DragonLord Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 does it matter if it was a joke? Exactly my point. Besides, this is Donald Trump we are talking about, he tends to speak his mind a little too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 Exactly my point. Besides, this is Donald Trump we are talking about, he tends to speak his mind a little too much. This I can agree with. And yes it matters if it's a joke, because if it wasn't, then I definitely would not be voting for him. I won't ever vote for a murderer/criminal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 This I can agree with. And yes it matters if it's a joke, because if it wasn't, then I definitely would not be voting for him. I won't ever vote for a murderer/criminal. i'm not sure i want my presidents joking about killing protestors lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuvarkz Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 i'm not sure i want my presidents joking about killing protestors lol He said "Shooting people" not "Killing protestors". To note, it would be pretty darn funny if he somehow managed to organize a paintball game in New York streets. He'd have shot people (with paintball guns) in the streets and probably not lost a single supporter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 Well, the jokes the president makes don't matter at all to me as long as he does great things for this country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crysta Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 (edited) It wasn't a joke; it was bragging. And considering the jumps and gymnastics Trump supporters usually go through in order to justify their support of him makes me think he's not entirely wrong and it's not as hyperbolic as it sounds. Yeah guys he could totally be referring to paintball guns! Edited April 4, 2016 by Crysta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuvarkz Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 It wasn't a joke; it was bragging. And considering the jumps and gymnastics Trump supporters usually go through in order to justify their support of him makes me think he's not entirely wrong and it's not as hyperbolic as it sounds. Yeah guys he could totally be referring to paintball guns! It's pretty obvious I was joking there. I more than know he was not referring to paintball guns. Just brought out that the nigh-nonexistant possibility that he decided to create said event would be pretty darn hilarious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 Well, the jokes the president makes don't matter at all to me as long as he does great things for this country. to an extent i'd agree. however, trump would be a pretty shit president, projecting his current behaviors to the oval office. several world leaders have spoken out against trump, and a few important people here have too. how much easier for trump would it be to make agreements, do you think, if everyone hates the guy? trump is all bark and no bite. his record says as much in a series of circumstances. It's pretty obvious I was joking there. I more than know he was not referring to paintball guns. Just brought out that the nigh-nonexistant possibility that he decided to create said event would be pretty darn hilarious. if you're gonna shitpost stay in /pol/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuvarkz Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 to an extent i'd agree. however, trump would be a pretty shit president, projecting his current behaviors to the oval office. several world leaders have spoken out against trump, and a few important people here have too. how much easier for trump would it be to make agreements, do you think, if everyone hates the guy? trump is all bark and no bite. his record says as much in a series of circumstances. if you're gonna shitpost stay in /pol/ All of them world leaders that would have to concede because the US would be naturally negotiating from a position of power. Also, a great amount of them happen to either a) be disadvantaged should Trump's policies be put into place, or b) happen to be on the left side of politics. Of course they are bound to speak against him. (And for note, I only go to /pol/ for the Trump threads and happening threads. I mostly go to /a/ and /tg/, with the occasional /k/ humour thread lurk) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryhard Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 The more I read this topic the more I see the gulf between European and American politics growing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 All of them world leaders that would have to concede because the US would be naturally negotiating from a position of power. Also, a great amount of them happen to either a) be disadvantaged should Trump's policies be put into place, or b) happen to be on the left side of politics. Of course they are bound to speak against him. (And for note, I only go to /pol/ for the Trump threads and happening threads. I mostly go to /a/ and /tg/, with the occasional /k/ humour thread lurk) i'm no diplomat, but i don't think every country will be willing to concede because we're in a position of power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radiant head Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 I dunno, I think Europe beat us to the punch when Italy elected Berlusconi and neo nazi parties became a thing across the continent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anacybele Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 (edited) Well, I just don't want a Democrat in office again right now. And I especially don't want Hillary because she's actually kind of broken the law and let soldiers die as well (there was an incident where some US troops were in danger and when they called for help, it never came, and it was apparently Hillary's job to send help). Did you know Trump wants her further investigated for that? Edited April 4, 2016 by Anacybele Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
curse_slayer Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 The thing is, if some surveys are to be believed, there's a dangerously high proportion of Muslims that would appear to support downright barbaric practices, even if they don't resort to violent tactics to have them enforced in other places. I believe that Trump's temporary ban of muslims until the whole situation can be actually figured out is a legitimate tactic. I believe I've linked it before, but here: Functionally, there have been immigration bans before, even if Trump's one covers a wider group. You can't really implement a Muslim ban though, and that's coming from a Muslim. Most jihadis are low-lives who get brainwashed because they get a sense of community. These people easily cherry pick verses and can get past any religious tests via taqiyah. Ironically the less extremist people would be the ones stopped. IIRC most American Muslims are fairly productive. I believe there's a statistic that like 10% of doctors in America are actually Muslim. Just don't let in high risk people who would soak up welfare (i.e. single (young) adult males with no education) or at risk. Implementing a religious test seems contrary to the Constitution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 (edited) Well, I just don't want a Democrat in office again right now. And I especially don't want Hillary because she's actually kind of broken the law and let soldiers die as well (there was an incident where some US troops were in danger and when they called for help, it never came, and it was apparently Hillary's job to send help). Did you know Trump wants her further investigated for that? i can't fight those feelings, and don't intend to. however, what i feel obligated to argue against is your (read: anyone's) support of trump. i suggest googling around and visiting politifact specifically to arrive at a conclusion yourself. politifact isn't perfect, but it's one of the more unbiased sources i know of. (for the most part it really is just fact-checking, which is objective by definition. however, "stories" and