Obama: Trump ‘woefully unfit’ to be President

[Morch]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Can't catch mad cow disease from intercourse with a cow. Whatever.

If anyone takes him at his word they have a serious humour deficit. The guy is obviously very silly, and not to be taken seriously.

 

6 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

A silly fool. He really doesn't matter.

 

He was the Republican candidate for Governor of New York in 2010. Damage control aside, he's not a nobody.

The Obama comments are just a sample of his style.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Paladino

[Opl]

Intelligence experts believe that the use of Twitter by Trump "may already be used by foreign intelligence agencies to analyze his personality, understand his habits and find clues as to what to expect from his government,

"I do not want the enemy to know what I'm doing." One more contradiction.

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-twitter-national-security-232518

[iReason]

6 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

He really doesn't matter.

 

Pathetic.

Your usual flippant spin isn't going to fly at all this time:

 

Outrage and calls for Paladino to resign grow over Obama comments

 

"Buffalo School Board member Carl P. Paladino's latest inflammatory comments to a weekly Buffalo paper saying he wished death by mad cow disease upon President Obama, referred to the first lady as a man and said he'd like her to be "let loose in the outback of Zimbabwe where she lives comfortably in a cave with Maxie, the gorilla" prompted calls for his removal from the board and sparked outrage from Buffalo to the state capital."

 

"Even the transition team for President-elect Donald J. Trump –

who Paladino campaigned fervently for – called his remarks "absolutely reprehensible" and having no place in the public discourse."

 

"Erie County Executive Mark C. Poloncarz called on Paladino to resign immediately, as did Assemblyman Sean Ryan D-Buffalo, who said Paladino's comments are "outrageous, dangerous and disturbing."

http://buffalonews.com/2016/12/23/carl-paladinos-harsh-2017-wish-list-causes-firestorm-social-media/

 

A-Holes like this guy matter.

But of course there will be those who think he is merely being "silly"...

[Ulysses G.]

9 minutes ago, iReason said:

 

Pathetic.

Your usual flippant spin isn't going to fly at all this time:

 

 

 

Not with you anyway. The man is a fool. Let him resign. No one cares. 

[iReason]

Trump adopting same behavior he criticized Clinton for  

 

"From installing Wall Street executives in his Cabinet to avoiding news conferences,

the president-elect is adopting some of the same behavior for which he criticized Clinton during their fiery presidential campaign."

 

Here's a look at what Trump said then — and what he's doing now:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-trump-campaign-promises-20161225-story.html

 

The Huckster hasn't held a press conference since July.

Afraid of a bumbling, stumbling meltdown? 

[iReason]

Newt Gingrich Admits Donald Trump Does Not Yet Have A Plan To Beat ISIS

 

"Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich conceded that President-elect Donald Trump, does not yet have a plan for defeating the Islamic State militant group."

 

“I don’t think they have a strategy,” Gingrich told “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace.  “I think that what they know, which is important, is that they are gonna need a strategy.” 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/newt-gingrich-trump-no-isis-plan_us_585ffcc6e4b0eb586486a599

 

Wait, what now?   What about the con-man's promise?:

 

“All I can tell you it is a foolproof way of winning  , ... it is a foolproof way of winning the war with ISIS."  "...I have an absolute way of defeating ISIS."

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/07/donald-trump-said-he-had-a-secret-plan-to-defeat-isis-as-of-now-hes-not-planning-to-use-it/?utm_term=.cd3d58f60fab

[Andaman Al]

17 hours ago, iReason said:

 

Pathetic.

Your usual flippant spin isn't going to fly at all this time:

 

Outrage and calls for Paladino to resign grow over Obama comments

 

"Buffalo School Board member Carl P. Paladino's latest inflammatory comments to a weekly Buffalo paper saying he wished death by mad cow disease upon President Obama, referred to the first lady as a man and said he'd like her to be "let loose in the outback of Zimbabwe where she lives comfortably in a cave with Maxie, the gorilla" prompted calls for his removal from the board and sparked outrage from Buffalo to the state capital."

 

"Even the transition team for President-elect Donald J. Trump –

who Paladino campaigned fervently for – called his remarks "absolutely reprehensible" and having no place in the public discourse."

 

"Erie County Executive Mark C. Poloncarz called on Paladino to resign immediately, as did Assemblyman Sean Ryan D-Buffalo, who said Paladino's comments are "outrageous, dangerous and disturbing."

http://buffalonews.com/2016/12/23/carl-paladinos-harsh-2017-wish-list-causes-firestorm-social-media/

 

A-Holes like this guy matter.

