Options

[3rd Presidential Debate]: Election Dragon Hungers: With A Vengeance (9pm EST)

1444546474850»

Posts

  • Options
    AbbalahAbbalah Registered User regular
    Knight_ wrote: »
    Abbalah wrote: »
    "if you don't like what I did, you should have changed the rules"

    ffffffffuck you bro

    The particularly galling part of that line of argument is that she did change the rules he was abusing by voting for a 2002 bill that closed one of the major loopholes he was taking advantage of.

    I'm consistently shocked that she never brought that up. It's such an easy, effective counter to his attack.

    Maybe she doesn't want to get trapped in the weeds on tax policy, but it seems like a slam dunk.

    I think there's a good chance she was going to - when Trump did his 'my turn' shushing thing, the question he'd just asked was 'why didn't you change these laws', and what Clinton started to say was "You know, I voted for -"

    And then Trump scolded her like a child and it seems like she decided it was better to just sit back and let him implode than to try and force the rebuttal out.

    It does seem weird that it's not something her campaign has been bringing up outside the debates themselves, though.

  • Options
    SniperGuySniperGuy SniperGuyGaming Registered User regular
    SniperGuy wrote: »
    Thread moved so fast not sure if anyone answered, but do they get monitors at the debates? Can they see themselves on the tv?

    I bet Trump touches his mic so often because he's a TV guy and wants to draw your attention towards himself with movement. He couldn't stand still.

    I doubt it. The entire time it's two super close ups, barely fitting more than their heads in frame. He was constantly looking down at his notes, drinking water, fidgeting in ways that made him look like a goon.

    I don't think I caught Hillary take a drink all night. Though her glass was probably filled with vodka.

    I mean you get down to the podium, at least on YouTube where I watched it. It felt a few times like it would bring him onto the frame and he'd go "oh shit they're looking" and start moving.

    Or he's just super fidgety but it seemed more than that to me.

  • Options
    knitdanknitdan In ur base Killin ur guysRegistered User regular
    Didn't have Internet last night so here are my thoughts

    Wallace was surprisingly fair, even if the "we encourage interruption" format made him look a bit weak at times.

    Lots of "bigly" from Trump early on

    Trump hammered her pretty hard on the "why didn't you fix anything in 30 years" and I'm worried it may stick

    Hillary had some good rejoinders such as "Putin wants a puppet" and "he choked in Mexico"

    It should feel like a Hillary win but it kind of felt like a tie

    “I was quick when I came in here, I’m twice as quick now”
    -Indiana Solo, runner of blades
  • Options
    SchrodingerSchrodinger Registered User regular
    edited October 2016
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    This is the silliest conspiracy theory after the "he's a Clinton plant" one.

    No, Donald Trump's goal was not something other then the Presidency. Have you seen Donald Trump? Have you watched his personality and behaviour? He's running to win. Because that's what feeds his ego and his desperate need for attention and praise.

    Sure.

    Trump is running to win the same way that he wants to offer you the best steaks on planet Earth:

    trumpsteaks3-640x530.png

    If Trump was seriously running to win, he would be pumping campaign dollars into his actual campaign, rather than on hats and Trump properties.

    The fact that he's doing the latter and not the former tells me that this is less about winning, and more about the grift.

    Again, have you seen Trump, his behaviour and his personality. He's 100% trying to win. That's why he's fucking melting down right now, on state in front of the entire nation. Because he can't lose so he has to make an excuse.

    Your reasoning here assumes he's good at what he does, which all evidence indicates he is not. He's a terrible manager. He's shit at it. The only thing he's good at is conning people and dumping his loses on someone else.

    That he's trying to make money off this run and not lose any of his own does not preclude that he's in this to win in order to satisfy his own rather obvious narcissism.


    Any hint at a Trump TV something is merely a backup plan to keep the grift going.

    Your own paragraph contradicts yourself.

    "You're wrong to assume that Trump is good at conning people, because the only thing he's good at is conning people."

    Would Trump enjoy winning the election? Sure. But that's not the primary goal for him. Just like the primary goal for Trump Steaks was never "let's deliver the highest quality beef to our customer!" And the goal of Trump University was never, "Let's help out students become financially affluent!"

    When Dr. Oz proposes a new miracle supplement to cure obesity, it's entirely possible that he genuinely wants a cure to exist. But that doesn't mean that curing obesity is his primary goal. The primary goal is always to make money, with the actual cure being a lower concern.

    Schrodinger on
  • Options
    The Raging PlatypusThe Raging Platypus Registered User regular
    Abbalah wrote: »
    Knight_ wrote: »
    Abbalah wrote: »
    "if you don't like what I did, you should have changed the rules"

    ffffffffuck you bro

    The particularly galling part of that line of argument is that she did change the rules he was abusing by voting for a 2002 bill that closed one of the major loopholes he was taking advantage of.

