Trump supporters, help me out

  • 134 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
#51 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (10873 posts) -

@mattbbpl said:

@joebones5000: They won't read, what makes you think they'll listen?

*Can't read*

Avatar image for mattbbpl
#52 Posted by mattbbpl (17338 posts) -

@HoolaHoopMan: We know they can read. They post replies on Stormfront and spread Facebook propaganda.

Avatar image for joshrmeyer
#53 Posted by JoshRMeyer (10468 posts) -

@joebones5000: @sonicare: He wasn't given 400 million back then. Stop with the blatent lies. There's plenty of truth you can use against him. He was given a 1 million dollar loan from his father.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-family-wealth.html

Avatar image for baelnergal
#54 Posted by BaelNergal (568 posts) -

@heirren said:

@baelnergal:

Politics are a clown show. Even if the die hard followers act like fools i prefer to think that theyre just very oblivious people. Many people are like that.

I'm not disagreeing, just that I don't think we should insult honest circus performers by associating them with Trump.

Avatar image for horgen
#55 Posted by Horgen (120857 posts) -

@N30F3N1X said:

https://twitter.com/DavidBahnsen/status/1152566809381543937

If only there was a better way to post this. Like, I don't know, like this:

Avatar image for heirren
#56 Posted by Heirren (2175 posts) -

@horgen:

Its not just the right/left but the media as well. Theyve created a hate/hate between the republicans and democrats. I made a somewhat harsh comment in regards to john stewart, but this is in a way what i meant.

Avatar image for baelnergal
#57 Posted by BaelNergal (568 posts) -

I have to agree with @heirren on this, and I'm going to go a bit further: I believe Trump is a direct result of the media encouraging an "us or them" mentality in both sides of the political divide and pushing both sides toward their logical extremes. In the long run, no matter which side wins or if both sides somehow work out a compromise to the current conflict, the media is going to face harsh backlash and restriction... and freedom of speech is going to be somewhat curtailed in the aftermath of that.

Avatar image for vl4d_l3nin
#58 Posted by vl4d_l3nin (1914 posts) -
@baelnergal said:

I have to agree with @heirren on this, and I'm going to go a bit further: I believe Trump is a direct result of the media encouraging an "us or them" mentality in both sides of the political divide and pushing both sides toward their logical extremes. In the long run, no matter which side wins or if both sides somehow work out a compromise to the current conflict, the media is going to face harsh backlash and restriction... and freedom of speech is going to be somewhat curtailed in the aftermath of that.

Well said. I think that curtailment will come sooner rather than later. 2019 has been a terrible year for the media.

Avatar image for horgen
#59 Posted by Horgen (120857 posts) -

@heirren said:

@horgen:

Its not just the right/left but the media as well. Theyve created a hate/hate between the republicans and democrats. I made a somewhat harsh comment in regards to john stewart, but this is in a way what i meant.

Ask for something like the Fairness Doctrine that FCC removed in 1987 to be implemented again. A late partying gift from Ronald Reagan perhaps?

Avatar image for mattbbpl
#60 Posted by mattbbpl (17338 posts) -

@heirren said:

@mattbbpl:

Not sure if you are being serious.

Now, of course, with the election coming up. But, throughout his term?

Yep - See the section labelled, "Donald Trump Job Approval by Party Identification" in that link.

Avatar image for heirren
#61 Posted by Heirren (2175 posts) -

@mattbbpl:

Pretty sure hes been subject to critique by republicans. I know in my own experience he has been, in almost any discussion. Correct me if im wrong but arent even those in favor of him rather critical of how he conducts himself at times?

Avatar image for heirren
#62 Posted by Heirren (2175 posts) -

@horgen:

Lol i had to look it up. I was a just a kid back then.

Hilarious though. It sounds like.........JOURNALISM. in other words its requiring people to have some degree of awareness of what they report, as a whole. Otherwise its people preaching their careers, which is what politics are about these days(most days actually)

Avatar image for mattbbpl
#63 Posted by mattbbpl (17338 posts) -

@heirren said:

@mattbbpl:

Pretty sure hes been subject to critique by republicans. I know in my own experience he has been, in almost any discussion. Correct me if im wrong but arent even those in favor of him rather critical of how he conducts himself at times?

Yeah, 10% of them - look at the numbers. His continued support in his own party is extremely strong.

To paint him as an outlier of the party is absurd.

Avatar image for heirren
#64 Posted by Heirren (2175 posts) -

@mattbbpl:

Well i stand corrected, then. People around me must be throwing fake news in my face.

