tropo

1 minute ago, robblok said:

Yes that is exactly what I said, voting for a habitual liar is not a smart thing to do. Unless you disagree that voting for a habitual liar is a stupid thing to do. 

 

I know for a fact I am more intelligent then at least half the Americans. Given the fact that my IQ has been tested between 124 and 135 (8 different tests). Given that the average IQ is around a 100 so its a safe bet.

 

This however does not mean I am brighter then each and every Trump voter. You know how averages work. 

 

Point was more how could anyone vote for someone like Trump who lies constantly. I gave one reason for smart people to vote Trump and that was that if they thought it was better to have an mental midget of a president who lies as a habit then a democrat. 

 

It just blows my mind that people can still defend the liar. 

 

 

I don't think you're putting your touted IQ to good use.  

Americans, come election time, usually have the choice of two candidates. Most, if not all politicians lie. Either way, they will likely end up with someone that lies no matter who they vote for. Taking your suggestions into consideration, not voting at all would be the best option, lest one gets labelled as unintelligent by smart people like you with very high IQs.

2 minutes ago, stevenl said:

No, that's not what he said, you're omitting the 'hated the other side more'part. But still, you're proving his point.

 

He said, quote: "I think Trump voters are not really bright". Nothing that was said after that changes the meaning of this statement.

As for your last sentence, "but still, you're proving his point". Would you care to elaborate? Bear in mind I am not an American voter, which, if you'd be paying attention. you would have known.

40 minutes ago, The Barmbeker said:

You know, what billions of flies are eating, right?

Dosen't make it a good foodsource, though!

He is a pathological liar and a lot of other things nasty!

Get over it!

We are actually discussing a "fact check" on Trump's tweet.

It was not a "fact check", but an opinion and politically motivated.

Fact-checkers say there is no evidence that mail-in ballots are linked to voter fraud. This is a lie as there is evidence to back up the President's claim. It's a lie and political censorship.

1 hour ago, robblok said:

More people voted against him as for. Yes he won but can you call it a democracy when more people vote for someone  and you still lose. I think Trump voters are not really bright but then again maybe some of them voted for him only because they hated the other side more. But its one of the least intelligent presidents ever (and that says a lot if you include Bush Jr). 

 

 

So you're saying on a public forum that 46.09% of the American voting public, or 62.8 million Americans are "not really bright"... because that's exactly what you just said.

At least we know you think you're more intelligent than at least 62.8 million Americans LOL. Could you take a guess at what percentage of Democrat voters are bright according to the same criteria?

12 hours ago, stevenl said:

Topic at hand, quite a few bipartisan and Republican and even Trump investigations have shown Trump to be wrong.

 

Your second paragraph is nonsense on the virus, is nonsense on the Twitter statement and is totally over the top in the china comparison.

On the topic of nonsense - both your first and 2nd paragraph fit that description rather well, but there's no need to flame. If you don't agree with something, explain why you don't agree. 

6 hours ago, mikebike said:

Apparently you do not understand the first amendment.

Don't stop there. Explain why I don't, why you do and where I went wrong.  

39 minutes ago, Opl said:

What would Trump Presidency be without Twitter?

Is Twitter so big and important that it cannot be replaced?

3 hours ago, Tug said:

It’s about time!

Yes, what a great idea - bring on the censorship and let Twitter decide what are the facts.

4 hours ago, tribalfusion001 said:

They seem quite determined in HK and quite rightly so.

Fantastic. You can count the bodies until the borders are no more. Merely collateral damage in a country where life is very cheap.

It's easy to sit here and write about it, but your life won't be at risk... as you're merely and armchair commentator... and cheer squad of course.

1 minute ago, tribalfusion001 said:

If/when this bill goes through and Chinese army or police start shooting at Hong Kong protesters then things are going to escalate very quickly. Tiananmen Square protests are from a different age, but this social media world especially in HK are going to be difficult for the CCP to control. I think quite a few countries are ready for a trade war with China.

That's wishful thinking. I wonder what you would do if you were there with the guns pointed at you.

China will survive a trade war. It's the other countries that will suffer - Australia is a good case in point.

19 minutes ago, tribalfusion001 said:

Is the South China Sea also part of the PRC, plenty of flashpoints coming up for the CCP.

I don't believe the South China Sea island building and military bases are a flash point. They were declared illegal while Obama was still president. He conveniently ignored it. The Trump administration talked about it a few times, then dropped it. 

China is well and truly embedded there now and very comfortable. The Philippines extended their welcoming arms, and everyone is happy. They let the Philippine fishermen fish on what was technically their own territory and there shouldn't be any more problems. Who's going to challenge them now?

9 hours ago, Just1Voice said:

China will not stop until it has crushed HK beneath it's military boot heel. 

Yes, it's all over, but did anyone have any doubts?