    I'm consistently shocked that she never brought that up. It's such an easy, effective counter to his attack.

    Maybe she doesn't want to get trapped in the weeds on tax policy, but it seems like a slam dunk.

    I think there's a good chance she was going to - when Trump did his 'my turn' shushing thing, the question he'd just asked was 'why didn't you change these laws', and what Clinton started to say was "You know, I voted for -"

    And then Trump scolded her like a child and it seems like she decided it was better to just sit back and let him implode than to try and force the rebuttal out.

    It does seem weird that it's not something her campaign has been bringing up outside the debates themselves, though.

    IIRC, she did bring it up in one of the other two debates.

    Quid wrote: »
    YOU'RE A GOD DAMN PLATYPUS.
    PSN Name: MusingPlatypus
  • Options
    Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    Knight_ wrote: »
    Abbalah wrote: »
    "if you don't like what I did, you should have changed the rules"

    ffffffffuck you bro

    The particularly galling part of that line of argument is that she did change the rules he was abusing by voting for a 2002 bill that closed one of the major loopholes he was taking advantage of.

    I'm consistently shocked that she never brought that up. It's such an easy, effective counter to his attack.

    Maybe she doesn't want to get trapped in the weeds on tax policy, but it seems like a slam dunk.

    She brought it up in the second debate.

  • Options
    Knight_Knight_ Dead Dead Dead Registered User regular
    Did she? I must have blanked it out since I watched that whole thing. This election is making me lose my mind.

    aeNqQM9.jpg
  • Options
    Commander ZoomCommander Zoom Registered User regular
    So say we all.

  • Options
    SchrodingerSchrodinger Registered User regular
    Also, the fact that Trump is having a meltdown over losing doesn't mean that his main goal right now is to win. It just means he's really insecure.

    If this was the year 2007, when Trump Steaks were still on the market, and a TV interviewer confronted Donald Trump with the fact that Trump steaks look terrible and not worth the money, then you would expect a similar meltdown. Trump would insist that the bad reviews are from haters and liars, and how these are actually the best steaks that he serves at all his restaurant, and how Sharper Image saw massive sales increases after he launched his brand of steaks, and that the reporter wouldn't know a good steak and it bit him in the ass, etc.

    But again: That doesn't mean that Donald Trump was ever serious about delivering high quality steaks. Because look at them. It just means he needs to maintain the appearance of being serious for the sake of the grift.

    The only difference between the Trump Steaks grift and the presidential campaign grift is that no one ever forced Donald Trump into a nationally televised debate on the quality of Trump Steaks. No one ever forced Trump into a nationally televised debate about Trump University. But if they had forced him into such a debate, he would have reacted in the exact same way that he's reacting to Hillary.

  • Options
    SleepSleep Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    The right wing is now trying to push that Clinton pointing out there's only about 4 minutes between the order and nuclear launch and proof she's giving away classified information.

    The information is not classified.

    Pretty sure we've gone over that fact, with people that worked nukes, in this forum. Haven't we?

  • Options
    VariableVariable Mouth Congress Stroke Me Lady FameRegistered User regular
    it certainly makes it seem like he at least partially wanted to win though...

    I think he entirely wanted and expected to win, he just has no idea how to run a campaign or get out votes and absolutely refuses to learn anything.

    BNet-Vari#1998 | Switch-SW 6960 6688 8388 | Steam | Twitch
  • Options
    PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    edited October 2016
    ObiFett wrote: »
    PantsB wrote: »
    The right wing is now trying to push that Clinton pointing out there's only about 4 minutes between the order and nuclear launch and proof she's giving away classified information.

    The information is not classified.

    Where are you getting that specific launch policy is not classified?

    Supposedly the right are getting this from sources at the Pentagon that say that specific information is actually classified

    http://www.snopes.com/clinton-four-minute-nuclear/ includes citations including the UN (although they say "under 5 minutes") and the American Federation of Scientists.

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • Options
    Hahnsoo1Hahnsoo1 Make Ready. We Hunt.Registered User regular
    Houn wrote: »
    Darkewolfe wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Forar wrote: »
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Forar wrote: »
    huh? what?

    I missed some context?

    did I do something like that before?

    Crap, no, that was Haks' thing. My mistake.

    Bitchsplainin is copyright me. If you're gonna use it you gotta pay up.

    And needless to say, if you ain't a lady, you're probably not using it right

    Wait, could you somehow elaborate on it's correct usage in some way?

    lol its just some tongue in cheek i've said when i'm making some long effortpost that ends up being a patronizing basic poli sci 101 lecture about how we have three branches of government

    Yeah, it was something Haks said that made me laugh way too hard, I thought I'd throw back to it, and conflated her and LA as I was posting.

