1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 09, 2025, 06:59:08 PM »

It is rather odd that AATW is worried about Trump but has never made mention of the increasing reports of rape and sexual assaults in his country as result of immigration, instead claiming that migrants have done good for his country.

I wouldn't want any of those rapists or sexual assaulters to be president or prime minister either.
I would like leaders with morals and integrity, I guess I'm a little old fashioned that way.

2

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 09, 2025, 04:59:29 PM »

Plenty of steps taken that were certainly not centrist.

Well, maybe. So give examples of those then.
Banging an intern isn’t one of them.

3

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 09, 2025, 04:40:07 PM »

I wonder what they’re doing to prepare.
Giving all the local young women rape alarms and pepper spray?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm20xvgmd8yo

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 09, 2025, 02:35:55 PM »

Clintons are "centrist."

What a fucking joke of a take.

Whether they are or not, the weird thing is you seem to be evidencing your position that they aren't by the fact Clinton had an affair with an intern.
"He cant be centrist! He got a blow job in the oval office!".

What the hell are you talking about? How are those two things linked?
Try "He can't be a centrist, he did <insert non-centrist policy he implemented here>"

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 09, 2025, 09:54:47 AM »

No, he's talking about the fact that Trump was found liable for sexual abuse rather than rape. We spent several pages discussing this back when the news first broke. According to Tom, the fact that the jury chose not to find Trump liable for rape is a clear repudiation of Carroll's entire story and proof that Trump is entirely innocent; however, the fact that the same jury found Trump liable for sexusl abuse and defamation when he denied the whole thing even happened means nothing at all.

Ah yes. Schrödinger's Jury. Beyond reproach when they find Trump not guilty, irrelevant when they find him guilty.
Cult members gotta cult member I guess.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 09, 2025, 06:20:45 AM »

Please stop lying. The jury ruled that he didn't rape E. Jean Caroll, and the leftists here were in shambles over it.

Aww, bless. You don’t understand the difference between adjudicated and convicted, do you? Trump is a convicted felon and an adjudicated rapist.

If a jury says someone is not guilty that doesn’t actually mean they’re saying the person didn’t do it. It just means they don’t believe the evidence is good enough to establish beyond reasonable doubt that they did. For good reason there is a high bar for conviction, and rape cases have a notoriously low level of conviction.

But the judge clearly believed Trump did it

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/07/donald-trump-rape-language-e-jean-carroll

That’s the trade off with the high bar for conviction. You don’t want innocent people being locked up but you do end up with a lot of people, like Trump, who are most likely rapists walking free.

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 08, 2025, 08:06:45 PM »

Is someone who has an affair logically more or less likely to cut taxes? To pursue foreign intervention? To support gay marriage? It doesn't really make sense.

Remember who you’re talking to.
I’ve literally no idea what Action is talking about. Clinton had an affair with an intern and therefore he’s left wing seems to be the implication.

It’s a “if she floats then she’s made of wood and therefore a witch” level of logic.

Trump has had multiple affairs. He’s been adjudicated to be a rapist. So what does that make him? Is that more or less left wing than Clinton? Just utter nonsense

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 06, 2025, 10:01:14 PM »

I partly agree with Tom

I do too, it's just a weird boast that they're actively enjoying this level of corruption, self-enrichment and cruelty to the poorest and most vulnerable in society.

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 04, 2025, 05:23:09 AM »

Welp, it passes the house without issue.

So Trump got what he wanted.

I'd day good luck America but honestly?  I hope you reap what you sow and if it's bad (it will be), you all suffer and know it's your own fault.

It’ll be fine. It only affects the poor and the vulnerable and fuck those guys, amirite?

10

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 02, 2025, 08:40:45 AM »

It's fairly absurd by any measure to claim that a billionaire is not a good businessman. Even the claim that he received a jumpstart through millions from his father just means that both Trump and his father are good business men.

His father?  Yes.
But you'd be amazed how far you can get riding on someone else's coat tails.

Indeed

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2016/live-updates/general-election/real-time-fact-checking-and-analysis-of-the-final-2016-presidential-debate/fact-check-trumps-claim-that-he-built-his-company-with-1-million-loan/

11

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 01, 2025, 06:00:49 PM »

Is it just me, or does anyone else think that whoever bought a copy of The Art Of The Deal should demand a refund?

He didn’t even write it.
Fairly likely he’s never read it.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/25/donald-trumps-ghostwriter-tells-all

12

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 29, 2025, 07:43:02 AM »

Sounds like obliterate means “cause a few months delay”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79qeqg89g2o

13

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 26, 2025, 06:53:05 AM »

I don't agree with the people giving even grudging credit to Trump over this. Trump clearly said that there was a ceasefire, and Israel and Iran clearly disregarded him and continued their war. The fact that at a later time Israel and Iran really did agree on a ceasefire doesn't somehow ripple back through time and imbue Trump's impotent declaration with retroactive relevance. No, Trump was bullshitting, because he's a thoroughly stupid man and a habitual liar, and he almost certainly played a very limited role (at best) in the actual ceasefire.

I dunno. While I certainly agree that orange man bad, it's not like he announced a ceasefire, then the war continued for another few weeks and then there was a ceasefire. After Trump announced the ceasefire there were some subsequent skirmishes, he yelled at them both and since then the ceasefire has held. Whether it will continue to hold remains to be seen of course. And of course like always he's massively exaggerating how effective everything he does is. But the timing is such that I don't think you can entirely detach the current ceasefire from his actions.
Don't get me wrong, this wasn't some brilliant strategic move from Trump. He operates entirely by gut feel. So if he did get this right it was more luck than judgement. But there are some tentative signs that he might have got it right.

