Printable View
He hasn't seen the light yet, wuf. He needs to log into /r/thedonald more. I'm gonna DM him that link
I'm curious as to the effects of the non muslim-ban muslim-ban on the rest of the world. Will other countries follow suit? Will other countries condemn it as reprehensible?
He has the cadence of someone who has supreme confidence with no basis what so ever. I haven't even gotten past the first minute. This is the kind of tone you hear from preachers, conspiracy nuts and psychopaths. The weaker your argument the stronger your consonants have to be and the more you cannot allow yourself to take a breath or else someone might come in and tell you that you're a fucking idiot.
I got to 1:50 on the second one. What the actual fuck is that argument... Criminality is skyrocketing after the fall of a totalitarian dictatorship. Wow no shit! Does that mean the people in that region were better off with Gaddafi? Let me help you out here: No they were not! People said the same thing about Irak after Hussain, and they'll say the same thing about the DPRK after Kim Jong Un. Because fucking retards hold the strongest opinions on this monkey farm. How hard is it to say: I'm not sure. Or: I really don't know enough to make a judgement.
It's like Trump told David Muir on ABC. I'm paraphrasing but his point was "FUCK the rest of the world. They're already monumentally pissed off, they already find everything we do reprehensible. Fuck 'em. I'm gonna take care of America, and flat out don't give a shit if the Taliban is politically offended.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
EIGHT THOUSAND TERRORISTS!!Quote:
The Government Accountability Office -- an independent non-partisan agency that works for Congress -- says that in 2015, 22,000 high-risk air travelers were prevented from coming to the USA.
In the same year more than 8,000 known or suspected terrorists tried to get in here but were thwarted.
https://www.billoreilly.com/b/The-Pr...849701172.html
That's the situation on the ground. Who in their right mind would be offended when we shut down immigration from 6 out of ~200 countries in the world, for 30 days, while we sure-up our vetting procedures. That seems totally reasonable, not reprehensible.
"known or suspected"Quote:
EIGHT THOUSAND TERRORISTS!!
Or, to put that in other words... "a number we pulled out of our arse to make people afraid".
Not that I have a problem with Trump's immigration policy. That's his business. I'm just not getting sucked into the fear. If 8000 "suspected terrorists" really did try to enter USA in 2015, then your border security are doing a fan-fucking-tastic job of preventing all out carnage in your beloved nation.
Either that, or the criteria for "suspected terrorist" is loose.
Yup. If you turn the dials up high enough, you can suspect just about anybody of terrorism. Or at least 8000 out of whatever number flew. How many of those actually had bad intentions is another question.
8,000, 800, or 80. Does it matter? It only takes one getting through to cause a problem
I doubt these 8000 people are totally retarded. They must have had a reason to believe that they could get into America. They must have thought there was at least a decent chance of success.
Why would they think that if our border security is batting 1.000?
Obviously, alot more than 8,000 attempted to get in. No one is saying that 8,000 represents a 100% thwart rate.
Trump's order only shut things down for a month. A measly 30 days so border security can be strengthened. Who could possibly object to that?
Of course it matters. If they said 80, then nobody would be very afraid, would they?Quote:
Originally Posted by banana
This is not about security. It's about fear.
If they said 19, I think people would be alot more afraid.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
it's not like that 8,000 stat is being widely reported on, so to call it fear-mongering is highly inaccurate.
It's just a notable fact when considered alongside other facts like Europe's extremely permissive immigration policies, and the fact that they have experienced multiple terrorist attacks at the hands of immigrants from some of the countries targeted by Trump's EO.
Take all those facts together and it's easy to see why it might be time to take a month off and regroup.
Yeah, granted. I might well be wide of the mark in this instance.Quote:
Originally Posted by babana
I wouldn't pay so much attention to this. Here in the UK, we have extremely permissive immigration policies. We don't have multiple terrorist problems. We did when we we fighting the Irish.Quote:
It's just a notable fact when considered alongside other facts like Europe's extremely permissive immigration policies, and the fact that they have experienced multiple terrorist attacks at the hands of immigrants from some of the countries targeted by Trump's EO.
I'm highly skeptical of these terrorist events in Europe, much like I'm skeptical of the one we had here. But I'll put that aside for a minute, and suggest that mainland Europe is vulnerable because of the very fact it is the mainland, and the lax borders. When I went to Austria, I had my passport checked at Dover (UK) and again at Calais (France), when boarding and disembarking the ferry. Then we drove through France, Belgium, Germany and into Austria without once having to stop at a border. That's only changed in very recent times, and even still, pretty much every country in Europe has a huge border, and lots of it is mountainous. It's MUCH easier for people to smuggle weapons and wanted criminals around Europe than it is to get them into an island nation like the UK, or to another continent such as North America.
The threat posed by Islamic terrorism is greatly exaggerated, especially in the UK and USA. I do believe it exists, that there is a threat, but not on the scale we're told, and only because we created the threat by destroying their nations. I truly believe that the concept of "control by fear" is the principle method by which the elite keep the masses under control. Religion has been doing it for millennia.