    My bad, I apologize for the confusion, and certainly didn't intend any offense.

    So I've been feeling bad for weeks because I kept confusing those two. Both have great posts and I kept messing them up in my head because their avatars were basically brown haired women. I always enjoy reading their posts because they add very much to the threads (in particular Hak's sass and LH's democrat's abroad updates). But until she switched her avatar, I could not tell them apart at times.

    I'm a terrible white guy for this. Sorry.

    Agree for terrible white guy, smh

    As a white guy

    It's kind of a redundant phrase tbh

    I realize that you're half-joking. I don't actually disagree with you, as a white guy myself. White guys, throughout history, have and continue to be, on the whole, kinda terrible.

    I'm still sad that my son, who has never participated in any of these crimes, is growing up in a world where he is increasingly going to be derided for his gender and the color of his skin. On the whole, yes, this is a pendulum of retribution a long time coming, but I don't have to like it that my son is increasingly made out to be the villain, the moron, the goofy uncool dude in every commercial on TV, because our fathers and grandfathers were dicks.

    It's only because of white guys today that Trump made it this far

    And I have two sons, so I get that you don't want them generalized into being part of the problem

    But it's my job as a parent to teach them that historically, we have been, so that they aren't

    I refuse to make excuses for the terrible people that put us where we are or #notallwhiteguys just because I am one
    Houn wrote: »
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Forar wrote: »
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Forar wrote: »
    huh? what?

    I missed some context?

    did I do something like that before?

    Crap, no, that was Haks' thing. My mistake.

    Bitchsplainin is copyright me. If you're gonna use it you gotta pay up.

    And needless to say, if you ain't a lady, you're probably not using it right

    Wait, could you somehow elaborate on it's correct usage in some way?

    lol its just some tongue in cheek i've said when i'm making some long effortpost that ends up being a patronizing basic poli sci 101 lecture about how we have three branches of government

    Yeah, it was something Haks said that made me laugh way too hard, I thought I'd throw back to it, and conflated her and LA as I was posting.

    My bad, I apologize for the confusion, and certainly didn't intend any offense.

    So I've been feeling bad for weeks because I kept confusing those two. Both have great posts and I kept messing them up in my head because their avatars were basically brown haired women. I always enjoy reading their posts because they add very much to the threads (in particular Hak's sass and LH's democrat's abroad updates). But until she switched her avatar, I could not tell them apart at times.

    I'm a terrible white guy for this. Sorry.

    Agree for terrible white guy, smh

    As a white guy

    It's kind of a redundant phrase tbh

    I realize that you're half-joking. I don't actually disagree with you, as a white guy myself. White guys, throughout history, have and continue to be, on the whole, kinda terrible.

    I'm still sad that my son, who has never participated in any of these crimes, is growing up in a world where he is increasingly going to be derided for his gender and the color of his skin. On the whole, yes, this is a pendulum of retribution a long time coming, but I don't have to like it that my son is increasingly made out to be the villain, the moron, the goofy uncool dude in every commercial on TV, because our fathers and grandfathers were dicks.

    I have a white son, too. And nothing he experiences will ever be on the level that my sister, or even my friend @MayGodHaveMercy have experienced.

    Yeah, unpacking white privileged is going to be painful for our progeny. But we're at least aware enough of it to help them to not become like Trump's children, while also allowing them to show their worth.

    And fuck me sideways if I'll ever spell privilege correctly.

    You both misunderstand me. I'm not hashtag-shitmovementing here. I'm not arguing in favor of retaining white male privilege. What is going to happen is both inevitable and necessary, and I am not going to stand in it's way. I am going to continue to teach them to treat everyone with respect and equality, and vote for politicians that will legislate the same.

    It's still shitty and fucked up that my son is going to become the scapegoat at the bottom of the social order so that my daughter can get treated more fairly by society.

    He's not going to be at the bottom, is all everyone is saying. He'll be able to take comfort in generations of societal privilege and sweet, sweet entrenched patriarchy any time the sting of mild social retribution gets a bit too spicy.

    I'm not so sure about that. The trend in TV comedies and advertising to have the white guy be the moron that all the cool women and non-whites school on brands and style has been ongoing for a few years already. This election has country largely divided into "white guys" and "everyone else", and if the dems were running anyone that wasn't named "Hillary Clinton", I'm confident in saying Trump would have been well and truly Mondale'd in every sense of the term. I also live in a pretty progressive city that's been taking steps toward equality for a long time, and large parts of institutional privilege are being dismantled via both law and the battle for hearts and minds.

