Donald Trump

stuckinline

igotid88 said:

Asshole

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/915249263520690177

What an embarassment

PJ_Soul

Yeah, once again  proving that he is scum of the Earth. I can't say I really understand how a person can be so totally oblivious about his own horrible behaviour even when he is under such scrutiny in the public eye. It very much seems like a form of insanity. There is just absolutely no self-awareness or something? Or I guess it could just be pure combo of sociopathy and psychopathy. Just so people are clear, here are the traits of both of those things, and I would say that Trump actually displays most of the traits under both of these personality disorders:

What is a Sociopath?

A sociopath is actually a person with antisocial personality disorder. Antisocial personality disorder is defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (the book which contains the diagnostic criteria for mental illnesses) as a cluster B personality disorder (those that are dramatic or emotional).

While sociopathy can only be diagnosed at the age of 18 or above, the following must be present before the age of 15 for the diagnosis:

• Repeated violations of the law
• Pervasive lying and deception
• Physical aggressiveness
• Reckless disregard for safety of self or others
• Consistent irresponsibility in work and family environments
• Lack of remorse

Psychopath vs. Sociopath

Psychopathy can be thought of as a more severe form of sociopathy with more symptoms. Therefore, all psychopaths are sociopaths but sociopaths are not necessarily psychopaths.

According to the Society for the Study of Psychopathy, psychopath traits include:

• Lack of guilt/remorse
• Lack of empathy
• Lack of deep emotional attachments
• Narcissism
• Superficial charm
• Dishonesty
• Manipulativeness
• Reckless risk-taking

Now the question is.... how is it that the law has absolutely now way of dealing with a POTUS who is both a sociopath and psychopath???? These types are usually the people we are all scared of and who we know are dangerous in various ways. But there is nothing that prevents them from becoming the nation's leader?

pjhawks

stuckinline said:

igotid88 said:

Asshole

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/915249263520690177

What an embarassment

the guy next to him should have turned to him and giving him a big FU. Seriously.  

PJ_Soul

BTW, I don't think anyone mentioned how Trump managed to slip a snide little statement about his American flag/NFL bullshit into that gross recitation of his about the Vegas shooting. Well I noticed... yeah, just one more indicator of what a creep he is, but I just thought it was interesting how he slipped it in there, because of course his real focus is always on himself and his petty beefs.

Kat

igotid88 said:

Asshole

https://twitter.com/CNNPolitics/status/915249263520690177

He can give up his golf trips, Mar-a-lago trips & stop his cabinet officials from using private jets (we haven't heard all of it) and forget the stupid wall and it'll help his budget. 

josevolution

http://www.snopes.com/trump-puerto-rico-golf-course/
So he did have something to do with the mess they find themselves in finacially in Puerto Rico not totally his fault but he's not without blame , what a bussiness guy ha best deal maker in the world ....

rgambs

PJ_Soul said:

I think capping how fast a car can legally be built to go at 65 mph is a fucking great idea, lol. I don't know why this didn't happen years ago... oh yeah, wait, it's because of all the jackasses who think it's awesome to go really dangerously fast in cars, no matter how many people speeding kills every year. Gotta put "awesome shit" first! Yeah, you can come back with all kinds of crazy comparisons as red herring arguments, but those generally ignore common sense.

Yep, even as a child I wondered why we don't drive marshmallow cars with 40 or so mph max.
Almost nobody would die.

That would require trains for freight though.

pjhawks

PJ_Soul said:

I think capping how fast a car can legally be built to go at 65 mph is a fucking great idea, lol. I don't know why this didn't happen years ago... oh yeah, wait, it's because of all the jackasses who think it's awesome to go really dangerously fast in cars, no matter how many people speeding kills every year. Gotta put "awesome shit" first! Yeah, you can come back with all kinds of crazy comparisons as red herring arguments, but those generally ignore common sense.

not to go off topic but do you know how much extra traffic can be caused by people going too slow? someone going 50 when everyone else is going 70 is quite dangerous in of itself.  not to mention very few accidents happen, other than impaired drivers, when there are few cars near you. bumper to bumper traffic is far more dangerous than when cars are more spread out.  move it or get the heck out of the way. it's really not a hard concept.

stuckinline

Trump tosses rolls of paper towels into a crowd

President Trump entered a multi-purpose room inside the Calvary Chapel to cheers from an enthusiastic crowd. 

