The narratives about Trump thread.


#2586

I must be on to something.

(That’s a straight line. Take it.)


#2588

It qualifies as a Classic Rowlandism, but the Rowlest Rowlandism Ever? The competition’s pretty tough. :2cents:


#2589

"Those who criticize the Dear Leader :notworthy: are both insane :dizzy_face: and evil! :imp: They shall surely be destroyed!" :rage:

I was just going by the news. I will try to get around to watching some videos this week, but I’ve fallen behind on the “toxic” editorials… :doh:


#2590

Don’t be silly yyy, there’s plenty to be critical of, I have no problem with that, or even selective reporting, all the news channels have their biases.

It’s the non stop stream of stupid bullshit that annoys me, turned on the TV a little earlier and there was some guest on TV and within 5 seconds he is talking about Trump’s anti immigrant stance and the hateful things he says about immigrants. I’t been like 3 years and his stance is related to illegal immigrants, everyone knows that, but his critics just keep coming out with bullshit, this is not aimed at you or anyone on these boards yyy, but it is increasingly difficult to have any kind of meaningful discussion.

This one is aimed at you though, because when I point this out, or try to make the point some people have just gone bonkers through an absolute hatred for Trump, rather looking to see if there might be truth to such a claim, you portray such an observance as defending “Dear Leader” and by extension my remarks are those akin to a cult follower.


#2591

Those who are stubbornly wrong will destroy themselves. All we need do is let them.


#2592

Pound Metoo, sorry #Metoo, I agree with you YYY. I have had to stop watching CNN completely. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:


#2593

How times change.
image


#2594

Look at that cheshire-cat grin. He’s thinking, “I am so going to fuck Obama over next chance I get.”


#2595

Then why is anyone who opposes any part of the Don’s policies, even for non-partisan reasons in another country, “deranged and hateful”? That’s basically what you said about the entire Canadian parliament (seven parties plus independents).

talking about Trump’s anti immigrant stance and the hateful things he says about immigrants. I’t been like 3 years and his stance is related to illegal immigrants, everyone knows that

This again. Steve Bannon’s idealism: we just want to kick out the illegals, we love all kinds of minorities as long as they’re citizens, everything is peachy! :rainbow: :unicorn: :heart:

Remember the KKK stuff? He issues denials and condemnations, but quietly. He knows racists support him, and he doesn’t try to shake them off. He pays lip service to the ideal of shaking them off, so his naïve supporters can say see, he’s not racist!

You can only blame the media up to a point. He knows how they work. He knows how to get attention. That’s the one area where he’s actually qualified!

This one is aimed at you though, because when I point this out, or try to make the point some people have just gone bonkers through an absolute hatred for Trump, rather looking to see if there might be truth to such a claim, you portray such an observance as defending “Dear Leader” and by extension my remarks are those akin to a cult follower.

Change a few words, and you know how I feel, more or less.

Fyi I don’t think of ordinary people who voted for the Don as brainwashed cult members. I assume most of them were desperate, disillusioned, and/or naïvely optimistic. I think the same of ordinary people who voted for the Hill. Such people, of course, are the least vocal.


#2596

How did Mr. “Libertarians are losers” become so laissez-faire, so suddenly?

The problem, of course, is the collateral damage caused by letting people self-destruct. If you care about them, it hurts your feelings. If you don’t care about them, it still damages your neighborhood. And the Beautiful Country sees the whole planet as its neighborhood.


#2597

Think what the point I am trying to make is. I am trying to say that for some the derangement and hatred of Trump is so strong that standing up to him whilst being very popular is going to result in a self inflicted and otherwise easily avoidable injury that normally would not happen and cooler heads would have prevailed.

Canada was chosen because there is bi-partisan support (or as you say seven parties plus independents). There should be someone screaming at Justin Trudeau “this is not going to hurt the USA at all, it will cripple the Canadian economy, perhaps for generations” but there is not.

There is not because the media (much like in England) have nurtured a deep resentment for the man, portrayed him as a buffoon, a bigot and standing up to him is the noble thing to do.

Never has it been more clear that in this case, Canada decided to put itself on the train tracks in protest of Trump, needlessly, and now have the Trump train bellowing down on them all the while the Canadian public are cheering Justin Trudeau on to hold his ground and the full support of all parties as if that were the right thing to do.

When in reality, that is not the right thing to do at all, it isn’t the popular thing, but the right thing would be to cut a deal on NAFTA and ensure Canada regains access to 100% of the American market. THAT is what would be in Canada’s interest. But I doubt we will see that, instead we get to watch a train wreak.


#2598

Let’s look for middle ground, shall we?

Imagine a tree trunk, long dead, infested with carpenter ants. Some day - no one can predict the moment - it will fall. If someone is underneath, that someone will be injured.

If someone says “we must take an ax to this thing!” you will be skeptical - if you know anything about rotted wood.