Not just in my world. The real world too. It's called check-mate yoQuote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
This is very much about security, but that part of it never gets play in the media because it reveals the disease of political Islam.
Go tell the Christians in Anatolia and the Levant how good it is for them to have open arms to Islamists. Oh wait...
Must have been very very recent times. The attacker in Germany had his face all over the news as the subject of an international manhunt. Yet he made it to Italy, no problem. I have to say, that's terrifying, and if there was ever an argument for having air-tight borders, that's it.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Where there is a will, there is a way. Even Trump has acquiesced that his border wall won't stretch end-to-end. He acknowledges that mountains make better fences. I wouldn't point to mountains as a weakness in the border. Mountaintops, even in summer time, are dangerous exposed areas. Anyone trying to cross them would be at tremendous risk. Plus, a human being moving through such desolate and lifeless areas would be picked up by a drone in about three seconds.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I don't agree. While it may be easier, I don't think it's because of landscape, geography, or the size of a particular border. It has to do with the level of commitment those governments have to enforcing their border security. I think alot of people who run shit in Europe are "globalists" that simply don't see border security as a priority.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I could not disagree more. I think the situation is the complete opposite. I think that the threat of Islamic terrorism is greatly UNDERSTATED in the UK and the USA. Yes, you read that right.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
If you took a poll of Muslims worldwide, you'd find majority support, or at least strong pluralities of support, for what western society would consider 'opression' and 'terrorism'. On a world-wide macro scale Muslims overwhelmingly support the subjugation of women, they categorically deny freedom of religious belief, an inordinate amount of them believe that bombing civilians is acceptable. I think, worldwide, more muslims celebrated 9/11 than mourned. I could go on..
This reality is never discussed in the UK and USA. This kind of discussion is branded racist. CAIR, and the mainstream media have spent the last 8 years (and somewhat beyond), pushing a narrative that "most" muslims are peace-loving, women-respecting, western-assimilated, law-abiding citizens. Well that's only true INSIDE the UK and USA. Everywhere else, you find a much larger prevalence of cultures that most westerners would find shocking, offensive, and dangerous.
I don't think the problem is limited to ISIS, Al-Queada or any of those fringe militant groups. They're just the loudest. Beyond those groups are plenty of 'ordinary' muslims who say
"Yeah, I'm gonna contribute to the caliphate by having 15 kids so we can overwhelm the infidels"
"No I'm not gonna let my daughter drive"
"Pffft, see if I care if someone flies a plane into the WTC. Fuck those white devils"
"Christians? Here? Hang 'em!"
AP is reporting that Trump and Nieto talked on the phone today.
It doesn't say who called who, but c'mon, who would you bet on? I haven't read "Art of the Deal" but I doubt it contains a chapter that says "Give an ultimatum, and then try to build bridges again the next day"
You're right that the globalist nature of European governments plays a significant role, but I don't think you're right to dismiss mountains as an obstacle for the would-be terrorist rather than a hinderance for border security. But that's a pointless side issue. Most European governments cannot physically secure their entire borders. They don't want to either, there is a great deal of legitimate movement of people. Imagine trying to seal the USA-Canada border. The sheer volume of people trying to go back and forth would greatly complicate any efforts.Quote:
Originally Posted by banana
Um, no, I do not think so at all. There is not majority support amongst Muslims when it comes to Islamic terrorism. If you really think there is, well I don't know what to say, other than you're being more paranoid than I am when I say that terrorist incidents are a crock of shit.Quote:
If you took a poll of Muslims worldwide, you'd find majority support, or at least strong pluralities of support, for what western society would consider 'opression' and 'terrorism'.
It's also worth noting you're using the western definition of "terrorism". There might be support for, say, a Muslim blowing himself up at an army barracks, because that would be seen as an attack on an enemy's military. That's different to blowing a train full of commuters up, or driving a truck through a crowd. That kind of stuff does not have support. If it did, it would be happening a lot more than it does, because "the majority of Muslims" is a figure in the region of a billion people.
This is more bollocks. You can't just say it has "overhwleming support" because that assumes the women are complicit too. Are they? Does it count as oppression if the person being oppressed supports it?Quote:
On a world-wide macro scale Muslims overwhelmingly support the subjugation of women
citation neededQuote:
I think, worldwide, more muslims celebrated 9/11 than mourned.
You're the one using terms like "overwhelming majority" and "inordinate amounts". Actually, the majority of Muslims are normal people, who are motivated by family.Quote:
pushing a narrative that "most" muslims are peace-loving, women-respecting, western-assimilated, law-abiding citizens.
You're assuming male, radical Muslims represent the entire faith. They don't, thankfully. They just get all the headlines.
I'm so glad I don't agree with you here, because quite frankly this is a really depressing way to view a culture of people 1.6billion in size.Quote:
"Yeah, I'm gonna contribute to the caliphate by having 15 kids so we can overwhelm the infidels"
"No I'm not gonna let my daughter drive"
"Pffft, see if I care if someone flies a plane into the WTC. Fuck those white devils"
"Christians? Here? Hang 'em!"