Trump, along with the First Lady and the governor, shook hands with the crowd. Trump, still wearing a wind breaker, picked up a can of tinned chicken breast and held it up for the crowd to see.

He handed a pack of batteries to a man, as many in the crowd held up their cell phones.

Trump held up a flashlight and showed it to the crowd, while shaking hands. 

The First Lady followed close behind. 

Trump kept picking up items from tables laden with supplies, showing them to the crowd and handing them to people with outstretched hands. 

"There's a lot of love in this room," the President said. "Great people."

He moved to a pile of yellow bags containing rice and handed them to whoever was nearest. 

He tossed rolls of paper towels into the crowd. Two were caught but one fell onto the carpet. 

The First Lady handed out small boxed solar panels.

PJ_Soul

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

I think capping how fast a car can legally be built to go at 65 mph is a fucking great idea, lol. I don't know why this didn't happen years ago... oh yeah, wait, it's because of all the jackasses who think it's awesome to go really dangerously fast in cars, no matter how many people speeding kills every year. Gotta put "awesome shit" first! Yeah, you can come back with all kinds of crazy comparisons as red herring arguments, but those generally ignore common sense.

not to go off topic but do you know how much extra traffic can be caused by people going too slow? someone going 50 when everyone else is going 70 is quite dangerous in of itself.  not to mention very few accidents happen, other than impaired drivers, when there are few cars near you. bumper to bumper traffic is far more dangerous than when cars are more spread out.  move it or get the heck out of the way. it's really not a hard concept.

Over 65 miles an hour isn't "too slow" in any situation. A 65m/hr cap wouldn't suddenly make everyone do 40 in a 60 zone. If cars could do 65, and the speed limit is 65 .... hey, that sounds about right. You could even cap it at 75. Would that make you feel better, so that you can still drive up people's asses and weave in and out of traffic that is doing the speed limit? You still want "those people" on the road, apparently, so let's make it 75.

HughFreakingDillon

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

I think capping how fast a car can legally be built to go at 65 mph is a fucking great idea, lol. I don't know why this didn't happen years ago... oh yeah, wait, it's because of all the jackasses who think it's awesome to go really dangerously fast in cars, no matter how many people speeding kills every year. Gotta put "awesome shit" first! Yeah, you can come back with all kinds of crazy comparisons as red herring arguments, but those generally ignore common sense.

not to go off topic but do you know how much extra traffic can be caused by people going too slow? someone going 50 when everyone else is going 70 is quite dangerous in of itself.  not to mention very few accidents happen, other than impaired drivers, when there are few cars near you. bumper to bumper traffic is far more dangerous than when cars are more spread out.  move it or get the heck out of the way. it's really not a hard concept.

it wouldn't be bumper to bumper if everyone was going the same speed. people going 30 in a 50 zone can create havoc, yes, but honestly, we don't need to be going that fast in the city. if people just slowed their lives the hell down, and calmed down a LOT, there would be no need for fast cars and higher speed limits. 

HughFreakingDillon

stuckinline said:

Trump tosses rolls of paper towels into a crowd

President Trump entered a multi-purpose room inside the Calvary Chapel to cheers from an enthusiastic crowd. 

Trump, along with the First Lady and the governor, shook hands with the crowd. Trump, still wearing a wind breaker, picked up a can of tinned chicken breast and held it up for the crowd to see.

He handed a pack of batteries to a man, as many in the crowd held up their cell phones.

Trump held up a flashlight and showed it to the crowd, while shaking hands. 

The First Lady followed close behind. 

Trump kept picking up items from tables laden with supplies, showing them to the crowd and handing them to people with outstretched hands. 

"There's a lot of love in this room," the President said. "Great people."

He moved to a pile of yellow bags containing rice and handed them to whoever was nearest. 

He tossed rolls of paper towels into the crowd. Two were caught but one fell onto the carpet. 

