[Non-Official Megathread] Donald Trump 2016

[Eliseus]

No they are worse than useless right now even. The election will be between x democrat and Trump, not between x democrat, y democrat, and Trump. So why on earth are you giving validity to polls that are based around the fact the democrats have not chosen their nominee yet?

The same thing happened in 2008. McCain got a polling boost and was ahead for a time because he was the republicans nominee while Obama and Hillary were still fighting it out, and look how that ended up turning out in Nov. So why are using data that is known to be misleading and worse than useless as if it had some usefulness?

You clearly didn't read my entire response, I strongly implied if nothing else the polls are showing an increase for Trump that is unexpected. I also several times stated that polls can be wrong, that they aren't absolute. You don't want to use this data because any polls not in support of your agenda should obviously be disregarded.

[BuckSparkles]

No they are worse than useless right now even. The election will be between x democrat and Trump, not between x democrat, y democrat, and Trump. So why on earth are you giving validity to polls that are based around the fact the democrats have not chosen their nominee yet?

The same thing happened in 2008. McCain got a polling boost and was ahead for a time because he was the republicans nominee while Obama and Hillary were still fighting it out, and look how that ended up turning out in Nov. So why are using data that is known to be misleading and worse than useless as if it had some usefulness?

Why do I get the feeling that any poll that doesn't have Clinton landsliding Trump is useless to you?

[Stacyrect]

That's really an excellent contribution to this discussion. Just Grade-A material. Your posts should definitely be taken seriously in the future.

Sorry that you see it that way. After years of marriage to a crazy woman, no more circular conversations for me.

[BuckSparkles]

Evidence of Trump bullshitting and being an egomaniac is bashing? You might have consumed too much rust.

I have not seen you comment on any of my things with your usual approach in awhile.

I missed you <3

[Daelak]

I have not seen you comment on any of my things with your usual approach in awhile.

I missed you <3

You bring nothing of substance to any thread, evidence #1 is above.

[BuckSparkles]

You bring nothing of substance to any thread, evidence #1 is above.

Any threads? I comment on many threads. And I don't bring substance to -any- thread?

Big claim there.

It's okay, I still love you.

[Deleted]

Evidence of Trump bullshitting and being an egomaniac is bashing? You might have consumed too much rust.

As Buck said earlier: "I am still going to vote for him, and the people, like you, who hate him, will hate him no matter what."

Spout all the crap you want to, it does not matter. You aren't going to change anyone's mind.

[Daelak]

As Buck said earlier: "I am still going to vote for him, and the people, like you, who hate him, will hate him no matter what."

Spout all the crap you want to, it does not matter. You aren't going to change anyone's mind.

I didn't spout crap, Bucksparkles comes in with his classic 7 syllable sentences accusing people who linked sources articles about Trump's past bullshitting and narcissistic endeavors as "bashing".

[Deleted]

Also in Trump news, Trump is building walls to protect his precious golf courses against rising sea levels, but apparently climate change is still a hoax made by China.

[alexw]

You clearly didn't read my entire response, I strongly implied if nothing else the polls are showing an increase for Trump that is unexpected. I also several times stated that polls can be wrong, that they aren't absolute. You don't want to use this data because any polls not in support of your agenda should obviously be disregarded.

This is what I mean, you are trying to suggest that the data is suggesting something that it isn't to push your narrative.

They are not showing an increase for Trump that is unexpected. They are showing an increase that is entirely expected. This is exactly what happens in every presidential race when the other candidates drop out and one becomes their de facto champion - there is a polling bump.

And I don't want to use this data because its utterly misleading. If it was Trump vs only Clinton then I'd accept the data no matter that I don't like it. Hell, I'm actually a sanders supporter, and I accept the fact he has roughly a zero chance of winning the nomination despite the fact that I want him to win. I accept data that is accurate or has some validity to it. I don't accept data that is completely and utterly misleading such as the data you are trying to push. Wait until a couple weeks after the convention and THEN we can talk about polling as if it has some accuracy.

[BuckSparkles]

I didn't spout crap, Bucksparkles comes in with his classic 7 syllable sentences accusing people who linked sources articles about Trump's past bullshitting and narcissistic endeavors as "bashing".

Let me educate you.

"Trump does this: I think Trump is wrong." Is Critique.

"Trump does this: What an absolute shitbag racist asshole fiend who eats rust." Is Bashing.

Observe the difference in language and the mood of the words.

There may be some critique in this thread, but there is a great deal of bashing. Kind of like how you insulted me previously.

[Bollocks]

Let me educate you.

"Trump does this: I think Trump is wrong." Is Critique.

"Trump does this: What an absolute shitbag racist asshole fiend who eats rust." Is Bashing.

Observe the difference in language and the mood of the words.

There may be some critique in this thread, but there is a great deal of bashing. Kind of like how you insulted me previously.