But of course there will be those who think he is merely being "silly"...

iReason, you are trying to 'reason' with the most stubborn person on the entire board. Someone that in all my time on here I have never seen him either change his mind, back down or be swayed by reasoned argument or factual information. Extreme does not come close to describing his attitudes. I have found it much better to try and skip over his posts and ignore him (great advice I got from another member), it has led to a more enjoyable board experience. He will always react the opposite to what you would expect any sensible person to consider, so I advise just to ignore.

[iReason]

Just now, Andaman Al said:

iReason, you are trying to 'reason' with the most stubborn person on the entire board. Extreme does not come close to describing his attitudes.

 

While I agree with you, I also believe ignorance and indeed, trolling should be confronted.

The Troll's mind will never be changed. It's not in a Troll's nature.

No point in trying to reason with them.

Better to expose them.

They are here to spread misinformation and to practice their favorite passtime: deflection and misdirection.

 

You might have noticed, when a fervent Troll (and there are two here for sure) attempts to propagate their gibberish,

and then confronted and pressed for facts to back up their often erroneous claims, they generally shrival up and go silent.

 

Thus, exposing their agenda. 

 

And they never respond to a post like #2497.

A centerpiece on the Con.

They can't. Too impossible to spin.

Edited December 26, 2016 by iReason

[Scott]

Stay on topic, please, and the topic is not about who is/isn't a troll and how to deal with them.   In fact, such discussions are trolling. 

[up-country_sinclair]

A sincere question for the Trump supporters:  Do you truly believe that Trump is interested in the "job" of president?  Not the title, prestige or ceremony that come with it, but the job itself.  Not the massive ego stroke it will bring, but the motivation to get out of bed in the morning to improve the lives of all Americans.

 

Because, quite frankly, I don't.  The man is in his 70s and I haven't seen any evidence that he's done anything for anyone other than himself in those seven decades.  His foundation was a self-enriching scam.  His "university" was a self-enriching scam.  His multiple bankruptcies were self-enriching scams.  Therefore it's not much of a leap to conclude that his candidacy (and now presidency) are self enriching scams.

 

So when the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue states that Trump is "woefully unfit" to be president, this is partly what he is referring to.  He could also be referring to the preponderance of evidence which indicates that Trump knows next to nothing about domestic and foreign policy.

 

Another question for the Trump supporters:  If Trump could somehow find a way to leave office in the next year or two without embarrassment (for example, a health issue) do you think he would jump at the chance?  I have no doubt whatsoever that he would.  

[Ulysses G.]

17 minutes ago, up-country_sinclair said:

 

Another question for the Trump supporters:  If Trump could somehow find a way to leave office in the next year or two without embarrassment (for example, a health issue) do you think he would jump at the chance?  I have no doubt whatsoever that he would.  

 

I do not have the slightest idea and - frankly - I do not think you do either. We will just have to wait and see.

[Andaman Al]

24 minutes ago, up-country_sinclair said:

Another question for the Trump supporters:  If Trump could somehow find a way to leave office in the next year or two without embarrassment (for example, a health issue) do you think he would jump at the chance?  I have no doubt whatsoever that he would.

I have heard his bone spurs are growing back.

[Opl]

The Swedish Language Council today introduced in the dictionary  "Trumpifiering" (a neologism that seems borrowed from French "Trumpisation" ).

"Trumpifiering "in Swedish is one of the 43 new words ratified this year by this institution, which depends on the Ministry of Culture.
Definition: "modification of the political debate in favor of a rhetorical style in which one speaks out in order to be noticed without taking into account the consequences or the facts".

Edited December 27, 2016 by Opl

[iReason]

Trump rewards big donors with jobs and access

Contributors who met with Trump gave about $59 million in support of his campaign and other Republicans,

averaging more than $800,000 per donor. (sub-title)

 

"Donors also represent 39 percent of the 119 people Trump reportedly considered for high-level government posts, and 38 percent of those he eventually picked, according to the analysis, which counted candidates named by the transition and in news reports."

 

"While campaign donors are often tapped to fill comfy diplomatic posts across the globe, the extent to which donors are stocking Trump’s administration is unparalleled in modern presidential history, due in part to the Supreme Court decisions that loosened restrictions on campaign contributions, according to three longtime campaign experts."

 

"The access and appointments are especially striking given Trump’s regular boasting during his campaign that his personal fortune and

largely self-funded presidential bid meant that he would not be beholden to big donors, as many of his rivals would."  

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/donald-trump-donors-rewards-232974

 

Self-funded. 

No special interests.

Remember that part of the con?

[Silurian]

10 hours ago, up-country_sinclair said:

A sincere question for the Trump supporters:  Do you truly believe that Trump is interested in the "job" of president?  Not the title, prestige or ceremony that come with it, but the job itself.  Not the massive ego stroke it will bring, but the motivation to get out of bed in the morning to improve the lives of all Americans.