Avatar image for horgen
#65 Posted by Horgen (120857 posts) -

@heirren said:

@horgen:

Lol i had to look it up. I was a just a kid back then.

Hilarious though. It sounds like.........JOURNALISM. in other words its requiring people to have some degree of awareness of what they report, as a whole. Otherwise its people preaching their careers, which is what politics are about these days(most days actually)

Another example that a marked can't regulate itself in a way that benefits the customers I guess.

Avatar image for heirren
#66 Edited by Heirren (2175 posts) -

@horgen:

Im not following..

Avatar image for horgen
#67 Posted by Horgen (120857 posts) -

@heirren said:

@horgen:

Im not following..

I was just speaking out of my ass with that one. :P

I have no idea what the reasoning was behind removing that rule. What we have today(media wise) is either a wanted result or the result of short sight. I'm inclined to believe the former.

Avatar image for jeezers
#68 Posted by jeezers (3145 posts) -

@mattbbpl: its because many of his supporters know what the alternative would be. Democrats have pushed people too trump. They dont have to like that hes brash, that he trolls and pokes the bear, or that he speaks off the cuff,

If your ideology is completely away from, socialism, collectivism, globalism, anti 2nd amendment/free speech, identity politics, open borders, global warming.

Your going to most likely support trump.

When the alternative is completely different ideology than your own, your not going to not support him. Alot of peoples critiques are about how trump acts or presents himself, I dont vote on those things so it doesnt affect me.

I promise you, alot of trumps supporters are political refugees who were moderates who are nervous about how far left the democrats have moved in a short amount of time.

Throw in the countless fake media stories, opinionated journalism, identity politics, and a feeling of growing division within the country due to those identity politics.

Individualism vs Collectivism

Nationalism vs Globalism.

Depending on where you agree most on these, I can usually figure out where someone leans politically.

Avatar image for heirren
#69 Posted by Heirren (2175 posts) -

@horgen:

Its the old saying: You can have your opinion as long as it does not affect mine.

People lack common sense. Everyone is right all the time, and if it is published its a fact(lmfao).

Social media has ushered in a new age of depression. Like like like like like like oh favorite and subscribe dont forget to hot that bell icon so we can eat up your life with all the other channels which do the same.

Modern. Day. Informercials. Thats what youtube is(the pop aspect of it.)

At least the Red Copper Pan lady has some charisma.

Avatar image for horgen
#70 Posted by Horgen (120857 posts) -

@heirren said:

@horgen:

Its the old saying: You can have your opinion as long as it does not affect mine.

People lack common sense. Everyone is right all the time, and if it is published its a fact(lmfao).

Social media has ushered in a new age of depression. Like like like like like like oh favorite and subscribe dont forget to hot that bell icon so we can eat up your life with all the other channels which do the same.

Modern. Day. Informercials. Thats what youtube is(the pop aspect of it.)

At least the Red Copper Pan lady has some charisma.

And as accepting of different opinions as these two are.

Loading Video...

Avatar image for heirren
#71 Posted by Heirren (2175 posts) -

@horgen:

What were they discussing, again? Contradictions?

Avatar image for joebones5000
#72 Edited by joebones5000 (2614 posts) -

@joshrmeyer said:

@joebones5000: @sonicare: He wasn't given 400 million back then. Stop with the blatent lies. There's plenty of truth you can use against him. He was given a 1 million dollar loan from his father.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-family-wealth.html

lol. You are the perfect example of the modern conservative - completely mindless and only sees what they want, instead of what's actually there. Communicating with you guys in your own little world is like trying to herd cats.

From the article you posted:

In all, financial records reveal, Mr. Trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate empire.

Avatar image for ad1x2
#73 Posted by ad1x2 (7641 posts) -

@MirkoS77 said:
@ad1x2 said:

Something we like to say in the military is we would rather have a strong commander that is a dirtbag in his private life lead us through battle than a meek commander that is a saint in his private life. We have priorities at that point that exclude making us feel like you’re going to win Father of the Year when (or if) we get home.

That's an odd argument in favor of Trump, as usually what makes a strong commander lies in the merit of their character. Many commanders in the past that've had the odds stacked against them have triumphed on the back of their values and character that instilled victory in their men, and some of the worst atrocities committed have been "strong leaders" whose character resided in the gutter. Hitler.....hey, he's not really that much of a saint, but at least the economy's strong so I'd rather have him leading me!

I've never quite understood how people can dismiss character in a leadership position as they do with Trump. He, as all presidents are, will be judged largely on that character, and in that respect, he's an abject failure and will be remembered as such.