I feel Americans have a very crooked view of the middle east. Maybe a little immigration from those places would help that.
Their backwards fundamentalist views on things aren't really all that different.
Maybe you misunderstood me. I think mountains make fine fences.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
What do you mean "seal"? The goal is for the government to know who's coming through, and for what reasons. The US/Canada border seems to do an excellent job of that. Are you suggesting that people cross in and out of canada completely unchecked?Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I confess, because the drinking age there is 18, and the drinking age in the US is 21, I spent three years of my life taking full advantage of Canada's hospitality. You didn't need passports back then, but they still checked ID's and searched your car at the border.
I don't know what to say either. Maybe we can split hairs over the definition of "islamic terrorism", but to say that there isn't widespread contempt for the west among Muslim countries is just naive. Iranians are not shy about shouting "death to america". Maybe you see less of that in the UK since it's not specifically directed at you.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
If you wanna call me out on the word "majority", fine. Maybe it's not quite 51%. But these numbers should make you shit your pants. Note the wording of the question....."civilian targets"Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/07/01/...-extremism-10/
Look how many countries exist where more than 1 in 4 people believe that suicide bombing a civilian target is often or sometimes justified.
Holy fucking shit YES it counts!!! The Amish are some of the worst people going. They claim 'free will' by allowing adolescents to 'ramspringah' (spelling?) and then 'choose' whether they want to remain with the Amish community, or go out on their own. 95% of them stay, a stat the Amish seem proud of. Saddam Hussein won elections by that same margin. Was he not an oppressor?Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Let's say an 18 year old does decide to leave the Amish community. He has barely an 8th grade education. No technical skills. Can't type. All his friend and family live with the Amish and provide no communication or support. He has no church. No training. No credit. No references. No place to live. And probably doesn't know how to drive. And if he does, it doesn't matter because there's pretty much no chance he has a car. What's more, there are some Amish communities where the remaining family members of the "escapees" are shunned or otherwise socially damaged in the community.
So of course, lots of them "choose" to stay. The alternative is hell. Textbook oppression.
If you're a woman in a muslim country, and your choices are to cover your entire body, share a husband with 6 other women, and squeeze out babies.....or......get buried up to your neck and have people huck rocks at your face.....which would you choose?
Maybe in the US and UK. But in the rest of the world, plenty of these "family men" wouldn't think twice about strapping a suicide bomb on their own 10 year old son if it served their cause.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
The only thing necessary for evil to prosper, is for good men to do nothing. My parents tried to raise me catholic, so I remember a few masses from my childhood. The only sermon that stands out in my memory came in the early 90s after some pro-life nut shot up an abortion clinic. The priest told the congregation to STOP debating abortion for a while. He actually told people to give up the cause, and focus on denouncing violence, spreading forgiveness, and avoiding contentious debate. Don't denounce abortion. Don't defend catholicism. Just be good people, back off, and let the other side heal.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
That stands out in my memory in stark contrast to how I see Muslims react to violence committed in the name if Islam. You want an example, find the press conference given by the lawyers of the family who committed the shooting in San Bernadino CA. It was just a diatribe, without provocation, seeking to head-off any Islamophobic narrative. It was an aggressive political play at a time that called for quiet condolences, and messages of peace.
Where exactly are the voices of "reasonable" Islam?
Yeah, let's see what tune you're singing when there is 3 billion of them and you're scared shitless to ride a bus.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I know nothing about the USA/Canada border, I guess I'm wrong to think it's a useful comparison to Europe. When I was in Europe, I literally went through three international borders like it was England/Wales, with nothing more than a signpost on the road defining the border. I think they have tightened things up as a result of recent terror attacks, and the immigration crisis, but it's a matter of time before they looses up again because the free movement of people is at the core of EU policy.
You're just being creative with your language here. I didn't say there wasn't widespread contempt... I said they don't support terrorism. I have contempt for the west. I don't support terrorism.Quote:
Originally Posted by banana
Of course. There's certainly some Iranians who say these things. Iran is a pretty big country though, over 77 million, the vast majority being Muslim, so unless you can demonstrate that this is how 35 million plus feel, we're probably going to be short of a majority.Quote:
Iranians are not shy about shouting "death to america".
Your statement here is techically correct. Indeed, we have Muslims here, some of whom have also been heard to say "Death to America", so you could also say that British people are not shy of saying these things, and still be technically correct.
You also have to disect what "death to America" means to the people saying it. Does it mean they want every American to die? Or does it mean the end of American imperialism? They are very much different things, and both could fall under the umbrella of "death to America".
There are also Iranians that like America. Have a look on youtube.
The radicals who want "death to America" very probably don't have the greatest opinion of the British, either. Anyone who would chop the head off someone for being American would happily take my head off for being British, so it's not like I draw comfort from the fact "death to Britian" isn't a phrase they use often.Quote:
Maybe you see less of that in the UK since it's not specifically directed at you.
