(February 26, 2017 at 12:03 pm)Zenith Wrote:

(February 26, 2017 at 10:00 am)TaraJo Wrote: I can't help but think, for example, if there was a huge terrorist attack now, Trump and his rhetoric and policies would be to blame, with everyone pissed at him instead of lining up behind him.

I believe that this is EXACTLY what you need for Trump to shout out loud "I told you so! I was right!" and get an increase of popularity by at least 20%
Things like terrorist attacks tend to to put people in defensive-aggressive mode, and this is where Trump can win big time.

I think that would depend on the specifics of the disaster and how Trump responds to it.  I mean, in the immediate aftermath of another disaster, Hurricane Katrina, Bush looked absolutely terrible.  

But even if it was some kind of terrorist attack, I can see Trump coming out of it looking worse than Bush did.  Diplomacy is his weak point and I can't see him gathering the rest of the worlds nations together the way Bush did.  I can't help but think, if Trump was in office when 9/11 happened, there would be far fewer countries supporting the war in Afghanistan and the Iraq war would have been far more costly than it already was.

(February 27, 2017 at 7:56 am)Mr Greene Wrote: Well it was Putin's prostitutes tits rather than his cock, but the point stands...
Intel reports

Oh wow, you guys are still rolling this one out? Fucking lol this forum.

---

(February 26, 2017 at 6:04 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: LOL

Evidence of Donald Trump's corruption? Shouldn't I be asking you for evidence of his non-corruption? He's corruption on legs with silly hair.

Since when did "a claim asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence", suddenly stop applying?

I'm interested to see how much Trump will expand the NSA's mass surveillance programs.

(February 27, 2017 at 7:26 pm)Bella Morte Wrote: I'm interested to see how much Trump will expand the NSA's mass surveillance programs.

He might get to that after he's done unraveling the EPA.

(February 27, 2017 at 7:31 pm)Jesster Wrote:

(February 27, 2017 at 7:26 pm)Bella Morte Wrote: I'm interested to see how much Trump will expand the NSA's mass surveillance programs.

He might get to that after he's done unraveling the EPA.

I suppose we will just have to wait and see.

(February 27, 2017 at 7:23 pm)Napoléon Wrote:

(February 26, 2017 at 6:04 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: LOL

Evidence of Donald Trump's corruption? Shouldn't I be asking you for evidence of his non-corruption? He's corruption on legs with silly hair.

Since when did "a claim asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence", suddenly stop applying?

Since when were you blind to evidence that is practically omnipresent? And since when did the burden of proof reverse to me having to prove the obvious? Indeed a claim without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. You claimed that Hilary was more corrupt than Trump which is easily dismissed.

And in fact it's quite the opposite. Like I said, it's not like there's any evidence of Donald Trump NOT being corrupt. Did you just crawl out from under a rock? Did Trump University, tons of lies and ties with Putin and the Russians tampering with the elections just slip by you?

Seriously if you think Trump is anything other than completely corrupt you are extremely blind. Hilary is just corrupt by a politician's standards... Trump goes way way way beyond that.

Every stupid fucking sentence that comes out of his mouth is corrupt every retarded fucking misspelled bunch of crap that he Tweets is corrupt. While you're at it why don't you also ask me for the evidence for evolution and when I am too busy rolling my eyes to bother why don't you pretend like there's no evidence for that either?

Nevermind, why am I even talking to you? You keep pretending Trump isn't a completely corrupt Republican idiot and that Hilary is far worse Bye.

Oh one more thing...

Why the fuck are you still taking about Hilary?

(February 27, 2017 at 7:36 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: Since when were you blind to evidence that is practically omnipresent? And since when did the burden of proof reverse to me having to prove the obvious? Indeed a claim without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. You claimed that Hilary was more corrupt than Trump which is easily dismissed.

And in fact it's quite the opposite. Like I said, it's not like there's any evidence of Donald Trump NOT being corrupt. Did you just crawl out from under a rock? Did Trump University, tons of lies and ties with Putin and the Russians tampering with the elections just slip by you?

Seriously if you think Trump is anything other than completely corrupt you are extremely blind. Hilary is just corrupt by a politician's standards... Trump goes way way way beyond that.

Every stupid fucking sentence that comes out of his mouth is corrupt every retarded fucking misspelled bunch of crap that he Tweets is corrupt. While you're at it why don't you also ask me for the evidence for evolution and when I am too busy rolling my eyes to bother why don't you pretend like there's no evidence for that either?

Nevermind, why am I even talking to you? You keep pretending Trump isn't a completely corrupt Republican idiot and that Hilary is far worse Bye.

So, a whole bunch of "it's self evident". You're right, why are you talking to me? You're not capable of any kind of rational discussion are you? I mean it's clearly not a two way dialogue when you're saying bye before even getting a response. The mere question of evidence sends you into a fit of hysteria.

It's funny how if this were a Christian using the same logic we'd all be demanding the person proves their claims, yet here you are with such a logical disconnect it's laughable. Why don't you apply the same critical thinking skills when discussing Trump? I'm not asking you to like the guy I'm just asking you to provide something that isn't 'hurr durr he's literally Hitler'

Oh, and FYI, stupid tweets != corrupt. I think you need to look up what the word corruption means mate.

Quote:Oh one more thing...

Why the fuck are you still taking about Hilary?

You were the one who quoted something I posted from 1st of December in response to someone else talking about Hillary. Don't act like I'm the one who brought her up. You were the dumbass who quoted me months after the fact.

I don't really get what your problem is.

Have you got any evidence of my 'problem' or my 'hysteria'?

You do realize that I don't have to provide you with any evidence right? And I assume you're familar with the argument from ignorance?

I don't bother giving evidence to creationists who don't see the evidence in front of their eyes so why should I bother with you when you've already clearly heard Trump speak and read his stupid Tweets and you still think he isn't corrupt?

(February 27, 2017 at 8:03 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: You do realize that I don't have to provide you with any evidence right?

Oh sure. But you should also realise I'm not going to take you seriously unless you provide it. In future I'd advise not to bother engaging me at all unless you're going to actually have a two way dialogue. Kindly put me on block if that's too difficult for you.

(February 27, 2017 at 7:56 pm)Napoléon Wrote: Oh, and FYI, stupid tweets != corrupt. I think you need to look up what the word corruption means mate.

Did I say that the definition of stupid Tweets was "corruption"?

Holy crap you're disingenuous. I was obviously talking about everything that comes out of his mouth and every sentence he Tweets being filled with his corrupt lies and bullshit. Again where's the evidence of him NOT being corrupt.

I know you are so opinionated you get offended when people think your opinions are bullshit but I always forget that you're also disingenuous as fuck.