop pulls me over for running a red light. 

His dash cam shows I am past it, my right signal on. Evidence is overwhelming.

But I did so to make way for an ambulance.

If I don't have a dash cam, his evidence stands.

So some when discussing politics often also have to ask themselves the purpose of the presented evidence.

So the street smarts, or an ability to read between the lines also is critical. 

Basing it on evidence only, is the wife telling me she's fine and leaving it at that. 

Reading between the line, reads the tone of the message, indicating something is wrong and she doesn't want to talk about it right now.

You need the latter to read into politics--a world where people everywhere will be slimy, slithery and know the system inside and out and find creative ways to hide evidence.