Donald Trump (3 Viewers)

[Blue Suede]

Id have laughed if it was Sanders lol, why trump?

are you like

one of those feminist folks?

Ok. I didn't realise I would need to explain myself but in the household I live in, we are all people who believe in peoples' rights and secure governance. Trump is not a good contender for President for a huge number of reasons that have come up in this thread several times. My April Fools joke was a prank. I've previously done it with Nicolas Cage's face, but Trump is a popular topic of conversation at the moment because of the elections. It is also an intentionally ridiculous photo because, you know, April Fools.

As a second point - DON'T DEGRADE FEMINISTS. I am indeed a feminist, and I think you need to come to terms with the fact that being a feminist is not about man hating, but rather promoting equality between the sexes. It's not a scary or new topic and you really should know this so your misinformation is something I find appalling. What we have here is a great example of how IQ =/= awareness or engagement with the world and throwing out 140 as an IQ means nothing if you can't back it up.

This video point by point counters what you just said, almost flawlessly
https://www.facebook.com/735236236562886/videos/950971208322720/

Just making mention of it, not intending as aggression, it just came to mind.

This video is straight up bullshit. Here are some reasons why:

- the dude misuses 'histrionic'
- the Tuck Frump campaign of courses uses people using great hand gestures and cutting between shots rapidly because it's something our generation responds to and they're the people the video is directed towards.
- When it comes to refugees and the point that most of them are individual men. Well... duh. Many families will send a single male ahead of the rest of the family to do things like find a job, find a place to live, etc before the rest of the family comes over. There are some legal ramifications in this approach too but basically it's not that weird. For example, if a family was relocating from Sydney to Perth for perhaps a reason like the father's work, he would likely go ahead and establish things before the rest of the family moved over. Also, I have no idea what the mass molestation in cologne has to do with this but ok, keep doing your fear mongering thing.
- The women are 'fat pigs' comments are an extension of how Trump spoke about Rosie. His words directed at one woman are representative of his philosophy towards women in general.
- Hating gays thing. It's not valid to bring Obama and Clinton into this because they have both changed their stance, whereas Trump has not. In terms of marriage equality, what reasons does he have for not supporting it? 'Being traditional'? Assuming traditional = 'christian values' because of the American context, Trump is very much NOT representing christian values in the way he lives his life so I don't think this is a valid reason. What other motivations may he have for being against marriage equality? He's casually picking and choosing issues based on personal preferences, which isn't a good quality for a president.
- Trump saying there is an issue with rapists and drug dealers entering America from Mexico does actually translate in the media to him associating an entire population with those traits. He hasn't made any effort to correct this misinformation.
- Trump still called Japanese people 'Japs', I don't care if the context was WWII, it's a politically incorrect thing to say in the here and now. For example, it's not ok for me to use the word 'Abbo' in Australia, regardless of the time period of Indigenous history I am talking about.
- Regarding Black people being responsible for over half of homicides, despite representing 13% of people, American has SO MANY ISSUES when it comes to the policing of their black population as compared to whites. There are systematic racist issues in the American criminal justice system and you can find out a little bit more about it in these newspaper reports here and here. Educate yourself with that 140 IQ brain.
-
There's still another 90 seconds left in the video but it's so ridiculous that I'm hoping the above points provide you with a starting point to critically analyse for yourself what is going on.

If you're interested in someone who provides a lot of evidence for why Trump is awful, I refer you to this John Oliver on Last Week Tonight


tl;dr watch LAST WEEK TONIGHT. It's long, but worth it.

 

[hayabusaboston]

Anyone care to explain why they DONT like donald trump, PURELY off his suitability for president? ie no "hes racist" cos thats FEELZ related. Not interested in the feelz here.

 

[hayabusaboston]

Ok. I didn't realise I would need to explain myself but in the household I live in, we are all people who believe in peoples' rights and secure governance. Trump is not a good contender for President for a huge number of reasons that have come up in this thread several times. My April Fools joke was a prank. I've previously done it with Nicolas Cage's face, but Trump is a popular topic of conversation at the moment because of the elections. It is also an intentionally ridiculous photo because, you know, April Fools.

