Republican Election 2016 - Donald Trump Megathread [OFFICIAL]

[Wulfey]

This is the definitive post on the M&M fallacy (from 2014).

https://debunkingdenialism.com/2014/...ty-of-bigotry/

Why is the poisonous M&Ms analogy monstrous?

Because it can be used to prop up any kind of harmful stereotype about groups such genders, ethnicities, religious and political communities without having to engage the objections to unfair generalizations. In reality, the poisonous M&Ms analogy is a more manipulative version of the general tactic known as the “I know not all X are Y, but [flawed generalization]”. Here are some examples from the white supremacist website Stormfront:

[Breccia]

Is it same time frame as the source i linked above?

Here is the full context of Obama's UNGA speech. And by "context" I mean "transcript". He said, amongst other things, this:

"It is a crisis of our shared security. Not because refugees are a threat. Refugees, most of whom are women and children, are often fleeing war and terrorism. They are victims. They’re families who want to be safe and to work, be good citizens and contribute to their country -- I was talking to Yusra -- she’s now in Germany. She already speaks some English. Now she’s trying to learn German -- who are interested in assimilating and contributing to the society in which they find themselves."

Obama didn't say a thing about a time frame. This Breitbart guy decided to throw that in to make it seem like Obama was lying. First of all, he doesn't cite his source, so that's on you. Secondly, even if he did, since Obama didn't specify a time frame, his attempt to work that in somehow is both disingenuous and irrelevant.

- - - Updated - - -

Here are some examples from the white supremacist website Stormfront:[/I]

Wait, so a Trump used a white supremacist group again?

[Stommped]

I linked the source. It's the United Nations!

Sorry didnt see it. Yeah that source is still refugees as of today vs. his was refugees received over the past year.

[Edge-]

Trump jrs comment was trying to reinforce Trumps position on refugees,

Yes, part of the official campaign.

while obamas was trying to reinforce HIS (and Hillarys) position on refugees.

No, he was explicitly speaking on behalf of the US government and his administration. His comments were in no way related to the Clinton campaign.

Theyre taking different routes but trying to achieve the same goal: convince ppl that their position is correct.

That's fine, but Obama was talking about his stance on the matter. If Hillary's lines up with his, so be it, but he was not speaking on behalf of the Clinton campaign.

[Stommped]

Here is the full context of Obama's UNGA speech. And by "context" I mean "transcript". He said, amongst other things, this:

"It is a crisis of our shared security. Not because refugees are a threat. Refugees, most of whom are women and children, are often fleeing war and terrorism. They are victims. They’re families who want to be safe and to work, be good citizens and contribute to their country -- I was talking to Yusra -- she’s now in Germany. She already speaks some English. Now she’s trying to learn German -- who are interested in assimilating and contributing to the society in which they find themselves."

Obama didn't say a thing about a time frame. This Breitbart guy decided to throw that in to make it seem like Obama was lying. First of all, he doesn't cite his source, so that's on you. Secondly, even if he did, since Obama didn't specify a time frame, his attempt to work that in somehow is both disingenuous and irrelevant.

- - - Updated - - -



Wait, so a Trump used a white supremacist group again?

But it would still make his comment factually incorrect, assuming the source is accurate. To make a sweeping statement like the majority are women and children you would have to look at the past year, not today or the past week. If it rains 80% of the time for a month and then you have a dew days of sunshine, you cant say the majority of days are sunny

[Breccia]

But it would still make his comment factually incorrect, assuming the source is accurate.

So now not only are you implementing this artificial "since Jan 1" timeline that Obama neither said nor implied, but now you're also "assuming" his unnamed source is accurate.

When his source depicts a trend that is completely the opposite of what the UN, the ones actually moving the refugees, have documented.

I'll say it one last time: Obama, as the full transcript I linked shows, never mentioned nor implied a timeline. Breitbart tried to call him a liar, by using a restricted timeline, with an unnamed source that shows a trend highly reversed from what the official source says.

And you're choosing to go with Breitbart, even after all that.

That is willful ignorance for the sake of making a political point.

P.S. TIME Magazine said in Nov that the total was 4.2 million, about a 50/50 split, and about 25% men. So...that percent of men has been about the same, maybe even gone down.

[BrerBear]

What exactly is the argument that you're making? That Donald Trump should make the decision to release his tax returns to the public so tens of thousands of CPAs can pour over them and report their findings to the IRS?

We've been over and over this before. The reason candidates release their tax returns is so that we can see who they are beholden to before we hand them the biggest power in the world. The IRS can't do that for both resourcing and privacy reasons. The public needs to vet.

That he somehow has an obligation to do that? He does not.

Legally, he only needs to be a US born citizen, 35 years old, and 14 years resident. But as a nation we have set higher standards of transparency on every candidate before we give them trust. At least until this year.

No Presidential candidate does. And why would you expect Trump to act completely against his own best interests?

It's truly bizarro world that in this election cycle, we would have to justify why a candidate for President shouldn't be doing everything in his own best interests. It's the most powerful position in the world, not Trump's ego and money machine.
This is the damage that Trump is doing to US politics. His tribe is so willing to forgive his lack of transparency that they are setting a terrible precedent for every future Presidential candidate.

I mean, who really cares if our President has secret multi-million dollar financial interests in our potential adversaries? Let's just give him full control of our military and executive branch.
It's fine.
Whatever.

And I'm not sure that the public can do a better job.

It is already proven that one reporter found multiple wrongdoings from Trump's Foundation that the IRS missed. Yes, the public will do a better job.

The fact that the IRS missed something in regards to normal filings of the Trump Foundation, doesn't necessarily indicate that they're not equipped to do a thorough job on his audit.

