• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Genius Trump

coldjoint said:
You said Trump would be lying for the next 4 years, I said Obama has lied the past 8 years. I gave a few examples. If you wish to demonize Trump try something else.
Click to expand...

Ive pointed out the clear differences between Trump and most normal human beings. His lies by sheer number and by his reluctance to admit reality even when it's painfully obvious, or when you even have a video of him saying what he claims he didn't say, speak to a very large difference between him and other politicians. Pointing out two lies (when one is clearly just an exaggeration since calling a group the JV team is just an opinion") isn't showing the statement to be false. It's like you want to disprove my comment that 2 is less than 3 by pointing out that three is in fact a small number also.
 
calamity said:
The only people Obama has screwed over are the Leftists who thought they were electing a guy who was Left of Hillary and a dove. Centrists like me, loved what we got. And, if I was a Rightie, I'd suggest we build a giant monument in his honor, since he gave you more than you could have ever hoped for.
Click to expand...

He has enabled the rise of Islamists since he took office. He has set race relations back a half century. He destroyed any trust in government.
He has left the southern border wide open and imports possible terrorists. I wouldn't even chip in for his tombstone.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Ive pointed out the clear differences between Trump and most normal human beings. His lies by sheer number and by his reluctance to admit reality even when it's painfully obvious, or when you even have a video of him saying what he claims he didn't say, speak to a very large difference between him and other politicians. Pointing out two lies (when one is clearly just an exaggeration since calling a group the JV team is just an opinion") isn't showing the statement to be false. It's like you want to disprove my comment that 2 is less than 3 by pointing out that three is in fact a small number also.
Click to expand...

Looks like you are having the trouble with reality. He is the president elect.
 
coldjoint said:
Looks like you are having the trouble with reality. He is the president elect.
Click to expand...

Diverting from the point. I've never said otherwise. You're trying to get off topic because you made a stupid point and don't have anything else to say now that you've been corrected.

Not worth my time if all your going to do is change topic when you've been corrected. You are dismissed. Have a good one.
 
roughdraft274 said:
If you hear Obama come out at a press conference and say "I just met with the mayor of blank town. We had a good meeting where we discussed blank topics" is your gut feeling really "Can't believe a word of that"?
Click to expand...

Obama is a Chicago politician, only a fool would trust one of those. Who knows the lies, half-truths, and propaganda they are going to throw out. Everything politicians say should be taken with a grain of salt...or a truck load.

The big difference is how brazen Trump is with his speech, but on an absolute scale, they are all roughly equivalent.
 
Ikari said:
Obama is a Chicago politician, only a fool would trust one of those. Who knows the lies, half-truths, and propaganda they are going to throw out. Everything politicians say should be taken with a grain of salt...or a truck load.

The big difference is how brazen Trump is with his speech, but on an absolute scale, they are all roughly equivalent.
Click to expand...

Good job evading the question, lol. It's such a simple and easy question and you know the truthful answer and yet you can't say it. You know damn well that if Obama said " I met with blank" you'd just accept it unless someone gives you a reason not to. With Trump he's literally lied about things like this throughout the entire campaign like no other politician ever.

You're excuse here, that he's just "brazen" with his speech is just lame.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Where did I say that Clinton didn't lie? All I said is that when it was proven he lied, he fessed up to it and to lying. Go ask Trump if he has ever said that Global Warming is a hoax by the Chinese. You could show it to him and he'd still lie even though all he has to say is "yea, I put that on twitter thinking I was being funny, what's your point?" but even though it's easy to do that, he'd rather lie.

You think I'm rewriting history but I'm the one pointing out that Clinton lied and I've never denied anything about committing perjury etc. I'm just pointing out that when it was proven that he lied, he finally admitted to it while Trump has been caught in numerous lies where he still continues to deny it.
Click to expand...
Good lord, Clinton in the face of the facts was still caught lying in a court of law twice, suborning perjury and trying to parse his was out of it saying oral sex was not sex. He even went to the extent of seeking to obfuscate the whole matter by the totally classic line, "depends on what the meaning of is is".

Finally admitted? He had to be nearly clubbed to death with all the many facts. He settled the Jones lawsuit, you will remember, without an admission of guilt.

Ladders at available at Lowe's if the high horse you are on starts to give you a little case of vertigo.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Diverting from the point. I've never said otherwise. You're trying to get off topic because you made a stupid point and don't have anything else to say now that you've been corrected.

Not worth my time if all your going to do is change topic when you've been corrected. You are dismissed. Have a good one.
Click to expand...