As a second point - DON'T DEGRADE FEMINISTS. I am indeed a feminist, and I think you need to come to terms with the fact that being a feminist is not about man hating, but rather promoting equality between the sexes. It's not a scary or new topic and you really should know this so your misinformation is something I find appalling. What we have here is a great example of how IQ =/= awareness or engagement with the world and throwing out 140 as an IQ means nothing if you can't back it up.



This video is straight up bullshit. Here are some reasons why:

- the dude misuses 'histrionic'
- the Tuck Frump campaign of courses uses people using great hand gestures and cutting between shots rapidly because it's something our generation responds to and they're the people the video is directed towards.
- When it comes to refugees and the point that most of them are individual men. Well... duh. Many families will send a single male ahead of the rest of the family to do things like find a job, find a place to live, etc before the rest of the family comes over. There are some legal ramifications in this approach too but basically it's not that weird. For example, if a family was relocating from Sydney to Perth for perhaps a reason like the father's work, he would likely go ahead and establish things before the rest of the family moved over. Also, I have no idea what the mass molestation in cologne has to do with this but ok, keep doing your fear mongering thing.
- The women are 'fat pigs' comments are an extension of how Trump spoke about Rosie. His words directed at one woman are representative of his philosophy towards women in general.
- Hating gays thing. It's not valid to bring Obama and Clinton into this because they have both changed their stance, whereas Trump has not. In terms of marriage equality, what reasons does he have for not supporting it? 'Being traditional'? Assuming traditional = 'christian values' because of the American context, Trump is very much NOT representing christian values in the way he lives his life so I don't think this is a valid reason. What other motivations may he have for being against marriage equality? He's casually picking and choosing issues based on personal preferences, which isn't a good quality for a president.
- Trump saying there is an issue with rapists and drug dealers entering America from Mexico does actually translate in the media to him associating an entire population with those traits. He hasn't made any effort to correct this misinformation.
- Trump still called Japanese people 'Japs', I don't care if the context was WWII, it's a politically incorrect thing to say in the here and now. For example, it's not ok for me to use the word 'Abbo' in Australia, regardless of the time period of Indigenous history I am talking about.
- Regarding Black people being responsible for over half of homicides, despite representing 13% of people, American has SO MANY ISSUES when it comes to the policing of their black population as compared to whites. There are systematic racist issues in the American criminal justice system and you can find out a little bit more about it in these newspaper reports here and here. Educate yourself with that 140 IQ brain.
-
There's still another 90 seconds left in the video but it's so ridiculous that I'm hoping the above points provide you with a starting point to critically analyse for yourself what is going on.

If you're interested in someone who provides a lot of evidence for why Trump is awful, I refer you to this John Oliver on Last Week Tonight


tl;dr watch LAST WEEK TONIGHT. It's long, but worth it.

Last week tonight? thats what the retards watch and fall for. This guy is far more intelligent tbh. And the tuck frump campaign uses that, exactly, and most of our generation responds to that, and thats a BAD THING LOL.
-Well clearly you havent been following the information stream about what single MILITARY AGE and extremely aggressive men are capable of doing to society. Pls read before you comment silly things like this.
-pls explain how words directed at one women reflect his philosophy on women in general?> THAT IS LITERALLY MOST RETARDED THING IVE EVER HEARD LOL. I saw your massive post and was expecting logical response but have been disappointed so far.
-It is entirely valid to bring obama and clinton into it because if they have changed their stance so can Trump. And you are missing the point of what trump says, he doesnt hate gays he is a marriage traditionalist. Do you comprehend that? doesnt seem like you know what that means tbh.


Ok I skimmed ahead and read "critically analyse what is going on" and lol'ed.

Wont bother tbh.

I mean hey argue back if u want I dont mind, I can see I wont convince you however.

 

[Nailgun]

Anyone care to explain why they DONT like donald trump, PURELY off his suitability for president? ie no "hes racist" cos thats FEELZ related. Not interested in the feelz here.