Here's a question for you... do you believe that the killing of innocent Muslims in their home nation by means of air strikes is justifiable to protect American lives?Quote:
Look how many countries exist where more than 1 in 4 people believe that suicide bombing a civilian target is often or sometimes justified.
What percentage of Americans do you think would answer "yes"?
Why should they give more of a shit about civillian lives than we do?
citation fucking neededQuote:
Maybe in the US and UK. But in the rest of the world, plenty of these "family men" wouldn't think twice about strapping a suicide bomb on their own 10 year old son if it served their cause.
I mean fuck man, where are you pulling this shit from? Sorry to be blunt, but in my opinion, this is the viewpoint of a fucking moron. The same could be said about virtually any culture. How many parents in America want their children, pressure their children, into a military life? How is that any different to the handful of Islamic morons that also think their "cause" is more important than their children? To the American moron, a life in the military is a good, stable job to be proud of. To the Islamic moron, a life of a suicide bomber is eternal virgin fucking. Different cultures, same fucking morons.
The irony is that the moron American is much more in line with the average American than the moron Muslim is to the average Muslim, while sitting there generalising an entire religion based on the nutjobs who cut heads off.
Where's all the terrorism in Canada? Highly tolerant country, highly lax on refugees, yet nobody seems to want to blow them up. Same for the UK arguably...
Edit: And yet the argument is and continues to be, this is a 'weak' stance. Well actually, it's a strong stance, because it appeals to everyone who isn't mentally ill. Which is the vast majority of people regardless of their religious faith.
It's only checkmate to you cause you're playing checkers. You can't defeat the logic i presented, only try to make the argument about something else.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
I have a chess rating of nearly 2000 (sadly never hit that figure).
Therefore, I have earned the right to say "checkmate" when I want to close an argument.
All you phoneys should say something else.
2000, that's very good, I never passed 1600.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Finally, something you can do better than me.
I did get in the 96th percentile on the logic portion of the GRE though.
My blitz rating is closer to 1600, so we'd probably have a decent game over the board. I'll crush you though if I can properly analyse.
I just checked, my highest rating was 1920 and my current rating is 1881, which represents 90th percentile.
Best result was a win vs 2048.
Cultural enrichmentQuote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
Religion of Peace
Islamic and Christian fundamentalism are very, very different. Antipodal in difference.
Damn, all this trouble because Abraham fucked the help....
It's a trick question. If killing them means American lives are saved, how can the be "innocent"?Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Dissecting your question more reveals the fallacy of your logic. You're obviously talking about collateral damage caused by attacks on justifiable targets. When an Islamic militant attacks civilians, the target is not justifiable.
Their tactic has a name. It's called Terrorism, and Americans don't do that. So you can't compare the two.
I'm not saying that the American military hasn't committed atrocities in the fog of war. But I'm sure that more often than not, we've made concerted efforts to avoid or minimize collateral damage. Unfortunately, collateral damage is part of warfare, it happens. That's not an excuse to go beserk and drive a truck over a sidewalk of pedestrians thousands of miles from the battlefield.
There's a reason that American soldiers don't bring their wives and kids to war. Terrorists haven't figured that out yet. I don't see how that's America's problem.
And I beat you? That must make me a FM or something.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Yet you couldn't solve the puzzle I did. I must be like 99th percentile.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
yea but r u smrtr than paul krugman
btw my avatar would be the best movie ever made. rambo and james bond need to team up to rid the world of some bullshit.
I'm not that smart and I have practically zero knowledge. So probs not.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
I wouldn't watch it.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Not even if it's filmed in Londonistan?Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
Maybe if it was freeing Birmingham of Sharia law.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
9.7 on imdb
I'd like to big you up, but I'm wildly inconsistent when it comes to blitz, so I can't give you too much credit for beating me, I'm sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
If you can beat me when I can take an entire day to make a single move, then I'll pat you on the back.
I'm shit at chess, the only thing I am good at is tactics/puzzles. I struggle to keep a 1100 rating playing 3/2 games on chess.com. Longer games online bore me and the only time I play IRL is with one mate and I'm usually too drunk to play seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I haven't played IRL for a while, none of my friends will play me because I'll obviously win and then sit there smirking like a smug twat.
I can't remember our games in detail, but I'm sure you played a solid game when you won, that I didn't throw it away with a dumb move, so you're obviously not shit. I do sometimes lose to shit people, but it's usually the result of time pressure.
https://en.lichess.org/fLhCGJYp/white#65Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
Oh that's why you beat me, because I didn't play Sicilian. I guess I was being kind.
19... Rxf2 is why I lost, I have an easy win if I trade rooks. That's where I lose a lot of blitz games... not taking the simple approach and getting "creative". In a long-game, I wouldn't make that play because I'd have analysed it and realised it's shit.
Should have an easy win from 1... against me mate.
