• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

If Trump wins again

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
The reality is that President Trump has introduced a budget which will eliminate the deficits. So he has kept his promise. If the Democrats in Congress refuse to pass his recommendations then they are responsible for the deficits not being eliminated, not President Trump.
Absolutely false, and as a matter of fact his more recent proposals would further ramp up the deficit while at the same time increasingly hurting the poor and elderly, especially through Medicaid cuts, as he wants to further increase military spending.

And the proof that you're wrong is clear as the fed has had to increase the prime because of this increased spending, otherwise inflation could all too easily run rampant.

IOW, basic Economics 101.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
What about him saying that a Judge Curiel in the Trump Univ case could not be fair because he was Mexican? Do you think that was selective reporting as well?

It does sound like an ad hom, at best
Sounds racist. I will look up the full quote.
It could of course, be an accurate observation,
too. Some people recuse themselves because
of a conflict of interest.

One line out of context is not enough to convince
me of the whole chant of racist xenophobe isomaophobe
blah and etc.

Is if for you?
 

Audie

Veteran Member
I am OK that you and others may not agree with my opinion. I do keep an open mind that my opinion can be changed. Though the more information I find that supports it, the more difficult that change is going to be and the more robust the information is going to need to be to change it.

I will still listen to what you have to say on the subject and often I find that I agree with your assessments. It is just that here, we are in disagreement. We may always be. I do not think we have to agree on everything. Where would the fun in discussion and debate be then?

I wont likely change my mind on Trump. I think
he is as turd; I dont see that he is all those other
awful things of which he is constantly accused.

The real probs are enough, no need to concoct
more.
 
What about him saying that a Judge Curiel in the Trump Univ case could not be fair because he was Mexican?

The thing with Trump is that he will aim to discredit any person who criticises him: 'fake news', 13 angry democrats, biggest witch hunt ever, 2nd rate lawyer trying to get a reduced sentence, etc.

He's not really saying 'Mexicans can't be fair' he's simply latched on to whatever he could that allows him and his base to dismiss the criticisms.

It's not exactly meritorious behaviour, but, on its own, it is more likely to be another example of the same rhetorical strategy he always uses than an expression of racism.

A major problem with modern politics is the tendency to interpret what people say in the worst possible manner, we should all give the benefit of the doubt to people, even/especially those we dislike.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
It's not exactly meritorious behaviour, but, on its own, it is more likely to be another example of the same rhetorical strategy he always uses than an expression of racism.
Na, it's also racism because no non-racist would use such language. Plus there's numerous other things he's said and done, such as asking why more people who "look like Norwegians" aren't coming here, for just one example.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
I wont likely change my mind on Trump. I think
he is as turd; I dont see that he is all those other
awful things of which he is constantly accused.

The real probs are enough, no need to concoct
more.
It looks like we will have to agree that we see things differently as to the extent and nature of the presidents qualities.
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
Main stream news, which collectively reaches the majority of people, has a record of 90% negative news against Trump. This has an accumulative impact on people who memorize, repeat and gossip, but who don't do research to determine the truth.

How about we run a test? We will ask a volunteer, from the forum community, to be the scapegoat in this test. The rest of members will make up the worse things we can say about the volunteer, until we achieve about 90% negative opinions of the volunteer, over the next year. We will mimic main stream news and the volunteer will attempt to defect the negative attacks.

We do this along with a running survey, for newcomers and visitors, where we allow them can express their opinion of the volunteer, to see who many will mimic the constant 90% negative criticism.

We will also do a side-by-side, where we have a second volunteer, but we give the second volunteer 90% positive opinions, to see if the visitors also mimic that. If this works as I suggest, everyone will learn the basics of propaganda 1.0 as function of gullibility.

We could also have a third question category which determines how many visitors will sense 90% bullies and 90% bootlickers, even without the ability to do research into the volunteers to test the accusations and options. These are the most perceptive people against which propaganda is not affective.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Main stream news, which collectively reaches the majority of people, has a record of 90% negative news against Trump.
Reporting the news is not "negative", but new commentaries may be. The major news networks mainly cover events, whether that may hurt or help Trump's image, but when one gets into MSNBC, Fox, and sometimes CNN, there's often news commentary that gets injected. At least CNN does bring in people on both sides of the aisle, whereas MSNBC and Fox aren't really good at that. Ya, they bring in some, but they're swamped,

Matter of fact, there were three independent studies done a while back that showed that those who get most of the news from Fox know less real news than those who typically don't watch the t.v. news. However, I tend to believe Fox has been trying to correct more of this negative image in recent years because of the scandals they've had with some of their former staff.

The unfortunate reality is that all too many people are gullible enough that when Trump says or tweets "Fake news!" they just blindly believe him. Trump is doing what Stalin did on a regular basis before nationalizing the press in the Soviet Union, including calling the media "the enemy of the people", which is also words that Trump has used against the media he hates.
 

Dan From Smithville

What's up Doc?
Staff member
Premium Member
You like trump and think he is all the awful things...?
Sure. We can twist my position away from disagreeing with you over the extent and result of Trumps actions as I see it and turn me into a supporter of odious little men that have big mouths and whine. Not sure how my support of Trump under those qualifications is going to do much for him.

Seriously.?! In my view, many of the characteristics attributed to Trump and the results of those characteristics in action by Trump as described in the media are correct descriptions. You disagree. We may always disagree on that. But we can agree that we are neither of us fans.
 
Top