SURVEY: Do you want Trump to finish his first term?

[mikebike]

On 4/29/2018 at 1:39 PM, jimmyyy said:

TRUMP 2020 KEEP AMERICA GREAT

 

On 4/29/2018 at 2:27 PM, mikebike said:

What, in your opinion, makes the USA great at the moment?

 

1 hour ago, F4UCorsair said:

The President!!!!    Go Donald.

Kinda sad.

 

In the not-so-distant past the obvious answers would have been, the Constitution; the opportunity; the economy; our youth; the legacy of Freedom and Democracy...

 

Now apparently national greatness is based on an individual. If you believe your country is great because of a cult of personality which can only ever last eight years rather than its universally acknowledged values  and unique historical legacy and the monumental, positive, changes its overarching guiding philosophies have brought the world in the last couple of centuries, I truly feel sorry for you.

[mikebike]

17 minutes ago, alocacoc said:

Actually it's Reuters News, not mine. TV loves Reuters. Better don't critizise them.

If you read the report you may understand why more and more millennials prefer the Republicans. You might even learn something. Come on, give it a try.

Sent from a so called Smartphone using an App.
 

I did read it. My take away was that some millennials were moving from Dem to GOP, but that many more were becoming "undecided".

 

How about you tell me your opinion on what the Pew Research poll says: http://www.people-press.org/2018/03/01/1-generations-party-identification-midterm-voting-preferences-views-of-trump/

[bristolboy]

2 hours ago, alocacoc said:

Actually it's Reuters News, not mine. TV loves Reuters. Better don't critizise them.

If you read the report you may understand why more and more millennials prefer the Republicans. You might even learn something. Come on, give it a try.

Sent from a so called Smartphone using an App.
 

Actually the report showed a 1 percent increase in Republican support among millenials. But it's nice to see you citing data for once. And I assum that when data that doesn't support your views is presented, you won't be crying "fake news."

Edited May 1, 2018 by bristolboy

[Johnniey]

On 28/04/2018 at 4:47 PM, F4UCorsair said:

This thread has degenerated into trash. Nothing seems to be off topic, and I suppose when the thread title is considered, it's difficult to post off topic. It invites garbage posts.

 

The gross pettiness is astounding, immature....at best!!

 

Moderators please close this crap thread.

 

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

 

 

 

Indeed. There was a thread before this that was exactly the same, the original question totally ignored.

It was closed, quite correctly but then this one appeared. This is nothing but a ranting area for disgruntled anti-trump supremacists. 

Please close it!!!! The sad fact is that there are only 2 posters that keep it going with their ant-Trump moaning. 

It's not World news, yet appears at the top every day, please close it. 

[bristolboy]

3 minutes ago, Johnniey said:

Indeed. There was a thread before this that was exactly the same, the original question totally ignored.

It was closed, quite correctly but then this one appeared. This is nothing but a ranting area for disgruntled anti-trump supremacists. 

Please close it!!!! The sad fact is that there are only 2 posters that keep it going with their ant-Trump moaning. 

It's not World news, yet appears at the top every day, please close it. 

You're not actually under any obligation to visit this web page.

[Scott]

Here's the rule that's going to be applied shortly:

 

10) Do not discuss moderation publicly in the open forum; this includes individual actions, and specific or general policies and issues. You may send a PM to a moderator to discuss individual actions or email support (at) thaivisa.com to discuss moderation policy.  You will not block contact with moderators or administrators. Doing so will result in suspension.

 

As noted, no one is under any obligation to read any thread that is not of interest to them nor to post.  

 

Feel free to move on to topics that are of interest to you.   

[Opl]

6 hours ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

The President!!!!    Go Donald.

Trump is a master at promoting exclusively his own brand.

[F4UCorsair]

On 4/30/2018 at 8:55 AM, Slip said:

As ridiculous as that may have seemed, this is far more so. Trump does not have a shred of diplomacy in him.

 

The title of the award is....Nobel Peace Prize, NOT Nobel Diplomacy Prize.

 

However peace is achieved is irrelevant, be it by the stick or carrot.

 

If any individual threatened to exterminate the Palestinians, and they lay down their arms, he would be well worthy of such a prize.

[bristolboy]

10 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I read those same articles quoting people who decline to give their name, while people who are willing to go on the record say it's bullshit.  Article after article after article quoting "sources". Since no one ever names the sources, what's to stop the "journalist" from just making up stories and saying they got it from a "source" who declines to go on the record?

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/kelly-calls-bs-report-called-trump-idiot-211307512--politics.html

Because of capitalism? Organization like the NY Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal are valued highly because 99.9 percent of the time they get it right. And when they get it wrong they acknowledge it. For  them to start spewing like Breitbart would ultimately cost them lots of money and ultimately their continued existence.