Your comparison with Hitler is missing the mark. Overlooking the fact that Hitler made several strategic mistakes that made it that much easier for the Allies to defeat him, he went above and beyond simply wanting Germany to be first in the world. His goals to murder as many Jews, homosexuals, and other people he considered undesirable as possible were simply unacceptable no matter how good of a leader he could have potentially been. Bringing up Hitler when criticizing Trump is why people are so ready to dismiss legitimate concerns about him.

But back to what you quoted, dirtbag as I used it refers to people that do things that, while morally questionable, don’t go into the realm of illegal. Things like being an alcoholic off duty (no DUI/public drunkenness), being a womanizer (no sexual harassment/assault/any other illegal sexual activity), being foul-mouthed, etc. Commanders that do stuff that is outright illegal will be relieved of their command no matter how good they are, to include committing adultery since that is illegal in the military.

To put it simply, you’re not going to convince me to vote against Trump because you think he is a reprehensible human being. Many Trump supporters already know that he is morally questionable and a lot of us have little doubt that he did in fact screw Stormy Daniels while Melania was pregnant with Barron. The way to convince me to vote for the eventual Democratic nominee is to prove that he or she will make and enforce policies that I agree with more efficiently than Trump is doing.

Note that I said policies that I agree with; you’re not going to convince a person that is pro-Second Amendment to vote for a candidate that wants to make it a lot harder to buy a gun, and you won’t convince a person that is against illegal immigration to vote for a candidate that says they want to decriminalize illegal border crossings or pass Medicare for All and make illegal aliens eligible for routine care through it.

The media isn’t helping either and that is a reason why some of Trump’s biggest blunders are dismissed as fake news. Let’s compare a few recent events: Andy Ngo, the Antifa guy that attacked the ICE facility in Washington, and the black Georgia lawmaker that claimed a white man told her to go back where she came from in a Publix. Andy Ngo, a gay Asian man, got very little attention after he was beaten by Antifa and some people claimed he deserved it because he was a conservative. Let’s not even get started on the fact that numerous Wikipedia editors are protecting the Antifa article by removing any mention of the attack while ensuring negative information stays in conservative articles.

Then there was the guy that attacked ICE, he attacked the facility a few weeks after AOC started calling the border facilities concentration camps. Not a single major network said her words may have inspired his attack. But a few days later, we have people saying Trump inspired some racist Trump supporter to tell a black woman to go back where she came from before he confronts her on camera and tells his side of the story as well as reveals he is Cuban. Later we find out he was a Democrat that hates Trump and posted multiple anti-Trump posts on his Facebook page. As long as the media is obviously biased, you’re going to see less and less people trust it.

Avatar image for joshrmeyer
#74 Posted by JoshRMeyer (10468 posts) -

@joebones5000: Yes Joe, the equivalent. Big difference.

Avatar image for joebones5000
#75 Edited by joebones5000 (2614 posts) -

@joshrmeyer said:

@joebones5000: Yes Joe, the equivalent. Big difference.

OK, so he was given the equivalent of $413 million. WTF is your point? Equivalent means he was given an amount equal to the purchasing power of $413 million.

Avatar image for plageus900
#76 Posted by plageus900 (2720 posts) -

Trump is morbidly obese and stupid. Most Republicans are morbidly obese and stupid. He's their icon.

Avatar image for jeezers
#77 Posted by jeezers (3145 posts) -

@ad1x2: well said, I agree

Avatar image for MirkoS77
#78 Edited by MirkoS77 (14341 posts) -

@ad1x2 said:

But back to what you quoted, dirtbag as I used it refers to people that do things that, while morally questionable, don’t go into the realm of illegal. Things like being an alcoholic off duty (no DUI/public drunkenness), being a womanizer (no sexual harassment/assault/any other illegal sexual activity), being foul-mouthed, etc. Commanders that do stuff that is outright illegal will be relieved of their command no matter how good they are, to include committing adultery since that is illegal in the military.

To put it simply, you’re not going to convince me to vote against Trump because you think he is a reprehensible human being. Many Trump supporters already know that he is morally questionable and a lot of us have little doubt that he did in fact screw Stormy Daniels while Melania was pregnant with Barron. The way to convince me to vote for the eventual Democratic nominee is to prove that he or she will make and enforce policies that I agree with more efficiently than Trump is doing.

Note that I said policies that I agree with; you’re not going to convince a person that is pro-Second Amendment to vote for a candidate that wants to make it a lot harder to buy a gun, and you won’t convince a person that is against illegal immigration to vote for a candidate that says they want to decriminalize illegal border crossings or pass Medicare for All and make illegal aliens eligible for routine care through it.

