Trump acts like a child while everyone else stands for the anthem

[edthecynic]

Biden did brag. The other “lies” are honestly irrelevant to me. I see it as hyperbole. In terms of the whistleblower that is pure opinion. To me you’re grasping at straws because you cannot refute my logic for liking what his actions have done for me and my family.

You can say they’re irrelevant to you. I don’t care. They’re still lies. If saying you’re 6’10” when you’re 6’3” is a lie, so is saying you’re worth $10 billion when you’re worth $4

Saying you like what he’s done isn’t logic. It’s completely unrelated. He could be the greatest president ever or the worst. It has nothing to do with the truth of his statements. Truth is truth. Whether you like the effects of his policy or not, it doesn’t change it.

You see, this is why I hate debating facts. It’s like they don’t exist anymore.

Agree to disagree. His hyperbole is what makes him unique. His policies is what helps me and my family. His “lies” have zero impact on me. His policies have a significant impact on me.

You’re not even making an argument anymore. I’m arguing he’s a liar and you’re arguing he’s made you rich. You decided to switch topics mid-debate.

You’re lying now. I said he was honest about a stronger economy, stronger military and pro Israel policies. Did you not see that post or are you lying?

I saw that post. It was irrelevant. If a person tells two truths and a thousand lies, can we no longer call them a liar?

Trust not him that hath once broken faith; he who betrayed thee once, will betray thee again.

- Shakespeare.

 

[colfax_m]

Sometimes the truth is in opinions. Red Sox play in Fenway Park is the truth and a fact. Red Sox are a great team is an opinion. The fun part of journalism is debating whether they are a great team or not

Debating whether they’re a great team is not journalism. That’s opinion. It’s fun, for sure, but it’s not journalism.

The fun part of journalism is uncovering truth that is hidden. No one gets a Pulitzer because they identified that Fenway is where the Red Sox play. They get a Pulitzer for examining decades of Trump’s financial records and exposing how the wealthy manipulate their wealth to avoid taxes.

Or maybe discovering that Joe Biden got his son a cool gig in Ukraine that paid him $83k per month while not paying child support? Or how people manipulate the system and take advantage of Medicaid. Yes, much of the news is negative. I prefer to discuss the Red Sox.

Hmm, interesting point. You act as though it’s a fact they Joe Biden got his son a cool gig when there is no factual basis for that.

No one is getting a Pulitzer for making things up.

That’s what I mean about debates. If we put two people up on a TV show to debate if Joe Biden got Hunter his job, people are just going to ignore the one they don’t want to listen to. No facts. No truth. Just two biased views. That’s not journalism.

Hunter admitted he got that job cause of Joe. You can look it up. I never Would have known without journalism.

So now you admit Hunter is honest.

Probably not that honest, but it’s obvious that Hunter got his job because of his family connection.

Still, Azog is conflating getting a job because of who your dad is and your dad getting you a job. Those are different statements. Azog doesn’t seem to care about being accurate.

 

[edthecynic]

I said he was honest about a stronger economy

Except the economy was stronger under Obama, Tramp simply lied about the Obama economy. For example Obama created more jobs his last 3 years than Tramp did his first 3 years and Obama did it with less debt! So job creation has slowed down since the Tramp error.
Here is my favorite Tramp lie about the Obama economy.

Don’t forget in the meantime we have a real unemployment rate that’s probably 21%. It’s not 6. It’s not 5.2 and 5.5. Our real unemployment rate–in fact, I saw a chart the other day, our real unemployment–because you have ninety million people that aren’t working. Ninety-three million to be exact.
If you start adding it up, our real unemployment rate is 42%.
- Donald J Trump, Time interview, Aug. 18, 2015

BTW using Tramp's own formula for REAL unemployment today it stands at 58%

 

[Correll]

It is quite hard to get hundreds of actual white supremacists to a rally. I do not think I have heard of that happening in my lifetime, in this country. Double digits is normally a good day for them. They are FRINGE.

Not as fringe as you want to believe.

How so?

And why is it, that you WANT to believe that they are not fringe?


What does it gain you, to have White Supremacists be "not fringe"?