He's a performer. He says abrasive things to deliberately attract attention and hate, and often changes his stance on something randomly.

People who do this are usually either just idiots, or are trying to distract from their real intentions.

I like neither.

 

[Blue Suede]

Anyone care to explain why they DONT like donald trump, PURELY off his suitability for president? ie no "hes racist" cos thats FEELZ related. Not interested in the feelz here.

How about I don't want someone who is racist having an influence over foreign policy because their racial beliefs will definitely be impacting the way that policy is written.

 

[pomsky]

Anyone care to explain why they DONT like donald trump, PURELY off his suitability for president? ie no "hes racist" cos thats FEELZ related. Not interested in the feelz here.

How is finding somebody racist 'feelz related'? It could be entirely based upon very legitimate statements that the individual (i.e Trump) has made.
But for the rest of your question, see below.

As for why I like trump:
Foreign Policy:
> Let Russia bash ISIS - love the idea that Russia doing you work for you isn't automatically a bad thing.

Why would Russia willingly do this? I haven't been keeping up with international news (or any current affairs) recently so I'm genuinely quite curious how the schematics work with this.

> Economic safe zone in Syria.

Economic safe zone or just a safe zone in Syria? Quick google search tells me: "We are going to build a safe zone, it is going to be in Syria, and I am going to get the Gulf States, who have more money than anybody, to pay for it, because they should"- Trump
Read more: http://sputniknews.com/us/20160302/1035634525/trump-vows-safe-zone-syria.html#ixzz44fhx2PRW

Firstly, how is he going to get the Gulf states to pay for it? Secondly, a safe zone won't allow civilians to escape the conflict as refugees. Also, the US can't just fence off the area, turn a blind-eye and make the countries fight it out within themselves. The US also has an obligation to the Middle East to facilitate peace as it is arguably their intervention and division of territories into nation-states that have caused such unrest in that region.

> US should not train rebels.
> Supports Middle Eastern dictators over chaotic Middle Eastern democracies.

The relationship between the US and the Middle-East is honestly far too complicated for this to be a clean-cut solution. For example, one problem of not training the rebels (in relation to ISIS) is that you're going to need somebody to fight against ISIS. And if you don't have trained rebels, then the other option really is US troops. And US troops, non-committal troops, can't win a war.

The German Weimar Republic was a chaotic democracy which failed and eventually warped into a dictatorship. And you know who that dictator was? Hitler.

Although a dictatorship would probably be a step forward in establishing socio-political stability, it’s a step backward in protecting human rights. Hence the support in Middle-Eastern democracies (despite the process being just a tad corrupt.)

> Advocates mutual respect with Russia.
> I don't like that he plays the Iranian bogeyman.

Yeah except Russian/US relations have been strained since before the Cold War. The mutual 'disrespect' (to use your term) is due to a conflict of values, of which neither country is willing to yield to the other. (Think Ukraine/Crimea if you need an example.) Also, given that as a US President Trump is very much exposed to the pressures of the American public (who don't view Russia in a very favourable light), it’s probably unlikely US/Russia can be too close.

Plus Trump vs Putin is a bit like Abbott vs Putin. And aside from a good chuckle and second-hand cringe attacks, it didn't really achieve anything.

Bogeyman? Actually I won't ask lol

Trade Policy:

> Opposes the TPP.
> Is Protectionist.
> Pro-tariffs.

Why would you, as an Australian, support American tariffs? You know that the US is one of the few countries that majorly subsidise their farmers and are contributing to an unsustainable world price of agricultural goods? Considering agriculture is an industry we're decent at, high US tariffs won't be that great for 'straya.

Same goes for the other protectionist policies. Protectionism might be good in the short run (for US citizens, not Aus) but in the long-term they just make things inefficient.

Immigration:

> Immigration restrictionist
> Anti-illegal immigration which comes into direct conflict with working class White and African-American unskilled labour.
> Asserts a more heavy handed assimilationist policy.