    Then you see posts like Josh's, in which we men who are allies of progressivism deride ourselves for the sins of the past. We make ourselves jokes. We place ourselves at the bottom because we feel we must apologize for men like Trump. And in a way, yes, "we" do.

    The thing is, there are centuries of resentment out there looking for a vent. We're striving toward equality, but there are definitely those who strive instead for retribution in the guise of equality. And they're not wrong. "They", as groups, deserve retribution, and the shifts in society ensure that they'll get it. And I'm ok with that.

    Individuals must suffer for the sins of the collective. Individuals must be sacrificed for the greater good. This is how humans have always behaved, and it's not changing anytime soon.

    I can support the cause while lamenting the personal outcome.
    And yet, your child will still have it much better than I did when I was growing up, even though I was one of the lucky ones (model minority and all that)! My parents did their best to insulate me from the pervasive racism of Indiana. But I'm only finding out just now exactly how much they sacrificed and worked to protect me. And ultimately, as a parent, that's what it will boil down to for your son. It isn't better or worse, it just is. And I'm sure you and the other parents here will do a great job.

    I can't even begin to imagine what it's like for a child growing up as a Latino or a Muslim in 2016.

    8i1dt37buh2m.png
  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    PantsB wrote: »
    The right wing is now trying to push that Clinton pointing out there's only about 4 minutes between the order and nuclear launch and proof she's giving away classified information.

    The information is not classified.

    so fucks sake that info in like on wikipedia

  • Options
    nexuscrawlernexuscrawler Registered User regular
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Hillary's campaign just texted me a gif of Hillary brushing off her shoulder at the Benghazi hearing to summarize last night and hit me up for cash

    you bastards you know i can't resist a sassy gif

    *shimmy*

  • Options
    enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Hakkekage wrote: »
    Hillary's campaign just texted me a gif of Hillary brushing off her shoulder at the Benghazi hearing to summarize last night and hit me up for cash

    you bastards you know i can't resist a sassy gif

    Given their data operation, this might literally be true.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • Options
    MorkathMorkath Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Hey good news, we don't have to suffer through any more debates for 4 more years.

    Or possibly ever.

    Oh, I made myself sad.

  • Options
    DevoutlyApatheticDevoutlyApathetic Registered User regular
    Morkath wrote: »
    Hey good news, we don't have to suffer through any more debates for 4 more years.

    Or possibly ever.

    Oh, I made myself sad.

    There will (hopefully) be GOP primary debates in something less than three years give or take.

    Nod. Get treat. PSN: Quippish
  • Options
    HounHoun Registered User regular
    Morkath wrote: »
    Hey good news, we don't have to suffer through any more debates for 4 more years.

    Or possibly ever.

    Oh, I made myself sad.

    There will (hopefully) be GOP primary debates in something less than three years give or take.

    Pence takes on all comers in a GOP throwdown town hall event Nov. 9th.

  • Options
    NobeardNobeard North Carolina: Failed StateRegistered User regular
    edited October 2016
    I watched the whole thing live with the wife. There was some lolling and angrish from us through most of it. Ms. Nobeard was especially interested in the abortion part.

    However, when we got to the "I'll leave you in suspense" part, I stopped laughing. It's terrifying implications ground my brain to a halt. It took me a moment to process it. It's surreal that this man has won the unwavering support of so many of my fellow people. This kind of madness has always been around, but it's not supposed to be so popular, so beloved, so close to the reigns of power.

    Hillary is likely going to win, but some real damage has been already done. I almost wish we had Generic Republican instead of Trump. The race would be much closer for Hillary, but we might have been better overall for it.

    Nobeard on
  • Options
    jothkijothki Registered User regular
    edited October 2016
    Nobeard wrote: »
    I watched the whole thing live with the wife. There was some lolling and angrish from us through most of it. Ms. Nobeard was especially interested in the abortion part.

    However, when we got to the "I'll leave you in suspense" part, I stopped laughing. It's terrifying implications ground my brain to a halt. It took me a moment to process it. It's surreal that this man has won the unwavering support of so many of my fellow people. This kind of madness has always been around, but it's not supposed to be so popular, so beloved, so close to the reigns of power.

    Hillary is likely going to win, but some real damage has been already done. I almost wish we had Generic Republican instead of Trump. The race would be much closer for Hillary, but we might have been better overall for it.

    Generic Republican is a better person than anyone in the Republican party.

    jothki on
  • Options
    RichyRichy Registered User regular
    Houn wrote: »
    Morkath wrote: »
    Hey good news, we don't have to suffer through any more debates for 4 more years.

    Or possibly ever.

    Oh, I made myself sad.

