Donald Trump

kingstongraham

Ballysmate wrote:

I also rarely delve on here because I get the impression that any good news re Trump would be greeted with dismay by some.

If someone is running riot and trying to destroy everything that you think is good about the country, and putting the rest of the world closer to war and helping make the world less stable, why would news that makes him more likely to get re-elected be greeted with anything other than dismay?

Plus, good news isn't as funny.

bianchimoon

I'm baffled as to how anyone can defend the man, for example his latest tweet

Jong Un just stated that the “Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.” Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!

FFS, Good job their dads aint alive, or they'd be meeting at the playground :roll:

rick_chasey

Bally has a bee in his bonnet about Hilary Clinton, so I'm expecting an answer to be mainly about how awful and/or how corrupt she is, followed by a "Trump isn't that" statement.

lostboysaint

Rick Chasey wrote:

Bally has a bee in his bonnet about Hilary Clinton, so I'm expecting an answer to be mainly about how awful and/or how corrupt she is, followed by a "Trump isn't that" statement.

Makes so much more sense to have a nuclear winter and not have a second Watergate (Trump/Russia) than have a female President who may be corrupt.

orraloon

Woah, you don't mean to tell me that a politician could be a bit dodgy? My dreams are rent asunder.

ballysmate

Veronese68 wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

I also rarely delve on here because I get the impression that any good news re Trump would be greeted with dismay by some.
Likewise the EU thread.
A negative attitude, like you, I find hard to fathom.

Feel free to list his good points.

Regarding his good points, you are right, I would struggle to list them. In fact if you go waaaay back in this thread, you will find that I posted that Trump is probably as bad as people say he is.

Last night's post was a nod to Stevo, who posted above me and his periodic observation of negativity. It was posted somewhat tongue in cheek, expecting a reaction akin to Pavlov's dogs. But there was a semi serious point. Yesterday, Goo asked a simple question requiring a yes or no answer and people for some reason were loathed to admit that DT was correct. Whether he was wise to say it was another matter, the arguments around which are more complex, I agree.
I am no expert on the US economy (Doesn't make me unique on this forum), which is apparently doing quite well. People, equally lacking in expertise,automatically seem to assume that is despite DT and not because of him. They may well be right, but I get the feeling that people are just now blindly accepting all negatives whilst shying away from any instances, albeit rare, when he could actually be right.

kingstongraham

Ballysmate wrote:

Yesterday, Goo asked a simple question requiring a yes or no answer

I would dispute that.

Anyway, Goo paraphrased Trump rather than quoting Trump. That turned a "he's mostly wrong but..." into "he's probably partly right but...".

ballysmate

Rick Chasey wrote:

Bally has a bee in his bonnet about Hilary Clinton, so I'm expecting an answer to be mainly about how awful and/or how corrupt she is, followed by a "Trump isn't that" statement.

Why would I mention HC? :?
Waaaay back I stated that the 2 nominees were the worst candidates in the history of the Presidential elections. Nothing has changed my view on that. I never claimed Trump to be any better than he has proved to be. They were equally lamentable as candidates.

rolf_f

Stevo 666 wrote:

Judging by the length of the Brexit thread, quite a lot of remainers are a bit UK centric as well, albeit rather negatively

You must stop broadcasting fake news that remainers are somehow more negative than brexiters. It's only the negativity of the brexiters that we are negative about; you were the lot that couldn't be happy with what we had and wanted to fix it by isolating us from our neighbours and rendering us a global laughing stock. And you still haven't explained how that is meant to work!

I wonder if Trumps fake news awards will include Kellyanne Conways "Bowling Green Massacre". I mean, surely even in America where mass shootings happen most days an entirely fictitious one has to be worth a top three placing in Trumps list ..........

As for the US economy - could it be that that is doing OK neither because of Trump nor despite him - but simply because he hasn't actually done anything so far? I don't really see much point looking for his positives - it's a bit like saying Kim Jong Un is a nasty piece of work but he is really nice to his cat Tiddles. The damage overwhelms any positives to the point of triviality.

bianchimoon

Ballysmate wrote:

Veronese68 wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

I also rarely delve on here because I get the impression that any good news re Trump would be greeted with dismay by some.
Likewise the EU thread.
A negative attitude, like you, I find hard to fathom.

Feel free to list his good points.

Regarding his good points, you are right, I would struggle to list them. In fact if you go waaaay back in this thread, you will find that I posted that Trump is probably as bad as people say he is.