It makes me wonder at what point would one individual's moral failings in a leadership position make you forgo your political and personal predilections to place your values and morals as a person at the forefront? Are you going to argue only proven illegal conduct would be capable of doing so, because that's what you're implying. If Trump came out tomorrow and stated, 'I'm a racist, minorities are scum', would you disavow him, or continue to argue to me I'm not going to convince you to vote against him because I find him reprehensible as a human being?

Now I'm happy for you that you're getting your way politically and policy wise, but the absence of his character and the irresponsibility of his rhetoric and behavior in fact are making many peoples' lives more difficult. We can argue until we're blue in the face about whether Trump was motivated by race in his most recent comments towards the squad, but to put it simply, you're not going to convince me that people are not going to be encountering an increased level of xenophobia and racist driven "go back to where you came from" sentiment directed their way despite your attempts to marginalize them as you just attempted above, sentiment which is licensed by the reprehensibility and irresponsibility of our so-called leader.

We've had this discussion before, and it's predicated upon an argument that I can certainly understand but that I simply cannot respect: you have your own personal interests at stake in the one you support and that while you view Trump as not the most upstanding of people, you don't consider him bad enough to concede those interests. The unfortunate flip side to that that Trump supporters don't seem to grasp (or worse, simply don't care about) is that in downplaying his personal failings in the context of leadership, it directly makes life harder for people.

And the kicker is, he doesn't need to be like this. He's an ass just because he can be. Because he loves to divide. Because we must own the liberals! If you want to enable/excuse that for your own self interests, go ahead. I can only hope that there would come a point before illegality would enter the picture where you'd say, "enough is enough".

Because there's been a few people (Republicans among them), who had dedicated their lives to the service of our country and have resigned in protest of Trump's character and the values he promotes. No offense meant here, but that strikes me as far more than what you hold at stake.

Avatar image for Sevenizz
#79 Posted by Sevenizz (4013 posts) -

@sonicare: ‘1. Referring to the vast majority of latino immigrants as rapists and murderers. Telling people of color to go back to their "shit hole" countries.’

Read his actual quotes again. He never said any of this. You got it wildly wrong.

‘2. Incompetent - Border being dealt with? Most illegals come in through ports of entry and overstay their visas. Building a wall does not solve that. Firing the vast majority of your cabinet and staff every 3-6 months. Tweeting out foreign policy announcements at 2 am on a whim without consulting anyone in your diplomatic core. Not knowing that tariffs are not a tax on a foreign country but your own consumers.’

Wrong again. Even Democrats admit there’s a border crisis. Although they call it manufactured by Trump, but it’s a left over from previous administrations.

3. Low IQ - See #2. Having multiple businesses go bankrupt. Making less money from you dad's huge windfall then someone who could simply have taken the money and bought index funds.

Entrepreneurs with multiple companies/enterprises regularly have some businesses go under. Nothing out of the ordinary.

‘4. Thin skinned - Poor self confidence. Insecurity. Hallmarks of large egos.’

Poor and inaccurate description of a type A personality.

5. Name calling is childish. Have you been watching Trump these last 3 years? Does "Low energy Jeb Bush", "Little Marco Rubio", "Lying Ted Cruz", "Crooked Hillary", "Little Adam Shitt", etc. etc. etc.

Was effective though. Come on, you’re not looking forward to his 2020 campaign/debates? Should be a hoot!

Avatar image for horgen
#80 Edited by Horgen (120857 posts) -

@Sevenizz said:

5. Name calling is childish. Have you been watching Trump these last 3 years? Does "Low energy Jeb Bush", "Little Marco Rubio", "Lying Ted Cruz", "Crooked Hillary", "Little Adam Shitt", etc. etc. etc.

Was effective though. Come on, you’re not looking forward to his 2020 campaign/debates? Should be a hoot!

Essentially this is OK because Trump did it. It was however not OK when @sonicare did so about Trump.

When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people. But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we're getting. And it only makes common sense. It only makes common sense. They're sending us not the right people. It's coming from more than Mexico. It's coming from all over South and Latin America, and it's coming.

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#81 Edited by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -

@MirkoS77 said:
It makes me wonder at what point would one individual's moral failings in a leadership position make you forgo your political and personal predilections to place your values and morals as a person at the forefront? Are you going to argue only proven illegal conduct would be capable of doing so, because that's what you're implying. If Trump came out tomorrow and stated, 'I'm a racist, minorities are scum', would you disavow him, or continue to argue to me I'm not going to convince you to vote against him because I find him reprehensible as a human being?

