ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Choose one:
1. Without significant intervention by Russians in the 2016 election, candidate Trump defeated the Clinton campaign fair and square in an electoral contest, while spending much less money than she did. This makes Trump almost certainly smarter than Hilary Rodham Felon, a former US Secretary of State and Senator.

It was an election, not an IQ-test. How could you miss that?

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

2. With significant intervention by Russians in the 2016 election, candidate Trump managed to conspire with said Russians in such a manner that, even after more than a year and over $20 million of dedicated investigation, the Mueller probe has not yet discovered the evidence necessary to prove Trump's complicity. This makes Trump almost certainly smarter than Robert Mueller, a former Director of the FBI.

It is an investigation, not an IQ-test. How can you miss that?

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Either way, he's almost certainly smarter than you, because you're probably not on the same level as Secretaries of State and Directors of the FBI.

I am not even slightly annoyed by this, knowing that you have obvious problems discerning different levels of intelligence, at least, where Trump is concerned.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Ruthlessness? Ha! President Trump can barely sign an order without the approval of the Circuit Courts, and certainly candidate Trump — my focus and yours for the above mental exercise — had no particular access to legitimate force.

Ruthless in the sense of unethical / unscrupulous / unprincipled /immoral.

If I remember correctly, you never viewed him as a particular moral person. You usually are more astute then the crowd, so I'll take it you're pretty annoyed by my description of Trump as an immoral idiot, since in this post you both used logic rather frivolously and misunderstood me deliberately.

Why?

Because if you don't care about the means as long as the goals are within reach, you should't care about the Trump's shortcomings, some of which you (again, if i remember correctly) conceded earlier.

"

DalaiLama wrote:

"

-Grandiosity with expectations of superior treatment from other people
-Fixated on fantasies of power, success, intelligence, attractiveness, etc.
-Self-perception of being unique, superior, and associated with high-status people and institutions
-Needing continual admiration from others
-Sense of entitlement to special treatment and to obedience from others
-Exploitative of others to achieve personal gain
-Unwilling to empathize with the feelings, wishes, and needs of other people
-Intensely envious of others, and the belief that others are equally envious of them
-Pompous and arrogant demeanor

All of those fit Obama. All of those fit Hillary.

You've used this poor defense many times now.

Other people have mental disorders too, so that makes it ok not to see any issue with the acting president to possibly have a mental disorder.

Instead of condemning a theft, a rape, or a murder, your defense is essentially "But others do it too! Some even get away with it!"

That's hardly the point.

"

The more people pick at his faults, the more they make him an underdog. Go ahead, kick the puppy some more and see how much public favor it garners. The more Trump's critics lie and exaggerate things against him, the less people believe Trump's critics.

Trump is hardly a puppy, give the man some credit. In locker room talk, he is the big dick, the bully. He grabs women by the pussy and pretends science is about nerds who don't have the courage to do that to women.

But it's true that Murica is the land of hope and dreams.

I think only in Murica, can you be vetted for the highest governmental position by being a reality tv star and a corrupt businessman with dubious credentials.

It's like "This man can clearly act, and make rich people even richer! Make him the leader of our nation!"

It's true a populist can get very far by appealing to fear and the lowest-common denominator. Nobody is immune to this, look at Europe in the recent years and the rise (and fall in many places, though) of populism.

I try and empathise with people, but it's true I find it very difficult sometimes, when confronted with a supposedly competent and enlightened leader of a nation dismissing climate change as a Chinese hoax, or how there are so many climate change deniers out there, mostly in Murica.

Then again, he says things like things are wet, in terms of water.

Very stable genius.

But people rush to his defense.

"Aww look at that puppy! They are kicking him!?!"

It's clear that there will never be agreement in this thread on President Trump.

The final judge will be history. History takes at least 10 years or so to digest a presidency. That's 10 years after it is over. Trump could turn out to be a decent president or the worst president in our history. The pivotal question will be what comes out of the Mueller probe. A clean bill of health on one end of the spectrum and a traitorous criminal on the other end of the spectrum.