Depends on what you mean by fringe I guess, but if you spend any time online, you’d see that white supremacist ideology has either grown or been unmasked.

Judging reality from what you see online, is a good way to be wrong.


And my question stands. Why do you WANT this to be true?

 

[edthecynic]

He did a shit job. Did he mention the study excludes neutral stories?

Here are some more links for you. Since you're still not convinced.

Anti-Trump Media? 92% Of Coverage Of His Presidency Is Negative: Study | Investor's Business Daily
A broadcast tradition: 90% of Trump coverage remains negative, study finds
Here's Undeniable Proof That the Media Despises Trump
Study: News Coverage Of Trump More Negative Than For Other Presidents
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ent-network-trump-coverage-has-been-negative/
Broadcast news slams Trump with 96 percent negative coverage since impeachment inquiry began, study says
Who's to blame for negative Trump coverage?
Study Finds TV Networks Fixated on Negative Impeachment Coverage of Trump

Okay I need some clarification on this. In your opinion, how much of the negative coverage is Trump’s own fault?

Tough to state as he is very polarizing but anything over 60% is extreme in my opinion.

like Tramp only says something negative only 60% of the time! Why should the media report Tramp's negatives as positive?????

How about not talking like a baby during a serious discussion? Or are you telling us to treat you like you are a baby?

Grow up, child!

 

[edthecynic]

I don’t think he was wrong. I think he was lying. I don’t know how he could claim to know who was and wasn’t a white supremacist just by looking at them.

exactly, and the rally was advertised as a white supremacist rally, so those who were there were NOT duped by Nazis!

Other ads were far less obvious.

OK, even the tame ads say NOTHING about statues!!!!!

Ah, so you admit there were "tame ads" and other ads that were more blatant about their white supremacist message.


Which matches with MY position that it was a dishonest attempt by a fringe group(s) to co-opt a much more popular issue, in a dishonest attempt to dishonestly broaden their appeal and dishonestly inflate their perceived numbers and relevance.


An attempt you are supporting, because it supports YOUR dishonest narrative(s) of America and Trump being inherently "racist" and "evul".



Trump is the GOOD GUY in all of this.

I admitted that even the so called "tame" ads do NOT support the LIE that honest people were duped by a debate about STATUES! Please show me where any of their ads mention STATUES!!!!!

 

[Correll]

Here are some more links for you. Since you're still not convinced.

Anti-Trump Media? 92% Of Coverage Of His Presidency Is Negative: Study | Investor's Business Daily
A broadcast tradition: 90% of Trump coverage remains negative, study finds
Here's Undeniable Proof That the Media Despises Trump
Study: News Coverage Of Trump More Negative Than For Other Presidents
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...ent-network-trump-coverage-has-been-negative/
Broadcast news slams Trump with 96 percent negative coverage since impeachment inquiry began, study says
Who's to blame for negative Trump coverage?
Study Finds TV Networks Fixated on Negative Impeachment Coverage of Trump

Okay I need some clarification on this. In your opinion, how much of the negative coverage is Trump’s own fault?

Tough to state as he is very polarizing but anything over 60% is extreme in my opinion.

like Tramp only says something negative only 60% of the time! Why should the media report Tramp's negatives as positive?????

How about not talking like a baby during a serious discussion? Or are you telling us to treat you like you are a baby?

Grow up, child!

I'm not the one talking like a baby.


That would be you.

 

[edthecynic]

It was a rally organized by white supremacists that was publicized as a rally about historical statues, in a dishonest attempt by the white supremacists to co-opt a larger and more popular issue to dishonestly inflate their perceived numbers and relevance.

BULLSHIT!
There was NO mention of statues in their publicity ads!

I assume that they mentioned statues elsewhere.

But they didn't mention statues anywhere, otherwise you would have posted an ad mentioning statues!!!

 

[edthecynic]

Okay I need some clarification on this. In your opinion, how much of the negative coverage is Trump’s own fault?

Tough to state as he is very polarizing but anything over 60% is extreme in my opinion.

like Tramp only says something negative only 60% of the time! Why should the media report Tramp's negatives as positive?????

