Trump
Comments
-
Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered change while the other terrible candidate offered more of them same. I added to this that the metrics were saying this was a "change" election and all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him. What happened is that in the final couple of weeks the large number of undecideds who had a low opinion of Trump decided that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
LolBS44325 said:
I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?BS44325 said:
I accept your apology.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).
I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.
You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?
No.
You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.
So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?0 -
Fair enough with regards to your personal position on Trump. Thanks for the clarification.BS44325 said:
Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered change while the other terrible candidate offered more of them same. I added to this that the metrics were saying this was a "change" election and all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him. What happened is that in the final couple of weeks the large number of undecideds who had a low opinion of Trump decided that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
LolBS44325 said:
I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?BS44325 said:
I accept your apology.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).
I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.
You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?
No.
You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.
So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?
If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.
When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base."My brain's a good brain!"0 -
Ahhhh....so I guess the beat down has been called off. Ok. Now in terms of your point I do take exception to how you describe his supporters (if you can call them that because many of his voters did not think highly of him) because they did a calculation compared to the other candidate. Some people on here have failed to come to grips with how terrible and corrupt of a candidate Hillary Clinton was. There are voters who felt they would be sacrificing values in voting for her. My argument is and always has been there is no point in trying to argue which candidate is more terrible as it is pretty much irrelevant in a "change" electorate. The voters are not stupid or lacking in values by selecting one candidate over the other...they are simply making a calculation as to whether they want "change" or more of the same. Voters new which way a Clinton administration would go and they didn't like it. They may not have had an affinity for Trump but they felt he at least gave them the possibility of something different. Don't demean that choice.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Fair enough with regards to your personal position on Trump. Thanks for the clarification.BS44325 said:
Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered change while the other terrible candidate offered more of them same. I added to this that the metrics were saying this was a "change" election and all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him. What happened is that in the final couple of weeks the large number of undecideds who had a low opinion of Trump decided that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
LolBS44325 said:
I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?BS44325 said:
I accept your apology.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).
I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.
You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?
No.
You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.
So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?
If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.
When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base.0 -
At some point in my life I was told. Its not about winning or losing, it's about how you play the game. ESP is a just plain rotten player.0
-
History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.dignin said:
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.bootlegger10 said:
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.HughFreakingDillon said:
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.dignin said:
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.JC29856 said:If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.0 -
I have zero idea if Trump will be an effective President but his campaign strategy warts and all was nothing short of genius. If you want to beat the man then don't underestimate the man.vaggar99 said:
History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.dignin said:
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.bootlegger10 said:
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.HughFreakingDillon said:
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.dignin said:
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.JC29856 said:If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.0 -
And hence we have ESP. If you think the man is a winner, he is. But that's all he is.BS44325 said:
That thing they told you at some point in your life is usually what they tell some who traditionally loses.vaggar99 said:At some point in my life I was told. Its not about winning or losing, it's about how you play the game. ESP is a just plain rotten player.
0 -
Winners make policy.vaggar99 said:
And hence we have ESP. If you think the man is a winner, he is. But that's all he is.BS44325 said:
That thing they told you at some point in your life is usually what they tell some who traditionally loses.vaggar99 said:At some point in my life I was told. Its not about winning or losing, it's about how you play the game. ESP is a just plain rotten player.
0 -
They do. And he will. And America will be great. Got it0
-
it wasn't genius. it was normal. clinton's was terrible. she sat on her laurels hoping the media's polls were right.BS44325 said:
I have zero idea if Trump will be an effective President but his campaign strategy warts and all was nothing short of genius. If you want to beat the man then don't underestimate the man.vaggar99 said:
History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.dignin said:
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.bootlegger10 said:
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.HughFreakingDillon said:
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.dignin said:
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.JC29856 said:If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
really. I certainly hope you are only saying this in the context of politics. Otherwise I guess I'm raising my kids to be losers.BS44325 said:
That thing they told you at some point in your life is usually what they tell some who traditionally loses.vaggar99 said:At some point in my life I was told. Its not about winning or losing, it's about how you play the game. ESP is a just plain rotten player.