The fact that Trump claims that IRS is still actively working on his audits from years ago, which (falsely) prevents him from releasing his taxes says the IRS is not equipped to do this work in any reasonable time frame. Or Trump is lying. Probably both.
Maybe the IRS will wrap up their work on Trump's taxes before he starts his second term.
It's fine.
Whatever.

- - - Updated - - -

Then during the primaries, the GOP watched as Trump's free advertising got him to swallow person after person far more qualified than he.

Great analysis, Breccia.
I still believe that if the Republicans had only had two or three candidates in the running, Trump would never have made it.
The sane candidate split the vote just enough for crazy T to get a plurality.

[PACOX]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...dc7_story.html

This why we need to see Trump's returns. How can we trust this man with our tax money when he he does deplorable things like this?

[Edge-]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...dc7_story.html

This why we need to see Trump's returns. How can we trust this man with our tax money when he he does deplorable things like this?

But, something about turning all 300 million US citizens into tax inspectors and something something IRS audit and it would detract from the issues and...and...and...

[LaserSharkDFB]

How's that 90% of the black vote working out?

Speaking at a rally in Kenansville, North Carolina, Trump again stumbled in an apparent attempt to endear himself to black voters.

“We’re going to make our country safe again. We’re going to rebuild our inner cities because our African-American communities are absolutely in the worst shape that they’ve ever been in before,” he said. “Ever, ever, ever.”

The comment, made in a city named for a slave owner, is objectively untrue, and completely ignores that black people were once subjected to slavery and Jim Crow laws.

[GennGreymane]

So are we gonna talk about him using funds from his charity to settle disputes?

[Edge-]

So are we gonna talk about him using funds from his charity to settle disputes?

Stop distracting from the issues! We need to focus on the important things, like Hillary's health and the fact that she's probably days away from her brain literally melting out of her ears and nose. Literally.

[Captain N]

Stop distracting from the issues! We need to focus on the important things, like Hillary's health and the fact that she's probably days away from her brain literally melting out of her ears and nose. Literally.

Oooo oooo can we use another candy analogy?

Hillary Clinton confirmed Snickers bar....bleeds nougat from ears!

[Ghostpanther]

So are we gonna talk about him using funds from his charity to settle disputes?

Conspiracy theories are not allowed on this forum.

[Edge-]

Conspiracy theories are not allowed on this forum.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...dc7_story.html

This why we need to see Trump's returns. How can we trust this man with our tax money when he he does deplorable things like this?

I'll just leave this here.

[Garnier Fructis]

Conspiracy theories are not allowed on this forum.

The problem is that it isn't a conspiracy theory.

[Ghostpanther]

I'll just leave this here.

Read this and make sure you do not overlook the "may" and "ifs." http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...Ehi?li=BBnbcA1 sometimes stuff can appear to be questionable, but until you do a in depth investigation, all may not be revealed. And the Washington Post is out to bring up whatever stuff they can against Trump. Biased reporting is so common now.

[Edge-]

Read this and make sure you do not overlook the "may" and "ifs." http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...Ehi?li=BBnbcA1 sometimes stuff can appear to be questionable, but until you do a in depth investigation, all may not be revealed. And the Washington Post is out to bring up whatever stuff they can against Trump. Biased reporting is so common now.

It's almost as if issues like this could easily be resolved if Trump was remotely transparent and released his taxes like every other presidential candidate for the past 40+ years.

These types of articles appear because media are looking into Trump now (while they've been looking into Hillary for decades) and are finding a lot of questionable shit.

Also, I find it pretty funny that Trump supporters complain when media post critical/questioning stories about Trump without having 100% of the information (because it's not available due to Trump refusing to release it) but working with what information is available, while Trump regularly pulls complete bullshit out of his ass and attributes it to, "some people say" or "I've heard very smart people ask". To which Trump supporters cheer and celebrate his courage for asking the hard questions that PC media are too afraid to ask, like whether or not Khan's wife was allowed to speak at the DNC because she's Muslim.

Edit: Also, looking back at it, the Palm Beach settlement info seems pretty clear cut and complete. He used his charity to make a donation that his Mar-a-Lago Club (a business, not a charity) was supposed to make as part of a settlement. Which likely violated tax law as the articles state.

[Garnier Fructis]

Read this and make sure you do not overlook the "may" and "ifs." http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...Ehi?li=BBnbcA1 sometimes stuff can appear to be questionable, but until you do a in depth investigation, all may not be revealed. And the Washington Post is out to bring up whatever stuff they can against Trump. Biased reporting is so common now.

You'll note that the 'may' and 'if' statements there aren't about the fact that he did use his foundations funds to settle disputes, but about whether or not that was illegal. They also don't use those words to qualify the fact that he used that money to buy portraits.

You noted the presence of these words but did not note what sentences they were attached to, and have thus failed to actually call into question what people are saying.

[Ghostpanther]

It's almost as if issues like this could easily be resolved if Trump was remotely transparent and released his taxes like every other presidential candidate for the past 40+ years.

These types of articles appear because media are looking into Trump now (while they've been looking into Hillary for decades) and are finding a lot of questionable shit.

Also, I find it pretty funny that Trump supporters complain when media post critical/questioning stories about Trump without having 100% of the information (because it's not available due to Trump refusing to release it) but working with what information is available, while Trump regularly pulls complete bullshit out of his ass and attributes it to, "some people say" or "I've heard very smart people ask". To which Trump supporters cheer and celebrate his courage for asking the hard questions that PC media are too afraid to ask, like whether or not Khan's wife was allowed to speak at the DNC because she's Muslim.

You responded pretty fast. So, you read the article and did not overlook the if's and may in them? You may be a faster reader than I am and for sure a faster typist, so I will assume you did read it. But your points may be good grounds why it may be smart for Trump not to release his tax returns, when the sharks are after his blood no matter where he is bleeding from.