I'm all for people standing up for their rights, but unfortunately, it won't work in China. Sometimes accepting defeat is the best option.

5 hours ago, Pattaya46 said:

I don't really understand all these negative critics on Tony's Gym. I use facilities on 3rd Road and have no real reason to complain on what is available. Even if a few machines may take time to be repaired, there are many other to work with.

Even less reasons to complain when I think about the price: I paid 15'000 B in 2008 for a LifeTime membership. Makes about 100 B per month (yes, ONE HUNDRED baht per month only)

 

And about the OP, just another negative rumour. Facilities are closed because of Covid-19 and will reopen once the problem is solved or contained. (as said on FB and on post above)

Everyone has their own ideas of what makes a good gym but...

We've covered Tony's gym in many previous threads over the years. Go back and revise them for the many reasons why Tony's gym was not the best place to train. The complaints came at a time when there were few alternatives available and Tony had a monopoly on the gym market. Now there are many, so people are less likely to complain and more likely to walk, but probably most have already left.

56 minutes ago, HashBrownHarry said:

Out of interest what gym would you recommend?

 

There's suppose to be a good one at Pratumnak, just past the art gallery turn left, it's just before the royal residence on the left, do you know anything about that, good or bad?

Sorry, I'm out of touch now. I ended up building my own home gym in 2015 and never went back to a public gym again.

18 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

You and a lot of others, I wonder why they were so cheap? 

Unfortunately, at that time, July 2012, there weren't too many options available. It was a very low period in the gym industry in Pattaya.

6 hours ago, simple1 said:

The above has been strongly refuted, example below- trump received a number of warnings concerning Covid spread to the US, which he ignored / downplayed for a number of weeks. There is a published timeline (link provided in another topic) of the 15 times trump praising China's Covid response over Jan / Feb period even after the warning. As usual trump denies any responsibility whatsoever and blames WHO for his personal errors of judgement.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/us/politics/navarro-warning-trump-coronavirus.html

 

Trump restricted some air travel from China, but at the time the 40,000 permitted to enter were not tested for Covid infection. Dems visiting Chinatowns has been put in context a number of times which refutes trump's propaganda. 

It's easy to look back, and in hindsight make the conclusions that Trump was too slow to react, after you already know what actually happened.

Peter Navarro was making predictions, that's it. The only reason we are discussing them is because it turned out he was partially correct (so far - depending on what happens going forward). It's only because of this people are going back to dissect the proceedings and judging it based on what actually happened in the future. This is nothing more than a Democratic plot to make him look bad.

Peter Navarro was at odds with Dr Fauci who disagreed with the travel ban. So Trump is faced with a decision. Go with the Trade advisor's predictions, or Dr Fauci, a person likely to know a lot more about virus pandemics, who argued against such travel bans. I know who I would have followed if I was making the decisions - Dr Fauci. As it happened, he still did take Peter Navarro's advice and limited travel from China the very next day - right in the middle of his impeachment trial, I might add. Lest we forget. It didn't help because the virus was already there. It had started circulating in China in December, or even late November. It wasn't until January 22 that the WHO finally suggested that human-to-human transmission is taking place in Wuhan, but there was no major warning for the world to start locking down.

If you were actually there, without a crystal ball to read the future, the decision he made was as good as any other. The idea of shutting down the US economy, inflicting trillions of dollars of loss, is not likely going to be done on the hunch from his trade advisor. It's ironic to say this, but Peter Navarro and the Democratic Party got lucky that his predictions proved to be prophetic.

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Won't make any difference. Bkk's roads are as congested now as before the Skytrain. Thais like to drive in their own car, not sit in public transport if they can afford to.

 

I don't know what sort of monorail they are intending to build or where, but I can guarantee they will make everyone miserable for years while building it, and it'll probably be many times as expensive as needed, for the usual reason.

 

In an ideal world they'd build the skytrain from Bkk to the port serving Kho Chang. Plenty of people along that route to make it viable.

Maybe Bangkok is a victim of the Braess' paradox - the observation that adding one or more roads to a road network can slow down overall traffic flow through it.

2 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

I tend to go to the cinemas far more when in the US, than here. The people responsible for booking the films here seem to be very lazy, and usually opt for the biggest film possible, then put it on 2-7 screens. Positively inane. I do not watch these so called tentpole movies anymore, as most are made for the Chinese market, and 7-15 year olds elsewhere. But, the independent films, and the foreign films I love to watch on a big screen. Eventually, that will be possible again. 

I gave up going to cinemas years ago. I download them if they seem interesting, then give them 10 minutes or so. Hardly any these days entice me to continue watching.

1 minute ago, Phil McCaverty said:

What he's saying is that only facts are allowed here. Not "your facts" or "my facts", just facts. And certainly not extreme right wing rhetorical tub thumping.

I know exactly what he is saying. Are you now his spokesman, or are you just buddies?