    There will (hopefully) be GOP primary debates in something less than three years give or take.

    Pence takes on all comers in a GOP throwdown town hall event Nov. 9th.

    Mike Pence's political future after this election, in summary.

    "Hi everybody, I'm Mike Pence."
    "Weren't you Donald Trump's VP?"
    "Bye everybody!"

    sig.gif
  • Options
    Knight_Knight_ Dead Dead Dead Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    Nobeard wrote: »
    I watched the whole thing live with the wife. There was some lolling and angrish from us through most of it. Ms. Nobeard was especially interested in the abortion part.

    However, when we got to the "I'll leave you in suspense" part, I stopped laughing. It's terrifying implications ground my brain to a halt. It took me a moment to process it. It's surreal that this man has won the unwavering support of so many of my fellow people. This kind of madness has always been around, but it's not supposed to be so popular, so beloved, so close to the reigns of power.

    Hillary is likely going to win, but some real damage has been already done. I almost wish we had Generic Republican instead of Trump. The race would be much closer for Hillary, but we might have been better overall for it.

    Generic Republican is a better person than anyone in the Republican party.

    He agrees with all my positions!

    aeNqQM9.jpg
  • Options
    Santa ClaustrophobiaSanta Claustrophobia Ho Ho Ho Disconnecting from Xbox LIVERegistered User regular
    Knight_ wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    Nobeard wrote: »
    I watched the whole thing live with the wife. There was some lolling and angrish from us through most of it. Ms. Nobeard was especially interested in the abortion part.

    However, when we got to the "I'll leave you in suspense" part, I stopped laughing. It's terrifying implications ground my brain to a halt. It took me a moment to process it. It's surreal that this man has won the unwavering support of so many of my fellow people. This kind of madness has always been around, but it's not supposed to be so popular, so beloved, so close to the reigns of power.

    Hillary is likely going to win, but some real damage has been already done. I almost wish we had Generic Republican instead of Trump. The race would be much closer for Hillary, but we might have been better overall for it.

    Generic Republican is a better person than anyone in the Republican party.

    He agrees with all my positions!

    And he's just telling lies to those other losers!

  • Options
    DivideByZeroDivideByZero Social Justice Blackguard Registered User regular
    Richy wrote: »
    Houn wrote: »
    Morkath wrote: »
    Hey good news, we don't have to suffer through any more debates for 4 more years.

    Or possibly ever.

    Oh, I made myself sad.

    There will (hopefully) be GOP primary debates in something less than three years give or take.

    Pence takes on all comers in a GOP throwdown town hall event Nov. 9th.

    Mike Pence's political future after this election, in summary.

    "Hi everybody, I'm Mike Pence."
    "Weren't you Donald Trump's VP?"
    "Bye everybody!" "Nope. Wasn't me. I never ran for VP. You must be thinking of somebody else."

    FTFY

    First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKERS
  • Options
    Knight_Knight_ Dead Dead Dead Registered User regular
    (Let it be known that I was going to put They agree to be gender neutral, but then I stopped, since no, a generic republican is totally a man)

    aeNqQM9.jpg
  • Options
    No-QuarterNo-Quarter Nothing To Fear But Fear ItselfRegistered User regular
    Nobeard wrote: »
    I watched the whole thing live with the wife. There was some lolling and angrish from us through most of it. Ms. Nobeard was especially interested in the abortion part.

    However, when we got to the "I'll leave you in suspense" part, I stopped laughing. It's terrifying implications ground my brain to a halt. It took me a moment to process it. It's surreal that this man has won the unwavering support of so many of my fellow people. This kind of madness has always been around, but it's not supposed to be so popular, so beloved, so close to the reigns of power.

    Hillary is likely going to win, but some real damage has been already done. I almost wish we had Generic Republican instead of Trump. The race would be much closer for Hillary, but we might have been better overall for it.

    I feel your concern, but it really is best that we sort this country's shit out. An intervention has been looooong over due.

  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    This is the silliest conspiracy theory after the "he's a Clinton plant" one.

    No, Donald Trump's goal was not something other then the Presidency. Have you seen Donald Trump? Have you watched his personality and behaviour? He's running to win. Because that's what feeds his ego and his desperate need for attention and praise.

    Sure.

    Trump is running to win the same way that he wants to offer you the best steaks on planet Earth:

    trumpsteaks3-640x530.png

    If Trump was seriously running to win, he would be pumping campaign dollars into his actual campaign, rather than on hats and Trump properties.

    The fact that he's doing the latter and not the former tells me that this is less about winning, and more about the grift.

    Again, have you seen Trump, his behaviour and his personality. He's 100% trying to win. That's why he's fucking melting down right now, on state in front of the entire nation. Because he can't lose so he has to make an excuse.