By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
There was nothing normal about what he did.HughFreakingDillon said:
it wasn't genius. it was normal. clinton's was terrible. she sat on her laurels hoping the media's polls were right.BS44325 said:
I have zero idea if Trump will be an effective President but his campaign strategy warts and all was nothing short of genius. If you want to beat the man then don't underestimate the man.vaggar99 said:
History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.dignin said:
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.bootlegger10 said:
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.HughFreakingDillon said:
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.dignin said:
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.JC29856 said:If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.0 -
That's not for me too say.HughFreakingDillon said:
really. I certainly hope you are only saying this in the context of politics. Otherwise I guess I'm raising my kids to be losers.BS44325 said:
That thing they told you at some point in your life is usually what they tell some who traditionally loses.vaggar99 said:At some point in my life I was told. Its not about winning or losing, it's about how you play the game. ESP is a just plain rotten player.
0 -
BS44325 said:
Some people on here have failed to come to grips with how terrible and corrupt of a candidate Hillary Clinton was. There are voters who felt they would be sacrificing values in voting for her. My argument is and always has been there is no point in trying to argue which candidate is more terrible as it is pretty much irrelevant in a "change" electorate. The voters are not stupid or lacking in values by selecting one candidate over the other...they are simply making a calculation as to whether they want "change" or more of the same. Voters new which way a Clinton administration would go and they didn't like it. They may not have had an affinity for Trump but they felt he at least gave them the possibility of something different. Don't demean that choice.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Fair enough with regards to your personal position on Trump. Thanks for the clarification.BS44325 said:
Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered change while the other terrible candidate offered more of them same. I added to this that the metrics were saying this was a "change" election and all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him. What happened is that in the final couple of weeks the large number of undecideds who had a low opinion of Trump decided that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
LolBS44325 said:
I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?BS44325 said:
I accept your apology.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).
I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.
You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?
No.
You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.
So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?
If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.
When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base.
2006 Clev,Pitt; 2008 NY MSGx2; 2010 Columbus; 2012 Missoula; 2013 Phoenix,Vancouver,Seattle; 2014 Cincy; 2016 Lex, Wrigley 1&2; 2018 Wrigley 1&2; 2022 Louisville0 -
Possibility of something different? Lol.BS44325 said:
Ahhhh....so I guess the beat down has been called off. Ok. Now in terms of your point I do take exception to how you describe his supporters (if you can call them that because many of his voters did not think highly of him) because they did a calculation compared to the other candidate. Some people on here have failed to come to grips with how terrible and corrupt of a candidate Hillary Clinton was. There are voters who felt they would be sacrificing values in voting for her. My argument is and always has been there is no point in trying to argue which candidate is more terrible as it is pretty much irrelevant in a "change" electorate. The voters are not stupid or lacking in values by selecting one candidate over the other...they are simply making a calculation as to whether they want "change" or more of the same. Voters new which way a Clinton administration would go and they didn't like it. They may not have had an affinity for Trump but they felt he at least gave them the possibility of something different. Don't demean that choice.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
Fair enough with regards to your personal position on Trump. Thanks for the clarification.BS44325 said:
Yes...please dig...you will never see me "gushing over Trump" as you describe it. I'll help you out if you are too lazy though. I was never a Trump fan...said it on here 1000 times. What I said repeatedly is that there were two terrible candidates...one terrible candidate offered change while the other terrible candidate offered more of them same. I added to this that the metrics were saying this was a "change" election and all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him. What happened is that in the final couple of weeks the large number of undecideds who had a low opinion of Trump decided that even with all his faults he was acceptable. That is hardly calling him a saviour or someone who would "make everyone's wildest dreams come true". AlL I ever said is that in a choice between two terrible people Trump has more potential upside. Hardly a ringing endorsement. So please go dig...show me where I said anything else. Come on...I need a beat down as nobody on here has ever been able to deliver.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
LolBS44325 said:
I don't see how your mistatement of facts followed by a refusal to provide evidence of said facts is a can of whoop ass. So again...apology accepted.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:
You mean you've accepted the can of whoop ass I opened on you?BS44325 said:
I accept your apology.Thirty Bills Unpaid said:Anybody keeping up with this thread knows what you've been saying. I'm not looking back for any of the posts where you essentially speak to the collective intelligence of a US public that opted for Trump as a fresh face that would serve them better than Hillary (or any other part of the establishment).