Now I'm happy for you that you're getting your way politically and policy wise, but the absence of his character and the irresponsibility of his rhetoric and behavior in fact are making many peoples' lives more difficult. We can argue until we're blue in the face about whether Trump was motivated by race in his most recent comments towards the squad, but to put it simply, you're not going to convince me that people are not going to be encountering an increased level of xenophobia and racist driven "go back to where you came from" sentiment directed their way despite your attempts to marginalize them as you just attempted above, sentiment which is licensed by the reprehensibility and irresponsibility of our so-called leader.

We've had this discussion before, and it's predicated upon an argument that I can certainly understand but that I simply cannot respect: you have your own personal interests at stake in the one you support and that while you view Trump as not the most upstanding of people, you don't consider him bad enough to concede those interests. The unfortunate flip side to that that Trump supporters don't seem to grasp (or worse, simply don't care about) is that in downplaying his personal failings in the context of leadership, it directly makes life harder for people.

And the kicker is, he doesn't need to be like this. He's an ass just because he can be. Because he loves to divide. Because we must own the liberals! If you want to enable/excuse that for your own self interests, go ahead. I can only hope that there would come a point before illegality would enter the picture where you'd say, "enough is enough".

Because there's been a few people (Republicans among them), who had dedicated their lives to the service of our country and have resigned in protest of Trump's character and the values he promotes. No offense meant here, but that strikes me as far more than what you hold at stake.

You literally blamed Trump and his manner of speaking for the attack on the ICE facility where the attacker wrote a manifesto which literally quoted AOC. You don't get to make a pedestal for yourself in telling others that they're not going to convince you when you made a point to make your arguments as dishonest as possible and also go out of your way to deny reality, even when it's smacking you in the face, as long as that means that you can delude yourself into blaming Trump for everything, because you're the one who's at fault here.

It's true that he doesn't need to be like this. Here's the thing though, public approval and candidacy for offices are decided in races, and the people he is and has been up against haven't exactly been shining examples of moral integrity so you don't get to single him out either. You don't get to call half your country deplorable or throw one of the brightest shining examples of actual moral integrity under the bus to try and score political points using fabricated rape allegations during a Supreme Court confirmation hearing and then pretend it's only Trump who's mean and bad.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
#82 Posted by LJS9502_basic (166847 posts) -

@heirren said:

@LJS9502_basic:

I was under the impression he was under fire from both parties. Hes more an independent than republican, imo; the guy says whatever he wants. Hes not a politician.

Its just that it being almost 2020, the republicans know they have nobody that can compete with his stage presence, and that goes for the Democrats as well.

No he has party support.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
#83 Posted by LJS9502_basic (166847 posts) -

@baelnergal said:

I have to agree with @heirren on this, and I'm going to go a bit further: I believe Trump is a direct result of the media encouraging an "us or them" mentality in both sides of the political divide and pushing both sides toward their logical extremes. In the long run, no matter which side wins or if both sides somehow work out a compromise to the current conflict, the media is going to face harsh backlash and restriction... and freedom of speech is going to be somewhat curtailed in the aftermath of that.

trump created the direct result of us vs them.

Avatar image for vfighter
#84 Posted by VFighter (5110 posts) -

@MirkoS77: That's an impressive amount of smugness and BS, most impressive.

Avatar image for heirren
#85 Edited by Heirren (2175 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic:

Noooooooooooooooooo. This goes WAAAAAAY before Trump.

....

Also im aware he has support, but he has critics too.

Avatar image for Serraph105
#86 Posted by Serraph105 (33959 posts) -

@joshrmeyer said:

@joebones5000: @sonicare: He wasn't given 400 million back then. Stop with the blatent lies. There's plenty of truth you can use against him. He was given a 1 million dollar loan from his father.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-family-wealth.html

"In all, financial records reveal, Mr. Trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate empire."

Citation: You're link.

Avatar image for joshrmeyer
#87 Posted by JoshRMeyer (10468 posts) -

@Serraph105: Do you guys know what "equivalent" means?

Avatar image for HoolaHoopMan
#88 Posted by HoolaHoopMan (10873 posts) -

@joshrmeyer said:

@Serraph105: Do you guys know what "equivalent" means?

I don't think you understand what you even linked. Donald wasn't just given a single million dollar loan. He was funneled money for decades from Papa Trump. Let's not forget when his dad walked into his failing casino, purchased 3.5 million in chips, and then left with out ever gambling.

Avatar image for Serraph105
#89 Edited by Serraph105 (33959 posts) -

@joshrmeyer said:

@Serraph105: Do you guys know what "equivalent" means?

