The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated

[Tarrou]

I've said many, many times before that it's impossible to engage with posters in these threads because as soon as you make a post in even the mere slightest defence of Trump, your notifications blow up. (I've also noticed that when I attempt to engage with the very same posters on other topics, replies are very slow in forthcoming. I don't mind; after all, it's every poster's right to reply to whomever they wish.)

I genuinely have no appetite to converse and debate with five and six people at a time. The end game remains the same anyhow: neither party will convince the other of their argument and the cycle starts all over again on the next issue. Repeat ad nauseum.

Have you given consideration to the possibility that it might you who is talking absolute bollocks?

I mean you wade in, say we're all high if we think Trump wants to start a nuclear war, when most of us are just joking about it anyway, then throw a hissy fit when a few people have a pop back at you? What did you expect?

I think I've made posts in here that somewhat defended Trump and it was greeted with reasonable debate.

 

[Buchan]

Absolute horse shit. You drop absolute nonsense, refuse to backup it up with any logic when it’s challeneged and then turn the whole thing into a drama about how hard you have it in here in the hope that you don’t have to actually have to address the difficult task of attempting to put some thought into your reply.

It’s tiresome, you know full well you’re defending the indefensible, I doubt you’re even honest enough with yourself to do a little introspection and ask exactly why you think Trump is a positive force for you.

Trump isn't a positive force for me. I merely commented today that Trump's tweet directed at Jong-Un gave him an 'out', that he does actually want a peaceful conclusion to this stand-off and I've been bombarded with nonsense (starting with a poster telling me he's now put me on ignore) ever since.

There are posters here claiming Trump wants nuclear war and I've posted an opinion on what I believe to the contrary, and my notifications have blown up. What's 'indefensible' about that?

You're right, it is incredibly tiresome.

 

[Buchan]

Have you given consideration to the possibility that it might you who is talking absolute bollocks?

I mean you wade in, say we're all high if we think Trump wants to start a nuclear war, when most of us are just joking about it anyway, then throw a hissy fit when a few people have a pop back at you? What did you expect?

I think I've made posts in here that somewhat defended Trump and it was greeted with reasonable debate.

If everyone was just joking anyway, why am I being called 'immature' for posting it's a ridiculous stance to take (thinking Trump wants nuclear war) when somebody put me on ignore for posting that exact opinion?

It is a preposterous situation. I commented what I did hoping for some reasoned debate myself yet it's reduced to hyperbole and condescension ever since.

 

[senorgregster]

You honestly believe an insult followed by let's be friends is an out? Because of course, an authoritarian dictator wouldn't look weak if he replied favorably, right.

 

[oates]

Of course Trump has made threats to North Korea to try curb their aggressive stance on weapons and weapons-testing, but has he outright clamoured for nuclear war? If he is hellbent on nuclear war, why isn't he the one initiating proceedings then? Why is he exploring different avenues to try coax Jong-Un into line? (China, sanctions etc.) I find it incredible that there are people here convinced Trump actually wants to start a nuclear war. Absolutely incredible.

Yet I'm the immature one? Go figure!

Good grief you are full of it. Trump made a speech to the UN where he threatened to totally destroy North Korea. You don't do that with ground forces and drones. Your stance is that people are high if they believe him and yet you believe one statement from him, one line on a tweet. You are a complete raving idiot if you think anyone else on here believes one word he has to say on any subject. That is the over arching thrust of the whole thread with you, the only one taking him at face value. You, are you high @Buchan ?

 

[Pexbo]

Trump isn't a positive force for me. I merely commented today that Trump's tweet directed at Jong-Un gave him an 'out', that he does actually want a peaceful conclusion to this stand-off and I've been bombarded with nonsense (starting with a poster telling me he's now put me on ignore) ever since.

There are posters here claiming Trump wants nuclear war and I've posted an opinion on what I believe to the contrary, and my notifications have blown up. What's 'indefensible' about that?

You're right, it is incredibly tiresome.

