US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7155
Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
LegalLord
United Kingdom13774 Posts
| ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
WolfintheSheep
Canada14127 Posts
On March 21 2017 03:35 LegalLord wrote: Good reporters are in short supply. And stories based on bullshit certainly have gone viral in the current cycle. Well, if you're looking at the stories gone viral, you've already picked the wrong starting line. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41088 Posts
Late into the third hour of Monday's House Intelligence Committee hearing, during which the FBI's director confirmed the agency was investigating whether there was any "cooperation" between the Trump campaign and Russia, one Republican congressman attempted to discredit the media's reporting on the topic. "Is it possible that the New York Times was misled by individuals claiming to be current or former American officials?" Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) asked. When Comey said he could not answer that question, Wenstrup continued down the same path. "Is it possible that a so-called 'source' to a media outlet may actually be a Russian advocate?" he asked. "Nothing to do with this story, but is it possible that a Russian surrogate could actually be the source that a newspaper is relying on?" Comey again refused to confirm or deny the source of a specific article, saying only: "In general, sure. Somebody could always be pretending to be something they're not." The New York Times article in question disclosed to the public that several members of Trump's presidential campaign and inner circle had phone conversations and other communications with Russian officials that were intercepted by U.S. intelligence agencies. The New York Times did not immediately respond to TPM's request for comment. Source edit #1: Edit#2: | ||
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On the point of pride; a fun thought experiment. Are there any of the 7 deadly sins that Trump does NOT personify? Clearly he personifies pride, greed, lust, wrath, and envy. Anyone got an argument for gluttony and sloth? | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41088 Posts
| ||
Artisreal
Germany9227 Posts
Not preparing for meetings. Not reading up on what he spouts. Healthcare is "complicated" Hes a fat blow. What more is there to see for gluttony? | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On March 21 2017 04:48 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: ......? https://twitter.com/DavidCornDC/status/843910949681664001 Sure the GOP just wants this thing to end as soon as possible so they can get on to not dealing with the ACA. They really seem lost without Obama to rail against. | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On March 21 2017 04:43 On_Slaught wrote: Pride cometh before the fall. His inability to just admit his mistakes and his need to always be right will get him. If not on this issue, then another. On the point of pride; a fun thought experiment. Are there any of the 7 deadly sins that Trump does NOT personify? Clearly he personifies pride, greed, lust, wrath, and envy. Anyone got an argument for gluttony and sloth? i'd say he doesn't fit gluttony particularly, and definitely not sloth. at least from what I've heard of him. | ||
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
also Kasparov's twitter has been pretty fire today | ||
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States40776 Posts
On March 21 2017 04:58 zlefin wrote: i'd say he doesn't fit gluttony particularly, and definitely not sloth. at least from what I've heard of him. He's one of the lazier Presidents in my lifetime. Refuses to work weekends and caused a diplomatic incident with Australia because it'd been a long day and he'd not had a midday nap. | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On March 21 2017 05:25 KwarK wrote: He's one of the lazier Presidents in my lifetime. Refuses to work weekends and caused a diplomatic incident with Australia because it'd been a long day and he'd not had a midday nap. just because he goes away on the weekend doesn't mean he's not working. the president can never really escape from work. and he'd cause a diplomatic incident with australia if he talked to them, so same difference I'm in general in favor of president's getting plenty of rest; regardless of trump being [various disparaging remarks], the most important thing is for the president to make a smaller number of high quality decisions and be ready for emergencies. I feel that most president's work too hard for how high-stress a job it is, and that we'd get better overall results if they delegate a bit more and get enough rest. especially given the considerable amount of known data on job performance effects by fatigue. last I heard any actual reporting on his workload, he was working hard; haven't heard much recently on the topic. | ||
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41088 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28262 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States40776 Posts
On March 21 2017 05:56 Liquid`Drone wrote: Lazy is one negative quality Trump can't be attributed with. I sure as hell wish it was accurate, but he's clearly a hard worker.. Somewhat selective, sure, lacking attention span for some of the more boring and tedious aspects of being a politician (or student of anything), absolutely, but he still works hard. He doesn't go to his briefings, clearly doesn't read briefings about any of the important subjects he ought to know, watches tv half the day and tweets about it the other half. I mean come on, really? This is a man who goes into every meeting completely unprepared and forces foreign leaders, from Theresa May to Shinzo Abe to Angela Merkel to Malcolm Turnbull to educate him about the fundamentals of the discussion at hand. The job is a vanity project for Trump, nothing more. This is a man who didn't really have any kind of idea for a healthcare plan, waited too long without working on one and then defended himself by saying that nobody knew it was a complicated subject. If you were doing a group project and Trump was in your group would you really say that he's a hard worker? Because I feel like he'd never show up to the meetings, never do the research or reading and then insist upon doing the presentation on the day, only to fuck it up. He took the job for the title, when forced to do actual work he throws all the responsibility away from his person and then deflects. When he's unable to deflect he shows himself to be woefully ignorant and incompetent. | ||
Artisreal
Germany9227 Posts
| ||
LegalLord
United Kingdom13774 Posts
On March 21 2017 06:05 Artisreal wrote: The thing is that his job is to work for the country and he's procrastinating "50% of the time" on twitter. I think that procrastination is the least of Trump's problems. If he were to do nothing for four years then we would probably have a relatively uneventful presidency. | ||
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On March 21 2017 06:03 KwarK wrote: He doesn't go to his briefings, clearly doesn't read briefings about any of the important subjects he ought to know, watches tv half the day and tweets about it the other half. I mean come on, really? This is a man who goes into every meeting completely unprepared and forces foreign leaders, from Theresa May to Shinzo Abe to Angela Merkel to Malcolm Turnbull to educate him about the fundamentals of the discussion at hand. The job is a vanity project for Trump, nothing more. This is a man who didn't really have any kind of idea for a healthcare plan, waited too long without working on one and then defended himself by saying that nobody knew it was a complicated subject. If you were doing a group project and Trump was in your group would you really say that he's a hard worker? Because I feel like he'd never show up to the meetings, never do the research or reading and then insist upon doing the presentation on the day, only to fuck it up. He took the job for the title, when forced to do actual work he throws all the responsibility away from his person and then deflects. When he's unable to deflect he shows himself to be woefully ignorant and incompetent. I'd say that he's a hard, dumb worker. He does a lot of work, but he does not work effectively or efficiently at it, and does not prep adequately, and was never prepared for the job in the first place. terribly ignorant of course. | ||
LegalLord
United Kingdom13774 Posts
| ||
| ||