What do you mean by the bolded?
Also, keep in mind that Trump was the one who suggested building a huge fence along the US borders as part of toughened immigration policies. This is costly to build and even more costly to maintain. It's just not efficient.
Given his racist views, I’m not too entirely sure he’s the best judge for immigration restrictions.

Tldr; From what I know, and I concede I don't know all that much about Trump, his words seem to be quite inconsistent and/or very far-fetched. He often assumes he can make policies happen at the click of his fingers, disregarding the more complex, democratic processes needed for his policies to be executed in reality. I think he might even overestimate the power granted to the US president.

Trump can talk, but I don't think he can deliver. Which is why I can't see him as president. And that's not really taking into account his egocentric, unlikeable personality. :s Final point: the sheer fact of the matter is that he's often also seen as a joke on the international stage. And the US, being such a big player, needs somebody who is not only reliable, but also has a credible reputation to lead their nation. Trump has neither characteristic.


Anndd... here's a link that might interest you all: http://www.news.com.au/finance/dona...s/news-story/1522e98fbc4318bb640c79c393ca94bc


_________
Finally, v. weird seeing almost a third of this forum made up of a personal conversation between Paradoxica and Hayabusaboston that although enlightening, did feel a bit intrusive into both of your lives. Much derail without needing Square's help.

 

[Paradoxica]

Last week tonight? thats what the retards watch and fall for. This guy is far more intelligent tbh. And the tuck frump campaign uses that, exactly, and most of our generation responds to that, and thats a BAD THING LOL.
-Well clearly you havent been following the information stream about what single MILITARY AGE and extremely aggressive men are capable of doing to society. Pls read before you comment silly things like this.
-pls explain how words directed at one women reflect his philosophy on women in general?> THAT IS LITERALLY MOST RETARDED THING IVE EVER HEARD LOL. I saw your massive post and was expecting logical response but have been disappointed so far.
-It is entirely valid to bring obama and clinton into it because if they have changed their stance so can Trump. And you are missing the point of what trump says, he doesnt hate gays he is a marriage traditionalist. Do you comprehend that? doesnt seem like you know what that means tbh.


Ok I skimmed ahead and read "critically analyse what is going on" and lol'ed.

Wont bother tbh.

I mean hey argue back if u want I dont mind, I can see I wont convince you however.

Oh, you're trying to convince them now? You were asking for their justification and you suddenly turn this into an opportunity to recruit? Then all your arguments are moot, as you have just verified my thoughts. This thread is no longer a debate thread. The purpose of debate is not to change your opponent's stance on something.

 

[hayabusaboston]

Oh, you're trying to convince them now? You were asking for their justification and you suddenly turn this into an opportunity to recruit? Then all your arguments are moot, as you have just verified my thoughts. This thread is no longer a debate thread. The purpose of debate is not to change your opponent's stance on something.

Im not trying to change opponents stance on something, im trying to convince of the logic in what I am saying. Different things. Perhaps didnt come across that way

I said this because I frequently notice opponents simply dismissing my points as "retarded" and "lacking in logic" and so what im trying to do is show why Ibelieve im logical.

 

[Paradoxica]

And also, Trump is only playing to win by any means possible, in this case, by turning this into a game of entertainment, as modern US politics has become. The election process has simply become a popularity contest, which just makes me weep for the fate of the world even more.

But in any case, if Trump gets elected, I'm calling out WW III now - no need to delay on the probable.

 

[Paradoxica]

Im not trying to change opponents stance on something, im trying to convince of the logic in what I am saying. Different things. Perhaps didnt come across that way

I said this because I frequently notice opponents simply dismissing my points as "retarded" and "lacking in logic" and so what im trying to do is show why Ibelieve im logical.

You're contradicting yourself there. You are using fallacies rather than reasoned explanations to dismiss your opponents arguments as well. The fallacy fallacy.

If you need someone as an example, look at dan964's posts on "Does God exist?" and "Same Sex Marriage" (I think that's the name?). Although I do not agree with most of his views, at least he is structuring it soundly and respectably.