You walk over, put your hand on the trunk, and give a shove. Either something happens, or nothing happens.

If something happens, the problem is solved. If nothing happens, then you know there’s no hurry.

Takeaway: when something is rotten, give it a shove and see what happens. Then, either way, walk away and get on with your life.

The trouble with Libertarians is they won’t even give it a proper shove.


#2599

How would you apply that to the last Rowlandism?

Those who are stubbornly wrong will destroy themselves. All we need do is let them.

“All we need to do is ‘push’ them,” eh? :roll:


#2600

If there’s no-one in all of Canada who would oppose the Don’s trade policy for reasons other than derangement and hatefulness, is there at least someone, somewhere on your Earth, who would?

As my worthless self says? :face_with_raised_eyebrow: Anything but the big two are just illusions?

We shouldn’t spend too much time hanging out with Rollo types. Psychic osmosis is a thing, whatever the scientific explanation may be. :brain:


#2601

If the question is, if a madman hijacks a locomotive and has it running at breakneck speed with the breaks disabled, is it a good idea to stand on the tracks waving a LGBT flag, my advise would be that doesn’t seem the wisest course of action.

Think of it this way, in a game of poker Canada is gambling with 20% of it’s stack, USA has a stack 10 times the size and only needs to gamble with 2%, plus it’s grown it’s economy to 3.5% growth. For USA, risk is contained, for Canada, it’s a huge risk.

What is to be gained? For Trump it’s the auto industry, if that moves to Ohio and Michigan, he gets to keep swing states and guarantees electoral victory in 2020. Not a prize to be sneezed at. What’s in this for Canada?

As to the question, should people be standing up to Trump on his economic push for better deals for the US. Or is Trump being reasonable/unreasonable, I’m not sure, you know, Im not an economist. I have heard some unfair trade practices by some countries, lets say China. I don’t know if that justifies what Trump is doing.

When you pull a 7 and 8 in poker, and it looks like your opponent is sitting on a pair of aces with a stack ten times the size of yours, you don’t gamble 20% of your stack in the hope they fold and you get to keep your ante and win theirs. Because realistically, in the real world, that’s not how it will play out.

See, this is what I mean by stupid dumb shit, it should be glaringly obvious what Trump is doing, why he is doing it and what he hopes to gain from it. But no, Canada don’t want to fold their cards for this round, everyone keeps egging them on to keep building the pot, well lets check back in around a year from now.


#2602

False dichotomy strikes again: you’re talking to me like I’m supporting Canada’s position. I never said that. For all you know maybe I oppose it. It doesn’t matter. I have zero interest in debating the trade policy.

My question to you is, can people oppose the Trump administration’s position for reasons that are not “deranged and hateful”? (Second question: how does your LGBT flag analogy work?)

I believe people can and do oppose things for sane and compassionate reasons, regardless of whether their opposition is good or bad in the grand scheme of things.

Deranged and hateful behavior has a tendency to be problematic, but it can also result in good things.


Btw the US ambassador invited 1000 people to the July 4th party this year (and several prominent ones declined), compared to 4000 last year, or so say the “deranged & hateful” media. That doesn’t prove anyone’s right or wrong, of course. Just putting it out there.


#2603

Your first question. Yes of course people can oppose what Trump is doing for all sorts of reasons. I would also suggest that most people weighing in on the subject are like me and are not familiar enough with the granular details surrounding trade to discern if what is happening is reasonable or unreasonable. This is the sort of thing both sides put on their spin and getting a clear picture is not so easy.

Second question was because at the beginning of renegotiation of NAFTA, Canada brought with it a chapter on gender equality and LGBT issues.

I agree with you also, people can oppose things for sane and compassionate reasons. They can also oppose something because it’s profitable for them despite it being completely unreasonable.

The big one on NAFTA, for the Americans was the place of origin clause. Canada (and Mexico I believe) are intransigent on this. From my understanding it’s a legitimate point, as I understand it, other countries ship to Canada and Mexico where they assemble whatever it is they are making and ship to the USA under NAFTA. It’s the cheapest way to get products into the US market, provides jobs for Canada and Mexico, hence their intransigence on doing anything about it, because it suits them. Puts the USA in a bind, either they just put up with it, or they scrap NAFTA. Canada is betting Trump is bluffing, but I don’t think that’s a safe bet, at all.


#2604

When they have done most of the work of destroying themselves, the astute will know when a gentle prodding in the back is called for.

Call it the “tipping point.”


#2605

The difference isn’t that hard to spot…

http://thefederalist.com/2018/07/03/convention-libertarians-struggle-distinguish-trump/

Principled. Whatever.

I’ll help you out, guys. Here’s a huge clue to the real difference:

Ask yourselves why that is.

Trump is what Libertarians would be if Libertarians weren’t losers.


#2606


:wink: