US Politics Mega-thread - Page 4304

On July 19 2016 03:55 GGTeMpLaR wrote:


I'm sorry the quotes you shared were just character-assassination pieces I've seen a hundred times from the left this cycle

"if Trump is elected the world will end, america is doomed, be scared, he's a psychopath fascist"

Me not taking that seriously is not being intellectually lazy - you're just not worth listening to when you say shit like that

It's not ironic at all because I don't take Trump seriously when he's clearly exaggerating his attacks on Hillary, or Hillary seriously when she does it to Trump. You are the one with double-standards here. The only irony here is your accusing me of intellectual laziness

By all means continue shitposting. Don't let me stop you from circlejerking how psycopathic trump is and how the world is going to end if he's elected

On July 19 2016 04:19 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
If you don't want people laughing at and dismissing wild exaggerations then don't post them in the first place.

On July 19 2016 04:19 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
<shares piece of some guy saying how if Trump is elected, there is an excellent chance it leads to the end of civilization>
<I laugh at both of you>
<you get mad at me for 'missing the point'>

On July 19 2016 04:23 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
It's a trash hit piece and you think it's supposed to cause an epiphany in everyone who would prefer Trump over Hillary because it's from a guy who is supposed to be 'Pro-Trump'

On July 19 2016 04:28 Doodsmack wrote:
Templar disbelieves everything negative about Trump because of his cognitive bias...so it's no surprise in this case. Apparently he does not see fit to disbelieve everything else Trump says because of the wild exaggerations and lies that come out of his mouth.

On July 19 2016 04:27 kapibara-san wrote:

you keep going to extremes... i'm not hoping for any epiphanies, i'm hoping for some level of consideration of the side of a story of someone who's arguably been closer to trump than anyone outside of his immediate family

you don't find it interesting in the slightest that the guy who wrote the book that trump's been hailing as his own magnum opus and indicator of his competence in dealmaking views the whole affair as a deal with the devil and a spin job?

On July 19 2016 04:43 kapibara-san wrote:
also of note: Trump agreed on-the-spot to a royalty deal that was almost unprecedentedly bad for book deals of that nature, 50% advance + 50% royalties.

the occam's razor explanation is that he did this because he cares about his ego/fame/appearanceofpower more than actually making good deals.

in fact, Trump's business history suggests that while he liked his ventures to succeed, he rarely had the foresight or patience to determine the profitability/viability of ventures, failing quite a bit with 6 bankruptcies and some really questionable attempts at education (Trump University, Trump Institute).

his father's money and political clout just paid for a lot of darts for him to throw at the board

On July 19 2016 04:38 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
I still don't know what you want from me.

On July 19 2016 04:38 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
Do you blame me for immediately taking a more skeptical stance on the quality/integrity of this man's testimony the second I see him say 'civilization will end if Trump wins'? It's clear he has alternate motivations for coming out like this.

On July 19 2016 04:45 kapibara-san wrote:

i've said it a few times in different ways, maybe this one will stick: find the parts of the article that you realistic, that you don't consider unforgivably exaggerated/biased, and discuss your impressions of them. that's it.

On July 19 2016 04:38 GGTeMpLaR wrote:


I still don't know what you want from me.

I acknowledge another person thinks Trump is a crazy psychopath who thinks the world will end if he is elected. This is what he said. He is the one who went to the extreme. I am aware of this.

I think it comes down to the fact that you're overestimating how close he and Trump were. So you're taking it like 'Trump's best friend even knows he's crazy this is indisputable proof' whereas I'm much more skeptical.

Do you blame me for immediately taking a more skeptical stance on the quality/integrity of this man's testimony the second I see him say 'civilization will end if Trump wins'? It's clear he has alternate motivations for coming out like this.

<unbiased source close to trump reveals shocking truth that trump actually IS a psychopath who will end the world and he's coming out with no alternative motivations other than because he feels ethically obliged to save us from making this mistake>

If you aren't suspicious of that narrative at all then there's our disagreement.

I'm not refusing to read the article at all. I'm just saying the bits of it you've shared aren't impressive at all. I'll read it when I get the chance if it makes you feel better.

On July 19 2016 04:59 oBlade wrote:
I don't think most Trump supporters are in any doubt about the fact that he's someone with a strong ego, if that helps you understand people not seeing the New Yorker piece as a revelation.

On July 19 2016 04:59 oBlade wrote:
I don't think most Trump supporters are in any doubt about the fact that he's someone with a strong ego, if that helps you understand people not seeing the New Yorker piece as a revelation.

On July 19 2016 04:45 kapibara-san wrote:

i've said it a few times in different ways, maybe this one will stick: find the parts of the article that you consider realistic, that you don't consider unforgivably exaggerated/biased, and discuss your impressions of them. that's it.

it's okay to be skeptical, but i consider it intellectually lazy to dismiss the whole thing without having read it based on the lines you consider most biased.

he's very straightforward about his motivations; that's not the point. ignore his outright statements of his own opinions on trump and look at the evidence/story he presents. see if you can put what you consider a better spin on the facts presented. offer your alternate explanation for the things that he drew his conclusions of trump from.

For the book, though, Trump needed to provide him with sustained, thoughtful recollections. He asked Trump to describe his childhood in detail. After sitting for only a few minutes in his suit and tie, Trump became impatient and irritable. He looked fidgety, Schwartz recalls, “like a kindergartner who can’t sit still in a classroom.” Even when Schwartz pressed him, Trump seemed to remember almost nothing of his youth, and made it clear that he was bored. Far more quickly than Schwartz had expected, Trump ended the meeting.

Week after week, the pattern repeated itself. Schwartz tried to limit the sessions to smaller increments of time, but Trump’s contributions remained oddly truncated and superficial.

“Trump has been written about a thousand ways from Sunday, but this fundamental aspect of who he is doesn’t seem to be fully understood,” Schwartz told me. “It’s implicit in a lot of what people write, but it’s never explicit—or, at least, I haven’t seen it. And that is that it’s impossible to keep him focussed on any topic, other than his own self-aggrandizement, for more than a few minutes, and even then . . . ” Schwartz trailed off, shaking his head in amazement. He regards Trump’s inability to concentrate as alarming in a Presidential candidate. “If he had to be briefed on a crisis in the Situation Room, it’s impossible to imagine him paying attention over a long period of time,” he said.

On July 19 2016 04:50 Simberto wrote:


But your point of view is just "someone says bad things about Trump, so it must be a liberal attack piece and can thus be ignored".

That makes it incredibly frustrating to deal with you, because with that line of thinking, it is simply impossible to convince you of anything. You will automatically discard any evidence that opposes your views because the simple fact that it opposes your point of view to you means that it is obviously flawed evidence.

I challenge you to name one hypothetical piece of evidence that could change your opinion. What would need to happen for you to change your opinion on Trump. Name anything, no matter how absurd.

at the top was Trump’s name, in large gold block lettering. Kaminsky recalls that Trump was pleased by the mockup, but had one suggestion: “Please make my name much bigger.”