*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[CoccoBill]

A serious question: what evidence is there that suggests Trump is smart?

[spoonitnow]

Perhaps unrelated to below: Trump won 2,654 out of 3,141 (84.5%) counties in the United States against Hillary Clinton according to official numbers.

A serious question: what evidence is there that suggests Trump is smart?

That he beat the most prolific politician of our time who hasn't been president on his first serious try of running counts for something, but the American people didn't choose Trump because of how smart they thought he was. They chose him because he was the best candidate.

[Jack Sawyer]

That he beat the most prolific politician of our time who hasn't been president on his first serious try of running counts for something, but the American people didn't choose Trump because of how smart they thought he was. They chose him because he was the best candidate.

LOL try harder

Hillary was only there cause she cheated to begin with; if you have to cheat to beat the democratic primary opponent winning the general is a very tall order

Thank Debbie WS for Trump's victory, his geniusness only got softballs in dead center to hit. LOL at Trump being smart hahahaha. Maybe his use of twitter indicates just how unbelievably "smart" he is? Hahahaha

[spoonitnow]

LOL try harder

Hillary was only there cause she cheated to begin with; if you have to cheat to beat the democratic primary opponent winning the general is a very tall order

Thank Debbie WS for Trump's victory, his geniusness only got softballs in dead center to hit. LOL at Trump being smart hahahaha. Maybe his use of twitter indicates just how unbelievably "smart" he is? Hahahaha

All numbers show that Hillary would have beaten Bernie without the help of the DNC.

[Jack Sawyer]

All numbers show that Hillary would have beaten Bernie without the help of the DNC.

How exactly?

1) Prior to his nomination, few knew who Bernie was and what he stood for
2) The DNC's shenanigans made sure it remained this way
3) Hillbots would accuse anyone who supported Bernie of being sexist.
4) Donna Brazile came clean on this exact issue as well

They totally rigged it. It just was not a fair race. The DNC made sure of this. And with all the rigging, she still only got 3 million more votes.

And in poll after poll, Hillary beat Trump right within the margin of error. Bernie beat Trump by like 10% in poll after poll. decisively outside any margin of error, and still to this day does. He just does not carry the baggage Clinton does.

[BananaStand]

How exactly?.

Super delegates

[spoonitnow]

How exactly?

1) Prior to his nomination, few knew who Bernie was and what he stood for
2) The DNC's shenanigans made sure it remained this way
3) Hillbots would accuse anyone who supported Bernie of being sexist.
4) Donna Brazile came clean on this exact issue as well

They totally rigged it. It just was not a fair race. The DNC made sure of this. And with all the rigging, she still only got 3 million more votes.

And in poll after poll, Hillary beat Trump right within the margin of error. Bernie beat Trump by like 10% in poll after poll. decisively outside any margin of error, and still to this day does. He just does not carry the baggage Clinton does.

The super delegate system is why Hillary would have beaten Bernie regardless of the DNC's interference. There's plenty that's been written about it in major publications that you're free to look up on your own. He didn't have a snowball's chance in hell because he's not a part of the Democratic party.

[Jack Sawyer]

Super delegates

The super delegate system is why Hillary would have beaten Bernie regardless of the DNC's interference. There's plenty that's been written about it in major publications that you're free to look up on your own. He didn't have a snowball's chance in hell because he's not a part of the Democratic party.

Of course, superdelegates. Which indicates it being even more rigged than I claimed. So you have to thank Debbie WS too

[oskar]

A serious question: what evidence is there that suggests Trump is smart?

Another one would be just standard whataboutism. Remember that the statute of limitations for bringing up past presidents, opposing candidates or just completely random fucking people NEVER runs out.
So you could go: lol look at this fat SJW bitch saying dumb things. Therefore: Trump is smart. Obama did some bad things. Therefore Trump is smart. Hilary Clinton would have been a bad president. Therefore...
you get the point.

[Jack Sawyer]

Another one would be just standard whataboutism. Remember that the statute of limitations for bringing up past presidents, opposing candidates or just completely random fucking people NEVER runs out.
So you could go: lol look at this fat SJW bitch saying dumb things. Therefore: Trump is smart. Obama did some bad things. Therefore Trump is smart. Hilary Clinton would have been a bad president. Therefore...
you get the point.

Hahahaha this is exactly how it looks

Seen the FISA flipflop? Trump tweets: "FISA BAD". An hour later: "FISA GOOD. IT IS FOREIGN. GET SMART!!" When FISA is actually local too, by its very nature. Even Fox fucking News called him out on the flip flop, despite the hilarious fact that it happened *because* he was watching fox news

Hahahahahaha this would be funnier if it wasn't so sad. This dude literally has no idea what the fuck he's doing, but he does have the alzheimer's and dementia out. All he wanted was tax cuts. Hahahahahaha OMG

[oskar]

Hahahaha this is exactly how it looks

Seen the FISA flipflop? Trump tweets: "FISA BAD". An hour later: "FISA GOOD. IT IS FOREIGN. GET SMART!!" When FISA is actually local too, by its very nature. Even Fox fucking News called him out on the flip flop, despite the hilarious fact that it happened *because* he was watching fox news

Hahahahahaha this would be funnier if it wasn't so sad. This dude literally has no idea what the fuck he's doing, but he does have the alzheimer's and dementia out. All he wanted was tax cuts. Hahahahahaha OMG

That's hilarious

[Poopadoop]

Thank God America is in the hands of President Fox News.