I'm pretty sure nothing has been lost on anyone within the respective parties' think tanks: empty promises, outright lies, and deceitful tactics can be usefully employed to sway votes and win an election. If the aforementioned can get a narcissistic, deceitful, orange sexual predator a presidency... they'll work for anyone.
You want me to dig through this thread to spit out to you what you have made abundantly clear?
No.
You keep gushing over Trump and how the people voted for change (he'll make everyone's wildest dreams come true... or America great again... or something like that) and I'll keep pointing out that Trump is an orange con man sex offender who's selection clearly defined the lack of values and/or intelligence across a nation.
So again... a beat down. You're not here for the hunting are you?
If you recall... we began to differ when you took exception top the fact that I essentially called Trump supporters (for lack of better terms at the moment) stupid or lacking in values.
When you say, "... all Trump had to prove is that he was an acceptable alternative and that people would take the plunge and vote for him"... this supports what I am saying because at no point in this election did he ever prove he was an acceptable alternative in my mind. He proved beyond a doubt that he was completely inappropriate to maintain such a position and for people to vote for him anyways says much about that voter base.
That's for sure: a con man sex offender with promises that had no substance.
Again... take exception all you want. I'm right."My brain's a good brain!"0 -
I wouldn't call it genius but it wasn't normal either. He took his campaign to the gutter in ways we had never seen a nominee do before. He spoke directly to the masses via Twitter in a way we had never seen before. He rejected political norms such as releasing his taxes in a way we had never seen before.HughFreakingDillon said:
it wasn't genius. it was normal. clinton's was terrible. she sat on her laurels hoping the media's polls were right.BS44325 said:
I have zero idea if Trump will be an effective President but his campaign strategy warts and all was nothing short of genius. If you want to beat the man then don't underestimate the man.vaggar99 said:
History repeats. Just wasn't expecting it so soon.dignin said:
That's on the Donald voter. Just because he won doesn't mean he's smart, for proof look to the American public electing Bush Jr, twice.bootlegger10 said:
Guy just beat Jeb Bush easily and Hillary Clinton without a ground campaign and a stripped down campaign team. I don't think he is an idiot. I don't like him as a person or president but not going to say he isn't smart.HughFreakingDillon said:
correct. smart people don't conduct themselves on social media like he does.dignin said:
We need to get rid of this myth that Donald is some kind of brilliant puppet master.JC29856 said:If you look at the Podesta emails it's clear Bill Hilliary Hilliarys circle and major media knew it would be a close race back in May and July. Not hard to believe that there was a concerted effort to give the illusion that Trump had no chance in hopes that his support would not turn out. It was a nice plan but Trump overcame it, he played the media like a fiddle.
Most media enjoyed record ratings, they got what they wanted.
The only group that bought the con was a Donald voter.
If you think that he had any brilliant plan then you were conned too, he isn't that smart.___________________________________________
"...I changed by not changing at all..."0 -
pretty sure an adult teaching our young people that winning is everything is the definition of a loser.BS44325 said:
That's not for me too say.HughFreakingDillon said:
really. I certainly hope you are only saying this in the context of politics. Otherwise I guess I'm raising my kids to be losers.BS44325 said:
That thing they told you at some point in your life is usually what they tell some who traditionally loses.vaggar99 said:At some point in my life I was told. Its not about winning or losing, it's about how you play the game. ESP is a just plain rotten player.
By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help