Is Trump TRYING To Lose?

[hydrium]

The Trump = Hitler shtick is just confirmation bias in peoples minds employed by the Clinton Campaign to whip up fervor in the mindless zealots of the far left. I don't know how a man who has never said anything about any race could be defined as Hitler but the Clinton campaign found a way and now liberals are primed to see anything Trump does as Hitler 2.0.

Honestly it says more about the people who fall for this than anything else but hey, useful idiots.

[Felya]

The Trump = Hitler shtick is just confirmation bias in peoples minds employed by the Clinton Campaign to whip up fervor in the mindless zealots of the far left. I don't know how a man who has never said anything about any race could be defined as Hitler but the Clinton campaign found a way and now liberals are primed to see anything Trump does as Hitler 2.0.

Honestly it says more about the people who fall for this than anything else but hey, useful idiots.

GOP, including Paul Ryan, have denounced the image as well. The only thing the above proves, is that Trump supporters will blame everything on Hillary or liberals, even when conservatives and GOP is saying the same thing.

- - - Updated - - -

The point is to get u to think for urself, not most of the cattle do X argument.

Think for your self, but with what basis? Thinking for your self is in no way congruent with being informed. In fact, ignoring evidance to form your own opinion is the definition of ignorant. Self evaluation of being informed, is meaningless. It litteraly becomes 'agree with me or you are misinformed'... which is little more than confirmation bias...

[Nfinitii]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histor..._United_States

He ranked solidly in the top half on the APSA survey in 2015. I don't think it means as much now as rankings after we've had a time to see his ultimate impact, but it would at least reasonably suggest he has been a decent president.

Again, quoting what other ppl think or do is not a valid justification. Ur basically saying these other ppl think he is an ok president.

Imo, he hasn't been. I have my reasons and don't feel like arguing over them. But just b/c other ppl think or do is not a valid reason, or I would be a crack head b/c that's the direction most of my friends went growing up.

[Kujako]

The point is to get u to think for urself, not most of the cattle do X argument.

So anyone that disagrees with you and your lack of information isn't thinking for themselves?

[Felya]

Again, quoting what other ppl think or do is not a valid justification. Ur basically saying these other ppl think he is an ok president.

Imo, he hasn't been. I have my reasons and don't feel like arguing over them. But just b/c other ppl think or do is not a valid reason, or I would be a crack head b/c that's the direction most of my friends went growing up.

No, those statistics do not mean you should agree, they show the general public's opinion. This is where your 'they must not be informed' comes in. Which, without you stating your reasons, is the exact thing you are doing.

[Nfinitii]

Think for your self, but with what basis? Thinking for your self is in no way congruent with being informed. In fact, ignoring evidance to form your own opinion is the definition of ignorant. Self evaluation of being informed, is meaningless. It litteraly becomes 'agree with me or you are misinformed'... which is little more than confirmation bias...

Think for urself involves doing research to make an informed decision.

Quoting "53% of Americans view Obama favorably" shows nothing about being informed or making a decision. It's a cop-out to thinking. Just because a majority think one way does not make it true or right. Just because 53% may feel he did a good job but the other 47% of Americans don't feel that way means their wrong without actually acknowledging y they feel that way.

[Adam Jensen]

Trump has never said one thing that was racist - not one. The only people that proffer that opinion are imbeciles that have no ability to think rationally (liberals/progressives).

I dare you to post one thing - ONE FUCKING THING - that he said that is actually racist (although I have a feeling that you don't even have the first fucking clue as to what the actual definition of racism is.)

Let me help you just a little bit before you make some idiotic mistake....

Mexican IS NOT A FUCKING RACE. (regardless, he never said that Whites were better than Mexicans)
Muslim IS NOT A FUCKING RACE. (regardless, he never said that Whites were better than Mexicans)

Now - go ahead and post one fucking thing that he said that was racist.

/crickets

So your argument is that "bigotry" better describes Trump than "racism?"

[Nfinitii]

No, those statistics do not mean you should agree, they show the general public's opinion. This is where your 'they must not be informed' comes in. Which, without you stating your reasons, is the exact thing you are doing.

I'm not saying the 53% r not informed, that quoting what the masses do is not a valid reason to do or believe one way or another. It's easy to believe something b/c that is what everyone else does with out actually taking the time to learn for urself.

Movie theaters r perfect examples, when the movie lets out a majority of ppl all go to the first bathroom available with out thinking, but if u go the opposite way or to the farthest bathroom u can find an empty bathroom and get done quicker.

[alexw]

Anyone else see that new Trump ad with the guy in the cemetery? "I'll be voting this fall, but there are a lot of people who WON'T be voting" and the camera pans to the military graveyard.

Is that a subtle way of him saying "I need you republican boomers to stop aging and dying"?