The guy basically needs constant supervision, otherwise dumb shit happens. Like a six-year-old with a chainsaw.

But ya, he's like a smart person. A very stable genius indeed.

[BananaStand]

Thank God America is in the hands of President Fox News.

The guy basically needs constant supervision, otherwise dumb shit happens. Like a six-year-old with a chainsaw.

But ya, he's like a smart person. A very stable genius indeed.

This is just left-wing hyperbole mixed with enough wishful thinking that you've convinced yourself it's true.

I love it.

Let this be the mantra of the democrats all the way to 2020. Galvanize your core of delusional kooks, and give the moderates a reason to go looking elsewhere.

Poop, when are you gonna realize that this shit you're saying is exactly the kinda shit that's gonna get Trump re-elected?

[Poopadoop]

This is just left-wing hyperbole mixed with enough wishful thinking that you've convinced yourself it's true.

Ah, here comes the cavalry...

I love it.

You love the fact that your president looks like a moron to most of the world? Oh, ok, that's reassuring.

Let this be the mantra of the democrats all the way to 2020. Galvanize your core of delusional kooks, and give the moderates a reason to go looking elsewhere.

Poop, when are you gonna realize that this shit you're saying is exactly the kinda shit that's gonna get Trump re-elected?

I don't live there buddy. You guys do what you want, elect who you want, and I'm sure whether it's Oprah, Trump, or Tom Brady it'll be entertaining. glhf.

[spoonitnow]

Poop, when are you gonna realize that this shit you're saying is exactly the kinda shit that's gonna get Trump re-elected?

They will never get it. There's no reason to even try with them. A big part of it is that they care more about being liked than anything else. It's why they put so much value in being a victim, which is tied into why the left has turned into a competition to see who can be the biggest snowflake.

It's the same reason why they can't understand that they lost tremendous ground politically under Obama. Obama was liked as a person, and Trump is not. They believe this makes Obama a better president and that it gives "their side" more political clout. It doesn't.

They don't have a clue when it's completely and totally obvious to anyone who looks at the actual data. If you look at the state legislatures, Congress and the governors of the states, the Democrats lost well over 1,000 seats during Obama's presidency. That's a lot of fucking seats.

A related topic is how they feel victimized by Hillary winning the popular vote but losing the election. This gives them another "I'm a victim" point to add to their total, and many of them want to change the rules so that the Electoral College doesn't exist. They aren't in touch enough with reality to realize that the campaign strategies for each side would have been completely different if the rules would have been different, but instead, they like this fantasy world where they think they would have won "if only things were fair." Never mind ever trying to explain why the Electoral College is necessary: Their idea of fairness is whatever set of rules gets them what they want without earning it.

This is why I'll give one or two tries with one of them, and once they show that they're incapable of getting it, I stop trying. They're like zombies. There is no cure.

Edit: While I was typing my comment, the perfect example was posted:

You love the fact that your president looks like a moron to most of the world? Oh, ok, that's reassuring.

To quote myself above: A big part of it is that they care more about being liked than anything else.

[Poopadoop]

A serious question: what evidence is there that suggests Trump is smart?

There are different kinds of smart. The smart it takes to brand yourself in particular way and constantly self-aggrandize yourself and your brand relates to business acumen. I think that's more or less where it ends with Trump.

Where he seems not smart is in self-monitoring. That is, he seems completely incapable of adapting his behaviour to context or resisting an impulse to act. Of course the riposte to this is that this behaviour is really all part of the show and reflects a strategic 3D chess game that goes beyond our understanding as non-geniuses. Nonetheless, it's undeniably paradoxical that a wily politician repeatedly says thing that offend 2/3 of the country.

[BananaStand]

There are different kinds of smart. The smart it takes to brand yourself in particular way and constantly self-aggrandize yourself and your brand relates to business acumen.

No. Intelligence is Intelligence. You don't get to slice and dice it up just so you can pigeon hole your political rival into only being smart on 'certain things'. It's also kind of a backdoor statement about your self which seems both erroneous and irrelevant. You're basically saying that you have some kind of supreme wordly intelligence that not only allows you to slice and dice, but to point to someone like Trump and belittle him for 'only' having the specific type of intelligence to build a multi-billion dollar empire of business success and celebrity.

I think that's more or less where it ends with Trump.

Well thanks for your opinion. It's so nice to have input from someone who so deeply understands the granularity of intelligence. /sarcasm. Now get the fuck over yourself.

Where he seems not smart is in self-monitoring. That is, he seems completely incapable of adapting his behaviour to context or resisting an impulse to act.

Jeeeezus man, ego much? Just because he doesn't act how YOU would act, that means he lacks intelligence? His behavior seems to be working just fine for him up to this point.