How about not talking like a baby during a serious discussion? Or are you telling us to treat you like you are a baby?

Grow up, child!

I'm not the one talking like a baby.


That would be you.

Grow up, child!

 

[colfax_m]

It is quite hard to get hundreds of actual white supremacists to a rally. I do not think I have heard of that happening in my lifetime, in this country. Double digits is normally a good day for them. They are FRINGE.

Not as fringe as you want to believe.

How so?

And why is it, that you WANT to believe that they are not fringe?


What does it gain you, to have White Supremacists be "not fringe"?

Depends on what you mean by fringe I guess, but if you spend any time online, you’d see that white supremacist ideology has either grown or been unmasked.

Judging reality from what you see online, is a good way to be wrong.


And my question stands. Why do you WANT this to be true?

I disagree. People are afraid to openly admit to harboring white supremacist ideologies. Online, they are free to express their ideology. The internet provides a valuable insight to this. It pops up openly from time to time. Sometimes very obvious:

White supremacist Coast Guard officer sentenced to 13 years in prison

Sometimes more subtle:
Rio Arriba County sheriff flashes controversial hand gesture

Sometimes violently:
El Paso Walmart Shooting Suspect Pleads Not Guilty

Who said I want it to be true? I think it is true and the truth doesn’t care what I want or don’t want.

 

[Correll]

I don’t think he was wrong. I think he was lying. I don’t know how he could claim to know who was and wasn’t a white supremacist just by looking at them.

exactly, and the rally was advertised as a white supremacist rally, so those who were there were NOT duped by Nazis!

Other ads were far less obvious.

OK, even the tame ads say NOTHING about statues!!!!!

Ah, so you admit there were "tame ads" and other ads that were more blatant about their white supremacist message.


Which matches with MY position that it was a dishonest attempt by a fringe group(s) to co-opt a much more popular issue, in a dishonest attempt to dishonestly broaden their appeal and dishonestly inflate their perceived numbers and relevance.


An attempt you are supporting, because it supports YOUR dishonest narrative(s) of America and Trump being inherently "racist" and "evul".



Trump is the GOOD GUY in all of this.

I admitted that even the so called "tame" ads do NOT support the LIE that honest people were duped by a debate about STATUES! Please show me where any of their ads mention STATUES!!!!!

Maybe you are right. Maybe Trump and I, and so many others are wrong about who was there.


THat means that when Trump talked about who was there, he was wrong about that.


That is still not even close to the lie that the media and your fellow libs are telling about what he said.


They are saying that he purposefully said that nazis and white supremacists are "very fine people".




Being wrong about who was there, is not the same as being sympathetic to Nazis.



WHy are you not more upset about that, then about whether Trump was right or wrong about who was where?


We all know the answer to that question. The only real question is, are you man enough to admit it.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Debating whether they’re a great team is not journalism. That’s opinion. It’s fun, for sure, but it’s not journalism.

The fun part of journalism is uncovering truth that is hidden. No one gets a Pulitzer because they identified that Fenway is where the Red Sox play. They get a Pulitzer for examining decades of Trump’s financial records and exposing how the wealthy manipulate their wealth to avoid taxes.

Or maybe discovering that Joe Biden got his son a cool gig in Ukraine that paid him $83k per month while not paying child support? Or how people manipulate the system and take advantage of Medicaid. Yes, much of the news is negative. I prefer to discuss the Red Sox.

Hmm, interesting point. You act as though it’s a fact they Joe Biden got his son a cool gig when there is no factual basis for that.

No one is getting a Pulitzer for making things up.

That’s what I mean about debates. If we put two people up on a TV show to debate if Joe Biden got Hunter his job, people are just going to ignore the one they don’t want to listen to. No facts. No truth. Just two biased views. That’s not journalism.

Hunter admitted he got that job cause of Joe. You can look it up. I never Would have known without journalism.

So now you admit Hunter is honest.

Probably not that honest, but it’s obvious that Hunter got his job because of his family connection.

Still, Azog is conflating getting a job because of who your dad is and your dad getting you a job. Those are different statements. Azog doesn’t seem to care about being accurate.