 

[hayabusaboston]

I actually feel bad writing here, I can never get the point across as entertainingly as some youtubers. Perhaps I find some videos for you folks. Youtube "Paul Joseph Watson" for starters.

 

[hayabusaboston]

You're contradicting yourself there. You are using fallacies rather than reasoned explanations to dismiss your opponents arguments as well. The fallacy fallacy.

Contradicting self? how?
Let x be my side y be Bluesuede


I want to find x for Blue Suede (turn it from unknown to known for her). You are suggesting I am trying to make y=x. I am disagreeing with you because making y=x isnt the same as finding identity of x. Dont see how thats contradicting lol.

 

[hayabusaboston]

How is finding somebody racist 'feelz related'? It could be entirely based upon very legitimate statements that the individual (i.e Trump) has made.
But for the rest of your question, see below.


Why would Russia willingly do this? I haven't been keeping up with international news (or any current affairs) recently so I'm genuinely quite curious how the schematics work with this.

Economic safe zone or just a safe zone in Syria? Quick google search tells me: "We are going to build a safe zone, it is going to be in Syria, and I am going to get the Gulf States, who have more money than anybody, to pay for it, because they should"- Trump
Read more: http://sputniknews.com/us/20160302/1035634525/trump-vows-safe-zone-syria.html#ixzz44fhx2PRW

Firstly, how is he going to get the Gulf states to pay for it? Secondly, a safe zone won't allow civilians to escape the conflict as refugees. Also, the US can't just fence off the area, turn a blind-eye and make the countries fight it out within themselves. The US also has an obligation to the Middle East to facilitate peace as it is arguably their intervention and division of territories into nation-states that have caused such unrest in that region.


The relationship between the US and the Middle-East is honestly far too complicated for this to be a clean-cut solution. For example, one problem of not training the rebels (in relation to ISIS) is that you're going to need somebody to fight against ISIS. And if you don't have trained rebels, then the other option really is US troops. And US troops, non-committal troops, can't win a war.

The German Weimar Republic was a chaotic democracy which failed and eventually warped into a dictatorship. And you know who that dictator was? Hitler.

Although a dictatorship would probably be a step forward in establishing socio-political stability, it’s a step backward in protecting human rights. Hence the support in Middle-Eastern democracies (despite the process being just a tad corrupt.)


Yeah except Russian/US relations have been strained since before the Cold War. The mutual 'disrespect' (to use your term) is due to a conflict of values, of which neither country is willing to yield to the other. (Think Ukraine/Crimea if you need an example.) Also, given that as a US President Trump is very much exposed to the pressures of the American public (who don't view Russia in a very favourable light), it’s probably unlikely US/Russia can be too close.

Plus Trump vs Putin is a bit like Abbott vs Putin. And aside from a good chuckle and second-hand cringe attacks, it didn't really achieve anything.

Bogeyman? Actually I won't ask lol


Why would you, as an Australian, support American tariffs? You know that the US is one of the few countries that majorly subsidise their farmers and are contributing to an unsustainable world price of agricultural goods? Considering agriculture is an industry we're decent at, high US tariffs won't be that great for 'straya.

Same goes for the other protectionist policies. Protectionism might be good in the short run (for US citizens, not Aus) but in the long-term they just make things inefficient.

What do you mean by the bolded?
Also, keep in mind that Trump was the one who suggested building a huge fence along the US borders as part of toughened immigration policies. This is costly to build and even more costly to maintain. It's just not efficient.
Given his racist views, I’m not too entirely sure he’s the best judge for immigration restrictions.

Tldr; From what I know, and I concede I don't know all that much about Trump, his words seem to be quite inconsistent and/or very far-fetched. He often assumes he can make policies happen at the click of his fingers, disregarding the more complex, democratic processes needed for his policies to be executed in reality. I think he might even overestimate the power granted to the US president.

