"Make America Great Again!": The TRUMP Thread!!! - - - - - - - - - - - - Part 21

[KRYPTON INC.]

Reading public of the interwebs... Do you REALLY think anyone actually believes that Streep's comments were meant to be discriminatory against foreigners?


Or is it more likely that some are making Everest out of anthills because they just don't know any other way of communicating at this point?

If you've been paying attention reading public, you know in your heart of hearts which one it really is.

 

[TheVileOne]

Reading public of the interwebs... Do you REALLY think anyone actually believes that Streep's comments were meant to be discriminatory against foreigners?


Or is it more likely that some are making Everest out of anthills because they just don't know any other way of communicating at this point?

If you've been paying attention reading public, you know in your heart of hearts which one it really is.

That's the problem though. She was completely ignorant and in her need to have this moment she insulted a whole industry of hard working people that heavily employs a lot of foreigners, immigrants and outsiders. It's beyond condescending.

The woman who just defeated Ronda Rousey at UFC 207 is not only Brazilian, she's openly lesbian. So yeah. Way to go. I know in my heart of hearts I'm not giving her a pass on this and I don't have to. And guess what? My not doing so definitely isn't going to make her lose sleep at night either.

 

[KRYPTON INC.]

That's so absolutely silly and obtuse and deep down everyone pretty much everyone knows it. Play the outrage card for something actually outrageous. In order to actually BE different from the people you oppose you have to ACTUALLY be different. Playing the "That side blows stuff way out of proportion so I'm going to willfully do the same thing" card is not doing that. You don't really believe that she meant to be discriminatory against foreigners, you aren't actually angry and you know that any equivalence you can come up with will be spurious at best. No. I suspect that those making an issue of this think that's how the other side works and therefor they must do the same.
"They get angry at useless stuff... We must do the same!"

It's a formula built to showcase hypocrisy for sure but little else. It also displays a flawed judgment. I mean... If you are seeing shades of anti-foreigner rhetoric in what Streep said... What else are people offended by that getting totally wrong?

 

[Morg]

WTF??


she really have no clue about history??

 

[DeadPresident]

Streep's speech was based on rhetoric, it clearly wasn't her intention to insult, so to over-analyze her word choice seems excessively pedantic. Her comments about Football and MMA were clearly in reference to the perceived demographics that participate and like those activities. Might have been a poor example but the spirit of her message was appropriate and good.

 

[DaddlerTheDalek]

WTF??

"Walls Work". Yeah. This wall was really awesome...

 

[John G. Lodge]

Wow. Nice guilt-by-association fallacy there, with Nikita and Walter "endorsing" Trump.

Since you resort to logical fallacies, I question if you have anything else worthwhile to offer this discussion.

 

[DaddlerTheDalek]

Nope. I just reacted to a dumb little tweet with a dumb little picture I found in the internet.

 

[Manowar]

I love how Trump tries to defend himself against the mocking of a disabled man. Everyone heard and saw what he said. There's no defending that kind of behaviour. But, in typical Trump fashion, instead of just trying to defend himself, he had to add in that Streep is "overrated."


How easily people forgot about that instance as well. Trump supporters shouldn't sleep well at night.

Trump mocked that reporter, but not because he was disabled, even though Trumps actions may look that way. The thing is, right or wrong, that is how Trump mocks a lot of people he finds incompetent. There are many videos of him using the exact same "mocking gestures" portraying many other people he finds incompetent who are not disabled.

Does he always act presidential? Hell no... But voters knew and accepted his flaws, and still choose him to run the country for a variety of reasons.

The public should still hold him accountable for his actions as president, but they also have to move forward and work with him.

Streep's speech is like hearing your doorbell expecting friends over and when you open the door, it's a Jehovah witness preaching their beliefs...

 

[Sithborg]

And onto something actually important, Session's confirmation hearing is happening now.

 

[Sithborg]

"How does it feel to be called racist?"

Oh **** off.

 

[Kyle]

"How does it feel to be called racist?"

Oh **** off.

what happened?

 

[Sithborg]

what happened?

That was a question that Session received.