The First Lady handed out small boxed solar panels.

life is now like a Simpson's episode. incredible. 

pjhawks

PJ_Soul said:

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

I think capping how fast a car can legally be built to go at 65 mph is a fucking great idea, lol. I don't know why this didn't happen years ago... oh yeah, wait, it's because of all the jackasses who think it's awesome to go really dangerously fast in cars, no matter how many people speeding kills every year. Gotta put "awesome shit" first! Yeah, you can come back with all kinds of crazy comparisons as red herring arguments, but those generally ignore common sense.

not to go off topic but do you know how much extra traffic can be caused by people going too slow? someone going 50 when everyone else is going 70 is quite dangerous in of itself.  not to mention very few accidents happen, other than impaired drivers, when there are few cars near you. bumper to bumper traffic is far more dangerous than when cars are more spread out.  move it or get the heck out of the way. it's really not a hard concept.

Over 65 miles an hour isn't "too slow" in any situation. A 65m/hr cap wouldn't suddenly make everyone do 40 in a 60 zone. If cars could do 65, and the speed limit is 65 .... hey, that sounds about right. You could even cap it at 75. Would that make you feel better, so that you can drive up people's asses and weave in and out of traffic that is doing the speed limit? You still want "those people" on the road, apparently, so let's make it 75.

one reason people weave in and out of traffic and drive on people asses is because the people in front of them are going too slow. the law around my area is pass left drive right so you are technically by law supposed to move out of the way of faster traffic.  if you see someone wants to go faster than you why would you stay in front of them and allow them to stew  behind you? would you do that intentionally in a line at a store or walking on the sidewalk, etc.?  

and capping speed is dangerous in cases of merging in and off highways. there are times were speeding up so those merging is a better option than slowing down or having those people slow down to merge. 

the biggest problem with traffic is people don't understand or work in tandem with others.  you have to take into account road conditions, volume, location, etc.  while i agree at times 65 mph can be too fast at other times not as much.  if there are 30 cars on a highway and everyone on that highway is going 65 except 1 or 2 cars those 2 cars are more dangerous to everyone because they are causing everyone to adjust their pattern.  

and don't even get me started on rush hour traffic where people stop 30 or more feet from the car in front of them at a stop light leaving a huge gap.   move the heck up closer to the car in front of you.  all you are doing by staying so far from the car in front of you when stopped is causing cars behind you to be pushed back even more. keep doing that and at each light more and more cars get pushed back to the next light causing more traffic.

PJ_Soul

Well, I actually 100% support a complete ban of cars that require drivers too, if we're getting deep into the subject. The sooner driverless cars are the only option, the better. That will cure society of 99% of all traffic woes and accidents. However, I think your arguments for cars going way faster than any speed limit are a bit crazy. There is NO justification for weaving in and out of traffic or tailgating. That is ALWAYS dangerous driving behaviour, and really the only thing that justifies it is impatience. I agree driving habits are the main cause of traffic jams... fast drivers and slow drivers alike have those habits though, so that is besides the point. Driverless cars all the way! SO much safer and SO much more efficient. But only if everyone is using them. Someday it will become law... if society doesn't collapse and go to shit first.

pjhawks

PJ_Soul said:

Well, I actually 100% support a complete ban of cars that require drivers too, if we're getting deep into the subject. The sooner driverless cars are the only option, the better. That will cure society of 99% of all traffic woes and accidents. However, I think your arguments for cars going way faster than any speed limit are a bit crazy. There is NO justification for weaving in and out of traffic or tailgating. That is ALWAYS dangerous driving behaviour, and really the only thing that justifies it is impatience. I agree driving habits are the main cause of traffic jams... fast drivers and slow drivers alike have those habits though, so that is besides the point. Driverless cars all the way! SO much safer and SO much more efficient. But only if everyone is using them. Someday it will become law... if society doesn't collapse and go to shit first.

so you never change lanes?

anyway i don't see a time where driverless cars will ever be a norm.  too many variables and decisions have to come into play when driving for all decisions to be allowed to be made by the car.  for example you are driving down the block and a child runs into the street to retrieve a ball. too many factors to take into account do decide the course of action in that case.  stop, swerve left, swerve right? the variables for those 3 decisions are too numerous to mention. without human thought and instinct at the moment what decision is to be made? you can't program  that for every possibility of what is left ,right and behind you.

as for Trump he thinks because people desperate for supplies who reach out to take them from him are doing it out of love?  ok Donny that's why they are taking that from you.  letting him out in public is a hazard to this country.