14

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 25, 2025, 09:02:47 AM »

Whisper it quietly, but he might have got this one right.
The ceasefire is holding, for now. Early days yet of course.
And naturally he's going "laa laa laa, can't hear you" at all the intelligence indicating the striker might have not been quite as effective at obliterating the Iranian nuclear sites as he's claiming.

I wonder what is wrong with him that he has to always claim the superlative, always be so absolute. All the "they said this was the greatest..." stuff. Who are "they"? And was it the greatest? (That's just an example, not referring to anything specific, just generally the way he talks such utter bollocks all the time.)

15

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 24, 2025, 08:22:04 AM »

"Israel defence minister accuses Iran of violating ceasefire and orders ‘powerful strikes’ on Tehran"

From the BBC.

Well that went very well.

16

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 24, 2025, 07:39:03 AM »

Not sure he's being honest here.

He said he'd sort out the Ukraine thing very easily in a day and he did that*, so surely he wouldn't lie about this?

*lol

17

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 20, 2025, 04:06:06 PM »

So your criticism isn't criticism.  You just wanted more Trump.  Markjo's point stands: you have no criticism.  No questioning thoughts.  No disliked action.

I knew what his answer would be.
It’s like one of those answers to the “what would you say is your biggest weakness!” Interview questions.
“I think I’m too much of a workaholic and too committed to my employer”
 

As for Trump’s approval rating…

https://www.economist.com/interactive/trump-approval-tracker

18

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 16, 2025, 09:45:43 AM »

It's a dishonest tactic, and one that I'm not going to indulge in myself.

Somewhat guilty as charged, I was partly fishing a bit to see if Tom would bite - he rarely disappoints.
But I still think the way Trump phrased it was odd - why would Russia being our ally in WWII have any influence on how the West views Putin who famously wasn't alive at the time. And Trump's lack of understanding of how we could be a country's ally 80 years ago and not now is somewhat baffling.

Trump is every bit as senile as Biden was, if not more.

I'm not sure about that. Trump rambles, but he's always done that.
You look at transcripts of his speeches from 10 years ago and they make as little sense as the ones today. This from 2016, for example:

https://x.com/StigAbell/status/763075178926596096

Trump isn't sharp or lucid, but by comparison he comes across as much less of a senile old man than Biden. Some of that is energy and confidence, but some of it is I think Trump is in a better cognitive place than Biden is. Obviously he's not as going to be as sharp as he was 30 years ago, no-one is as sharp in their 70s as their 40s, but I don't have big concerns about his cognitive abilities in terms of senility. My bigger issues with him are I completely disagree with his politics, he makes decisions based on gut feel rather than data and he's very transactional and easy to manipulate by flattery. He rails against "fake news" while believing and parroting right wing demonstrably false propaganda about immigrants eating pets. It's the age old trick - blame the minority group and pretend that it's those people who are causing your problems to distract you from what is actually causing the problems. He's a wannabe dictator. I think he's picked the wrong country to try it in but it beggars belief that after January 6th he managed to get elected a second time.

Fuck the Republicans for kowtowing to him rather than reigning him in.
And Fuck the Democrats for sticking with Biden for so long, lying about his clear senility and being in such a mess that there's no credible alternative to Trump right now.

19

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 15, 2025, 08:45:11 PM »

This is a terrible argument.

I'm not making an argument. I'm simply highlighting your clear pattern of behaviour. Your assessment of actions and words depends entirely on who did or said them rather than on their own merits. Which renders honest discussion impossible. I'm uncertain whether you are being dishonest with us (and therefore trolling) or with yourself (and simply deluded)

You come to us with a constant stream of lies

A claim which cannot be taken seriously given the above and your last accusation of me lying was a response to my quoting Trump verbatim.
Now, I don't think Trump really believes Putin fought in World War II - I thought his phrasing was odd, but I know what he was trying to say. But even what he was trying to say was pretty dumb - he was basically saying it's odd that Russia was our ally in WWII and now people don't like them. How could that be? How about because of the EIGHTY YEARS of geopolitics since then.

I do have criticisms about Trump

No, you don't. Because you're in his cult and you cannot bear to hear any criticism of him. The mental backflips you do to defend him and his cronies are ridiculous. But OK, prove me wrong - what are your criticism of him? Come on, this is a safe space, Trump won't read this.

20

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 15, 2025, 04:06:31 PM »

And how do you think Tom would have interpreted it had Biden said it?

I probably wouldn't have commented.

Past experience of your posts after every misspeak by Biden tells me different. Or, at the very least, if someone else had brought it up you’d have piled on. That isn’t speculation, there’s a clear pattern in your posting.
Any slight misstep from the people you like and it’s defend and deny. If it’s someone on the other side then it’s all out attack.

I’m not particularly defending Biden, he clearly was mentally unfit for office. But Trump is unfit for office too - in a different way - but because he is your guy the mental backflips you will do to find no fault in him and defend everything he says and does are ridiculous. It’s intellectually dishonest. You must at some level acknowledge that Trump is human and therefore fallible. And yet I don’t recall ever seeing you criticise or condemn anything he says or does. And it’s that which makes you appear like a cult member who is so far gone they can find no fault in their glorious leader. And that’s what makes any honest conversation with you impossible.