I found an inflation calculator for you and did the math. $42,007,784.71 is roughly what Trump received which would be worth about $400,000,000 today in 2019.

Sources say that he was 8 at the time when he had this amount of money which would have been in 1954. Popped it into the calculator and it gave me $42,007,784.71, so you know, 42 million dollars, which is a about 41 million dollars more than the "1 million" dollars Trump loves to talk about.

http://www.in2013dollars.com/2019-dollars-in-1954?amount=400000000

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#90 Edited by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -
@Serraph105 said:
@joshrmeyer said:

@joebones5000: @sonicare: He wasn't given 400 million back then. Stop with the blatent lies. There's plenty of truth you can use against him. He was given a 1 million dollar loan from his father.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-family-wealth.html

"In all, financial records reveal, Mr. Trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate empire."

Citation: You're link.

The fact that even with abysmal reading comprehension and financial skills such as those you just displayed in this comment you can still afford to live comfortably enough to get on a forum using an electronic device and whine about Trump is testament of how really great the american economy is doing.

Like seriously, how do you confuse a single loan's present value with a 40 years span of cash flows?

Avatar image for Serraph105
#91 Edited by Serraph105 (33959 posts) -

@Serraph105 said:
@joshrmeyer said:

@Serraph105: Do you guys know what "equivalent" means?

I found an inflation calculator for you and did the math. $42,007,784.71 is roughly what Trump received which would be worth about $400,000,000 today in 2019.

Sources say that he was 8 at the time when he had this amount of money which would have been in 1954. Popped it into the calculator and it gave me $42,007,784.71, so you know, 42 million dollars, which is a about 41 million dollars more than the "1 million" dollars Trump loves to talk about.

http://www.in2013dollars.com/2019-dollars-in-1954?amount=400000000

@N30F3N1X said:
@Serraph105 said:
@joshrmeyer said:

@joebones5000: @sonicare: He wasn't given 400 million back then. Stop with the blatent lies. There's plenty of truth you can use against him. He was given a 1 million dollar loan from his father.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/02/us/politics/trump-family-wealth.html

"In all, financial records reveal, Mr. Trump received the equivalent today of at least $413 million from his father’s real estate empire."

Citation: You're link.

The fact that even with abysmal reading comprehension and financial skills such as those you just displayed in this comment you can still afford to live comfortably enough to get on a forum using an electronic device and whine about Trump is testament of how really great the american economy is doing.

Like seriously, how do you confuse a single loan's present value with a 40 years span of cash flows?

Oh look, the post right above you where I did the math and it's all about the early age when Trump received the vast sum of wealth that far surpasses a "million dollars: and the roughly 400 million dollars it's worth today.

Avatar image for N30F3N1X
#92 Posted by N30F3N1X (8923 posts) -

@Serraph105 said:

Oh look, the post right above you where I did the math and it's all about the early age when Trump received the vast sum of wealth that far surpasses a "million dollars: and the roughly 400 million dollars it's worth today.

You realize that the article you're talking about said he received inflation-adjusted 413M$ over his lifetime, while the math you did compressed the entirety of the sum he received over a lifetime in a single payment?

"I did the math" lmao this is full-blown Dunning-Kruger at work

Avatar image for ad1x2
#93 Posted by ad1x2 (7641 posts) -

@MirkoS77 said:

It makes me wonder at what point would one individual's moral failings in a leadership position make you forgo your political and personal predilections to place your values and morals as a person at the forefront? Are you going to argue only proven illegal conduct would be capable of doing so, because that's what you're implying. If Trump came out tomorrow and stated, 'I'm a racist, minorities are scum', would you disavow him, or continue to argue to me I'm not going to convince you to vote against him because I find him reprehensible as a human being?

Now I'm happy for you that you're getting your way politically and policy wise, but the absence of his character and the irresponsibility of his rhetoric and behavior in fact are making many peoples' lives more difficult. We can argue until we're blue in the face about whether Trump was motivated by race in his most recent comments towards the squad, but to put it simply, you're not going to convince me that people are not going to be encountering an increased level of xenophobia and racist driven "go back to where you came from" sentiment directed their way despite your attempts to marginalize them as you just attempted above, sentiment which is licensed by the reprehensibility and irresponsibility of our so-called leader.

We've had this discussion before, and it's predicated upon an argument that I can certainly understand but that I simply cannot respect: you have your own personal interests at stake in the one you support and that while you view Trump as not the most upstanding of people, you don't consider him bad enough to concede those interests. The unfortunate flip side to that that Trump supporters don't seem to grasp (or worse, simply don't care about) is that in downplaying his personal failings in the context of leadership, it directly makes life harder for people.