He’s not a positive force for you and yet you feel the need to defend his crass, offensive and often bizarre behaviour on a constant basis.

If he wanted a peaceful conclusion, he would leave it down to the diplomats and strategists. His words are petty and provocative and have only lead to an escalation in NK’s troubling activities.

 

[Fully Fledged]

Stay tuned for the next episode of "the real housewives of Pyongyang"

That's got to be fake.

 

[Silva]

You're all high here

everyone in the thread is high.

utter narcissists, love drama and feel superior

quite sad

half-baked

infantile

gossiping like schoolgirls about these mental conspiracy theories.

I commented what I did hoping for some reasoned debate

hahaha

 

[senorgregster]

And as a reminder, as if we needed one, of his latest lie saying he would never insult...


"Just heard Foreign Minister of North Korea speak at U.N. If he echoes thoughts of Little Rocket Man, they won't be around much longer!"


Perhaps he meant his rocket, as in military rocket, is little.

 

[oates]

That's got to be fake.

No, it's his grammar and behaviour. It's schoolboy diplomacy.

 

[senorgregster]

hahaha

You missed his school girl jab.

 

[Buchan]

hahaha

Contextomy 101 via @Silva.

Great.

 

[Silva]

You missed his school girl jab.

My bad, updated.

 

[Pexbo]

hahaha

I think that says it all. I'm going to put him on ignore now, I suggest you do the same.

 

[Snowjoe]

Can we get back on topic to ridiculing Trump now this is spoiling my Sunday morning.

 

[oates]

Why would @Silva insult me? I would never call Silva rude names. Oh well I try so hard to be his friend - and someday that will happen!

Believe

 

[Tarrou]

If everyone was just joking anyway, why am I being called 'immature' for posting it's a ridiculous stance to take (thinking Trump wants nuclear war) when somebody put me on ignore for posting that exact opinion?

It is a preposterous situation. I commented what I did hoping for some reasoned debate myself yet it's reduced to hyperbole and condescension ever since.

But you are the one who started from a passive aggressive stance - can't you see that?

If you want a fecking reasoned debate don't post like a child.

 

[kps88]

I genuinely have no appetite to converse and debate with five and six people at a time. The end game remains the same anyhow: neither party will convince the other of their argument and the cycle starts all over again on the next issue. Repeat ad nauseum.

No one is forcing you to post in here. This isn't the first time you've complained about having to debate multiple people. You seemed to have figured out what happens when you do post in here so just stop if you don't have the appetite for a debate.

 

[Fully Fledged]

No, it's his grammar and behaviour. It's schoolboy diplomacy.

The man is clinically insane.

 

[oates]

The man is clinically insane.

Probably contracted Syphilis decades ago.

 

[kps88]

No, it's his grammar

I refuse to believe he's learnt how to use quotation marks correctly.

 

[Fully Fledged]

Probably contracted Syphilis decades ago.

That could be it.

 

[senorgregster]

It certainly reads like him and adds another check mark against an apparent bipolar disorder.

 

[Mr Pigeon]

Where in my post did I direct or @ to that poster? I don't give an ounce of thought to whom ignores/blocks me. It was a wider point in general about announcing it to someone. Posters who feel the need to tell others they have them on ignore, blocked on Twitter etc. are utter narcissists, love drama and feel superior to the thoughts and ideas of the person they're ignoring. "I have nothing whatsoever to learn from your opinions and even merely reading your posts is a great inconvenience to me."

Indeed.

The bit where you said “jog on fella”. For once it would be good to see you stick to one argument instead of acting like you’re Teflon coated.

 

[JPRouve]

That tweet is fake, it's not even a matter of diplomacy but self respect. Surely the man has an ego?

 

[senorgregster]

That tweet is fake, it's not even a matter of diplomacy but self respect. Surely the man has an ego?

I thought so when I first read it.

 

[afrocentricity]

That poster is clearly a DIM I don't know why y'all even engage... Here's me thinking something has happened but no it's Buchan playing victim for a few pages again...