[lannarebirth]

Just now, bristolboy said:

Because of capitalism? Organization like the NY Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal are valued highly because 99.9 percent of the time they get it right. And when they get it wrong they acknowledge it. For  them to start spewing like Breitbart would ultimately cost them lots of money and ultimately their continued existence.

The object of the story I posted says they got it wrong. What happens then?

 

I'm not saying they got it wrong BTW, I'm saying it is really shoddy journalism. So shoddy it could give license to, dare I say it, "fake" stories ,, as no one would know the difference except the person they're writing the story about.

[simple1]

38 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

The title of the award is....Nobel Peace Prize, NOT Nobel Diplomacy Prize.

 

However peace is achieved is irrelevant, be it by the stick or carrot.

 

If any individual threatened to exterminate the Palestinians, and they lay down their arms, he would be well worthy of such a prize.

Trump has made numerous low life comments regards both domestic and international matters, blatantly lies nearly every day and so on. IMO it would grossly demine the prestige of the prize for an individual such as Trump to be selected. However, at this stage Trump sycophants are counting the chickens before they hatch.

[Berkshire]

6 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

The object of the story I posted says they got it wrong. What happens then?

 

I'm not saying they got it wrong BTW, I'm saying it is really shoddy journalism. So shoddy it could give license to, dare I say it, "fake" stories ,, as no one would know the difference except the person they're writing the story about.

Just about everything that Trump claims to be "fake news" turns out to be true.  Which is why the mainstream media has more credibility than Trump.  Much, much more...unless you're a devoted Trump minion. 

[bristolboy]

2 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

The object of the story I posted says they got it wrong. What happens then?

 

I'm not saying they got it wrong BTW, I'm saying it is really shoddy journalism. So shoddy it could give license to, dare I say it, "fake" stories ,, as no one would know the difference except the person they're writing the story about.

Well, it would be shocking if he confirmed it. How often is it the case that officials confirm leaks that would hurt their standing?

 

Anonymous leaks have been around since forever. And they're an important way of getting information. There aren't a hell of a lot of government officials or business executives looking to be outed as whistleblowers. And the reputable news sources usually ask for more than one anonymous source for confirmation. As in this case:

"The officials said Kelly portrays himself to Trump administration aides as the lone bulwark against catastrophe, curbing the erratic urges of a president who has a questionable grasp on policy issues and the functions of government. He has referred to Trump as "an idiot" multiple times to underscore his point, according to four officials who say they've witnessed the comments."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/kelly-thinks-he-s-saving-u-s-disaster-calls-trump-n868961

[lannarebirth]

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Well, it would be shocking if he confirmed it. How often is it the case that officials confirm leaks that would hurt their standing?

 

Anonymous leaks have been around since forever. And they're an important way of getting information. There aren't a hell of a lot of government officials or business executives looking to be outed as whistleblowers. And the reputable news sources usually ask for more than one anonymous source for confirmation. As in this case:

"The officials said Kelly portrays himself to Trump administration aides as the lone bulwark against catastrophe, curbing the erratic urges of a president who has a questionable grasp on policy issues and the functions of government. He has referred to Trump as "an idiot" multiple times to underscore his point, according to four officials who say they've witnessed the comments."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/kelly-thinks-he-s-saving-u-s-disaster-calls-trump-n868961

 

The article I posted used sources "that had left the administration but were not authorized to speak". What the hell does that mean? Again, I'm not saying they are wrong  but I don't put much stock in articles where you can't judge the credibility and/or motives of a source. I guess that's just me.

[bristolboy]

Just now, lannarebirth said:

 

The article I posted used sources "that had left the administration but were not authorized to speak". What the hell does that mean? Again, I'm not saying they are wrong  but I don't put much stock in articles where you can't judge the credibility and/or motives of a source. I guess that's just me.

Me, I'll go with the Bayesian approach to such issues.

[bristolboy]

46 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

Well, what an honorable chap you are!!

 

I find it interesting that those who do think Trump should be given a chance to get the job done don't heap insults on those who want him gone.  Unfortunately, not the same courtesy from the left....minions???

Really?

Until you actually provide data for your assertion, it's entirely an empty one. I see lots of stupid insults coming from both sides. I will say, that I believe the most over the top crazy insults come from the right wingers but they  tend to get deleted by the moderators.

[lannarebirth]

3 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Me, I'll go with the Bayesian approach to such issues.

Ok, you got me. I had to look that up. Must be somewhere above my 200 level Stats class.

[mikebike]

36 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I read those same articles quoting people who decline to give their name, while people who are willing to go on the record say it's bullshit.  Article after article after article quoting "sources". Since no one ever names the sources, what's to stop the "journalist" from just making up stories and saying they got it from a "source" who declines to go on the record?