    Your reasoning here assumes he's good at what he does, which all evidence indicates he is not. He's a terrible manager. He's shit at it. The only thing he's good at is conning people and dumping his loses on someone else.

    That he's trying to make money off this run and not lose any of his own does not preclude that he's in this to win in order to satisfy his own rather obvious narcissism.


    Any hint at a Trump TV something is merely a backup plan to keep the grift going.

    Your own paragraph contradicts yourself.

    "You're wrong to assume that Trump is good at conning people, because the only thing he's good at is conning people."

    Would Trump enjoy winning the election? Sure. But that's not the primary goal for him. Just like the primary goal for Trump Steaks was never "let's deliver the highest quality beef to our customer!" And the goal of Trump University was never, "Let's help out students become financially affluent!"

    When Dr. Oz proposes a new miracle supplement to cure obesity, it's entirely possible that he genuinely wants a cure to exist. But that doesn't mean that curing obesity is his primary goal. The primary goal is always to make money, with the actual cure being a lower concern.

    No, it doesn't. You said if Trump was seriously trying to win, her be doing smarter things with his campaign and investing more in it. This assumes he's actually competent. All evidence says otherwise.

    Winning the election is 100% his primary goal. It's what most feeds his ego, it's what he's melting down over not accomplishing and it's what he's fucked over everything else he had going before this to feed.

    It's also the most straightforward, obvious and consistent with his personality explanation for his actions. And didn't really on conspiracy theory lunacy.

  • Options
    ArcTangentArcTangent Registered User regular
    More accurate I think, in his mind, he's already doing more than enough to win. He's putting all of his time into it, and some (but not much) of his money. That he's not winning is proof positive that the system is rigged against him. It's not that he could be trying harder, because he obviously could. It's that he believes he's already trying more than hard enough and he's OBVIOUSLY much better than any of those politicians out there who failed. He's the big winner man dude, and she's the loser nasty woman.

    ztrEPtD.gif
  • Options
    SchrodingerSchrodinger Registered User regular
    edited October 2016
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    This is the silliest conspiracy theory after the "he's a Clinton plant" one.

    No, Donald Trump's goal was not something other then the Presidency. Have you seen Donald Trump? Have you watched his personality and behaviour? He's running to win. Because that's what feeds his ego and his desperate need for attention and praise.

    Sure.

    Trump is running to win the same way that he wants to offer you the best steaks on planet Earth:

    trumpsteaks3-640x530.png

    If Trump was seriously running to win, he would be pumping campaign dollars into his actual campaign, rather than on hats and Trump properties.

    The fact that he's doing the latter and not the former tells me that this is less about winning, and more about the grift.

    Again, have you seen Trump, his behaviour and his personality. He's 100% trying to win. That's why he's fucking melting down right now, on state in front of the entire nation. Because he can't lose so he has to make an excuse.

    Your reasoning here assumes he's good at what he does, which all evidence indicates he is not. He's a terrible manager. He's shit at it. The only thing he's good at is conning people and dumping his loses on someone else.

    That he's trying to make money off this run and not lose any of his own does not preclude that he's in this to win in order to satisfy his own rather obvious narcissism.


    Any hint at a Trump TV something is merely a backup plan to keep the grift going.

    Your own paragraph contradicts yourself.

    "You're wrong to assume that Trump is good at conning people, because the only thing he's good at is conning people."

    Would Trump enjoy winning the election? Sure. But that's not the primary goal for him. Just like the primary goal for Trump Steaks was never "let's deliver the highest quality beef to our customer!" And the goal of Trump University was never, "Let's help out students become financially affluent!"

    When Dr. Oz proposes a new miracle supplement to cure obesity, it's entirely possible that he genuinely wants a cure to exist. But that doesn't mean that curing obesity is his primary goal. The primary goal is always to make money, with the actual cure being a lower concern.

    No, it doesn't. You said if Trump was seriously trying to win, her be doing smarter things with his campaign and investing more in it. This assumes he's actually competent. All evidence says otherwise.

    Nope.

    Here's what I actually said: "If Trump was seriously running to win, he would be pumping campaign dollars into his actual campaign, rather than on hats and Trump properties."

    Putting your money where your mouth is isn't a matter of being "smart," it's a sign of where your priorities are.

    Likewise, if Trump says "I'm going to offer you the best luxury steaks on the market!" and then he scouts out the cheapest pieces of beef he can find, the problem isn't "Oh, Trump was obviously too dumb to pay for higher quality meat!" The problem is, "Oh, Trump is a lying sack of shit who never cared about quality in the first place."

    Being smart and being committed are two completely different things.
    Winning the election is 100% his primary goal.