Trump can talk, but I don't think he can deliver. Which is why I can't see him as president. And that's not really taking into account his egocentric, unlikeable personality. :s Final point: the sheer fact of the matter is that he's often also seen as a joke on the international stage. And the US, being such a big player, needs somebody who is not only reliable, but also has a credible reputation to lead their nation. Trump has neither characteristic.


Anndd... here's a link that might interest you all: http://www.news.com.au/finance/dona...s/news-story/1522e98fbc4318bb640c79c393ca94bc


_________
Finally, v. weird seeing almost a third of this forum made up of a personal conversation between Paradoxica and Hayabusaboston that although enlightening, did feel a bit intrusive into both of your lives. Much derail without needing Square's help.

forgive me for not having strength to respond to all that tonight. I will probably respond tomorrow Eyes r shutting atm from tiredness lol.

 

[Paradoxica]

I actually feel bad writing here, I can never get the point across as entertainingly as some youtubers. Perhaps I find some videos for you folks. Youtube "Paul Joseph Watson" for starters.

Those people have the patience and tenacity to explain themselves. You need to pick up on that if you wish to structure responses that are coherent.

Also, trying to prove you are logical? You're a human, no such thing is attainable. Sorry. I have yet to see a person who is completely logical about everything in every aspect of their lives.

 

[Paradoxica]

Contradicting self? how?
Let x be my side y be Bluesuede


I want to find x for Blue Suede (turn it from unknown to known for her). You are suggesting I am trying to make y=x. I am disagreeing with you because making y=x isnt the same as finding identity of x. Dont see how thats contradicting lol.

You're being as dismissive of your opponent as they are of you.

I've been through this myself, you don't get anywhere by saying your opponent's arguments are illogical. Just because a conclusion was arrived at in a fallacious manner does not mean the conclusion is incorrect.

 

[hayabusaboston]

Those people have the patience and tenacity to explain themselves. You need to pick up on that if you wish to structure responses that are coherent.

Also, trying to prove you are logical? You're a human, no such thing is attainable. Sorry. I have yet to see a person who is completely logical about everything in every aspect of their lives.

Mm I have little patience because ive an extensive fb history of arguments and sadly have noticed my right wing colleagues and I are unable to get anyone to ever acknowledge our points as having sense but rather endlessly spew the stuff we just methodically countered step by step or simply go for RACIST BIGOT ISLAMOPHOBE and every name under sun.

I no longer have desire to write that much anymore, am questioning whether its even worth it to respond to pomsky lol.

Laziness/10

And trying to prove my points are logical based off scientific and rational principles focused on "progress of civilization". Scientific principles like survival of fittest. Quick example, mass immigration of alien culture consisting of predominantly aggressive young males brainwashed with barbaric components of their religion isnt "logical" as its not conducive to social progress, rather, will only cause problems. pls dont make me give you 1,000,000 examples. I could, but tired/10. Lazy/10. Muslims in germany man. You dont need me to tell you the shit that has been going down.

I claim to be logical with reference to universal principles of science and rationality, not just out of the blue "im logical"

 

[pomsky]

Last week tonight? thats what the retards watch and fall for. This guy is far more intelligent tbh. And the tuck frump campaign uses that, exactly, and most of our generation responds to that, and thats a BAD THING LOL.
-Well clearly you havent been following the information stream about what single MILITARY AGE and extremely aggressive men are capable of doing to society. Pls read before you comment silly things like this.
-pls explain how words directed at one women reflect his philosophy on women in general?> THAT IS LITERALLY MOST RETARDED THING IVE EVER HEARD LOL. I saw your massive post and was expecting logical response but have been disappointed so far.
-It is entirely valid to bring obama and clinton into it because if they have changed their stance so can Trump. And you are missing the point of what trump says, he doesnt hate gays he is a marriage traditionalist. Do you comprehend that? doesnt seem like you know what that means tbh.


Ok I skimmed ahead and read "critically analyse what is going on" and lol'ed.

Wont bother tbh.

I mean hey argue back if u want I dont mind, I can see I wont convince you however.