And the kicker is, he doesn't need to be like this. He's an ass just because he can be. Because he loves to divide. Because we must own the liberals! If you want to enable/excuse that for your own self interests, go ahead. I can only hope that there would come a point before illegality would enter the picture where you'd say, "enough is enough".

Because there's been a few people (Republicans among them), who had dedicated their lives to the service of our country and have resigned in protest of Trump's character and the values he promotes. No offense meant here, but that strikes me as far more than what you hold at stake.

If Trump came out tomorrow and said he was a racist that hated minorities, then you wouldn’t have to worry about me not disavowing him for political reasons, although I would have no issues doing so. Such a move should end his presidency immediately either through pressure to resign, the 25th Amendment, or impeachment with Republicans trying to salvage the party voting for removal. If none of those three worked then he would be primaried out of the race next year. You should give the so-called Deplorables some credit; most Trump supporters are not racists and just want what is best for them and their families even if their opinion of what is best doesn’t match the opinions of people on the other side of the aisle.

With that said, those people aren’t looking to give up their vote in exchange for the respect you would give them for opposing someone you find as reprehensible as Trump. Your respect isn’t going to lower their taxes if Bernie or Warren becomes president and they then proceed to raise taxes to pay for Medicaid for All or student loan forgiveness. You pointing out that Trump is on his third wife isn’t going to make a pro-life voter change their vote to a candidate on their first wife (or husband if Buttigieg or one of the female candidates win) that says they are okay with abortion until the end of the third trimester. Yes, we know that the First Amendment gives athletes the right to kneel during the National Anthem, that doesn't mean we can't verbally express our disapproval over it.

If any Republicans resigned rather than work for Trump, then they may have had their reasons and it was their right to do so. Despite that, the legacy of the country doesn't end with Donald Trump. Running away instead of trying to make it better isn't going to help the country, and you can refuse to obey an illegal order.

Avatar image for joebones5000
#94 Edited by joebones5000 (2614 posts) -

@N30F3N1X said:
@Serraph105 said:

Oh look, the post right above you where I did the math and it's all about the early age when Trump received the vast sum of wealth that far surpasses a "million dollars: and the roughly 400 million dollars it's worth today.

You realize that the article you're talking about said he received inflation-adjusted 413M$ over his lifetime, while the math you did compressed the entirety of the sum he received over a lifetime in a single payment?

"I did the math" lmao this is full-blown Dunning-Kruger at work

lol. Dunning-Kruger has nothing to do with this discussion. It is hilarious how Trump supporters twist themselves into pretzels defending this clown, though.

In their minds $400 million isn't actually $400+ million. lol

Avatar image for MirkoS77
#95 Edited by MirkoS77 (14341 posts) -

@N30F3N1X said:

You literally blamed Trump and his manner of speaking for the attack on the ICE facility where the attacker wrote a manifesto which literally quoted AOC. You don't get to make a pedestal for yourself in telling others that they're not going to convince you when you made a point to make your arguments as dishonest as possible and also go out of your way to deny reality, even when it's smacking you in the face, as long as that means that you can delude yourself into blaming Trump for everything, because you're the one who's at fault here.

It's true that he doesn't need to be like this. Here's the thing though, public approval and candidacy for offices are decided in races, and the people he is and has been up against haven't exactly been shining examples of moral integrity so you don't get to single him out either. You don't get to call half your country deplorable or throw one of the brightest shining examples of actual moral integrity under the bus to try and score political points using fabricated rape allegations during a Supreme Court confirmation hearing and then pretend it's only Trump who's mean and bad.

And I still hold Trump ultimately responsible for the attack on the ICE facility. Who has been approaching immigration as not a problem that needs to be tackled, but who demonizes those who comprise it? Little wonder that his policies are being viewed as analogous to concentration camps, yet you sit there befuddled and clueless, blaming everyone else and not holding Trump at all accountable for his disgusting rhetoric and posturing towards immigrants. I'm not being dishonest, I'm being realistic. And I don't condone what AOC did, but I can understand why she viewed things the way she did. YOU are the people that are denying reality every step of the way to excuse your support of this pig.

Don't assume I condone anything you've accused me of, but Trump is the president, and as such, hell if I don't hold him to a higher moral responsibility above those of whom you condemn. You wouldn't even be condemning them if it weren't for Trump.