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/kelly-calls-bs-report-called-trump-idiot-211307512--politics.html

I believe the country's libel laws are what was put in place to protect protect both journalistic integrity and individuals from unsourced abuses. The journalist does not have to reveal sources unless they are called to do so in a court of law. Very smart those earlier US politicians.

[bristolboy]

Just now, mikebike said:

I believe the country's libel laws are what was put in place to protect protect both journalistic integrity and individuals from unsourced abuses. The journalist does not have to reveal sources unless they are called to do so in a court of law. Very smart those earlier US politicians.

Your belief is not correct. It was the Supreme Court that ruled that public figures don't enjoy the same degree of protection as do private citizens. They set the standard that you had to prove actual malice. There's a good chance that Trump provided such an instance when he said Stormy Daniels was engaged in a con job.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times_Co._v._Sullivan

[mikebike]

26 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

The object of the story I posted says they got it wrong. What happens then?

 

I'm not saying they got it wrong BTW, I'm saying it is really shoddy journalism. So shoddy it could give license to, dare I say it, "fake" stories ,, as no one would know the difference except the person they're writing the story about.

Then, if they believe they have a case and can prove it they sue and crush the liar(s).

[lannarebirth]

Just now, mikebike said:

I believe the country's libel laws are what was put in place to protect protect both journalistic integrity and individuals from unsourced abuses. The journalist does not have to reveal sources unless they are called to do so in a court of law. Very smart those earlier US politicians.

 

I'm in favor of journalists not being compelled to reveal sources. Especially if it's Deep Throat or someone who's life or career may be at risk. But if you're going to use anonymous sources the subject matter ought to be verifiable IMO.

[metisdead]

Some troll posts and the replies have been removed. 

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I'm in favor of journalists not being compelled to reveal sources. Especially if it's Deep Throat or someone who's life or career may be at risk. But if you're going to use anonymous sources the subject matter ought to be verifiable IMO.

I"m sure many politicians, particularly the corrupt ones, endorse your point of view.

[Berkshire]

36 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I'm in favor of journalists not being compelled to reveal sources. Especially if it's Deep Throat or someone who's life or career may be at risk. But if you're going to use anonymous sources the subject matter ought to be verifiable IMO.

It's funny that you guys criticize the use of "anonymous sources."  Yet, when a real person comes forward, what happens?  Like Stormy Daniels, James Comey, Karen McDougal, Trump Tower meeting, etc.  More denials.  What's becoming apparent to everyone who's objective about this is that just about every allegation against Trump turns out to be true.  And then we have Robert Mueller.   

[F4UCorsair]

Hell YES!!! Then another 4 years. The US needs a President like Trump, a guy with balls of stainless steel, not some politically correct c*** sucker who tries to be everything to everybody.

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Andaman Al]

2 hours ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

The title of the award is....Nobel Peace Prize, NOT Nobel Diplomacy Prize.

 

However peace is achieved is irrelevant, be it by the stick or carrot.

 

If any individual threatened to exterminate the Palestinians, and they lay down their arms, he would be well worthy of such a prize.

And the amazing thing is that you seem to think that Trump has anything to do with what is happening in North Korea. Calling someone fatso and Rocket Man is not what gets people to disarm. The reason North Korea will disarm is because President Xi has taken hold of Kim Jongs balls very tightly and told him he will rip them off if Kim Jong continues to disrupt his plans for territory grabbing in the South China Sea. China have issued a fait accompli to Kim Jong, nobody else. If anyone were to get the Nobel Peace Prize it should be Xi of China and that would be just as insane as giving it to Trump.

 

Can people start thinking beyond their geographically preferred boundaries and actually look what is happening in the world, instead of seeing what you want to see and getting someone you like to be given credit. President Xi is another SOB but it is what it is, he is responsible for the breaking of the ice, nobody else.

[stud858]

Interesting to see the public vote here on Thai visa.  52% winner winner chicken dinner. Trump stays then. Case closed. 

[Jingthing]

1 minute ago, stud858 said:

Interesting to see the public vote here on Thai visa.  52% winner winner chicken dinner. Trump stays then. Case closed. 

Speaking of chickens, how about those bone spurs? 

[Slip]

3 hours ago, F4UCorsair said:

 

The title of the award is....Nobel Peace Prize, NOT Nobel Diplomacy Prize.

 

However peace is achieved is irrelevant, be it by the stick or carrot.

 

If any individual threatened to exterminate the Palestinians, and they lay down their arms, he would be well worthy of such a prize.

North Korea "... will be met with fire and fury and frankly power the likes of which the world has never seen before".  The pinnacle of peacefulness.  How's that double-think working out for you?  

[Becker]

1 hour ago, F4UCorsair said:

Hell YES!!! Then another 4 years. The US needs a President like Trump, a guy with balls of stainless steel, not some politically correct c*** sucker who tries to be everything to everybody.

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

555555555! A pathetic lying draft dodger with balls of stainless steel???

Again; 5555555!