Of course, it's fun to speculate how we think it will likely turn out though. My view is that Trump's behavior towards the special counsel investigation seems to indicate that it will more likely be on the bad end of that spectrum somewhere. For example, there seems to be too many examples of obstruction of justice in plain sight. Why obstruct justice if there's nothing to hide?

"

Turtledove wrote:

It's clear that there will never be agreement in this thread on President Trump.

I refused. I don't see the resemblance. Trump don't look like a puppy.

"

k1rage wrote:

MAYBE.

"

Turtledove wrote:

It's clear that there will never be agreement in this thread on President Trump.

The final judge will be history. History takes at least 10 years or so to digest a presidency. That's 10 years after it is over. Trump could turn out to be a decent president or the worst president in our history. The pivotal question will be what comes out of the Mueller probe. A clean bill of health on one end of the spectrum and a traitorous criminal on the other end of the spectrum.

Of course, it's fun to speculate how we think it will likely turn out though. My view is that Trump's behavior towards the special counsel investigation seems to indicate that it will more likely be on the bad end of that spectrum somewhere. For example, there seems to be too many examples of obstruction of justice in plain sight. Why obstruct justice if there's nothing to hide?

Not exactly a reply to you, just something that’s been on my mind.

It’s somewhat frustrating to me, because we have a long and proud tradition of making fun of our presidents. Trump certainly does enough to make fun of, but there definitely seems to be this witch hunt that just ruins it. E.g., the constant passive aggressive ad hominem that takes place after anyone says “nah, that doesn’t sound right.” It’s no fun when you have to virtue signal, lest a few loud cunts act like loud cunts. It’s like.. don’t they realize Trump was elected to punch back, specifically at them?

"

Turtledove wrote:
The final judge will be history. History takes at least 10 years or so to digest a presidency.

That is why you cult people already consider Obama the GREATEST president since Washington? Has it been 10 years already?

The Obama cultists use mental illness as an insult for sure (no irony there lol). No mirrors in their houses either.

In general, I doubt there is anyone anymore that runs for high public office that doesn't have something wrong with them (or at the very least, what you would say a few screws loose). No normal person would do it. If you think about it, the reward/risk ratio is such that only a person with delusions of grandeur would ever want to put their foot in that pile of shit. I think we are well past the era of altruistic people really looking to help the masses (WAIT here come the Obama cultists again). Their "diagnosis" of Trump, could be easily applied to any of these people.

For example, Trudeau looks like a massive nut to me. Ditto the Chinese dude. Putin looks real normal, lol. Have a look at some video of Poroshenko and then tell me he looks normal. ROFLMAO

Both Khoranth and Dalailama nailed it. So called "mental health professionals" that diagnose a public figure (who is clearly "in character" most if not all the time we see him) are not worth anything. No real professional would do it.

This is like diagnosing an actor based on a character they play. Anyone seriously believe that Anthony Hopkins is a psycho cannibal? This really is THAT stupid.

Not trying to be mean, but after living in US for many years I have come to the inescapable conclusion that much of the population has severe problems with differentiating reality and fantasy. I have seen them speak of characters (always movies and TV, never books) as though they were real people. I've not seen this anywhere else I have been.

"

kolyaboo wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:
The final judge will be history. History takes at least 10 years or so to digest a presidency.

That is why you cult people

Rolls eyes and shakes head

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

That is why you cult people

Rolls eyes and shakes head

It really is hilarious looking at some of these posts.

*complains about passive aggressiveness, whilst posting a passive aggressive post*

*complains about insults, whilst insulting others*

*claims politicians are clearly acting all the time and shouldn't be judged based on role*

*judges politicians based on role*

You should have seen that person's posts about the lab. Think this shit is passive aggressive? WHOA

Some of those posts were brutal. Probably got probated over and over.

But it was the same story, different subject.

The lab SUCKS! It should be removed.

And btw, if you disagree you suck and you are the most idiotic person and you should probably just shut your mouth until you grow enough sense to agree with me.

(I paraphrased an actual post from that person in that last sentence).

Seriously. Some people just can't help themselves.