Of course the riposte to this is that this behaviour is really all part of the show and reflects a strategic 3D chess game that goes beyond our understanding as non-geniuses.

No, that's something you want to believe to make yourself feel smarter. You're basically inventing a bullshit riposte, so you can slam it as bullshit. It's a strawman, and a really weak one at that.

The actual riposte is "WHY WOULD HE CHANGE HIS BEHAVIOR? HAS HIS BEHAVIOR TO THIS POINT BROUGHT NEGATIVE, OR POSITIVE CONSEQUENCES?"

Nonetheless, it's undeniably paradoxical that a wily politician repeatedly says thing that offend 2/3 of the country

No, it's only paradoxical if you live inside your liberal echo chamber. Outside of that, the things he says are not actually offensive, and even if they are to some, it's not 2/3 of the country. You're listening too much to the SJW's out there who just hate Trump no matter what he says or does. So every bombastic or hyperbolic or comedic remark is twisted into some worst-case rhetoric that people like you confirmation bias themselves into believing.

[Poopadoop]

No. Intelligence is Intelligence.

Got this far before my head exploded. A new record for uninformed arguments.

First of all, even the most basic things like verbal and spatial intelligence are separable. For another, intellectual and emotional intelligence are separable. So, e.g., one can be speak several languages fluently but suck at maths. One can be excellent at getting on with people but unable to read a map. One can be, like you banana, fluent with language but dysfluent in showing people basic courtesy and respect.

So please go back and reconsider the rest of your post which I can only assume is largely based on this retarded premise.

[BananaStand]

Got this far before my head exploded. A new record for uninformed arguments.

First of all, even the most basic things like verbal and spatial intelligence are separable. For another, intellectual and emotional intelligence are separable. So, e.g., one can be speak several languages fluently but suck at maths. One can be excellent at getting on with people but unable to read a map. One can be, like you banana, fluent with language but dysfluent in showing people basic courtesy and respect.

So please go back and reconsider the rest of your post which I can only assume is largely based on this retarded premise.

No, intelligence is the ability to acquire knowledge and skills. Everything else you listed is knowledge and skills.

[Poopadoop]

No, intelligence is the ability to acquire knowledge and skills. Everything else you listed is knowledge and skills.

No, that's not how it works. If intelligence were as simple and basic as that, any 'intelligent' person would be able to acquire any set of knowledge and skills. We know that doesn't happen.

Perhaps the way to make you understand the concept is to view things as 'aptitudes' rather than 'intelligence'. A person may have an aptitude to be a great musician but not a great mechanic, whereas another person may have an aptitude to be a great doctor but not a great musician, and a third person may an aptitude to ....etc. etc.etc. Each of these people is intelligent by your definition of being able to acquire knowledge and skills, but the domain in which they are best suited to do so differs from person to person.

Trump is intelligent at acquiring business skills. He is not (imho) intelligent in the skills required to be a non-moron in the social realm, such as knowing what to say and when to keep your mouth shut, or thinking before you act.

[BananaStand]

He is not (imho) intelligent in the skills required to be a non-moron in the social realm, such as knowing what to say and when to keep your mouth shut, or thinking before you act.

Completely impossible given where he is right now.

[spoonitnow]

Got this far before my head exploded. A new record for uninformed arguments.

First of all, even the most basic things like verbal and spatial intelligence are separable. For another, intellectual and emotional intelligence are separable. So, e.g., one can be speak several languages fluently but suck at maths. One can be excellent at getting on with people but unable to read a map. One can be, like you banana, fluent with language but dysfluent in showing people basic courtesy and respect.

So please go back and reconsider the rest of your post which I can only assume is largely based on this retarded premise.

Most of this is completely incorrect. There is only one thing measured that is intelligence. The rest is attributed to personality.

[Poopadoop]

Most of this is completely incorrect. There is only one thing measured that is intelligence. The rest is attributed to personality.

Your understanding of psychology is right about where your understanding of socialism is, the 1800s.

[Poopadoop]

lolz

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-42663167

[BananaStand]

lolz

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-42663167

I guess you have to be all the kinds of smart to think this is funny

[oskar]

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/game-ethics/

[wufwugy]

A serious question: what evidence is there that suggests Trump is smart?

None. He does everything opposite of what all the experts say he should and bumbles into success time and again. The only evidence is that he is a bumbling lucky idiot.

[Jack Sawyer]

None. He does everything opposite of what all the experts say he should and bumbles into success time and again. The only evidence is that he is a bumbling lucky idiot.

There is some hilarious irony in this statement and the fact that you delivered it so perfectly

[wufwugy]

There is some hilarious irony in this statement and the fact that you delivered it so perfectly

What do you mean?

[Poopadoop]

None. He does everything opposite of what all the experts say he should and bumbles into success time and again. The only evidence is that he is a bumbling lucky idiot.

So Trump is the political equivalent to drawing to a gutshot and hitting it?

[wufwugy]

So Trump is the political equivalent to drawing to a gutshot and hitting it?

he shoves with 22 on AT6 off suit against AA and still wins.