    Do you also believe Donald Trump when he says that the primary goal of the Trump Foundation is charitable causes?

    The problem is you're relying on the word of a known liar over his actual finances.
    It's what most feeds his ego, it's what he's melting down over not accomplishing and it's what he's fucked over everything else he had going before this to feed.

    Trump also had a meltdown when he was accused of not respecting women.

    Do you think that means that respecting women is a #1 goal for Donald Trump?
    It's also the most straightforward, obvious and consistent with his personality explanation for his actions. And didn't really on conspiracy theory lunacy.

    It's not a conspiracy theory, it's backed up by his spending reports and his history as a business man.

    Your only evidence to the contrary is, "Well, this election has really upset him!" Big deal. Trump is easily baited.

    161009194352-donald-trump-debate-clinton-accusers-st-louis-photo-op-00000000-exlarge-169.jpg

    Here's Trump holding a press conference with Clinton's accusers. Do you think it's a "conspiracy theory" for me to insist that he doesn't really give a shit about them?

    Schrodinger on
  • Options
    SchrodingerSchrodinger Registered User regular
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyONt_ZH_aw

    Trump says his steaks are the world's greatest steaks, the most favorable beef you've ever had.

    Is it a "conspiracy theory" for me to say that he doesn't really care about the quality?

  • Options
    MahnmutMahnmut Registered User regular
    Hahnsoo1 wrote: »
    And yet, your child will still have it much better than I did when I was growing up, even though I was one of the lucky ones (model minority and all that)! My parents did their best to insulate me from the pervasive racism of Indiana. But I'm only finding out just now exactly how much they sacrificed and worked to protect me. And ultimately, as a parent, that's what it will boil down to for your son. It isn't better or worse, it just is. And I'm sure you and the other parents here will do a great job.

    I can't even begin to imagine what it's like for a child growing up as a Latino or a Muslim in 2016.

    It sounds like it's not going well at all: http://www.vox.com/identities/2016/10/20/13319366/donald-trump-racism-bigotry-children-bullying-muslim-mexican-black-immigrant

    :(

    Steam/LoL: Jericho89
  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    edited October 2016
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyONt_ZH_aw

    Trump says his steaks are the world's greatest steaks, the most favorable beef you've ever had.

    Is it a "conspiracy theory" for me to say that he doesn't really care about the quality?

    No, it's a conspiracy theory to act like he wasn't saying that for the purpose of selling steaks.

    The same way all the shit he says and does during the campaign is primarily for the purpose of winning.

    That he's a failure at both goals does not change that. Nor do his attempts to offload any losses he takes willing trying to do it.

    shryke on
  • Options
    SniperGuySniperGuy SniperGuyGaming Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyONt_ZH_aw

    Trump says his steaks are the world's greatest steaks, the most favorable beef you've ever had.

    Is it a "conspiracy theory" for me to say that he doesn't really care about the quality?

    No, it's a conspiracy theory to act like he wasn't saying that for the purpose of selling steaks.

    The same way all the shit he says and does during the campaign is primarily for the purpose of winning.

    That he's a failure at both goals does not change that. Nor do his attempts to offload any losses he takes willing trying to do it.

    I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to suggest Trump mostly ran for president in order to get name recognition, not because he actually thought he'd win.

    I mean he might also think he's going to win but he's deluded, clearly.

  • Options
    MorkathMorkath Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Eh, Trump was already a very well known name from his TV shows and whatnot. It's possible he did it for the publicity I guess, but that still circles back to the incompetence thing.

  • Options
    Houk the NamebringerHouk the Namebringer Nipples The EchidnaRegistered User regular
    SniperGuy wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyONt_ZH_aw

    Trump says his steaks are the world's greatest steaks, the most favorable beef you've ever had.

    Is it a "conspiracy theory" for me to say that he doesn't really care about the quality?

    No, it's a conspiracy theory to act like he wasn't saying that for the purpose of selling steaks.

    The same way all the shit he says and does during the campaign is primarily for the purpose of winning.

    That he's a failure at both goals does not change that. Nor do his attempts to offload any losses he takes willing trying to do it.

    I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to suggest Trump mostly ran for president in order to get name recognition, not because he actually thought he'd win.

    I mean he might also think he's going to win but he's deluded, clearly.

    I have no doubt that Trump wants to win the election and be called the President of the United States.

    I also have no reason to believe he actually wants to be the President of the United States.

  • Options
    SchrodingerSchrodinger Registered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyONt_ZH_aw

    Trump says his steaks are the world's greatest steaks, the most favorable beef you've ever had.

    Is it a "conspiracy theory" for me to say that he doesn't really care about the quality?