Tomato...Tomaato. If his last name is not Biden and if his father is not the VP he doesn’t get that job.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

I said he was honest about a stronger economy

Except the economy was stronger under Obama, Tramp simply lied about the Obama economy. For example Obama created more jobs his last 3 years than Tramp did his first 3 years and Obama did it with less debt! So job creation has slowed down since the Tramp error.
Here is my favorite Tramp lie about the Obama economy.

Don’t forget in the meantime we have a real unemployment rate that’s probably 21%. It’s not 6. It’s not 5.2 and 5.5. Our real unemployment rate–in fact, I saw a chart the other day, our real unemployment–because you have ninety million people that aren’t working. Ninety-three million to be exact.
If you start adding it up, our real unemployment rate is 42%.
- Donald J Trump, Time interview, Aug. 18, 2015

BTW using Tramp's own formula for REAL unemployment today it stands at 58%

He didn’t create anything. He just lowered interest rates to the floor. Obama was the known as the food stamp President.

 

[Correll]

It is quite hard to get hundreds of actual white supremacists to a rally. I do not think I have heard of that happening in my lifetime, in this country. Double digits is normally a good day for them. They are FRINGE.

Not as fringe as you want to believe.

How so?

And why is it, that you WANT to believe that they are not fringe?


What does it gain you, to have White Supremacists be "not fringe"?

Depends on what you mean by fringe I guess, but if you spend any time online, you’d see that white supremacist ideology has either grown or been unmasked.

Judging reality from what you see online, is a good way to be wrong.


And my question stands. Why do you WANT this to be true?

I disagree. People are afraid to openly admit to harboring white supremacist ideologies. Online, they are free to express their ideology. The internet provides a valuable insight to this. It pops up openly from time to time. Sometimes very obvious:

White supremacist Coast Guard officer sentenced to 13 years in prison

Sometimes more subtle:
Rio Arriba County sheriff flashes controversial hand gesture

Sometimes violently:
El Paso Walmart Shooting Suspect Pleads Not Guilty

Who said I want it to be true? I think it is true and the truth doesn’t care what I want or don’t want.

Sure. The very, very few who hold such ideologies are afraid to admit it in real life and thus they spend a lot of time online, creating the illusion that they are more numerous than they really are.


YOu look at any numbers in real life, and they are vanishingly small. David Duke, when he ran for Presidency, got .04 % of the national vote.


Why do you want this to be true?

 

[Faun]

Ah, the usual Trump hypocrisy. Acting like a jackass during the anthem is okay but kneeling is blasphemy!

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/article239913588.html

While Impeached Trump is a jackass, there's nothing wrong with him doing that.

 

[Correll]

It was a rally organized by white supremacists that was publicized as a rally about historical statues, in a dishonest attempt by the white supremacists to co-opt a larger and more popular issue to dishonestly inflate their perceived numbers and relevance.

BULLSHIT!
There was NO mention of statues in their publicity ads!

I assume that they mentioned statues elsewhere.

But they didn't mention statues anywhere, otherwise you would have posted an ad mentioning statues!!!

I heard about the rally, after the fact. It was discussed in the news, broadcast, cable and print, as a rally for the historical statues.


I never questioned that, nor have I heard anyone question that, until you.


I dont' know HOW they got out the message on the rally for the statues, but everything I have heard, indicates that they did.


What are you on about this for? THe most you can "prove" with this line of argument, is that Trump and I are wrong about who was there.


That still does not justify the Lie the media and the libs are telling.

 

[colfax_m]

Not as fringe as you want to believe.

How so?

And why is it, that you WANT to believe that they are not fringe?


What does it gain you, to have White Supremacists be "not fringe"?

Depends on what you mean by fringe I guess, but if you spend any time online, you’d see that white supremacist ideology has either grown or been unmasked.

Judging reality from what you see online, is a good way to be wrong.


And my question stands. Why do you WANT this to be true?

