Trump does rocket science
-
Trump does rocket science:
-
-
They must be silly parties indeed to both have all of the people to represent them.
-
-
Fuck Donald Trump. Right in the ass.
Trump is someone who becomes irrelevant the moment you stop caring about him.
Don't let yourself get distracted.
Because if you pay attention to all the candidates both sides, it's all one big tragic comedy.
-
Trump doesn't care if you're saying really good things about him or really bad things about him, as long as you're saying really ___ things about him.
To get that upset over him is to play into his hand.
-
Trump is someone who becomes irrelevant the moment you stop caring about him.
Trump doesn't care if you're saying really good things about him or really bad things about him, as long as you're saying really ___ things about him.
To get that upset over him is to play into his hand.
#PLUS MOTHERFUCKING INFINITY
Publicity, of any kind == profit. Trump is a brand, and every time the media says the brand name, it strengthens it. Will boost book sales and speaking tours later.
Ignore him. It's the most powerful weapon imaginable.
-
Problem is, that book sale publicity stunt might unexpectedly put him in the POTUS seat.
-
-
Problem is, that book sale publicity stunt might unexpectedly put him in the POTUS seat.
No, it won't. You'll always have the crazy 13% who will support anyone. It isn't enough to get him to POTUS. So the only thing it does is give him PR. Stop doing that.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
America
North or South?
That was settled in 1865. It's all the same.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
America
North or South?
I looked for any other nation that even had "America" in its name.
Nope.
So, this pedantry is unfounded.
-
hey! we have our own silly politics in south america, we don't need trump here TYVM
-
-
Wouldn't that make it American?
Ah... whatever.
-
We're all living in America. Amerika ist Wunderbar (sp?).
-
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Ignore him. It's the most powerful weapon imaginable.
McAfee.
McAfee, McAfee, McAfee, McAfee, McAfee;
McAfee, McAfee, McAfee, McAfee, McAfee!McAfee McAfee!
McAfee!
Filed under: squirrel
-
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/rocket#Verb names five possible meanings of "to rocket":
- To accelerate swiftly and powerfully
- To fly vertically
- To rise or soar rapidly
- To carry something in a rocket
- To attack something with rockets
Which of these does Trump do to science?
-
Wow. No one's defending Trump? No one?
This is the first time TDWTF has been united about anything that I can remember.
-
This is the first time TDWTF has been united about anything that I can remember.
I make it the second; the first was the reaction to Discourse.
-
I make it the second; the first was the reaction to Discourse.
Nope, plenty of dumbasses liked Discourse. Not like us normal people who were opposed to it from the start.
-
How many of the TDWTF people that were here at the time actually liked it? I think a number of people liked the idea of it but that the execution sucked.
Though I think you might be right and I'm just misremembering.
-
How many of the TDWTF people that were here at the time actually liked it? I think a number of people liked the idea of it but that the execution sucked.
It does have a couple of good ideas but every good idea appears to be offset by batshit implementation and an array of very amusing bugs.Though I think you might be right and I'm just misremembering.
-
Despite being on both Community Server and Discourse, I was inactive when the switch was made; in fact, it was the switch that brought me back in. At first, I thought Discourse was OK; a bit too flash maybe, but not bad. Then of course I started to get to know it, and quite quickly I went from
Eh, it's OK, I guess
to
Wow, I can't believe how shit this software is
to
Can it really get any worse without breaking the laws of physics? As it turns out... yes, it can.
It really is hopeless.
The weirdest thing is, I kinda have something to be thankful to Discourse for...
-
I was thinking of
-
Wow. No one's defending Trump? No one?
What's to defend here? It's just a standard 2 minute hate.
-
What's to defend here? It's just a standard 2 minute hate.
Don't know. I was expecting at least a little bit of flame war.
-
You came here expecting... an argument, not just the automatic gainsaying of whatever the other person says?
-
@boomzilla said:
What's to defend here? It's just a standard 2 minute hate.
Don't know. I was expecting at least a little bit of flame war.
I think some of what Trump says gets a bad rap and a lot of the truly awful stuff he's said and done in the past has been ignored. But this is just violent fantasy without any content.
Sometimes people just need to let the bile out.
-
I think some of what Trump says gets a bad rap and a lot of the truly awful stuff he's said and done in the past has been ignored. But this is just violent fantasy without any content.
I would LOVE it if he managed to enter the actual presidential race. It'd be so interesting seeing him trying to reverse the image he created in order to win the Republican base.
-
I would LOVE it if he managed to enter the actual presidential race.
It would certainly be interesting. Especially if you got both him and Bloomberg in.
It'd be so interesting seeing him trying to reverse the image he created in order to win the Republican base.
I've seen stuff pointing out that he actually has a fair amount of support from Democrats, too. Mainly similar demographics, but also a lot more support among black voters than most actual Republicans. No way Sanders or Hillary! get anywhere close to Zero's support there anyways, but Trump would probably do better there than anyone else.
-
I've seen stuff pointing out that he actually has a fair amount of support from Democrats, too. Mainly similar demographics, but also a lot more support among black voters than most actual Republicans.
Admittedly, I haven't been following this thing too closely, but my impression is, he'd limited his hate speech to the sort of issues that everyone feels a bit concerned about, even if they don't like to admit it to themselves. Immigrants, Muslims, etc.
And because he's screaming so loud about those, he can get away with not touching the true "third rails", like abortion, social services, religion...
My guess is, if he becomes the nominee, we'll suddenly start hearing how he's totally for gay rights, abortion etc.
-
It would certainly be interesting. Especially if you got both him and Bloomberg in.
