Is Trump Smart?

Author: ponikshiy
Trump
smart
Donald Trump

Posts

Total: 170
#61
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
First, Trump is not a mob boss. Moreover, Trump has of yet not been convicted in any court of any crime.
I didn't say he was a mob boss. I said he behaves like one. I even provided a specific example of him engaging in this behavior. So your misunderstanding is baffling. 


Trump doesn't have to be a criminal or a mob boss to be defeated politically.
Of course not. He lost because he is a useless, loser of a president. He followed standard republican policies that every republic would do. He just added being a complete asshole to the repertoire. The fact that he also committed crimes while in office didn't help though.
Making shit up is what is actually whipping his followers into a frenzy. Just stop it.
I agree. Trump making shit up up is what whipped up his followers and convinced them to commit treason. They tried to overthrow democracy to install Trump even though he lost. If they'd gotten their way, they would have toppled democracy. 

#62
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@HistoryBuff
If they'd gotten their way, they would have toppled democracy. 
Really?  Is your faith in the system so weak that a bunch of "deplorables" would topple our democracy?

You drink the kool-aide too?  You and Rooskie must share a pitcher between you two.  Just parrot the narrative like good sheeple.

#63
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,974
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
Imagine not making shit up about Trump for a hot minute. Do you think he would be in the news at all?

The fact that he also committed crimes while in office didn't help though.
Not a fact. Made up shit. Making up shit about Trump is whipping their base into a frenzy. Admit it.

Why is it so important to make up a story about criminal acts. Just go with the "dummy" spin, and that would have been the end of Trump. instead you went full Schiff. Never go full Schiff.

they would have toppled democracy
You mean toppled the corporate oligarchy. But no, neither a cosplay Shaman, nor an Orange TV star was ever going to topple the current Oligarchy in DC.

Was never going to happen, no matter what story was fabricated.

#64
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,597
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
Is Trump smart? Trump's lawyers told him to come up with an excuse for taking top secret papers.
So Trump at a news conference said: " I did not have sexual relations with those top secret papers."
#65
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,170
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
" It was on television.' That's called the media. You will believe anything the television puts forth that massages your confirmation bias and reject anything that doesn't. I reject the television media entirely as a information source. I know what goes on outside my front door,  how much tax I pay and what it is costing to do business. All the rest is third party political hack hear say that does nothing to make living easier. Better to be dead than listen to the television.
Topic's author
#66
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@HistoryBuff
Stolen is a very general term from my understanding. It could mean a hundred different things.
Topic's author
#67
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@FLRW
So Trump at a news conference said: " I did not have sexual relations with those top secret papers."
But this is most likely true. 
#68
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@sadolite
None of you know anything about Trump other than what the media regurgitates and wants you to think.
The media isn't a person, it doesn't sit around asking itself what it wants you to believe for the hell of it. There are different networks, different stations, different reporters, different hosts, all with their own viewpoints. The question is whether you have enough critical thinking abilities and media literacy to sort through all of the bullshit.

I reject the television media entirely as a information source.
Being on television doesn't make a story false any more than being printed in the New York Times makes it true. Anyone interested in facts and reality would judge reach story on its own merits, not hand waive away anything that appears in their television screen.
Topic's author
#69
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Double_R
I live in Russia. Trust me, you don't want to believe the media blindly. 
#70
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ponikshiy
What part of anything I've said suggests that one should believe the media blindly?
Topic's author
#71
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Double_R
You claim that they are unique and have own opinions. Name mainstream media source that is openly communist?or openly anarchist or fascist in U ited States. 
Topic's author
#72
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
They are definitely pro establishment like here in Russia
#73
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,974
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ponikshiy
Why do american cut dick?
Topic's author
#74
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Greyparrot
I don't know but most likely I will have to learn to like it as I might target a wealthy Jewish man to exploit with my beauty 
#75
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,974
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ponikshiy
#76
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,170
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@Double_R
Whatever, you will believe what ever you want to believe just like everyone else. And yes just like Roosevelt. In my view, the media and govt are the greatest enemies of the people that exist.  They are nothing but  divisive  hate factories that make the common man hate one another. The greatest hate breeders on the planet.
#77
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@sadolite
Better to be dead than listen to the television.
What are you saying ? The video images from January 6th are faked? Are you a moron? 

#78
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,170
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain
Whatever, you are right about everything, there's no pulling the wool over your eyes. You are all seeing and all knowing.
Topic's author
#79
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@sadolite
She will call Tucker's release of tapes cherry picking, without applying same skepticism to other state media like CNN about tapes they show
#80
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@ponikshiy
You claim that they are unique and have own opinions. Name mainstream media source that is openly communist?or openly anarchist or fascist in U ited States. 
There is no market for any of those ideas (except fascism, clearly the MAGA crowd is all good with that) so of course there is no main stream media outlet expressing these opinions. If they did they wouldn't be mainstream because viewers would tune them out.

That's not evidence against my claim, which had nothing to do with uniqueness, btw.
Topic's author
#81
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Double_R
Literally 90% of Americans hate media. There must be some market for media to not be hivemimd controlled groups like current media
#82
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@DavidAZ
Really?  Is your faith in the system so weak that a bunch of "deplorables" would topple our democracy?
their goal was to force the VP to illegally overturn the results of an election and install the loser as the president. and many of the republicans would have been happy if they had succeeded. How is that not toppling democracy?