Cliffy6745

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

Well, I actually 100% support a complete ban of cars that require drivers too, if we're getting deep into the subject. The sooner driverless cars are the only option, the better. That will cure society of 99% of all traffic woes and accidents. However, I think your arguments for cars going way faster than any speed limit are a bit crazy. There is NO justification for weaving in and out of traffic or tailgating. That is ALWAYS dangerous driving behaviour, and really the only thing that justifies it is impatience. I agree driving habits are the main cause of traffic jams... fast drivers and slow drivers alike have those habits though, so that is besides the point. Driverless cars all the way! SO much safer and SO much more efficient. But only if everyone is using them. Someday it will become law... if society doesn't collapse and go to shit first.

so you never change lanes?

anyway i don't see a time where driverless cars will ever be a norm.  too many variables and decisions have to come into play when driving for all decisions to be allowed to be made by the car.  for example you are driving down the block and a child runs into the street to retrieve a ball. too many factors to take into account do decide the course of action in that case.  stop, swerve left, swerve right? the variables for those 3 decisions are too numerous to mention. without human thought and instinct at the moment what decision is to be made? you can't program  that for every possibility of what is left ,right and behind you.

as for Trump he thinks because people desperate for supplies who reach out to take them from him are doing it out of love?  ok Donny that's why they are taking that from you.  letting him out in public is a hazard to this country.

Machines will make these decisions much faster and better than humans.  They can process information regarding those types of things so much quicker.  Angle, speed, etc. will tell it exactly what to do.  You can program that, very easily.

Machines are always faster than humans...

PJ_Soul

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

Well, I actually 100% support a complete ban of cars that require drivers too, if we're getting deep into the subject. The sooner driverless cars are the only option, the better. That will cure society of 99% of all traffic woes and accidents. However, I think your arguments for cars going way faster than any speed limit are a bit crazy. There is NO justification for weaving in and out of traffic or tailgating. That is ALWAYS dangerous driving behaviour, and really the only thing that justifies it is impatience. I agree driving habits are the main cause of traffic jams... fast drivers and slow drivers alike have those habits though, so that is besides the point. Driverless cars all the way! SO much safer and SO much more efficient. But only if everyone is using them. Someday it will become law... if society doesn't collapse and go to shit first.

so you never change lanes?

anyway i don't see a time where driverless cars will ever be a norm.  too many variables and decisions have to come into play when driving for all decisions to be allowed to be made by the car.  for example you are driving down the block and a child runs into the street to retrieve a ball. too many factors to take into account do decide the course of action in that case.  stop, swerve left, swerve right? the variables for those 3 decisions are too numerous to mention. without human thought and instinct at the moment what decision is to be made? you can't program  that for every possibility of what is left ,right and behind you.

as for Trump he thinks because people desperate for supplies who reach out to take them from him are doing it out of love?  ok Donny that's why they are taking that from you.  letting him out in public is a hazard to this country.

I live car free because I think every single person who can stay out of cars should, for the sake of the environment, to keep as much money away from the oil companies as possible, and to reduce all the noise pollution, and to free up the roads for those who really have to drive.

I do think driverless cars will eventually be the norm. And FYI, a driverless car is WAY better at avoiding that kid who runs out in the street than any human driver is. Driverless cars are literally many times safer in every imaginable way. And if ALL cars were driverless, car accidents would become incredibly rare compared to today. Yes, they can be programmed to do all the things you think they can't. I suggest you research it more. It is precisely that human thought and instinct (or lack thereof) that causes the vast majority of car accidents.

pjhawks

Cliffy6745 said:

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

Well, I actually 100% support a complete ban of cars that require drivers too, if we're getting deep into the subject. The sooner driverless cars are the only option, the better. That will cure society of 99% of all traffic woes and accidents. However, I think your arguments for cars going way faster than any speed limit are a bit crazy. There is NO justification for weaving in and out of traffic or tailgating. That is ALWAYS dangerous driving behaviour, and really the only thing that justifies it is impatience. I agree driving habits are the main cause of traffic jams... fast drivers and slow drivers alike have those habits though, so that is besides the point. Driverless cars all the way! SO much safer and SO much more efficient. But only if everyone is using them. Someday it will become law... if society doesn't collapse and go to shit first.