Last night's post was a nod to Stevo, who posted above me and his periodic observation of negativity. It was posted somewhat tongue in cheek, expecting a reaction akin to Pavlov's dogs. But there was a semi serious point. Yesterday, Goo asked a simple question requiring a yes or no answer and people for some reason were loathed to admit that DT was correct. Whether he was wise to say it was another matter, the arguments around which are more complex, I agree.
I am no expert on the US economy (Doesn't make me unique on this forum), which is apparently doing quite well. People, equally lacking in expertise,automatically seem to assume that is despite DT and not because of him. They may well be right, but I get the feeling that people are just now blindly accepting all negatives whilst shying away from any instances, albeit rare, when he could actually be right.

That's part of the problem, Trump is taking credit, but the US economy has been on an upward trend ever since Obama inherited a deep recession and put it on the right path, Trump brags and says things to make himself look good, people don't fact check and think he's doing things right

ballysmate

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Judging by the length of the Brexit thread, quite a lot of remainers are a bit UK centric as well, albeit rather negatively

You must stop broadcasting fake news that remainers are somehow more negative than brexiters. It's only the negativity of the brexiters that we are negative about; you were the lot that couldn't be happy with what we had and wanted to fix it by isolating us from our neighbours and rendering us a global laughing stock. And you still haven't explained how that is meant to work!

I wonder if Trumps fake news awards will include Kellyanne Conways "Bowling Green Massacre". I mean, surely even in America where mass shootings happen most days an entirely fictitious one has to be worth a top three placing in Trumps list ..........

As for the US economy - could it be that that is doing OK neither because of Trump nor despite him - but simply because he hasn't actually done anything so far? I don't really see much point looking for his positives - it's a bit like saying Kim Jong Un is a nasty piece of work but he is really nice to his cat Tiddles. The damage overwhelms any positives to the point of triviality.

Should I point out that Stevo is a Remainer or would spoil the rant. Or is it to be classed as a 'fake rant'?

kingstongraham

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Judging by the length of the Brexit thread, quite a lot of remainers are a bit UK centric as well, albeit rather negatively

You must stop broadcasting fake news that remainers are somehow more negative than brexiters. It's only the negativity of the brexiters that we are negative about; you were the lot that couldn't be happy with what we had and wanted to fix it by isolating us from our neighbours and rendering us a global laughing stock. And you still haven't explained how that is meant to work!

Fake news. Stevo was for remaining.

veronese68

Ballysmate wrote:

I am no expert on the US economy (Doesn't make me unique on this forum), which is apparently doing quite well. People, equally lacking in expertise,automatically seem to assume that is despite DT and not because of him. They may well be right, but I get the feeling that people are just now blindly accepting all negatives whilst shying away from any instances, albeit rare, when he could actually be right.

I'm no economist, this will probably become abundantly clear, but how much of the economy doing well would be down to him? Presumably it takes a while for things to trickle through and have an effect and he has only been in the top job for a year. Also the economy could be doing well on paper, but in reality only making the rich richer and not helping the majority of the people. I'm not a great believer in trickle down economics.
I believe his world view is hugely over simplistic to say the least, and whilst he may be right on a few points the way he goes about it is utterly ridiculous and I can't help but laugh. My knob's bigger than your knob being a prime example.

ballysmate

bianchimoon wrote:

I'm baffled as to how anyone can defend the man, for example his latest tweet

Jong Un just stated that the “Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.” Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!

FFS, Good job their dads aint alive, or they'd be meeting at the playground :roll:

You are quite correct, we unfortunately have these 2 leaders on the world stage. Trump doesn't appear to have any meaningful strategy on foreign policy such as involving China who it is said, are the only ones that hold influence on N Korea.
Kim didn't just decide to build nuclear warheads last 20 Jan did he? It would appear that the previous administration left the North Korea file in the 'Too Difficult' tray for 8 years.

Ben6899

Ballysmate wrote:

I also rarely delve on here because I get the impression that any good news re Trump would be greeted with dismay by some.
Likewise the EU thread.
A negative attitude, like you, I find hard to fathom.

You can be such a tool, sometimes Bally. As Graham said:

KingstonGraham wrote:

If someone is running riot and trying to destroy everything that you think is good about the country, and putting the rest of the world closer to war and helping make the world less stable, why would news that makes him more likely to get re-elected be greeted with anything other than dismay?

Why should anyone greet anything that makes him slightly more re-electable with glee?

For the record, when he tweeted regarding the train derailment in WA, I said to my colleagues "he's right, you know".

However, he's still a c*** who's in danger of compromising the civilised world. But you carry on picking fault with commentators in here, mate...

rolf_f

Ballysmate wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

Judging by the length of the Brexit thread, quite a lot of remainers are a bit UK centric as well, albeit rather negatively

You must stop broadcasting fake news that remainers are somehow more negative than brexiters. It's only the negativity of the brexiters that we are negative about; you were the lot that couldn't be happy with what we had and wanted to fix it by isolating us from our neighbours and rendering us a global laughing stock. And you still haven't explained how that is meant to work!