 

Not a con man supporter (not by a long shot) but my Thai father-in-law is very similar to Don the con. My father-in-law is a fairly successful business man but has extreme narcissistic behaviors. He too is in his 70's. I have noticed that over the past few years he is more concerned about donating to charity and building things more for public use (while still doing many private business dealings). Every time he donates something or builds something for the public, he makes sure it is widely recognized that he was the one that did it. From what I can tell he is trying to leave his "mark" on society before it is too late.

 

I also expect this from Don the con. He is trying desperately to leave his "mark" on society as a benevolent, altruistic person while making sure telling everyone that is exactly what he is doing. His desire for recognition is what drives him every single day. He believes that being POTUS fulfills yet another successful chapter of his life. One that he can (and does) gloat about at every chance he gets (i.e. Thank You tours).

 

To me, seeing it first hand, there is no doubt about it. Don the con is doing this all for himself. Who ever else it might benefit is just a byproduct.

 

 

[kevkev1888]

13 hours ago, up-country_sinclair said:

A sincere question for the Trump supporters:  Do you truly believe that Trump is interested in the "job" of president?  Not the title, prestige or ceremony that come with it, but the job itself.  Not the massive ego stroke it will bring, but the motivation to get out of bed in the morning to improve the lives of all Americans.

 

Because, quite frankly, I don't.  The man is in his 70s and I haven't seen any evidence that he's done anything for anyone other than himself in those seven decades.  His foundation was a self-enriching scam.  His "university" was a self-enriching scam.  His multiple bankruptcies were self-enriching scams.  Therefore it's not much of a leap to conclude that his candidacy (and now presidency) are self enriching scams.

 

So when the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue states that Trump is "woefully unfit" to be president, this is partly what he is referring to.  He could also be referring to the preponderance of evidence which indicates that Trump knows next to nothing about domestic and foreign policy.

 

Another question for the Trump supporters:  If Trump could somehow find a way to leave office in the next year or two without embarrassment (for example, a health issue) do you think he would jump at the chance?  I have no doubt whatsoever that he would.  

 

1. YES

2. NO

This is an interesting documentary from 1994:

 

 

[nausea]

Well, we'll see won't we.The proof is in the eating.

[iReason]

TOP TRUMP CANDIDATE: PLUTOCRACY IS JUST WHAT AMERICA NEEDS

Larry Kudlow argues you can trust Trump’s billionaire advisers because wealthy folks

have no need to steal" (sub-title)

"There has never been a White House administration nearly as wealthy as the team of financiers and business magnates Donald Trump has selected to implement his supposedly populist vision."

"But Larry Kudlow, inveterate supply-sider and leading candidate to run the Council of Economic Advisers, has another take, which he published in the National Review late last week: putting the obscenely wealthy in charge of the government is actually a great idea because, unlike the middle class, you can actually trust the rich." 

Sayeth Kudlow:

"Why shouldn’t the president surround himself with successful people?

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/12/larry-kudlow-wealthy-dont-steal

Edited December 29, 2016 by metisdead
Edited as per fair use policy.

[Ulysses G.]

"Why shouldn’t the president surround himself with successful people? Wealthy folks have no need to steal or engage in corruption."

 

Logically he is correct, but not always true. However, John F. Kennedy and Bobby spring to mind.

[heybruce]

29 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

"Why shouldn’t the president surround himself with successful people? Wealthy folks have no need to steal or engage in corruption."

 

Logically he is correct, but not always true. However, John F. Kennedy and Bobby spring to mind.

People who continue to accumulate wealth long after they've become filthy rich aren't doing it because of need, they're doing it out of ego.  Trump is clearly a man motivated by ego, not ethics.  I'm sure many of his appointees are the same.

[Ulysses G.]

Just now, heybruce said:

People who continue to accumulate wealth long after they've become filthy rich aren't doing it because of need, they're doing it out of ego. 

 

 

SOME off them do, but not all of them. You might be right about Trump. We will find out in the next 4-8 years.

[theguyfromanotherforum]

Find it ridiculous that liberal Hilary voters kneel before the mighty China telling them who should USA take a phone call from.

How sadly pathetic.

[maewang99]

23 minutes ago, theguyfromanotherforum said:

Find it ridiculous that liberal Hilary voters kneel before the mighty China telling them who should USA take a phone call from.

How sadly pathetic.

yeah, but we have been doing it for a long time.  ever wonder [ if you are anywhere near old enough to have ] why we never crossed the DMZ in Vietnam and instead had to wait for them to come to us so that they could pace ****us*****  until we gave up.... no matter what our wonderful leaders really were thinking..... one thing is pretty certain. 