I expect him to be the Republican nominee at this point, and I doubt Bloomberg will actually enter the race.
The best Nanny Bloomberg could do is be Ross Perot. Also,
http://www.dailypundit.com/?p=114938
Jazz posits that Bloomberg can win both New York and Texas, plus “another large swing state?” But who in their right mind thinks he can actually do that, no matter how much money he slings into the fight? Texas is going to vote for the coke-grabbing, gun-hating guy who is the living, breathing symbol of the dreaded “New York Values?” As for New York, check out Bloomie’s favorables in that state: [49% approval when he left office]
-
his hate speech
Just so we're clear, acknowledging 10 million people sneaking into the country illegally, a high proportion of which then commit additional criminal acts and saying things like "the country most of them are coming from should help pay the cost of the problems they cause" isn't actually necessarily hate speech.
Even ignoring criminality, illegals are destroying the low-end job market, and you know who that hurts the worst? Blacks and other Latinos.
-
How many of the TDWTF people that were here at the time actually liked it? I think a number of people liked the idea of it but that the execution sucked.
I remember Nagesh loved it. Take that for what it's worth.
-
Just so we're clear, acknowledging 10 million people sneaking into the country illegally, a high proportion of which then commit additional criminal acts and saying things like "the country most of them are coming from should help pay the cost of the problems they cause" isn't actually necessarily hate speech.
Even ignoring criminality, illegals are destroying the low-end job market, and you know who that hurts the worst? Blacks and other Latinos.
Agreed.
Hate speech was the wrong word to use. Replace with "controversial opinion expressed in the way that panders to peoples' darkest emotions".
-
The weirdest thing is, I kinda have something to be thankful to Discourse for...
Yeah, if it wasn't for Discourse, you'd never have learned that your spelling really isn't that bad afer all....
-
Admittedly, I haven't been following this thing too closely, but my impression is, he'd limited his hate speech to the sort of issues that everyone feels a bit concerned about, even if they don't like to admit it to themselves. Immigrants, Muslims, etc.
I know that @FrostCat already addressed that, but I have to say it too. Calling what he's said "hate speech" is retarded.
-
Hate speech was the wrong word to use. Replace with "controversial opinion expressed in the way that panders to peoples' darkest emotions".
Yeah...maybe. But probably the most "outrageous" thing he said was that we should halt immigration from Muslim countries until we figure out what's going on.
I guess people will probably include the so-called registry of Muslims, but that was actually suggested by a reporter. It's not clear how seriously he was taking it, or if he interpreted that as a registry of immigrants, which you'd think would already be a thing and seems perfectly reasonable.
-
When are people going to get that none of the current running candidates on either side of the party line are not dumb. If their behavior looks dumb, it's because voters are dumb. This also goes for the past set of Presidents. They all pretty much achieved what they wanted. If terrorists are being armed, it's because someone wants it. If ISIS is spreading, it's because someone wants it. If insurance premiums are going up and the insurance the poor ended up getting doesn't pay for anything, it's because someone wants it.
Whatever we have is a product of what someone wanted. Either someone voter wanted it and a politician exploited that, or a politician wanted it and all they've had to do is lie to people to get it. And the reality is that the line is very thin between the two.
-
Whatever we have is a product of what someone wanted. Either someone voter wanted it and a politician exploited that, or a politician wanted it and all they've had to do is lie to people to get it. And the reality is that the line is very thin between the two.
That makes a certain amount of sense, but it ignores real-world effects that produce results nobody wanted.
Compromise. Somebody wanted A and somebody wanted B. What we ended up with was something part A, part B that isn't really what anybody wanted, and the two parts don't quite work together.
Unintended consequences. We got what somebody wanted, but it came with side effects that nobody expected, or that were predicted, but the people that wanted it either denied or ignored.
-
That makes a certain amount of sense, but it ignores real-world effects that produce results nobody wanted.
It's not an absolute, just refuting people who say X or Y is stupid simply because they disagree with them.
No one gets to office because they are a bumbling idiot.
Trump et.al. has made a career on manipulating people.
-
he said was that we should halt immigration from Muslim countries until we figure out what's going on.
Now, bear in mind, you can say that in different ways, with various nuances of whether they're likely to be hate speech or not. "Keep the filthy wogs out," duh, would be. "A not-insignificant portion of Muslim immigrants cause serious problems, so we should at least talk about restricting immigratrion in some ways" probably isn't.
-
It's not clear how seriously he was taking it
Political season is always full of a reporter asking a question of a candidate, who then says "yeah, sure", without having a chance to actually consider the question. This is no worse than any other time that happens. No better, either, of course.
-
When are people going to get that none of the current running candidates on either side of the party line are not dumb.
Listen, some of them are. Martin O'Malley, for example. Or my perennial favorite, Michael Badnarik. Ok, MB, might be smart, but he wasn't smart enough to realize most people didn't care about his particular bugaboo so getting arrested for not having a driver's license wasn't going to gain him any voters.
-
wasn't going to gain him any voters.
Maybe I need to rephrase to
Do not assume that successful politicians are dumb. It's safer to assume they are creating the outcomes they want.
But either way, it wasn't meant to be an absolute, but to get people unstuck from this mentality of assuming people are stupid because their rhetoric disagrees with you, or EVEN IF their rhetoric IS stupid.
-
Read the one-box you posted.
American Samoa is not a nation.
-
It's safer to assume they are creating the outcomes they want.
Oh. Yeah, also, you should probably expect that, specifically, of a salesman who wrote a book called "The art of the deal." Scott Adams has been blogging a bunch about this.
-
American Samoa is not a recognized nation.
My left armpit has a negative airspace that is a nation.