Liberal angst.:lamo
 
Ontologuy said:
It's not baseless: http://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/271355-approx-3-09-million-non-citizens-registered-vote-many-voted.html.

:shock:

Using actual surveys, sound analysis, and accurate math, we know at least 3.09 million non-citizens were registered to vote on November 8th .. and likely many more.

We'll be able to speculate more accurately how many of them were mathematically likely to vote once the final vote count is in and we can finish the proportional analysis.

I know that Hillary-Dem supporters like to fool themselves that non-citizens (including illegal aliens!) didn't vote.

But they can't fool the vast majority, the vast majority who've read the surveys, reviewed the sound analysis, and who can do basic math .. without having their reasoning capabilities distorted by political ideology.
Click to expand...

So do a Nation wide recount and put the issue to bed.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Please point out anywhere I've been incorrect in this thread. I'm guessing you can't otherwise you would have.
Click to expand...
You said, and I quote, "Literally every other word out of his mouth could be a lie."

Taking out the weasel word could [almost anything could], and inserting what you are really implying there. Prove That.
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
Good lord, Clinton in the face of the facts was still caught lying in a court of law twice, suborning perjury and trying to parse his was out of it saying oral sex was not sex. He even went to the extent of seeking to obfuscate the whole matter by the totally classic line, "depends on what the meaning of is is".

Finally admitted? He had to be nearly clubbed to death with all the many facts. He settled the Jones lawsuit, you will remember, without an admission of guilt.

Ladders at available at Lowe's if the high horse you are on starts to give you a little case of vertigo.
Click to expand...

1. Yes, he was clubbed with the truth. But he admitted it when it was plainly obvious that he had to. And on top of that, as I pointed out earlier, this was a lie in order to stay out of trouble, the kind of lie you'd expect from your average sleazy politician. Trump will gladly lie about even unimportant stuff just to stroke his ego or because he feels like it. You seem to simply be arguing that Bill Clinton did indeed lie or that he was more dishonest than most. I don't disagree. But the sheer number of lies or the refusal to accept that you were caught in a lie just isn't the same as it is with Trump. This isn't a "liberals are better than conservatives" thing. I can't think of another politician on either side I would say this about. Even Nixon when he was caught lying he at least had a reason behind it and was trying to stay out of trouble. Same with Reagan, same with Clinton, Obama lied to push a healthcare bill that he thought would help people. It doesn't make it not a lie, but it also isn't the same as just spitting out lie after lie all day long and refusing to admit to lying when you are presented with video evidence or a quote showing otherwise.

2. Off topic but Clinton only settled the Jones lawsuit after it was dismissed from court. He paid her so that she wouldn't bring it up yet again, and his friends and political acquaintances agreed to pay the settlement. Any person in his position also would have settled at that point whether guilty or not. But regardless, this lawsuit doesn't adress the argument at all. Why even bring it up?
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
You said, and I quote, "Literally every other word out of his mouth could be a lie."

Taking out the weasel word could [almost anything could], and inserting what you are really implying there. Prove That.
Click to expand...

Lol, so change the meaning of what I said and then make me prove that thing I didn't say? The **** outta here. You're joking right?

I said that "every other word out of his mouth could be a lie". What I didn't say is that nearly every other word is a lie. I just meant that you have no idea when he's talking what could be a lie and what probably isn't. If Obama said he met with the governor of texas, I don't think any reasonable person gets suspicious because we have no reason to be. But when Trump says it, we have numerous examples where he said he has met with people that he in fact never met with. We have examples of him getting letters from organizations that never sent him a letter.

If Obama and Trump both got accused of bribing an official and they both denied it, I wouldn't believe either, because of course they both could be lying to protect themselves. But if Obama and Trump both were asked a question about Flint Michigan and the water situation and they both said "I had a meeting with a group from Flint Michigan the other day on this problem to work out solutions", I have no good reason to think Obama would lie about such a thing, but every reason to doubt Trump. Because if Obama didn't have a meeting he would have said "the problem is very severe and the federal government is doing our best to address this situation etc etc." where as Trump might just think it sounds good to have had a meeting so he says "I had a meeting" and we know he's made stuff like this up plenty in the past.
 
roughdraft274 said:
Good job evading the question, lol. It's such a simple and easy question and you know the truthful answer and yet you can't say it. You know damn well that if Obama said " I met with blank" you'd just accept it unless someone gives you a reason not to. With Trump he's literally lied about things like this throughout the entire campaign like no other politician ever.