#83
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@ponikshiy
Stolen is a very general term from my understanding. It could mean a hundred different things.
it could, trump likes to stay vague. But he and his allies threw out dozens of accusations. From very vague "the election was stolen" to very specific claims that poll workers in specific areas sabotaged the voting machines. They even threw out claims that a voting machine company was working with a dead south american leader. Trump and various surrogates filed dozens of lawsuits alleging lots of stupid and crazy lies. They all got thrown out for having no evidence. 
#84
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@HistoryBuff
their goal was to force the VP to illegally overturn the results of an election and install the loser as the president.
It wasn't to overturn the election.  It was for the VP to not certify the election until certain investigations were done.  The whole point of Jan 6, for most people, was to make a point that the middle class will not stand down.  Others brought it farther and other wanted some violence, but all in all, it was not meant to be violent.

How is that not toppling democracy?
I still wouldn't use the term "topple democracy".  If it had gotten out of hand, then the government would have used appropriate force.  There is no way a group of average group of grumpy people will topple democracy.  This term is so extreme and one that is carried by the MSM and it's kool-aide drinkers.

#85
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@DavidAZ
It wasn't to overturn the election.  It was for the VP to not certify the election until certain investigations were done. 
1) people had investigated. it had been over 2 months since the election. Every investigation, every lawsuit had the same result. No evidence of fraud. The fact that they chose not to believe that is not a defense. You don't get to overturn the results of an election just because you feel like something is wrong when there is absolutely no evidence anything is wrong. 

2) the vice president does not have that power. It would be wildly illegal for him to try to do that. His role is only to certify that the count of the electoral collage is done. That's it. He has no power or authority to pass judgement on the results of the election or the validity of the electoral college. If he did, then any sitting president could just refuse to accept he had lost by refusing to certify the results. 

 The whole point of Jan 6, for most people, was to make a point that the middle class will not stand down.  Others brought it farther and other wanted some violence, but all in all, it was not meant to be violent.
lol the crowd smashed windows, attacked police and chanted hang mike pence. But yes, tell me all about how it was a peaceful protest. 

I still wouldn't use the term "topple democracy".  If it had gotten out of hand, then the government would have used appropriate force. 
the "government" was run by trump. Trump wanted them to attack. And the government didn't use appropriate force. They refused to force the protesters to leave or even use appropriate force to stop them attacking in the 1st place. So saying the government would do so, when we already know that they wouldn't (because they didn't) is kind of silly.

There is no way a group of average group of grumpy people will topple democracy.  This term is so extreme and one that is carried by the MSM and it's kool-aide drinkers.
it was literally their goal. They wanted to stop the results of the election from being certified to stop the peaceful handover of power. There was no legal basis for doing what they demanded and they threatened violence ("hang mike pence) if their demands were not met. The relevant authorities refused to use force to stop them. So if they had succeeded in convincing Mike Pence to refuse to certify the result, that would be a constitutional crisis. That is definitely a threat to democracy. 
#86
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@sadolite
the media and govt are the greatest enemies of the people that exist.  They are nothing but  divisive  hate factories that make the common man hate one another.
The media and government are nothing more than a reflection of us. There's a reason political ads are mostly negative, because that's what works. People don't go to the polls out of optimism, they go out of fear.

If this really is your issue, and you really do despise the hatred and fear mongering within our society, curious to know whether you vote moreso for democrats or republicans...
#87
Slainte
Slainte's avatar
Debates: 25
Posts: 131
1
5
9
Slainte's avatar
Slainte
1
5
9
-->
@ponikshiy
I think Trump has a social intelligent, while pathological, he gets what he wants.  He knows how to manipulate and use people.  He knows how to blame people, and deflect.

He is very intelligent in those skills.
#88
DavidAZ
DavidAZ's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 345
1
2
8
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
1
2
8
-->
@HistoryBuff
1) people had investigated. it had been over 2 months since the election. Every investigation, every lawsuit had the same result. No evidence of fraud. The fact that they chose not to believe that is not a defense. You don't get to overturn the results of an election just because you feel like something is wrong when there is absolutely no evidence anything is wrong. 
They felt it wasn't done enough.

2) the vice president does not have that power. It would be wildly illegal for him to try to do that. His role is only to certify that the count of the electoral collage is done. That's it. He has no power or authority to pass judgement on the results of the election or the validity of the electoral college. If he did, then any sitting president could just refuse to accept he had lost by refusing to certify the results. 
I agree, except that I don't think it was about trying to "overturn" the results.  It was to delay the results.

lol the crowd smashed windows, attacked police and chanted hang mike pence. But yes, tell me all about how it was a peaceful protest. 
How many people actually did that?  As in percentage. Almost everyone there was not wanting it to get violent.  Of course if a window gets smashed then the whole crowd is violent, right?

the "government" was run by trump. Trump wanted them to attack. And the government didn't use appropriate force. They refused to force the protesters to leave or even use appropriate force to stop them attacking in the 1st place. So saying the government would do so, when we already know that they wouldn't (because they didn't) is kind of silly.
Trump ran the government just like Biden does.  There are checks and balances.  The speaker of the house could have easily squashed it if needed. To say that Trump was able to stop all law enforcement when it's needed is ridiculous.  There was no need to send out shock troops.  Besides, they did use force when needed with Ashley Babbitt.

That is definitely a threat to democracy. 
That is a more realistic term than topple.  Threat can be interpreted in any way.
#89
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,974
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
 people had investigated. it had been over 2 months since the election.
Imagine if Mueller was only given 2 months to investigate....
Topic's author
#90
ponikshiy
ponikshiy's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 604
3
3
6
ponikshiy's avatar
ponikshiy
3
3
6
-->
@Slainte
He is very intelligent in those skills
We all have our strengths. I find it heart warming g you focus on them instead of people's weaknesses.