Interesting take, and exactly my thoughts. This is the precise impression that the whole situation with Trump gives; that you can't take him or his word seriously. And that is very dangerous IMO
If you behave too much like a child in the eyes of those you have to deal with, they will have to assume you are a child. Remember, literally the eyes of the world are affixed on this at the moment. The POTUS is always a looked upon figure, the one P that everyone around the world knows his (or her) name. Non-Europeans, name 10 other currently in office presidents excluding Canada's and Mexico's, for instance.
So now when we have a child in the room, and that damn kid happens to posses nukes, all bets are off. Maybe this is exactly what the people wanted?
Again, don't shoot the messenger. Opinion piece on the other favorite fake news outlet (MSNBC are partisan bad, and are basically becoming coporate-left-wing FOX, not kidding there, but anyway here it is)
<object width="425" height="355">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fM8iWOOLlls
It's nice that you feel as smug for beating me as I do for beating spoon.Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
It's no big deal really.Quote:
Originally Posted by OngBonga
I wouldn't elect Lawrence O'Donnell to dog catcher.
That was a masterpiece in bullshit though. At least he masters that.
I don't believe you. Beating spoon was a big deal, just because I didn't really like him. So if it's no big deal that you beat me, I guess that means you like me.Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Sawyer
Obviously he missed the part where Trump checkmates Nieto by giving him an excuse to cancel the trip.
Lol every other move is a blunder.Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
Doesn't matter how many mistakes you make as long as you win.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Serious question: how dumb do you think Trump is?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
fypQuote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
You made my post significantly worse. This is because you have a losers mindset.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
I'd say ~110-115 IQQuote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Not quite sure. Dumb enough to promise Mexico will pay for the Wall, assuming it ever gets built? Yes. Possibly dumb enough to think he can get them to pay for it? Apparently, yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Is this the IQ test that Paul "Never Go Full Paul Krugman" Krugman passes?Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
Okay so a total fucking retard. On the order of lampshade brilliance. Things are starting to make sense now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
You don't pass or fail IQ tests. I also have no idea who this Krugman is you keep bringing up.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Does this mean that after the wall is built and after Mexico pays for it, you'll have newfound respect for Trump?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
If the US allows Mexicans to build the wall and pays them and then taxes them an extra wall tax is this considered Mexico paying for the wall?
It's not about IQ so much as having an understanding of things.Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
Krugman is dumb because, despite having a Nobel prize in economics, he doesn't understand or want to understand that his models don't work. Basically, neither he nor any other economist can predict anything, which makes their models useless.
Trump is dumb because he thinks he can treat the presidency like reality TV; he's too concerned with appearances and not enough with substance. He wastes times having twitter fights with people who don't matter about things that don't matter. He lies constantly. He can't help but let his ego run him in everything. That's pretty dumb.
lol yeah totally true.Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
luckyQuote:
I also have no idea who this Krugman is you keep bringing up.
Still waiting to see how that's going to come about:Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Plan A. Ask Nieto. Oh shit he said no.
Plan B. 20% tariff. Oh wait, that's making American consumers pay for it.
Plan C?
The irony is that he has done a tremendous amount substantively, in part because low-order logic thinkers eagle eye focus on his twitter spats.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
The irony is the only way to build the wall cheaply will be to use illegal immigrant labor.Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
All sorts of things count. This is one of the funnier things that Trump antagonists harp on, because it's actually very very very very easy for Mexico to pay for the wall. A mere renegotiation of NAFTA that doesn't royally fuck the US would more than count. Granted, I think it will be much more visible than that, but I can't say how.Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
He's tremendous, no-one accomplishes more than him.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Or not. Where do you get these wrong ideas?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Willful blindfold.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
The only thing that counts is if the president of mexico dresses up as an incredibly racist Mexican caricature and hands over a huge blank check to trump in the Oval Office.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
NAFTA doesn't favor Mexico over the US; it's a free trade agreement. It basically encourages trade by removing barriers to trade like tariffs, which is a good thing for all parties. It's not like it's some shady deal that Mexico and Canada made just for the sake of screwing the US, as much as Trump would like you to believe it.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
lolQuote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
i like it
...on his knees, and with a mariachi band playing.Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
The latter doesn't substantiate the former.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
When the POTUS acts like a child having a tantrum, it's newsworthy. If you think the image he projects to the world is irrelevant, then well I guess you have to in order to support him.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
How would you change the agreement to favor the US more?Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
It would be spectacular if world leaders made the same mistake that his twitter-watching outrage-princesses do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
It's not outrage, it's ridicule. He acts like an idiot. Pretty sure the world leaders agree. The former Mexican president just told him to 'grow up'.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
There are all sorts of things that can be done. The simple removal of tariffs benefits Mexico more than US for a variety of reasons, but that's only a small part of what goes into Mexico/US relations. I'm not as studied on this aspect of economics as others, so I can't give a strong rundown of the details.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Good. They make the mistake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
It benefits both. Even if it benefits Mexico more than the US, it still benefits the US overall. Applying tariffs may hurt Mexico but it will also hurt Americans. And if Mexico applies tariffs in retaliation it will hurt both countries more. And since tariffs are the crucial issue in any free trade agreement, it's hard to see how renegotiating NAFTA is going to benefit the US in any significant way.Quote:
Originally Posted by wufwugy
Here's what I think will happen: Trump will make a big song and dance about renegotiating NAFTA, because he either doesn't understand how foreign trade works and thinks he can screw other countries like he screwed over building contractors, or because he's dug himself a hole by talking about it so much that he can't back down now. Him, Trudeau, and Nieto will meet, there'll be some minor, insignificant adjustments here and there, and Trump will claim a 'huge, tremendous victory' for the US and that this will pay for the Wall (assuming it goes ahead) 'several times over'. The media will crunch the numbers and say 'wtf', and Trump will reply with some hateful tweets about 'fake news'. The joint ministers of propaganda Kellyanne Conway and Sean Spicer will come out with some alternative facts about how it's a great deal and the Trump supporters will lap it up. Everyone else will be unimpressed.