Avatar image for MirkoS77
#96 Edited by MirkoS77 (14341 posts) -

@ad1x2 said:

If Trump came out tomorrow and said he was a racist that hated minorities, then you wouldn’t have to worry about me not disavowing him for political reasons, although I would have no issues doing so. Such a move should end his presidency immediately either through pressure to resign, the 25th Amendment, or impeachment with Republicans trying to salvage the party voting for removal. If none of those three worked then he would be primaried out of the race next year. You should give the so-called Deplorables some credit; most Trump supporters are not racists and just want what is best for them and their families even if their opinion of what is best doesn’t match the opinions of people on the other side of the aisle.

With that said, those people aren’t looking to give up their vote in exchange for the respect you would give them for opposing someone you find as reprehensible as Trump. Your respect isn’t going to lower their taxes if Bernie or Warren becomes president and they then proceed to raise taxes to pay for Medicaid for All or student loan forgiveness. You pointing out that Trump is on his third wife isn’t going to make a pro-life voter change their vote to a candidate on their first wife (or husband if Buttigieg or one of the female candidates win) that says they are okay with abortion until the end of the third trimester. Yes, we know that the First Amendment gives athletes the right to kneel during the National Anthem, that doesn't mean we can't verbally express our disapproval over it.

If any Republicans resigned rather than work for Trump, then they may have had their reasons and it was their right to do so. Despite that, the legacy of the country doesn't end with Donald Trump. Running away instead of trying to make it better isn't going to help the country, and you can refuse to obey an illegal order.

I don't give Trump supporters much credit, no, and certainly not Republicans. They are so beholden and petrified of his base's support (and loss of it) that they'd be mostly complicit in silence upon such a declaration I've no doubt. Probably more than a few would come out and repudiate him, sure, but not much more than posturing before they'd get back to business. Put it up to a vote? Forget it. Primaried? Perhaps, but even then I have severe doubts and those will remain until America proves me otherwise. It seems to me that the lower Trump descends into moral bankruptcy, the more the support behind him solidifies. People love it, and I've never seen anything like it.

As far as respect.....I apologize, I gave the wrong impression. I don't expect people to change their vote to gain my respect and that wasn't even a thought in my mind in typing that as it's incredibly presumptuous and arrogant and wasn't at all what I meant. Just to me, it's not a position I respect personally, but again, I do understand it. You say things that won't change voters' minds, I agree, but it's at least reassuring to hear that there is a line of character that if crossed would make you sacrifice your own interests. I'm just curious as to where that currently lies, and legality apparently isn't it if him coming out and stating he was a racist would do it. As far as I'm concerned, he's pushing close to that with every statement he makes.

And those that stood down I wouldn't claim as "running away"; they simply had some personal integrity and placed their own values above partisan interests. That's rare in today's day and age, and it's not a failing I'd only lay at Republicans' feet. It's only more apparent currently as Trump is in the White House.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
#97 Posted by LJS9502_basic (166847 posts) -

@heirren said:

@LJS9502_basic:

Noooooooooooooooooo. This goes WAAAAAAY before Trump.

....

Also im aware he has support, but he No the country was NEVER this divided disfor the Civil War. Though I realize the GOP wouldn't work with Obama. Also this is about his supporters...…...not his critics. The fact that a president so abysmal has ANY support is dismaying.has critics too.

Avatar image for heirren
#98 Posted by Heirren (2175 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic:

Right. He has critics, someone said it is only 10% of his party. I question that. I said i believe theres many common folk which may side with the republicans but take issue with some things he does.

But no, the country has been divided for a long time. To blame trump is the easy way out. If anything it is more the emergence of social media and everyone having the "correct" opinion on everything. Its the peoples fault as well. Todays age lacks basic common sense communicational skills and is highly persuaded by media bias without understanding that they arent being fed the news, but an agenda.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
#99 Posted by LJS9502_basic (166847 posts) -

@heirren said:

@LJS9502_basic:

Right. He has critics, someone said it is only 10% of his party. I question that. I said i believe theres many common folk which may side with the republicans but take issue with some things he does.

But no, the country has been divided for a long time. To blame trump is the easy way out. If anything it is more the emergence of social media and everyone having the "correct" opinion on everything. Its the peoples fault as well. Todays age lacks basic common sense communicational skills and is highly persuaded by media bias without understanding that they arent being fed the news, but an agenda.

Republican Congress won't even stand up to him. If his base was small they'd be more bold. Unless they hold the same reprehensible ideas for running a country. In which case they should be voted out. But they are not. So tell me how the Republican base is a critic again.

Avatar image for heirren
#100 Posted by Heirren (2175 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic:

Go out today and ask people that voted for him if they are critical of him in any way. Have any extreme right wingers of the media been critical of him?