    No, it's a conspiracy theory to act like he wasn't saying that for the purpose of selling steaks.

    The same way all the shit he says and does during the campaign is primarily for the purpose of winning.

    That he's a failure at both goals does not change that. Nor do his attempts to offload any losses he takes willing trying to do it.

    We're not debating the question of "Does Donald Trump want to win?" So citing evidence where Donald Trump is a sore loser with a massive ego doesn't help your case, because that's not the area of disagreement.

    Instead, we're debating the question of, "What does Donald Trump define as his victory condition?" Which you keep deflecting away from so you can focus on the above.

    For instance, what is the primary goal of Trump Steaks? There are two possible answers:

    1) Produce the best possible steaks, better than the competitors, by sourcing higher quality beef (even if it means cutting into profits)

    2) Produce the most possible dollars, by sourcing cheaper beef, even if it means cutting into quality.

    Now, most businesses will have a combination of both goals. But if finances are finite (and they always are), then one of these goals will always take precedence over the other. In the commercials, Trump insists that he's focused on goal #1. But can we trust him? If we follow your logic of "Trump wants to win, he has a massive ego," then there's no reason not to. Because your entire argument relies on confirmation bias of "Does this piece of evidence confirm my pre-existing beliefs?" Rather than "Does this piece of evidence disprove the opposition?"

    If we want to test which side takes precedence over the other, then it's not enough to ask "Does Donald Trump have a massive ego?" That tells us nothing. Instead, we have to look at his finances. "Compared to his competitors, did the bulk of the revenue go towards ingredients, or did the bulk of the revenue go towards profits?" And by looking at his finances, we can safely conclude that he's in option #2.

    Likewise, regarding the election, we have two options:

    1) Donald Trump's main goal is to become president, even if it means less money for his businesses.

    2) Donad Trump's main goal is to enrich his businesses, even if it means less money for his campaign.

    Again, it's possible for Donald Trump to be concerned for both goals. But if we want to examine his primary concern, then we should examing where his money is going compared to his competitors. And once again, that shows option #2.

    Also, given Trump's massive ego, that's all the more reason to prioritize a media empire over the actual presidency.

    The President has to serve all Americans, even the ones he doesn't like. And he has no control over negative media coverage. Look at how worn down Trump is from the negative coverage from just the past month alone. Do you really think he has the stamina for four more years of that?

    OTOH, a media mogul only has to serve his base. And he's free to control his own echo chamber, where everyone loves him and showers him with constant praise.

    So if you have a massive egomaniac with a thin skin like Trump, which one of these options sounds more appealing?

  • Options
    valiancevaliance Registered User regular
    edited October 2016
    big map from the alt right, might not be correct:

    tQrmMa.jpg

    shocking to me how racially polarized the electorate is. Hillary doesn't even win if only white women voted nationwide? if only college educated whites vote? makes me sort of doubt this map's validity, and I cant source it to anyone legit, it seems like the alt-right made it. it might be right, but who knows what polls they used etc

    valiance on
  • Options
    shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    SniperGuy wrote: »
    shryke wrote: »
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyONt_ZH_aw

    Trump says his steaks are the world's greatest steaks, the most favorable beef you've ever had.

    Is it a "conspiracy theory" for me to say that he doesn't really care about the quality?

    No, it's a conspiracy theory to act like he wasn't saying that for the purpose of selling steaks.

    The same way all the shit he says and does during the campaign is primarily for the purpose of winning.

    That he's a failure at both goals does not change that. Nor do his attempts to offload any losses he takes willing trying to do it.

    I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to suggest Trump mostly ran for president in order to get name recognition, not because he actually thought he'd win.

    I mean he might also think he's going to win but he's deluded, clearly.

    It's definitely plausible he began that way but it's completely unreasonable to think he's gone on this long, put up with this much shit and invested this much money while burning a TON of bridges without believing he was totally gonna win this. It's also the explanation that's actually consistent with his personality.

    Like, his name recognition among the deplorable set began ages ago with his seizing of the title The Birther in Chief. And let's not pretend that wasn't mostly about his blatant long-standing racism issues. I mean, the Central Park 5 letter alone establishes this as a consistent pattern for him.

    He's been in the politics game for awhile now and it's not just about name recognition for him. Not at the start and not now. Though clearly it's still something he's concerned with.

  • Options
    ElJeffeElJeffe Roaming the streets, waving his mod gun around.Moderator, ClubPA Mod Emeritus
    Okay, everyone out of the pool. Take it to gen pop.

    I submitted an entry to Lego Ideas, and if 10,000 people support me, it'll be turned into an actual Lego set!If you'd like to see and support my submission, follow this link.
This discussion has been closed.