Just realised Ong's nick in this game is captaintugwash. Looool.Quote:
Originally Posted by ImSavy
Not necessarily. The idea has been orthodox for a while. Economists have begun questioning it recently because the results are not what they're supposed to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
I've used that as my dj name.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Holy christ.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Why do you think Trump is rich? Did he get all that money by not understanding business? Whenever someone invokes the "trump is dumb" or "trump doesn't understand", or "trump doesn't get it", I can't help but just roll my eyes and assume I'm talking to someone oblivious to reality.
If you're so smart, where are your billions?
In regards to Twitter, how much time do people think he actually spends tweeting on an average day? One tweet can take up an entire day's news cycle it seems, when it reality, it probably ate up about 2.8 seconds of Trump's day. They make it sound like he's pounding on a keyboard all night throwing a cyber-tantrum.
The fact is, he wouldn't use Twitter so much if the media gave him any shred of a chance. If they respected the rule of law, and the results of the election at all, Trump wouldn't have to do this so much. Instead, there is an overt movement by left wing politicians and the left win media to completely de-legitimize Trump. Every news and political organization out there is dedicated to non-stop attacks.
Trump NEEDS a rapid-deployment defense mechanism, and Twitter provides that.
GW let the media and the left wing press run absolutely wild. That surely hurt his legacy.
Survivor bias.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
On the idea of trade benefiting all parties, it is likely true only in particular circumstances, like when one region has a resource or skill that another does not. Cheap labor is very likely not one of those.
Mexican immigrant labor really just appears to be displacing American labor that was once done by youths and the low skilled. Foreign factory labor appears to also not be creating a benefit for America. Things like clothing are bought more often, but they are of lower quality, there does not appear to a change in utility experienced by consumers, and also there does not appear to be a change in proportion of income spent on clothing. There are also harder to assess costs that could actually be increasing costs for American consumers than otherwise. This includes things like shit Mexican-made pipe being preferred over quality American-made, yet the shit pipe goes bad sooner and ultimately costs more over proportionate lifetimes.
This doesn't begin to get into the other indirect costs, like having a society of people who FEEL like they are getting screwed or like having Detroit-type zones.
Something one of my economics professors told me (who is extremely lefty) is that lots of economists are beginning to think that it is possible that the export model of burgeoning economics is harming their own development via things like not developing other sectors sufficiently. It may be that it is better for countries to trade only specific types and quantities of things instead of trading anything/everything.
I guess you missed the part I said about foreign trade being a different type of business than building hotels. Foreign trade is not about self-promotion and stiffing contractors and fake universities. These aren't gullible fools you're dealing with, and they're not going to be bullied into doing things against their country's interests.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Lol ad hominen.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
It's more than the time it takes him to type the words with his tiny fingers. It's the fact that he's sitting around watching everything that's being said about him. He's watching all the news shows, all the SNL skits. Get a fucking perspective on what matters and stop crying over getting a rough ride in the media. Every president gets criticized by the media.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
And he doesn't just tweet to cry over shit. The other day Fox News said the feds should go in and clean up Chicago. Half an hour later he tweets about sending in the feds. Is that really the kind of guy you want running things?
You mean like how he tried to de-legitimize Obama with all that birther shit? Awww, I feel so bad for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
The reason the media is hard on Trump is T R U M P. There's no-one else to blame; it's really that simple. If he started acting like a decent, grown-up person he would stop getting all the bad press.
Trump does a very good job debasing himself. I was kind of on the fence whether he was actually stupid or just playing to the masses, but no, he's actually that stupid. First press conference: straight up lying about facts and then not taking any questions. First negotiation with a foreign country: tell the other side over twitter to either agree with him beforehand or not even bother, and the other side rightfully saying, well let's not bother then. Complete and utter failure. The most grievous failure being to openly and transparently lie to the press and public, leaving everyone to think: if he's going to openly lie about something as petty and stupid as crowd sizes, what will he not lie about, especially in cases where we won't have the information he does.
The longer this is going on the more confident I'm getting in my prediction of impeachment or assassination by the end of the year.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7551521.html
This just in.