I wonder if Trumps fake news awards will include Kellyanne Conways "Bowling Green Massacre". I mean, surely even in America where mass shootings happen most days an entirely fictitious one has to be worth a top three placing in Trumps list ..........

As for the US economy - could it be that that is doing OK neither because of Trump nor despite him - but simply because he hasn't actually done anything so far? I don't really see much point looking for his positives - it's a bit like saying Kim Jong Un is a nasty piece of work but he is really nice to his cat Tiddles. The damage overwhelms any positives to the point of triviality.

Should I point out that Stevo is a Remainer or would spoil the rant. Or is it to be classed as a 'fake rant'?

So was Theresa May. Is,was - he seems pretty Brexity now. Still, I'm out of practice. Not been on here in 10 days - I'm bound to be more than averagely crap for the next few posts!

ballysmate

For the record, when he tweeted regarding the train derailment in WA, I said to my colleagues "he's right, you know".

https://youtu.be/ymTAUO32ysc?t=5

Why should anyone greet anything that makes him slightly more re-electable with glee?

Can I infer from that that you would rather the POTUS fcuk up and not get re elected than do a good job and get re elected?

I grant that one is much more likely than the other. Personally I would prefer the incumbent in the White House to do a good job regardless of their political stripe.

rjsterry

Ballysmate wrote:

For the record, when he tweeted regarding the train derailment in WA, I said to my colleagues "he's right, you know".

https://youtu.be/ymTAUO32ysc?t=5

Why should anyone greet anything that makes him slightly more re-electable with glee?

Can I infer from that that you would rather the POTUS fcuk up and not get re elected than do a good job and get re elected?

I grant that one is much more likely than the other. Personally I would prefer the incumbent in the White House to do a good job regardless of their political stripe.

Does depend on your definition of a good job.

kingstongraham

Ballysmate wrote:

For the record, when he tweeted regarding the train derailment in WA, I said to my colleagues "he's right, you know".

https://youtu.be/ymTAUO32ysc?t=5

Why should anyone greet anything that makes him slightly more re-electable with glee?

Can I infer from that that you would rather the POTUS fcuk up and not get re elected than do a good job and get re elected?

I grant that one is much more likely than the other. Personally I would prefer the incumbent in the White House to do a good job regardless of their political stripe.

That's way too reductive. If I was American, I think that it would be worth the short term pain of him being no good at anything to get the long term gain of him not being President for any longer than necessary.

As a non-American, I think that getting a boost to the US economy and stock market based on increased borrowing is not worth the (deliberate?) destabilising of the whole world.

ballysmate

KingstonGraham wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

For the record, when he tweeted regarding the train derailment in WA, I said to my colleagues "he's right, you know".

https://youtu.be/ymTAUO32ysc?t=5

Why should anyone greet anything that makes him slightly more re-electable with glee?

Can I infer from that that you would rather the POTUS fcuk up and not get re elected than do a good job and get re elected?

I grant that one is much more likely than the other. Personally I would prefer the incumbent in the White House to do a good job regardless of their political stripe.

That's way too reductive. If I was American, I think that it would be worth the short term pain of him being no good at anything to get the long term gain of him not being President for any longer than necessary.

As a non-American, I think that getting a boost to the US economy and stock market based on increased borrowing is not worth the (deliberate?) destabilising of the whole world.

Why would you want your leader to be rubbish at everything? Would you prefer Theresa May for instance to totally make a pigs ear of Brexit, giving us the worst possible outcome, just purely because you don't like/didn't vote for her on the assumption that she wouldn't get re elected, or would you rather she surprise you and get the best possible outcome?

rick_chasey

Ballysmate wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

For the record, when he tweeted regarding the train derailment in WA, I said to my colleagues "he's right, you know".

https://youtu.be/ymTAUO32ysc?t=5

Why should anyone greet anything that makes him slightly more re-electable with glee?

Can I infer from that that you would rather the POTUS fcuk up and not get re elected than do a good job and get re elected?

I grant that one is much more likely than the other. Personally I would prefer the incumbent in the White House to do a good job regardless of their political stripe.

That's way too reductive. If I was American, I think that it would be worth the short term pain of him being no good at anything to get the long term gain of him not being President for any longer than necessary.

As a non-American, I think that getting a boost to the US economy and stock market based on increased borrowing is not worth the (deliberate?) destabilising of the whole world.

Why would you want your leader to be rubbish at everything? Would you prefer Theresa May for instance to totally make a pigs ear of Brexit, giving us the worst possible outcome, just purely because you don't like/didn't vote for her on the assumption that she wouldn't get re elected, or would you rather she surprise you and get the best possible outcome?

Depends dunnit.

If Brexit is handled so badly it ultimately doesn't happen, and therefore the long term cost is lower than having achieved a 'best possible' Brexit, then it's different, isn't it?