 

[JPRouve]

I thought so when I first read it.

It's arguably the worst thing coming from his Twitter account, if that tweet is real then imagine how other world leaders will look at him when they are in a room with him. They know that he is the weakest leader.

 

[NoLogo]

Stay tuned for the next episode of "the real housewives of Pyongyang"

I know how inappropriate this behavior is for a president but damn for some reason I can't stop laughing at how hilariously stupid his twitter feud with Kim is.

 

[Florida Man]

@Buchan posters will respond to you more politely if you stop posting like an asshole. I really appreciate devil’s advocate and counterpoints, but you’re just taking cheap shots because you don’t like the liberal echo chamber. You should be more conscious of your presentation because you sort of come off as the edgy type. Amd I’m saying this not to have a go at you, but in case you were wondering why posters respond to you the way they do.

 

[senorgregster]

It's arguably the worst thing coming from his Twitter account, if that tweet is real then imagine how other world leaders will look at him when they are in a room with him. They know that he is the weakest leader.

You have to imagine most, if not all of them, are already accounting for his behaviors and even taking advantage of it when they can.

 

[Cheesy]

As has been noted, the fact that Trump seems to get along with just about every authoritarian leader he isn't in conflict with, and has often criticised or had feuds with democratic leaders, is quite telling.

 

[senorgregster]

@Buchan posters will respond to you more politely if you stop posting like an asshole. I really appreciate devil’s advocate and counterpoints, but you’re just taking cheap shots because you don’t like the liberal echo chamber. You should be more conscious of your presentation because you sort of come off as the edgy type. Amd I’m saying this not to have a go at you, but in case you were wondering why posters respond to you the way they do.

e
I'm sure he's right about the notification thing. The thread would benefit from diverse opinions including highlighting when the trump administration does something well. It has done something well, right?

 

[Fully Fledged]

e
I'm sure he's right about the notification thing. The thread would benefit from diverse opinions including highlighting when the trump administration does something well. It has done something well, right?

It sent Trump out of the country for the best part of a fortnight. It would be even better if they could just leave him they're. If he can use There for They're I can use They're for There.

 

[senorgregster]

It sent Trump out of the country for the best part of a fortnight. It would be even better if they could just leave him they're. If he can use There for They're I can use They're for There.

Their doing some of there jobs well then

 

[sun_tzu]

As has been noted, the fact that Trump seems to get along with just about every authoritarian leader he isn't in conflict with, and has often criticised or had feuds with democratic leaders, is quite telling.

I'm no trump fan but...Russia, China and Saudi
I suspect it wouldn't be hard to find complementary comments on their leadership from may Merkel and macron
I doubt Clinton would have said anything negative and I don't recall Obama saying negative things about the leaders either

I'm not sure people would exactly be supportive if trump started tweeting personal insults at xi for example

 

[Cheesy]

I'm no trump fan but...Russia, China and Saudi
I suspect it wouldn't be hard to find complementary comments on their leadership from may Merkel and macron
I doubt Clinton would have said anything negative and I don't recall Obama saying negative things about the leaders either

I'm not sure people would exactly be supportive if trump started tweeting personal insults at xi for example

There's a difference between maintaining cordial relations and actively staying you trust said authoritarian leader (Putin) over your own intelligence community though.

 

[Fully Fledged]

Their doing some of there jobs well then

Their's that.

 

[Ivor Ballokov]

Well that clears that up then.

 

[Cheesy]

e
I'm sure he's right about the notification thing. The thread would benefit from diverse opinions including highlighting when the trump administration does something well. It has done something well, right?

I'm all for various lines of argument etc, but the problem is that most defences of Trump end up being dishonest and flimsy, inevitably resorting to whataboutism and going on weird tangents that aren't all too related to Trump.

I disagree with the idea of banning Buchan, but the high and mighty "you're all sheep and I'm a liberal merely highlighting an alternative theory" gets pretty tiresome when said poster repeatedly refuses to criticise Trump and yet latches on relentlessly to every small thing Clinton does.