 

so LBJ was a pussy too?

 

Edited December 29, 2016 by maewang99

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed.  

[ilostmypassword]

11 hours ago, iReason said:

TOP TRUMP CANDIDATE: PLUTOCRACY IS JUST WHAT AMERICA NEEDS

Larry Kudlow argues you can trust Trump’s billionaire advisers because wealthy folks

have no need to steal" (sub-title)

"There has never been a White House administration nearly as wealthy as the team of financiers and business magnates Donald Trump has selected to implement his supposedly populist vision."

"But Larry Kudlow, inveterate supply-sider and leading candidate to run the Council of Economic Advisers, has another take, which he published in the National Review late last week: putting the obscenely wealthy in charge of the government is actually a great idea because, unlike the middle class, you can actually trust the rich." 

Sayeth Kudlow:

"Why shouldn’t the president surround himself with successful people?  

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/12/larry-kudlow-wealthy-dont-steal

What makes Kudlow's comment particularly ridiculous and hypocritical is that he is a supporter of massively reducing taxes on the super-wealthy in order for them to have sufficient incentive to invest and create jobs. On the other hand, he claims that they really don't care about having more money.  

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, theguyfromanotherforum said:

Find it ridiculous that liberal Hilary voters kneel before the mighty China telling them who should USA take a phone call from.

How sadly pathetic.

Find it ridiculous how Trumpies ignore the fact that Putin and China hated Hillary because she called for both to respect human rights.  "kneel before" indeed, you are totally detached from reality.

 

How sadly pathetic. 

[theguyfromanotherforum]

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

Find it ridiculous how Trumpies ignore the fact that Putin and China hated Hillary because she called for both to respect human rights.  "kneel before" indeed, you are totally detached from reality.

 

How sadly pathetic. 

 

I could care less about Trump or Hilary.

 

I am certainly not a "Trumpie" or American. Just making an observation about mighty USA.

 

Heck, I don't even know or care much about American politics, but if someone told me what I can and can not do I'd show them the finger.

 

If Hilary was so concerned about human rights then accepting a phone call from Taiwan should not be an issue.

 

Hypocrisy....Don't you think?

 

 

 

[heybruce]

5 minutes ago, theguyfromanotherforum said:

 

I could care less about Trump or Hilary.

 

I am certainly not a "Trumpie" or American. Just making an observation about mighty USA.

 

Heck, I don't even know or care much about American politics, but if someone told me what I can and can not do I'd show them the finger.

 

If Hilary was so concerned about human rights then accepting a phone call from Taiwan should not be an issue.

 

Hypocrisy....Don't you think?

My apologies, I didn't realize you were posting about a subject for which you care and know nothing.  Perhaps that is why you are confusing a violation of protocol and established US policy with human rights.  Although it is a stretch to consider this a human rights issue.

 

If you are at all interested, neither Hillary or her supporters kneel to China.  We are much more concerned about Trump kneeling, or selling out, to Russia.

 

Also, when you are President, or President elect, and your actions and statements may affect the future of the country, you need to consider carefully the implications of your actions and words.  Trump doesn't realize this.  Apparently neither do you.

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎26‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 11:19 PM, Andaman Al said:

iReason, you are trying to 'reason' with the most stubborn person on the entire board. Someone that in all my time on here I have never seen him either change his mind, back down or be swayed by reasoned argument or factual information. Extreme does not come close to describing his attitudes. I have found it much better to try and skip over his posts and ignore him (great advice I got from another member), it has led to a more enjoyable board experience. He will always react the opposite to what you would expect any sensible person to consider, so I advise just to ignore.

Simply attacking Trump over every silly little thing is not going to change anyone's mind.

Why would the anti HRC basket of deplorables care about anything an anti Trumper said anyway?

 

I've been away a bit, and had a long laugh when I saw this thread still going. Obama is almost gone, Trump, despite everything is about to become president. Time to accept that and not pretend that anything on here is going to change Trump's ascent to power.

 

I've been watching Chinese tv and he's obviously got them rattled. No idea what they are saying, but that has to be a good thing.

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

My apologies, I didn't realize you were posting about a subject for which you care and know nothing.  Perhaps that is why you are confusing a violation of protocol and established US policy with human rights.  Although it is a stretch to consider this a human rights issue.

 

If you are at all interested, neither Hillary or her supporters kneel to China.  We are much more concerned about Trump kneeling, or selling out, to Russia.

 

Also, when you are President, or President elect, and your actions and statements may affect the future of the country, you need to consider carefully the implications of your actions and words.  Trump doesn't realize this.  Apparently neither do you.

IMO Trump knows exactly what the effect his words have. That he has so obviously upset the dictators in China is, IMO, a very good thing.