1 hour ago, Hank Gunn said:

Yes, but the question is not about whether we want Trump to lead us (us Americans). I've already been pretty clear that I'm not a supporter of his, didn't vote for him, nor would I ever.

 

The question is, is there a bias in the media? As a hypothetical, if Obama (or Clinton for that matter) had done the same, would it even make the news, and if so would the headlines read, "Obama/Clinton leave Macri in the lurch." I keep going round and round on this point with other posters, so I'm done with this thread as no one addresses what I've continually said.

 

However, before I go, regarding his intelligence, I'd say he's probably close to a zero on emotional intelligence that's for sure (similar to my dear departed dad). However, someone who takes a large inheritance and multiplies its value by a factor of seven (not through passive but active investments) I wouldn't call stupid. (My father had an advance degree in probability and statistics from a top-ranked US university.)

 I agree that after reading the article, the title does leave a lot to be desired .But sometimes that's what titles are. They are designed  To get you to read the article.   Since we both read the article , Mission accomplished!

As far as the bias in the media that did not exist for Obama , or Clinton, or I might add for Bush, (both senior and Junior) or any previous president,  I am afraid is a "Bias" (in quotes because it is a lot more than a simple bias)  is a bias that he by his behaviour has invited upon himself.

In your previous reply you mention that "We hate Trump" I like to take this opportunity to correct you, I don't hate Trump. I LOATHE Trump  in fact I don't think  I ever LOATHED anyone as much as I LOATH Trump. I LOATHE him so much that using a capital T in front of his name makes me uncomfortable so from now on trump. 

Edited December 5, 20187 yr by sirineou

1 hour ago, mikebike said:

Of course there is. But it is a corporate/establishment bias, not a bias towards either party.

Da Nile ain't just a river in Egypt. Answer the hypothetical again, if Clinton or Obama had done the same thing, would the BBC had created video clip of it with the title, "Obama (Clinton) leaves Macri in the Lurch". And no, the fact that Fox/Faux News continued to harangue Obama doesn't count. They are rightly considered a lone wolf voice out on the right. But nearly every other "mainstream media" outlet (i.e. NBC, CBS, CNN, etc.) is what I'm talking about.

If you don't like the news don't watch it.

 

A man goes to a doctor...

 

Man: It hurts when I do this.

Doctor: Don't do that.

 

 

Whinging about it just seems like a waste of time.

 

The MSM was very challenging to President Obama, who can forget when he wore a tan suit or forgot to salute.

 

Seems like the thin-skinned among us are losing their memory.

 

 

1 hour ago, mikebike said:

Financial experts opinion is that if 45 had just invested his inheritance in a bluechip portfolio he would be far more wealthy now. Him getting his "great brain" involved COST him wealth... I would call that stupid.

Have you bought a car or motorcycle in your lifetime? If so, it most likely lost money (unless it was of a rare vintage). I don't think that necessarily makes you stupid. Just because Trump decided to make less money than he actually could have, by being actively involved in its activities doesn't necessarily make him stupid. It just means he wanted to do something else with his money beside passively investing it and just watching it. He probably enjoys the deal-making and negotiations. He made money. Nothing stupid about that.

 

You hate the guy. Fine. That's not a silly thing. In fact, I'd say it's quite logical and needs very little defense as it's easy to point to many of his gaffes and examples of buffoonery. But my original point still stands. This BBC headline, "Trump Leaves Macri in the Lurch" is just overblown hyperbole. It's just a great example of people focusing on stupid surface things rather than real substance (making me think maybe you've been in Thailand too long ????).

 

Instead, why doesn't the BBC do a story like, "Despite the Pause in Sino-US Tariffs, Trump Still Vague on Solutions" or something of that nature.

8 minutes ago, Hank Gunn said:

Have you bought a car or motorcycle in your lifetime? If so, it most likely lost money (unless it was of a rare vintage). I don't think that necessarily makes you stupid. Just because Trump decided to make less money than he actually could have, by being actively involved in its activities doesn't necessarily make him stupid. It just means he wanted to do something else with his money beside passively investing it and just watching it. He probably enjoys the deal-making and negotiations. He made money. Nothing stupid about that.

 

You hate the guy. Fine. That's not a silly thing. In fact, I'd say it's quite logical and needs very little defense as it's easy to point to many of his gaffes and examples of buffoonery. But my original point still stands. This BBC headline, "Trump Leaves Macri in the Lurch" is just overblown hyperbole. It's just a great example of people focusing on stupid surface things rather than real substance (making me think maybe you've been in Thailand too long ????).

 

Instead, why doesn't the BBC do a story like, "Despite the Pause in Sino-US Tariffs, Trump Still Vague on Solutions" or something of that nature.

For somebody who in post #55 and just 2 hours ago said he was finished with this thread you have made 3 more posts since then.

 

"I keep going round and round on this point with other posters, so I'm done with this thread as no one addresses what I've continually said."

1 hour ago, mikebike said:

Financial experts opinion is that if 45 had just invested his inheritance in a bluechip portfolio he would be far more wealthy now. Him getting his "great brain" involved COST him wealth... I would call that stupid.

 

3 hours ago, bristolboy said:

had Trump simply invested his inheritance in index funds he'd be at least as well off today.

https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/dec/09/occupy-democrats/occupy-democrats-say-simple-investment-trumps-fath/

 

Edited December 5, 20187 yr by UncleTouchyFingers

28 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

The MSM was very challenging to President Obama,

32 minutes ago, Hank Gunn said:

Just because Trump decided to make less money than he actually could have

 

trump had a chance to buy the Dallas Cowboys for $ 50 million in 1984 - instead he spent ~ $ 9 million on the USFL's New Jersey Generals.

 

The Cowboys are today valued at ~ $ 4.8 BILLION.

 

Bye Felicia.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/dec/09/occupy-democrats/occupy-democrats-say-simple-investment-trumps-fath/

 

I agree with politifact on this article. Unfortunately the article they refer to is not the only source for these claims.

2 hours ago, Hank Gunn said:

Have you bought a car or motorcycle in your lifetime? If so, it most likely lost money (unless it was of a rare vintage). I don't think that necessarily makes you stupid. Just because Trump decided to make less money than he actually could have, by being actively involved in its activities doesn't necessarily make him stupid. It just means he wanted to do something else with his money beside passively investing it and just watching it. He probably enjoys the deal-making and negotiations. He made money. Nothing stupid about that.

 

You hate the guy. Fine. That's not a silly thing. In fact, I'd say it's quite logical and needs very little defense as it's easy to point to many of his gaffes and examples of buffoonery. But my original point still stands. This BBC headline, "Trump Leaves Macri in the Lurch" is just overblown hyperbole. It's just a great example of people focusing on stupid surface things rather than real substance (making me think maybe you've been in Thailand too long ????).

 

Instead, why doesn't the BBC do a story like, "Despite the Pause in Sino-US Tariffs, Trump Still Vague on Solutions" or something of that nature.

What belies your protestations about your neutrality is that there is plenty of hard information out there about how Trump repeatedly screwed up and had to be bailed out by his father In fact, he was a terrible negotiator, repeatedly making bad deals. You could actually look that up. It's easy to find. And if you actually weren't a Trump fan, you would have done this by now.

You must have a very strange idea of what a good businessman is if you think that at best matching the performance of index funds qualifies one for that designation.

It was only his father's death and the resulting big inheritance, that finally bailed him out. How man repeats after disasters do most business people get in their lives? Trump's greatest business coup was being born to a very very rich man.

 

Edited December 5, 20187 yr by bristolboy