I like to paint like trump does it. Those aren't insults, it's just not being PC

[Reeve]

I hate megathreads. It just means that a few diehards end up spending all their time in that thread while anyone else who has an interesting topic to bring into discussion faces 500 pages of reading material they don't want to go through, making a huge barrier to entry.

The nice thing about new threads is that anyone can jump in at some point near the beginning, having read the thread, so that people don't immediately jump down their throat with, "We already discussed this 167 pages ago!!!" Megathreads quash meaningful discussion amongst people who don't want to devote their lives to those megathreads, and among those that do, they end up becoming endless regurgitations of the same arguments going in circles.

[ringpriest]

Lmao. Great argument. Trump hurts your feelings (are you an illegal alien in the country...... illegal?), therefore psychopath and pathological liar. Neither has he been diagnosed with. On the other hand. Hillary's evil is all over the internet.

Nice ad hominem (and a great example of the corrosive effect Trump has on American society) - I'm going to guess you engaged in it (along with deciding to make up Trump "hurting my feelings" and attempting to divert the discussion to Clinton) and cut my post down to a single sentence fragment, as part of a feeble attempt to divert attention from the utter baselessness of your ludicrous original claim (when you pretended that people were voting for Clinton because of sheer anti-Republican bias, rather than because of how awful Trump is).

I never claimed that Trump has been clinically diagnosed as either a pathological liar or a psychopath, just that he appears to be one. Since you didn't disagree with that, I'll presume you agreed, which leaves the question: Why does the simple fact that he hasn't been clinically diagnosed (as far as I'm aware) for his psychopathy and pathological lying make Trump acceptable, even though he does lie near-compulsively and repeatedly demonstrates the behavior one would expect from a psychopath?

And lest you or someone else claim that evidence is not present... "Harvard Psychologist Explains Trump Is ‘Dangerous’ Because He’s Literally a Narcissistic Psychopath" and before anyone raises the accusation of left-wing bias, I'll also reference the National Review: "Trump is an example of the Stupid Psychopath Problem."

On the lying front, here's a few links - more can be found with little effort:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...stantly-lying/
http://www.dailywire.com/news/4834/t...s-hank-berrien
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/12/...ear-award.html


I'll leave by linking this for reference (and to add that I will be rather surprised if your response rises above blanket contradiction):

[alexw]

Why do I get the feeling that any poll that doesn't have Clinton landsliding Trump is useless to you?

No I'd accept a poll as having some relevance if we didn't still have sanders in the race. Because he is still in it, it means polls right now are meaningless. The Nov election isn't going to be Clinton vs Sanders vs Trump so why would you give validity to polls that are essentially this?

[BuckSparkles]

No I'd accept a poll as having some relevance if we didn't still have sanders in the race. Because he is still in it, it means polls right now are meaningless. The Nov election isn't going to be Clinton vs Sanders vs Trump so why would you give validity to polls that are essentially this?

After reading a few more of your posts, I would say you at least have a good point. Perhaps I was wrong about the whole polling thing.

[Eliseus]

Snip

Lmao victim card.

[ringpriest]

Lmao victim card.

Such an eloquent rebuttal - you've said reams about your character and intellect; still, it is nice to see you agree that Trump is indefensible.

[Deleted]

That's not the objective though. We are not trying to convince people of changing their vote, it's just a discussion about Trump. I think most of us are fully aware that Trump supporters are inmune to reason and evidence , so we are just discussing.You can either add to the contribution or leave.

Then, by your own admission, this is not actually a "discussion" about Trump, it is - as Buck pointed out - nothing but a circle J of Trump bashing.

Since you are "fully aware that Trump supporters are immune to reason and evidence" then there is no reason for a Trump supporter to try and refute anything you folks says. Consequently, that leads not to a discussion and to nothing more than a "bash Trump" thread, which is truly what this is.

Again, say anything you like, it really doesn't matter - all you are doing is playing in an echo chamber.

[Bollocks]

Then, by your own admission, this is not actually a "discussion" about Trump, it is - as Buck pointed out - nothing but a circle J of Trump bashing.

Since you are "fully aware that Trump supporters are immune to reason and evidence" then there is no reason for a Trump supporter to try and refute anything you folks says. Consequently, that leads not to a discussion and to nothing more than a "bash Trump" thread, which is truly what this is.

Again, say anything you like, it really doesn't matter - all you are doing is playing in an echo chamber.

You misunderstood or my phrasing was inadequate. It's a discussion trump supporters can come and add to it and even refute the arguments , and claims made here. However the intention of this thread is not convince people, ideologies are hard to change and this place is far too small to make an impact on public opinion, its to discuss ideas and I like to think that most of us in this forum know that. If you can refute claims made here do so. The last was an opinion of mine, based on my experience I'll delete as its unclear the message I was trying to express