[Nfinitii]

Those "other people" are political scientists whose specific area of expertise is the US presidency.

It's other ppls opinions which may not align with my values or experiences and should not influence ones ability to research and form their own opinions.

[Felya]

I'm not saying the 53% r not informed, that quoting what the masses do is not a valid reason to do or believe one way or another. It's easy to believe something b/c that is what everyone else does with out actually taking the time to learn for urself.

No one is saying it is. You are confusing having your opinion and being the authority on the opinion. You can say that you think he is the worst president, but that's no reason for anyone else to think the same. Majority of people polled disagreeing with you, does not make them wrong. It's why blanket statements, without a reason, don't work...

Movie theaters r perfect examples, when the movie lets out a majority of ppl all go to the first bathroom available with out thinking, but if u go the opposite way or to the farthest bathroom u can find an empty bathroom and get done quicker.

This is why I called confirmation bias earlier. You don't know why majority go to the same one. Is it their first time at the theater? Is the other bathroom containing full amenities? Did the majority even leave through the same door? There are a lot of reasons this happens and any attribute to it, is simply basing an opinion on not having all of the information.

- - - Updated - - -

It's other ppls opinions which may not align with my values or experiences and should not influence ones ability to research and form their own opinions.

Then do it... Do the reasearch and show them they are wrong. Otherwise, the only reason they are wrong, is because it does not match your opinion.

[Deleted]

Hillary, Trump, Hillary, Hillary, Bernie, Trump, Hillary, Trump, Hillary, Hillary, Trump, Bernie, Trump, Trump...

Welcome to MMO Champ 2016!

It definitely was more fun when the whole feminism threads were still around.

[Aucald]

I'm no fan of Donald Trump, but this "star" controversy has to be one of the most manufactured examples I've seen in some time. Calling every single six-pointed star a Star of David would be akin to calling every five-pointed star a Pentacle and declaring it in support of witchcraft or Satanism. it's a random shape likely chosen because it could more easily fit the text in the image - no sinister motivations or agendas required. There's plenty of dumb things Trump has said or done in recent memory you could opt to hammer away on, this one is an overreach of epic proportions, IMO.

[Breccia]

No. Trump is not trying to lose.

He is just demonstrating how unfit he is for the role due to lack of experience and poor temperment.

[Nfinitii]

No one is saying it is. You are confusing having your opinion and being the authority on the opinion. You can say that you think he is the worst president, but that's no reason for anyone else to think the same. Majority of people polled disagreeing with you, does not make them wrong. It's why blanket statements, without a reason, don't work...



This is why I called confirmation bias earlier. You don't know why majority go to the same one. Is it their first time at the theater? Is the other bathroom containing full amenities? Did the majority even leave through the same door? There are a lot of reasons this happens and any attribute to it, is simply basing an opinion on not having all of the information.

- - - Updated - - -



Then do it... Do the reasearch and show them they are wrong. Otherwise, the only reason they are wrong, is because it does not match your opinion.

The one who brought up the 53% gave no other reason y he believes Obama is a good president, which is my point of just b/c 53% of the country swings one way is not a reason to base opinion off of. Just because a majority of the general public believes one way does not make things true or false.

Ur over complicating the theater, I rarely go to the theater but it's not hard to c that the full movie u just exited out of with everyone else that if everyone goes to the same bathroom u will have to wait in line. And finding another bathroom will be beneficial.

Public opinion means very little to me, which is y I said just because a majority believes it doesn't make it true. U don't know y they feel he is a good president, if they r informed or not or any reasoning.

[Pangean]

I'm no fan of Donald Trump, but this "star" controversy has to be one of the most manufactured examples I've seen in some time. Calling every single six-pointed star a Star of David would be akin to calling every five-pointed star a Pentacle and declaring it in support of witchcraft or Satanism. it's a random shape likely chosen because it could more easily fit the text in the image - no sinister motivations or agendas required. There's plenty of dumb things Trump has said or done in recent memory you could opt to hammer away on, this one is an overreach of epic proportions, IMO.

Context is everything. Perhaps read the articles blow.

http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-...-2016/1.729654

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...9b1_story.html

[TheMediator]

I'm no fan of Donald Trump, but this "star" controversy has to be one of the most manufactured examples I've seen in some time. Calling every single six-pointed star a Star of David would be akin to calling every five-pointed star a Pentacle and declaring it in support of witchcraft or Satanism. it's a random shape likely chosen because it could more easily fit the text in the image - no sinister motivations or agendas required. There's plenty of dumb things Trump has said or done in recent memory you could opt to hammer away on, this one is an overreach of epic proportions, IMO.