 

[summerteeth]

Streep's speech was based on rhetoric, it clearly wasn't her intention to insult, so to over-analyze her word choice seems excessively pedantic. Her comments about Football and MMA were clearly in reference to the perceived demographics that participate and like those activities. Might have been a poor example but the spirit of her message was appropriate and good.

Yeah, but it makes her come across as elitist and out of touch. I don't think her message was one that was based in any type of reality. Nobody, literally nobody is advocating kicking out legal citizens or residents. Also the part where she said we are the most vilified people in society...give me a freaking break on that one. Nobody is going to feel sorry for you guys. To throw yourself a pity party and shame some midwestern blue collar worker for their interests is downright laughable and typical. It really was an unnecessary barb thrown.

It was a speech full of navel gazing. If she wanted to focus the importance that immigration is to the country and the value immigrants have on our culture and what they bring to our society is overwhelmingly positive she should have broadened her scope outside of the people in the room. Then again, what do you expect.

 

[Kyle]

That was a question that Session received.

Like the question, just looked up - hate his answer. The guy was deemed too racist to be a federal judge, now he's trying to act like he's not racist.

 

[DeadPresident]

Yeah, but it makes her come across as elitist and out of touch. I don't think her message was one that was based in any type of reality. Nobody, literally nobody is advocating kicking out legal citizens or residents. Also the part where she said we are the most vilified people in society...give me a freaking break on that one. Nobody is going to feel sorry for you guys. To throw yourself a pity party and shame some midwestern blue collar worker for their interests is downright laughable and typical. It really was an unnecessary barb thrown.

It was a speech full of navel gazing. If she wanted to focus the importance that immigration is to the country and the value immigrants have on our culture and what they bring to our society is overwhelmingly positive she should have broadened her scope outside of the people in the room. Then again, what do you expect.

I agree, but considering the time she had at her disposal and the audience present she gave it a shot. It boiled down to respecting diversity for its own sake (which is a whole other conversation) and to be fair her concerns aren't misplaced. Trump and his recklessness are serious risks, especially at a very tentative and uncertain time in world history.

That's why I said her example was poorly chosen, she preached tolerance for diversity but essentially shot down all the perceived "white people" stuff in the process, which is counter-productive. The contents of the message were seriously flawed, but I think what she may have been aiming for was right.

Trump mocked that reporter, but not because he was disabled, even though Trumps actions may look that way. The thing is, right or wrong, that is how Trump mocks a lot of people he finds incompetent. There are many videos of him using the exact same "mocking gestures" portraying many other people he finds incompetent who are not disabled.

Does he always act presidential? Hell no... But voters knew and accepted his flaws, and still choose him to run the country for a variety of reasons.

The public should still hold him accountable for his actions as president, but they also have to move forward and work with him.

Streep's speech is like hearing your doorbell expecting friends over and when you open the door, it's a Jehovah witness preaching their beliefs...

I love how people will defend others by claiming to know their intentions…it's truly, truly astounding. "He didn't call that gay guy a ****** because he was gay, that's just how he mocks lots of people he finds incompetent!"

 

[Kyle]

I know absolutely nothing about business. But one thing that confuses me is small business optimism has risen since the election, however Trump put Linda McMahon in charge of small businesses who has a noted history of crushing small businesses.... What's going on here?

 

[DeadPresident]

Now you're just repeating newspaper headlines. Provide a little more input than that.

 

[Kyle]

Now you're just repeating newspaper headlines. Provide a little more input than that.

Exactly. I have no input if you read my message, I'm pretty sure the first sentence states as such as plainly as humanly possible. I'm here for an explanation since the two are in conflict. Small business optimism is soaring, yet Linda McMahon is reputed as an enemy of small businesses... Is that an overstatement about her the media issued? Is something else going on? The two are conflicting. Not everything is an argument, man.

 

[DeadPresident]

You're talking about Trump's selections. The same guy who sold his self-branded steaks in a store known for electronic equipment, if you're looking for sense or reason you've come to the wrong place. Trump's cabinet is going to be a friends and family affair where his inner circle are going to be allowed access to positions that allow them to enrich themselves as easily as possible. This isn't anything as intricate or ideological as Nazi Germany or Communist Russia, Trump is simply going to use his new position to benefit himself and his cronies as much as possible before the tricked and angry populace notices.