What you say of Last Week's Tonight could be said exactly the same of the video you linked. You provide no reasonable explanation as to why it's 'retarded' aside from your personal opinion. You accusing somebody of not being able to prove something, when that's exactly the treatment you return to them is both hypocritical and a paradox. Dismissing what they say is not a suitable rebuttal.

Which is what Paradoxical was probably referring to.

If you don't want to sound illogical, please rebut with logic, and not with the 'feelz'.

 

[Blue Suede]

Last week tonight? thats what the retards watch and fall for. This guy is far more intelligent tbh. And the tuck frump campaign uses that, exactly, and most of our generation responds to that, and thats a BAD THING LOL.
-Well clearly you havent been following the information stream about what single MILITARY AGE and extremely aggressive men are capable of doing to society. Pls read before you comment silly things like this.
-pls explain how words directed at one women reflect his philosophy on women in general?> THAT IS LITERALLY MOST RETARDED THING IVE EVER HEARD LOL. I saw your massive post and was expecting logical response but have been disappointed so far.
-It is entirely valid to bring obama and clinton into it because if they have changed their stance so can Trump. And you are missing the point of what trump says, he doesnt hate gays he is a marriage traditionalist. Do you comprehend that? doesnt seem like you know what that means tbh.


Ok I skimmed ahead and read "critically analyse what is going on" and lol'ed.

Wont bother tbh.

I mean hey argue back if u want I dont mind, I can see I wont convince you however.

- Now you're the one using emotive language. A variety of people watch Last Week Tonight, not just 'retards', and there is some great evidence used in that video which making blanket statements like 'it's for retards' doesn't discount or invalidate.
- There is no evidence all those men are part of terrorist groups. Sure, a small portion may be, but policies can be put in place to guard against terrorists entering the country that doesn't involve the vilification of an entire race.
- The words he has used to describe this one woman reflect his attitude towards Rosie, correct? If we then consider the way he has spoken about other women in this convenient little video here. From all these different examples of how he objectifies and degrades women, we can understand this reveals something about his attitude towards women in general.
- Trump may change his view in the future, but in the here and now, people are going to be voting based on what his stance is here and now. And that is anti marriage equality. As a second note, he has expressed support for the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) which would expose LGBT people to more discrimination. I'm not going to say he 'hates' people who identify as gay, but he is certainly not supportive of them.

If you read 'critically analyse' and 'lol', it would suggest you don't know how to do it properly.

 

[hayabusaboston]

What you say of Last Week's Tonight could be said exactly the same of the video you linked. You provide no reasonable explanation as to why it's 'retarded' aside from your personal opinion. You accusing somebody of not being able to prove something, when that's exactly the treatment you return to them is both hypocritical and a paradox. Dismissing what they say is not a suitable rebuttal.

Which is what Paradoxical was probably referring to.

If you don't want to sound illogical, please rebut with logic, and not with the 'feelz'.

Have a read of above. You have fair points, I simply rarely have desire to do more these days. Sometimes I get inkling of desire but then it dies again lol.

 

[hayabusaboston]

- Now you're the one using emotive language. A variety of people watch Last Week Tonight, not just 'retards', and there is some great evidence used in that video which making blanket statements like 'it's for retards' doesn't discount or invalidate.
- There is no evidence all those men are part of terrorist groups. Sure, a small portion may be, but policies can be put in place to guard against terrorists entering the country that doesn't involve the vilification of an entire race.
- The words he has used to describe this one woman reflect his attitude towards Rosie, correct? If we then consider the way he has spoken about other women in this convenient little video here. From all these different examples of how he objectifies and degrades women, we can understand this reveals something about his attitude towards women in general.
- Trump may change his view in the future, but in the here and now, people are going to be voting based on what his stance is here and now. And that is anti marriage equality. As a second note, he has expressed support for the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) which would expose LGBT people to more discrimination. I'm not going to say he 'hates' people who identify as gay, but he is certainly not supportive of them.

If you read 'critically analyse' and 'lol', it would suggest you don't know how to do it properly.

Too tired atm. K den. W/e u say fuhrer