I thought he was just retarded, but it turns out he's dangerously retarded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
He inherited a small fortune from his father and his father's already developed real estate and business network. The guy was given a platform to pay other people to succeed for him and he still went bankrupt multiple times.
http://fortune.com/2015/08/20/donald-trump-index-funds/
Seriously? How can you not look at the man's business success, worldwide, and at least have a little respect. Lots of companies build hotels. None of them have anyone as wealthy and successful as Donald Trump working there. Just admit, the guy is fucking great at business.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
I'm not saying he's an angel, but there are definitely two sides to the story on stiffing contractors and T-University. Besides, do you know any great cornerbacks who have never been flagged for pass interference? Ever heard a basketball player say "if you're not foulin' you're not tryin'"? Did you know, 'rubbin is racin'?
Trump is far from an arch-criminal.
Funny, I feel like that's exactly what the rest of the world did to Obama.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
But apt. The point is, it's not easy to get from wherever he started to where he is. Whether he started with a million, ten milllion or half a billion, he's still a tremendous success, even without getting elected president of the United States.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
I'm sure every president, going all the way back Washington, has paid attention to media coverage. So what? Why does that bother you? So what if he spends twenty seconds out of his weekend to challenge a report on crowd size? Why is that even news?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
It's news because a hostile media decided that it's news. They decided that this was concrete evidence delusion and an inability to comprehend facts. He's an old man with an ego who doesn't like being insulted. And when he can take three seconds to respond to an attack, he does it. This isn't news. Everyone has known this about Trump for two years now, and HE STILL WON.
The media coverage of the POTUS definitely matters. It affects his perception to voters, it affects the party's perception to voters, it affects the perception to other countries. It definitely matters. It definitely hurt George W's ability to lead, and it definitely helped cover many of Obama's failings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
You can't deny that the media coverage of politics is a completely different animal after this election. The game has changed. And it's obvious the President needs a defense mechanism to keep salacious and spun-up stories from being propagated as facts.
I don't get what you mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
First of all, you must not watch much Fox News. They've been yelling at Emmanuel to call in the National Guard for a long time now. That narrative has been out there. It's an option that's always been on the table. Just because Trump seized on it as a potential solution doesn't mean he's a media puppet. It means he sees a problem, is genuinely concerned, and promises action.
In other words, he's doing the job of the president of the united states. Sheesh.
That being said, it is obvious that Bill O'Reilly has Trump's ear on some things. But to tell you the truth, I think that's great.
First of all, the "you started it" game, is for fifth graders. Secondly, if Obama wants to be resentful, he can be. How is that NBC and CNN are the 'enforcers' here? Third, Trump started the birther stuff as one man, a private citizen. That's WAY different than a coordinated agenda by a supposedly ethical and impartial media. And fourth, when he was proven wrong, he backed off, and admitted publicly that he was wrong. That doesn't sound like the delusional tantrum-thrower the media is trying to create now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Zoom out a little more. The only way Trump could get elected was to do and say things exactly as he did throughout the campaign. He manipulated the media coverage during the primary by purposefully saying crazy stuff, to keep the attention on him. Rather than admit that they were being played, the media has chosen to strike back in viciously personal ways.Quote:
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
I mean, during the campaign Trump said "I want to ban all Muslim immigration". A student in an 8th grade civics class could give you 20 different reasons why that would be unconstitutional/illegal. Do you really think Trump didn't know this? Do you really think that he believes such an order could become law? Do you really believe that as successful as he's been, that he's THAT stupid???
That's how the media played it. "this guy doesn't even know the first amendment, how can he be president???"
It's been proven now that those statements were merely the openings for negotiations. That's obvious in light of the fact that Trump's actual order was to shut down immigration from just 6 countries, for a mere 30 days. Given how that played out, you'd think that the media would be open to the wall being paid through a renegotiation of NAFTA, rather than Nieto showing up in Juarez in a sombrero holding a giant novelty check.
That doesn't seem to be the case. You almost never hear the news media mention the 30-day restriction. You just hear "trump slams the door on muslims". The other day I saw a CAIR spokesperson on TV being asked about this order. He said "Well this is obviously just the first of many anti-muslim acts to come from this administration" or something like that. In other words, he's protesting his own hypothesis. That's the sin the media is committing. They're taking the 'extreme what-if', and making it today's news.
OMG. Yeah, totally stupid people make billions running gigantic corporations, and then go home to one of their many mansions and supermodel wife. Only an idiot could pull that off.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
It's not a lie if he believes it. He's a stubborn old man with an ego. He stood in front of that crowd, saw it with his own eyes, and he has his opinion in regards to his size. Trying to start an argument with him about it is called trolling. Trump is not a perfect human being, he has flaws. Stubborness and ego are his, and everyone knew this all along. He still won the election. Nobody gives a fuck if Trump believes his crowd was bigger than it was. So what? Let the old man have a nice memory of an event that's only been experienced by a mere 45 men in the history.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Instead now we're consumed with this narrative that he "lied". It's not a lie if he believes it. If he believes it, it doesn't mean he's stupid. It means he's a human being.