All about context Bally.

Ben6899

You just don't get it, Bally. Or you refuse to get it.

And the youtube link you posted (oh, the hilarity) is why I think you often act like a tool. I was actually making the point that it's possible to agree with certain things anyone says or does, but that doesn't make them a good or nice person or the right person for the job either short term or long term. But in your tried and tested ways... there you went with a sh1tty youtube video.

ballysmate

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

For the record, when he tweeted regarding the train derailment in WA, I said to my colleagues "he's right, you know".

https://youtu.be/ymTAUO32ysc?t=5

Why should anyone greet anything that makes him slightly more re-electable with glee?

Can I infer from that that you would rather the POTUS fcuk up and not get re elected than do a good job and get re elected?

I grant that one is much more likely than the other. Personally I would prefer the incumbent in the White House to do a good job regardless of their political stripe.

That's way too reductive. If I was American, I think that it would be worth the short term pain of him being no good at anything to get the long term gain of him not being President for any longer than necessary.

As a non-American, I think that getting a boost to the US economy and stock market based on increased borrowing is not worth the (deliberate?) destabilising of the whole world.

Why would you want your leader to be rubbish at everything? Would you prefer Theresa May for instance to totally make a pigs ear of Brexit, giving us the worst possible outcome, just purely because you don't like/didn't vote for her on the assumption that she wouldn't get re elected, or would you rather she surprise you and get the best possible outcome?

Depends dunnit.

If Brexit is handled so badly it ultimately doesn't happen, and therefore the long term cost is lower than having achieved a 'best possible' Brexit, then it's different, isn't it?

All about context Bally.

Read what I asked again Rick. I assume you don't see the 'worst possible outcome' as being no Brexit do you?

Ben6899

Ballysmate wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

For the record, when he tweeted regarding the train derailment in WA, I said to my colleagues "he's right, you know".

https://youtu.be/ymTAUO32ysc?t=5

Why should anyone greet anything that makes him slightly more re-electable with glee?

Can I infer from that that you would rather the POTUS fcuk up and not get re elected than do a good job and get re elected?

I grant that one is much more likely than the other. Personally I would prefer the incumbent in the White House to do a good job regardless of their political stripe.

That's way too reductive. If I was American, I think that it would be worth the short term pain of him being no good at anything to get the long term gain of him not being President for any longer than necessary.

As a non-American, I think that getting a boost to the US economy and stock market based on increased borrowing is not worth the (deliberate?) destabilising of the whole world.

Why would you want your leader to be rubbish at everything? Would you prefer Theresa May for instance to totally make a pigs ear of Brexit, giving us the worst possible outcome, just purely because you don't like/didn't vote for her on the assumption that she wouldn't get re elected, or would you rather she surprise you and get the best possible outcome?

Depends dunnit.

If Brexit is handled so badly it ultimately doesn't happen, and therefore the long term cost is lower than having achieved a 'best possible' Brexit, then it's different, isn't it?

All about context Bally.

Read what I asked again Rick. I assume you don't see the 'worst possible outcome' as being no Brexit do you?

The "worst possible outcome" is a Brexit which sees us sold up the river. But it's really too late now - I need to get some eggs in my German basket.

lostboysaint

Ballysmate wrote:

Kim didn't just decide to build nuclear warheads last 20 Jan did he? It would appear that the previous administration left the North Korea file in the 'Too Difficult' tray for 8 years.

Please enlighten oh wise one, exactly what has Trump achieved by picking up the file? And what exactly should another country be looking to achieve? Are you suggesting that the US/Sino relationship should have been stronger and that they should have invaded to prevent any kind of nuclear proliferation? Because of course interventionist wars always end well don't they, as opposed to playground spats by two f@@kwits who know they can't push the button because they're genuinely scared that the other one can hit harder.

Still it's a great distraction from the real threat that is how much Russia now owns the US government.

dinyull

bianchimoon wrote:

I'm baffled as to how anyone can defend the man, for example his latest tweet

Jong Un just stated that the “Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.” Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!

FFS, Good job their dads aint alive, or they'd be meeting at the playground :roll:

He definitely, DEFINITELY gets Melina to measure his d1ck each and every night.

dinyull

bianchimoon wrote:

I'm baffled as to how anyone can defend the man, for example his latest tweet

Jong Un just stated that the “Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.” Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!

FFS, Good job their dads aint alive, or they'd be meeting at the playground :roll:

He definitely, DEFINITELY gets Melina to measure his d1ck each and every night.

dinyull

Twice, by the looks of it.

Ben6899

Dinyull wrote:

Twice, by the looks of it.

Vernier calipers are not easy to use.

pblakeney

Dinyull wrote:

Twice, by the looks of it.

How do you know what it looks like? Pray tell.
On second thoughts, don't...