some statements are open to interpretation.) trump is a liar, an inexperienced diplomat, and divisive. these are not the desired traits of any leader. Edited April 4, 2016 by Phoenix Wright Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tuvarkz Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 i can't fight those feelings, and don't intend to. however, what i feel obligated to argue against is your (read: anyone's) support of trump. i suggest googling around and visiting politifact specifically to arrive at a conclusion yourself. politifact isn't perfect, but it's one of the more unbiased sources i know of. (for the most part it really is just fact-checking, which is objective by definition. however, "stories" and some statements are open to interpretation.) trump is a liar, an inexperienced diplomat, and divisive. these are not the desired traits of any leader. Politifact seems pretty bloody biased in regards to some statements from politicians. Realclearpolitics gives a wider view, considering it links to articles from all sides of the conversation. And of the five people in the race (Trump, Cruz, Kasich, Sanders, Clinton), the only one that isn't incredibly divisive is Kasich, but he could only be nominated in a brokered convention, so he'd likely be even more bought than Hillary is already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 (edited) like what, specifically? i'm willing to consider what you say, depending on what you show. they recently did an ama and were pretty transparent on their methodology, including what's linked in the page. perhaps a bias could come from the reader instead? Edited April 5, 2016 by Phoenix Wright Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBM Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 My comment about trump inciting violence wasn't referring to the "jokes" he makes about punching people; it was about his rhetoric being designed to stir up feelings of fear and hatred. People who are angry and afraid, not just against Muslims or Latin Americans, but also through the backlash from opposition, tend to be more likely to commit violence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Cynthia- Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 If you don't like Politifact, Factcheck.org is a similar fact checking site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crysta Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 (edited) Realclearpolitics is an aggregator, so it mostly just gathers all your partisan editorials in one place instead of in several different places. I use it every day, but it is not where I would go for facts. Politifact seems to be in the same vein as FactCheck.org, which is considerably better in terms of actual credibility imo. Edited April 5, 2016 by Crysta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Wright Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 how do people, particularly conservatives (though many governments are also to blame), feel about free-market capitalism now after we've learned a bunch about the panama papers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dondon151 Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 You can't really implement a Muslim ban though, and that's coming from a Muslim. Most jihadis are low-lives who get brainwashed because they get a sense of community. These people easily cherry pick verses and can get past any religious tests via taqiyah. Ironically the less extremist people would be the ones stopped. see i literally said the exact same thing and tuvarkz ignored that too so that's a lost cause Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Raven Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 (edited) IIRC most American Muslims are fairly productive. I believe there's a statistic that like 10% of doctors in America are actually Muslim. Just don't let in high risk people who would soak up welfare (i.e. single (young) adult males with no education) or at risk. Implementing a religious test seems contrary to the Constitution. I don't need an IIRC, when I have a ton of family and family friends who are lawyers and doctors in the USA. The thing is, if some surveys are to be believed, there's a dangerously high proportion of Muslims that would appear to support downright barbaric practices, even if they don't resort to violent tactics to have them enforced in other places. I believe that Trump's temporary ban of muslims until the whole situation can be actually figured out is a legitimate tactic. I believe I've linked it before, but here: Functionally, there have been immigration bans before, even if Trump's one covers a wider group. hi have you met anyone in your life that isn't white? i'm just curious, because I often catch you arguing for really inane shit that tends to be sexist or racist in nature I'm legit curious, because I've met one Muslim in my life that has had ties to anything resembling terrorism - and believe me I have interacted with significantly more Muslims in my life than the majority of this forum can say they have. On top of that, the basic sense of anti-constitutional sentiment you're violating for what is effectively a temporary peace of mind is nuts and on top of that selfish and xenophobic. How do you propose we ban Muslims? What if I have family from Pakistan or England that want to visit? What about commerce with Muslim non-Americans that are clearly westernized? There is absolutely no fucking way you can advocate for an islamic ban because some could be violent. You know that the KKK thinks their values are rooted in Christian beliefs right? That's legitimately the same shit, the difference is that the KKK are full of white people. Is anyone else amazed we actually have Trump supporters on SF? I'm all for free speech and the right to have one own viewpoint - but I definitely thought we were all more open minded and critical of that. Trump is clearly a fucking idiot who has no idea what he's talking about, and he's not gonna do anything dangerous in office except fart around and do nothing. It's Ted Cruz that really scares me because he knows his shit, and he's an asshole. Edited April 5, 2016 by Lord Raven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blah the Prussian Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Well, I just don't want a Democrat in office again right now. And I especially don't want Hillary because she's actually kind of broken the law and let soldiers die as well (there was an incident where some US troops were in danger and when they called for help, it never came, and it was apparently Hillary's job to send help). Did you know Trump wants her further investigated for that? Ah, Benghazi! She did actually let US soldiers die, but not in Benghazi. Clinton was critical to getting the invasion of Iraq through Congress. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alertcircuit Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 Is anyone else amazed we actually have Trump supporters on SF? I'm all for free speech and the right to have one own viewpoint - but I definitely thought we were all more open minded and critical of that. Trump is clearly a fucking idiot who has no idea what he's talking about, and he's not gonna do anything dangerous in office except fart around and do nothing. It's Ted Cruz that really scares me because he knows his shit, and he's an asshole.Not disagreeing with you that Cruz could act more efficiently, but I don't think Trump is harmless. Sure he's going to have a frustrating time getting anything done with Congress, but he's definitely going to bring us back a few steps in the foreign policy department. There are very few leaders I can see him getting along with, if anything he kind of reinforces the negative American stereotypes.Ah, Benghazi! She did actually let US soldiers die, but not in Benghazi. Clinton was critical to getting the invasion of Iraq through Congress.I was of the understanding that she was responsible for Benghazi, just not in a criminal way as her opponents suggest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.