Rainbows don't belong to gays, but if you burn a rainbow flag while wearing a white sheet and holding a rifle... you'd have to have been very stupid and unlucky to accidentally send such a message.

[mvaliz]

I'm no fan of Donald Trump, but this "star" controversy has to be one of the most manufactured examples I've seen in some time. Calling every single six-pointed star a Star of David would be akin to calling every five-pointed star a Pentacle and declaring it in support of witchcraft or Satanism. it's a random shape likely chosen because it could more easily fit the text in the image - no sinister motivations or agendas required. There's plenty of dumb things Trump has said or done in recent memory you could opt to hammer away on, this one is an overreach of epic proportions, IMO.

Would you call a six pinted star designed by the kKK for a web add associating Clinton with "corporate Jews" more understandable? Because that is where that add came from, unbeknownst (suposedly) by the Dump campaign when they re-posted it.

[Aucald]

Context is everything. Perhaps read the articles blow.

http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-...-2016/1.729654

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...9b1_story.html

I'm unsure of the context at play here - a red six-pointed star that's essentially a basic shape you'd find in PowerPoint or Captivate is not, on the face of it, anti-Semetic. Now if Trump declared Hillary Clinton was an "honorary Jew" because of her fortune or if there was an implication that the Jews were somehow connected I could better understand the furor. Perhaps I missed some key significance (wouldn't be the first time), but as it stands I just see a random shape over a stock image of Clinton as part of the endless number of politically-oriented and essentially lazy image macros.

- - - Updated - - -

Would you call a six pinted star designed by the kKK for a web add associating Clinton with "corporate Jews" more understandable? Because that is where that add came from, unbeknownst (suposedly) by the Dump campaign when they re-posted it.

If that's was the image's pedigree I'd say sure, that's more understandable. But the image itself doesn't seem to carry that implication, at least to me - without having that additional background it just seems as innocuous as it is stupid.

- - - Updated - - -

Rainbows don't belong to gays, but if you burn a rainbow flag while wearing a white sheet and holding a rifle... you'd have to have been very stupid and unlucky to accidentally send such a message.

That example supplies a lot more additional context, and would be a much clearer message of one's personal hatred. In the case of this image, I imagine Trump's mental process was more like "here's another meme image making fun of Hillary, I'll go slather it on my Twitter feed." He didn't make it, probably didn't have any foreknowledge of its origins, so I wouldn't hold him to the fire about it's unfortunate pedigree.

As I said, he's done and said more direct stupid things - you don't have to reach far to hold him accountable for worse.

[Pangean]

I'm unsure of the context at play here - a red six-pointed star that's essentially a basic shape you'd find in PowerPoint or Captivate is not, on the face of it, anti-Semetic. Now if Trump declared Hillary Clinton was an "honorary Jew" because of her fortune or if there was an implication that the Jews were somehow connected I could better understand the furor. Perhaps I missed some key significance (wouldn't be the first time), but as it stands I just see a random shape over a stock image of Clinton as part of the endless number of politically-oriented and essentially lazy image macros.

Fundamentally those inclined to antisemitism and those who have been on the receiving end of it understood what it showed. If you have had no experience from either end you might think it innocent. The fact that it was lifted wholesale from a known anti-Semite who has produced other racist and anti-Semitic "art-work" and commentary also explains the concern.

Here's what David Duke said about it.

Prominent white nationalist and former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke on Tuesday dismissed Donald Trump’s explanation of his controversial tweet featuring Hillary Clinton next to a pile of money, a Star of David, and the words the “most corrupt candidate ever.”

A Trump staffer took the blame for the tweet on Monday evening, saying he took the image from an anti-Clinton Twitter account and believed it was a sheriff’s star, not a Star of David. Duke, however, said it was clearly not a sheriff’s star.

“Let’s go to the tweet. The tweet again shows Clinton, it shows a Star of David. Of course later the campaign made the excuse, ‘well, no, that’s like a sheriff’s badge.’ Well, no way folks. Clinton, money, the most campaign corrupt person,” said Duke.

Earlier in the broadcast, Duke praised Trump for the tweet, saying his tweet was “all true.”

“We have situation right now where Trump is being absolutely pummeled for, guess what, posting a tweeting that shows Hillary Clinton with a big — in the midst of thousands of hundred dollar bills — a big Star of David, and the words ‘the most corrupt candidate ever,’” Duke said. “And Trump tweeted this, ‘Hillary Clinton the most corrupt candidate ever.’ Now of course, the media immediately came out and said that this was ‘anti-Semitic.’ But of course, it’s all true. We’re not talking about something that’s not true.”

Duke said all the “Jewish extremists” were supporting Clinton.

“So everything in the tweet that Donald Trump retweeted, that his campaign retweeted was absolutely correct,” concluded Duke. “Absolutely right.”