I disagree. People are afraid to openly admit to harboring white supremacist ideologies. Online, they are free to express their ideology. The internet provides a valuable insight to this. It pops up openly from time to time. Sometimes very obvious:

White supremacist Coast Guard officer sentenced to 13 years in prison

Sometimes more subtle:
Rio Arriba County sheriff flashes controversial hand gesture

Sometimes violently:
El Paso Walmart Shooting Suspect Pleads Not Guilty

Who said I want it to be true? I think it is true and the truth doesn’t care what I want or don’t want.

Sure. The very, very few who hold such ideologies are afraid to admit it in real life and thus they spend a lot of time online, creating the illusion that they are more numerous than they really are.


YOu look at any numbers in real life, and they are vanishingly small. David Duke, when he ran for Presidency, got .04 % of the national vote.


Why do you want this to be true?

David Duke ran for president 30 years ago and got nearly 50k votes. 50k is not so vanishingly small that it’s impossible to attract a few hundred in one place at a time.

I’m not making conclusions on the size of the population. I’m just saying it’s larger than is apparent.

 

[colfax_m]

I said he was honest about a stronger economy

Except the economy was stronger under Obama, Tramp simply lied about the Obama economy. For example Obama created more jobs his last 3 years than Tramp did his first 3 years and Obama did it with less debt! So job creation has slowed down since the Tramp error.
Here is my favorite Tramp lie about the Obama economy.

Don’t forget in the meantime we have a real unemployment rate that’s probably 21%. It’s not 6. It’s not 5.2 and 5.5. Our real unemployment rate–in fact, I saw a chart the other day, our real unemployment–because you have ninety million people that aren’t working. Ninety-three million to be exact.
If you start adding it up, our real unemployment rate is 42%.
- Donald J Trump, Time interview, Aug. 18, 2015

BTW using Tramp's own formula for REAL unemployment today it stands at 58%

Facts and figures aren’t going to do anything.

Trump told them the economy was dismal under Obama and the best ever under Trump despite no fundamental differences. The data is irrelevant. It’s all about feelings.

 

[depotoo]

I think he was trying to encourage everyone to sing along. He was pointing towards others then raised his hands like a choir director would. It didn’t work.
Trump Didn't Sing All The Words To The National Anthem At National Championship Game | HuffPost
He has attempted to sing along before. He may not have a good voice therefore he wished others would sing to it.

He has been made fun of for singing to it previously.
Did Trump forget the national anthem?

 

[Correll]

How so?

And why is it, that you WANT to believe that they are not fringe?


What does it gain you, to have White Supremacists be "not fringe"?

Depends on what you mean by fringe I guess, but if you spend any time online, you’d see that white supremacist ideology has either grown or been unmasked.

Judging reality from what you see online, is a good way to be wrong.


And my question stands. Why do you WANT this to be true?

I disagree. People are afraid to openly admit to harboring white supremacist ideologies. Online, they are free to express their ideology. The internet provides a valuable insight to this. It pops up openly from time to time. Sometimes very obvious:

White supremacist Coast Guard officer sentenced to 13 years in prison

Sometimes more subtle:
Rio Arriba County sheriff flashes controversial hand gesture

Sometimes violently:
El Paso Walmart Shooting Suspect Pleads Not Guilty

Who said I want it to be true? I think it is true and the truth doesn’t care what I want or don’t want.

Sure. The very, very few who hold such ideologies are afraid to admit it in real life and thus they spend a lot of time online, creating the illusion that they are more numerous than they really are.


YOu look at any numbers in real life, and they are vanishingly small. David Duke, when he ran for Presidency, got .04 % of the national vote.


Why do you want this to be true?

David Duke ran for president 30 years ago and got nearly 50k votes. 50k is not so vanishingly small that it’s impossible to attract a few hundred in one place at a time.

I’m not making conclusions on the size of the population. I’m just saying it’s larger than is apparent.

50k? Out of over a hundred million votes?

At that level, you really have to wonder, how many of them are errors.

And yet, other than this Unite the Right rally, where they put all their efforts into co-opting another far more popular issue,


when was the last time that they got "a few hundred in one place at a time"?


I don't recall it happening in my lifetime. (middle aged man)


Let me ask my question another way. Why do you not want to admit they are an insignificant and vanishingly small fringe?