so you never change lanes?

anyway i don't see a time where driverless cars will ever be a norm.  too many variables and decisions have to come into play when driving for all decisions to be allowed to be made by the car.  for example you are driving down the block and a child runs into the street to retrieve a ball. too many factors to take into account do decide the course of action in that case.  stop, swerve left, swerve right? the variables for those 3 decisions are too numerous to mention. without human thought and instinct at the moment what decision is to be made? you can't program  that for every possibility of what is left ,right and behind you.

as for Trump he thinks because people desperate for supplies who reach out to take them from him are doing it out of love?  ok Donny that's why they are taking that from you.  letting him out in public is a hazard to this country.

Machines will make these decisions much faster and better than humans.  They can process information regarding those types of things so much quicker.  Angle, speed, etc. will tell it exactly what to do.  You can program that, very easily.

child runs in front of you car, married couple walking with their dog to the left, old couple doing gardening to your right, 18-wheeler behind you.  someone is going to die.  who decides and who programs which life is most valuable in that instant? 

PJfanwillneverleave1

I think the delivery of how President Trump told Puerto Rico about money running out could have used a better delivery but it's the truth.  The US can't be an endless cash fountain all the time for everything.  The govt can only provide so much to other countries before it feels the strain on money designated for it's citizens. Other than that I think he has moved on so to speak to the other tragedy.  

Latest tweet folks......

Leaving Puerto Rico now for D.C. Will be in Las Vegas early tomorrow to pay my respects. Everyone is in my thoughts and prayers. 

PJ_Soul

pjhawks said:

Cliffy6745 said:

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

Well, I actually 100% support a complete ban of cars that require drivers too, if we're getting deep into the subject. The sooner driverless cars are the only option, the better. That will cure society of 99% of all traffic woes and accidents. However, I think your arguments for cars going way faster than any speed limit are a bit crazy. There is NO justification for weaving in and out of traffic or tailgating. That is ALWAYS dangerous driving behaviour, and really the only thing that justifies it is impatience. I agree driving habits are the main cause of traffic jams... fast drivers and slow drivers alike have those habits though, so that is besides the point. Driverless cars all the way! SO much safer and SO much more efficient. But only if everyone is using them. Someday it will become law... if society doesn't collapse and go to shit first.

so you never change lanes?

anyway i don't see a time where driverless cars will ever be a norm.  too many variables and decisions have to come into play when driving for all decisions to be allowed to be made by the car.  for example you are driving down the block and a child runs into the street to retrieve a ball. too many factors to take into account do decide the course of action in that case.  stop, swerve left, swerve right? the variables for those 3 decisions are too numerous to mention. without human thought and instinct at the moment what decision is to be made? you can't program  that for every possibility of what is left ,right and behind you.

as for Trump he thinks because people desperate for supplies who reach out to take them from him are doing it out of love?  ok Donny that's why they are taking that from you.  letting him out in public is a hazard to this country.

Machines will make these decisions much faster and better than humans.  They can process information regarding those types of things so much quicker.  Angle, speed, etc. will tell it exactly what to do.  You can program that, very easily.

child runs in front of you car, married couple walking with their dog to the left, old couple doing gardening to your right, 18-wheeler behind you.  someone is going to die.  who decides and who programs which life is most valuable in that instant? 

If you're literally surrounded without a single place for the car to go without running someone over, then a computer can do a MUCH better and faster job to minimize damage - it is not going to distinguish between a child, a married couple, or an old couple and decide who would be best to kill, and neither is any human in that split second instant. Why are you using examples that no human is capable of maneuvering? With a driverless car the chances of everyone being okay in that scenario are MUCH higher than if a person were driving. Sounds like you really do just need to research the technologies involved more, because if you think a person can do what you just suggested at all, or that a human will have faster reaction to anything, you don't understand them. Not to mention all the accidents caused directly by driver error, which would basically disappear. And that accounts for a huge portion of accidents.