Failure?? The guy called back the next fucking dayQuote:
Originally Posted by oskar
How funny is it that a Trump supporters idea of debate is to just tell you to agree with him while completely ignoring the thing he's replying to.
I find it alarming that whenever Trump says something that is clearly against the constitution like wanting to revoke citizenship for flag burning you guys come out of the ground and defend him by saying. He's not THAT stupid, he'll never actually do it. Well what if he actually does do it. The guys idea of diplomacy is calling foreign leaders out on twitter, he wants to "Defeat Isis in 30 days" He's a moron narcissist, and even you will eventually be surprised at how dangerous he can be.
He's still better than the alternative.
I mean, I wasn't there, but I'm sure once upon a time, Mr Trump telephoned Merv Griffin and said "Hey Merv, Give me the Taj Majal". And I'm sure Merv said "go fuck yourself".Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
Would you say that was a failed negotiation? Did Trump get the Taj Majal or not?
I think that "negotiation" as a political tactic scares people on the left. I think one of the main reasons that so many of Obama's "accomplishments" are written in sand, is because he believed that the nation should be governed totally by a majority ideology. He had his ideology, he won the election, he expected everyone to fall in line.
When he said "if you like your plan, you can keep it", I don't think he was lying or being purposefully misleading. I think he actually believed that the private sector of insurance companies would embrace his ideology, and cooperate to implement it. He believed that businesses also had a responsibility to fulfill the will of the people, even if it defies profit motives, and he somehow expected them to participate.
Also, there is a difference between believing that flag burning should cancel citizenship, and actually acting to make it law. Lots of people are pro-life, even though outlawing abortion is unconstitutional.
Anyone who thinks that flag buring should result in citizenship being revoked is a hysterical patriotic idiot.
To be clear, I don't consider myself a "trump supporter". I'm a fair minded person interested in the truth. I'm registered independent. I live in a state whose primary came early enough for there to still be 17 names on the ballot. I voted for someone else. In the general, well, Republicans have just proven throughout my lifetime to be overwhelmingly better at running the economy and handling foreign policy. And frankly, not much else matters to me. I don't have a womb, I have no need for a gun, and everyone in my neighborhood is white. That's how I voted for Trump.Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
That doesn't mean I'm giving him a free pass and am willing to defend every single thing he does. Yes I think he's being somewhat petty by getting fired up over the crowd size thing. But I knew he was like that when I voted for him, so I'm not about to complain about it. On the other hand, I will say that I think the wall is an epic bad idea.
The only way to stop illegal immigration is to destroy the underground economy that supports it. These people shouldn't be able to find jobs, get licenses, or have open access to healthcare and education in this country. But they do. So if I'm a poor person it Mexico, and getting to America means I can feed my family. Well Mr. Trump, you can't build a wall big enough.
If there was no incentive to come here, you wouldn't need a wall. You'd only need to keep terrorists and bad guys out. And you can do that much cheaper with drones and land mines. Easy game.
It seems to me that there is a feeling among the working middle class that illegal immigration has affected the job market negatively by reducing the number of jobs and helping to keep wages stagnant. They're pissed about it, and the wall is basically symbolic of their message to not take it anymore. Frankly, I can think of better ways for the gov't to spend 15 billion dollars.
At the same time, I totally do believe that somehow, someway, trade with Mexico will be changed such that 15 billion extra dollars flows north. So in the end, to me, it's a wash.
Is a wall something I would spend time on if I was president? Probably not. But I'm not president.
Do what?Quote:
Originally Posted by oskar
What if he tried to pass a law that's unconstitutional? It wouldn't pass one of the other two branches of government, and the law would die. We have a robust system of government here that prevents the "dangerous" ideas of one man to become a totalitarian edict.
So much drivel in one post, I don't even know where to start.
You know what I think when I see a real estate billionaire? 50% good businessman and 50% con man. And no I don't respect that. And even if I thought he was 100% great businessman, it doesn't change any of the other impressions I have of him. Not everything in life is measured in how much money you have.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
So someone who scams people out of their life savings is no different than someone who commits pass interference. Gtfo.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
That's your defense of him? He's not an arch-criminal?Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Maybe you feel that because you've heard Trump say it about a billion times. If that's your barometer on the truth, then I can't help you.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Did I say he was not a great success? Did I say he's not a billionaire? No, I said he's an idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
Sure they have. But no president until now has gone full retard on slamming the press. And it's not 20 seconds a weekend, it's almost daily. And when he's not doing it he's got his ministers of propaganda doing it. It clearly eats him up inside whenever he gets criticized. He obviously can't handle it like a mature adult. That's not a good trait for a leader to have, unless he's a dictator maybe.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
You seem to think that being thin-skinned is a reason to respect him. I don't.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
No, I'd say it was Trump being an idiot again lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
This point is incorrect bordering fandom and delusion. If you start closer to the finish line, you will be running records compared to those who started at the actual starting line.Quote:
Originally Posted by BananaStand
If somebody gave (GAVE) you a business network and 1 million to run wild, you would have to really suck in order to not make anything out of that.