You're excuse here, that he's just "brazen" with his speech is just lame.
Click to expand...

Your excuse that there's a difference from one liar to another liar that makes one liar more "trustworthy" than the other liar is lame. Just another partisan argument.

Also, you shifted goal posts. Your first statement was

"I just met with the mayor of blank town. We had a good meeting where we discussed blank topics"

Whereas you have now changed it to "I met with blank"

Hard to argue for honesty when being dishonest yourself.

If Trump said "I met with Joe" and Obama said "I met with Joe", it's take those as equivalent. Sure, they met with Joe. Whatever. If they went on to say "We had a good meeting were we discussed blank topics", I'd take those as equivalent as well. Sure, bet you had a "good meeting" depending on what you mean by "good", and you likely discussed topics. Has it been productive? Will it positively effect me? I don't take those at the words given, but rather the results of actions taken.

All sides spout off their version of propaganda and events, fundamentally Obama is no more or less trustworthy than Trump. I wouldn't believe either of them, nor would I trust them.
 
Last edited:
roughdraft274 said:
1. Yes, he was clubbed with the truth. But he admitted it when it was plainly obvious that he had to. And on top of that, as I pointed out earlier, this was a lie in order to stay out of trouble, the kind of lie you'd expect from your average sleazy politician. Trump will gladly lie about even unimportant stuff just to stroke his ego or because he feels like it. You seem to simply be arguing that Bill Clinton did indeed lie or that he was more dishonest than most. I don't disagree. But the sheer number of lies or the refusal to accept that you were caught in a lie just isn't the same as it is with Trump. This isn't a "liberals are better than conservatives" thing. I can't think of another politician on either side I would say this about. Even Nixon when he was caught lying he at least had a reason behind it and was trying to stay out of trouble. Same with Reagan, same with Clinton, Obama lied to push a healthcare bill that he thought would help people. It doesn't make it not a lie, but it also isn't the same as just spitting out lie after lie all day long and refusing to admit to lying when you are presented with video evidence or a quote showing otherwise.

2. Off topic but Clinton only settled the Jones lawsuit after it was dismissed from court. He paid her so that she wouldn't bring it up yet again, and his friends and political acquaintances agreed to pay the settlement. Any person in his position also would have settled at that point whether guilty or not. But regardless, this lawsuit doesn't adress the argument at all. Why even bring it up?
Click to expand...

1. Its not like the only lie Clinton has told, the only one he has ever hung onto. So again, ladders at Lowe's.

2. You and I have discussed the Jones lawsuit at length before, we disagree on almost all. Settling a lawsuit when your friends, you have already admitted, are going to be the ones paying anyway, is highly suspect. Any logical person would agree. No skin off Clinton's back, no dinero out of his pocket, what did he have to lose?

So, are you a person relying on logic... or not?
 
roughdraft274 said:
Lol, so change the meaning of what I said and then make me prove that thing I didn't say? The **** outta here. You're joking right?

I said that "every other word out of his mouth could be a lie". What I didn't say is that nearly every other word is a lie. I just meant that you have no idea when he's talking what could be a lie and what probably isn't. If Obama said he met with the governor of texas, I don't think any reasonable person gets suspicious because we have no reason to be. But when Trump says it, we have numerous examples where he said he has met with people that he in fact never met with. We have examples of him getting letters from organizations that never sent him a letter.

If Obama and Trump both got accused of bribing an official and they both denied it, I wouldn't believe either, because of course they both could be lying to protect themselves. But if Obama and Trump both were asked a question about Flint Michigan and the water situation and they both said "I had a meeting with a group from Flint Michigan the other day on this problem to work out solutions", I have no good reason to think Obama would lie about such a thing, but every reason to doubt Trump. Because if Obama didn't have a meeting he would have said "the problem is very severe and the federal government is doing our best to address this situation etc etc." where as Trump might just think it sounds good to have had a meeting so he says "I had a meeting" and we know he's made stuff like this up plenty in the past.
Click to expand...
You used a weasel word, EXACTLY as I described it and you KNOW it.

You then proceed in the latest post to give me **** whereupon you go on to then freely admit I was exactly right in what your true implication was.

Dude, if you cannot do any better than that there is no use going on here. I am beginning to limit myself to debating with only honest brokers here. The way its going, I might only end up debating with folks from my own side.

Do not give me ifs, please. That said, is this that same O bomb a of you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan, your premiums will go down, the I didn't know anything about that until I read it, heard about it in the news... that oh so "truthful" O bomb a? The one that didn't make any secret deals with Iran? The O bomb a who has deported more illegals?