Trump isn't going to send hit squads after homosexuals or minorities, he's going to put the country on auto-pilot and make money hand over fist using every dubious, unethical and (possibly) illegal avenue available to him. He's just going to keep doing what he's been doing for the last 40 odd years, only at a larger scale.

 

[Handsome Rob]

I love how people will defend others by claiming to know their intentions…it's truly, truly astounding. "He didn't call that gay guy a ****** because he was gay, that's just how he mocks lots of people he finds incompetent!"

But is it not the same when you criticize someone by claiming to know their intention? If Trump exhibits the same juvenile gestures when mocking several of his opponents, what else are you doing but claiming intent when you say that in this particular case, Trump is doing these gestures because that individual has a condition that causes similar gestures? That is claiming to know intent.

Of course, it would be nice if all this could be avoided by Trump not acting childish, either in person or on Twitter . . .

 

[Kyle]

Um... My statement had absolutely nothing to do with Trump himself. It had to do with polls and data finding that PEOPLE''s small business optimism has risen since the election regardless of news of Linda McMahon. The only group being discussed here is the people, as well as McMahon. With what we know of McMahon, it's odd that small business optimsim has risen unless there's more to both of them. Data on the two are in conflict, unless small businesses are just ignoring her which seems too simple of an explanation for this one (20 year high reportedly).

 

[DeadPresident]

But is it not the same when you criticize someone by claiming to know their intention? If Trump exhibits the same juvenile gestures when mocking several of his opponents, what else are you doing but claiming intent when you say that in this particular case, Trump is doing these gestures because that individual has a condition that causes similar gestures? That is claiming to know intent.

I'm not sure I'm following?

I'm criticizing Trump because the context of his gestures in relation to a disabled person are what should be criticized IMO. I'm not claiming to know his intent, I'm just claiming his behavior was unacceptable.

Um... My statement had absolutely nothing to do with Trump himself. It had to do with polls and data finding that PEOPLE''s small business optimism has risen since the election regardless of news of Linda McMahon. The only group being discussed here is the people, as well as McMahon. With what we know of McMahon, it's odd that small business optimsim has risen unless there's more to both of them.

Every pick Trump makes has to do with Trump himself. The truth? Laymen are uninformed as **** and don't know the operational variables necessary for a healthy economy and know even less about how individuals in high ranking positions can affect economic outcomes. You're asking why the same people who voted for Trump, a notorious, borderline compulsive liar and serial business failure on the basis that he "tells it like it is" and "is successful"? Small business optimism will rise for the same reason, because people will interpret these decisions how they want to, in a complete vacuum of reality.

 

[Handsome Rob]

Um... My statement had absolutely nothing to do with Trump himself. It had to do with polls and data finding that PEOPLE''s small business optimism has risen since the election regardless of news of Linda McMahon. The only group being discussed here is the people, as well as McMahon. With what we know of McMahon, it's odd that small business optimsim has risen unless there's more to her and them.

The cost of additional rules and regulations handed down by governments tends to hit small business owners more greatly. They may not have departments dedicated to compliance, and so the additional work falls on already overworked management (who, again, may not be adept at reading legal and regulatory code).

Trump is viewed as business-friendly, and so they would anticipate a relaxing of regulations that not only take away time from conducting business but also add costs that can't be plugged into actual business operations. There are a good number of people who believe that federal and state regulations don't have any real negative consequences. The regulation accomplishes what it proposes to accomplish, and there are no secondary or tertiary impacts that could possibly be negative. That perspective, of course, is completely and profoundly ignorant. Given the seemingly unending growth in regulations and rules that must be complied with (and the perception that Democrats in particular are quick to pile on regulations after regulations), it would only make sense that optimism among small businesses would spike after his election--as opposed to a Clinton election, which would have been viewed as more of the same, regulations-wise.

 

[Kyle]

The awkward thing is also that no left news (or in general) is mentioning McMahon yet which flies in the face of the data. For those who know the economy and business, if people hold false beliefs and act upon them in the face of McMahon acting against them what are the kinds of repercussions we are looking at? Would this create a neutral effect or further and severely cripple the economy? Similarly to how the housing "boom" led to the prior recession (not exact, but still falsehoods at play economically).