That O bomb a? Give me a break.
 
Ikari said:
Your excuse that there's a difference from one liar to another liar that makes one liar more "trustworthy" than the other liar is lame. Just another partisan argument.

Also, you shifted goal posts. Your first statement was

"I just met with the mayor of blank town. We had a good meeting where we discussed blank topics"

Whereas you have now changed it to "I met with blank"

Hard to argue for honesty when being dishonest yourself.
Click to expand...
Shifted goal posts lmfao. Good lord. Pick either one. The entire point remains the same. One lies about that kind of stuff and the other doesn't. It's fine if you don't care but don't deny reality. Obama isn't very likely to lie about having a meeting or something so trivial. Or any other politician for that matter. But Trump has done this frequently. Like I said if you don't care that's fine but you can't just act like it didn't happen and then make up bull**** about shifting goal posts.

Last word is yours.
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
1. Its not like the only lie Clinton has told, the only one he has ever hung onto. So again, ladders at Lowe's.

2. You and I have discussed the Jones lawsuit at length before, we disagree on almost all. Settling a lawsuit when your friends, you have already admitted, are going to be the ones paying anyway, is highly suspect. Any logical person would agree. No skin off Clinton's back, no dinero out of his pocket, what did he have to lose?

So, are you a person relying on logic... or not?
Click to expand...

You completely aren't discussing my point. You apparently don't understand what I'm saying. There's a large difference in the types of lies and numbers of them from Trump compared to other politicians. I've explained this enough to where I do t want to continue repeating myself. But suffice to say you are addressing points that are related to what I'm saying but not my actual point.
 
Gaugingcatenate said:
You used a weasel word, EXACTLY as I described it and you KNOW it.
Click to expand...

No. it's a word that clearly described what I meant. You're wrong. Last word is yours so feel free to lie a few more times about what I said.
 
roughdraft274 said:
You completely aren't discussing my point. You apparently don't understand what I'm saying. There's a large difference in the types of lies and numbers of them from Trump compared to other politicians. I've explained this enough to where I do t want to continue repeating myself. But suffice to say you are addressing points that are related to what I'm saying but not my actual point.
Click to expand...
I DON'T AGREE with the nature, the quality nor silly distinctions you try to draw in any of your points. The importance in ALL OF OUR LIVES that Trump may or may not have made with his lies, pales [ do not hit me with being a racist for using that term please ], simply pales in contrast to the damage done by the lies of the Clintons AND O bomb a.

Ladders....Lowe's, Home Depot, Ace Hardware, local hardware store.
 
roughdraft274 said:
No. it's a word that clearly described what I meant. You're wrong. Last word is yours so feel free to lie a few more times about what I said.
Click to expand...

Could you do me a favor? Nail it down for me, what does "could" mean? Be specific. Could could mean it might or might not? Could mean in every case that it does/must? Could mean maybe? Could could be used when something might seem to be completely impossible...like Trump could win the election, ha ha? Could you be right? Could you be wrong? Could you be a little more specific? Could you tell me that you were not using a weasel word? Could you tell me you were?
 
Ontologuy said:
It's not baseless: http://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/271355-approx-3-09-million-non-citizens-registered-vote-many-voted.html.

:shock:

Using actual surveys, sound analysis, and accurate math, we know at least 3.09 million non-citizens were registered to vote on November 8th .. and likely many more.

We'll be able to speculate more accurately how many of them were mathematically likely to vote once the final vote count is in and we can finish the proportional analysis.

I know that Hillary-Dem supporters like to fool themselves that non-citizens (including illegal aliens!) didn't vote.

But they can't fool the vast majority, the vast majority who've read the surveys, reviewed the sound analysis, and who can do basic math .. without having their reasoning capabilities distorted by political ideology.
Click to expand...

The sound analysis should be:

1. "non-citizens registered to vote" is NOT the same as " ‘millions’ voted illegally". Not at all. I assume you know that there are many errors in registrations. Outdated addresses, duplicated registrations ... you name it.

2. Who is Trump to say the errors in the registrations worked to Clinton's favor, not his?

3. Want to bash the election? Indeed, do it logically. Borrow Trump's words, the election was rigged. The election result should be nullified! ...

We all would be happier, I guess. :lol::lol:
 
roughdraft274 said:
Shifted goal posts lmfao. Good lord. Pick either one. The entire point remains the same. One lies about that kind of stuff and the other doesn't. It's fine if you don't care but don't deny reality. Obama isn't very likely to lie about having a meeting or something so trivial. Or any other politician for that matter. But Trump has done this frequently. Like I said if you don't care that's fine but you can't just act like it didn't happen and then make up bull**** about shifting goal posts.

Last word is yours.
Click to expand...

Don't shift goal posts then if you don't want to be called out on it. I documented exactly when you shifted the emphasis in your argument.

If either Trump or Obama were to state "I met with X", I'd say "OK, you met with X". If either of them went on to say "We had a productive meeting and made some really good progress on a, b, and c", I'd say "Yeah right, I'll believe it when I see it."

No one is going to get up to the podium and say "Well I met with X...and I really ****ed it up. Everything is ****ed now, we really sent progress back with this one, holy ****." Politicians spin, politicians throw out their propaganda, politicians lie. That's why you always have to keep tuned in, and look at the results of actions, not the particular brand of propaganda being sold.
 
Casper said:
So do a Nation wide recount and put the issue to bed.
Click to expand...
Your statement with respect to the topic is simply illogical.

Recounting all the votes won't in any way "put the issue to bed" of how exactly how many non-citizens voted, as there's no way to tell from a ballot if the person casting it was a citizen or a non-citizen. We are still left with the analytical method I presented.

Once the final count is in, however it's determined that the count is now to be considered "final", then we can apply the proportional math in the analytical method I presented and arrive at an approximate figure of non-citizens who voted that has a very high probability of being accurate.

Aside from the thread topic, as far as recounting is concerned, I'm all for recounting every state until everyone is happy with the count.

But there comes a point where the cost and delay needs to be weighed against the percentage of possibility that the result would change the outcome.

Thus only in states where the vote is super close should be recounted.
 
Reed95 said:
The sound analysis should be:

1. "non-citizens registered to vote" is NOT the same as " ‘millions’ voted illegally". Not at all. I assume you know that there are many errors in registrations. Outdated addresses, duplicated registrations ... you name it.

2. Who is Trump to say the errors in the registrations worked to Clinton's favor, not his?

3. Want to bash the election? Indeed, do it logically. Borrow Trump's words, the election was rigged. The election result should be nullified! ...

We all would be happier, I guess. :lol::lol:
Click to expand...
No, the sound analysis is as I have stated it here: http://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/271355-approx-3-09-million-non-citizens-registered-vote-many-voted.html

1. The analysis is based on actual recent surveys of non-citizens -- "Many errors in registrations. Outdated addresses, duplicated registrations ... you name it" simply thereby do not come into play in that.

2. Since "errors in registration" is a red herring here and did not come into play in the analysis because such is irrelevant to actual recent survey polls of non-citizens, speculating anything about "errors in registration" is irrelevant.

3. I'm not "bashing" the election. I'm simply saying that millions of non-citizens most certainly did likely vote.

It is highly intelligent to speculate that if a non-citizen voted, which they did highly likely knowing doing so was illegal, then there was something very important to them that made them take additional risk where a severe penalty for them would have been the result if they were caught.

And thus it is also highly intelligent to speculate that, considering Trump had campaigned on imprisonment and deportation for law-violating non-citizens and that Clinton wanted to make them citizens, ..

.. Nearly all illegal aliens who voted cast their ballot for Hillary and that the great majority of legal non-citizens who voted cast their vote for Hillary as well.
 
Re the Koch Network:

But there’s an added appeal for Trump.

During the campaign, Trump railed against a Washington GOP establishment — embodied by the family of his vanquished primary foe Jeb Bush — from which the Kochs for years had worked to demonstrate their independence. And, after he won, President-elect Trump announced a sweeping lobbying ban that could be more of a deterrent for many conservative policy professionals than for Koch network staffers, who can work for years within the brothers’ network of think tanks and advocacy groups without directly lobbying federal or state officials.

“If you’re not going to pull from the Chamber of Commerce, Bush wing of the party, you don’t have that many places to go, so it makes sense to look to Koch world,” said a GOP operative who advised Trump team’s during the campaign and the transition. “Trump is looking for new blood that wasn’t part of the traditional establishment, and his presidency is already totally rewriting the Republican hierarchy. There were all these people who were locked out who are now getting their chance.”
Click to expand...
Trump’s Koch administration - POLITICO


Typical TRUMP BRILLIANCE this is.

And so is going after the elite with claims of voter fraud.

My whole life is about winning. I don't lose often. I almost never lose.
Click to expand...
DJT
https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/donaldtrum733773.html
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom