Trump Is Just A Terrible President, Totally Unfit For The Job

[BillStime]

3 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

☝️

Doesn't understand what Twitter is for. It's not for talking to the governors, it's for talking to the people. Who controls the governors? 

 

We do. 

 

Unless you're a prog-fascist like Billz/sTime. Then you reverse it and claim you know best. 

 

Prog-fascists can't help but to expose themselves daily, doubly so when they rock REAL small brains to begin with, and most those are now filled with a toxic swill of TDS and projection.

 

Ladies and Gentleman, Deranged Rhion, or it is it billsfan1959, or IDBillzFan, jrober38 - has spoken.  Oh and lets not forget about BuffaloGal - no doubt Deranged handles many of these personalities.

 

Only Deranged knows what Twitter is and can easily sugar coat Trumps intent.

 

Hey Deranged - hustle buddy - run to the moderators again - you big baby.

 

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, BillStime said:

 

Ladies and Gentleman, Deranged Rhion, or it is it billsfan1959, or IDBillzFan, jrober38 - has spoken.  Oh and lets not forget about BuffaloGal - no doubt Deranged handles many of these personalities.

 

Only Deranged knows what Twitter is and can easily sugar coat Trumps intent.

 

Hey Deranged - hustle buddy - run to the moderators again - you big baby.

 

 

I'm on your side, lol

 

I put him on ignore a couple months ago. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by jrober38

[Deranged Rhino]

4 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

What a complete lunatic.

 

Looking in the mirror again, as you ran around here for weeks claiming millions of Americans were about to die... and since then, you've not taken a breath to even acknowledge how ***** wrong you were. 

 

Because, you're the actual lunatic. Completely emotional, devoid of reason and logic, and driven solely by your FEELZ! 

2 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Hey Deranged - hustle buddy - run to the moderators again - you big baby.

 

More fake news from the source. Something I've never done once on here  Ever. 

 

But, when you lie 24/7, what else do you expect?

 

Go back to pushing that sweet, sweet, disinformation Billz/sTime. You've been wrong about damn near everything you've posted. It's hilarious to the rest of the folks out there with working frontal lobes. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

2 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

I'm on your side, lol

 

I put him on ignore a couple months ago. 

Your friends can pick you up, or drag you down.  When he isn't sure which side you're on, you may want to consider him a down-dragger. 

[Buffalo Bills Fan]

6 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

Ladies and Gentleman, Deranged Rhion, or it is it billsfan1959, or IDBillzFan, jrober38 - has spoken.  Oh and lets not forget about BuffaloGal - no doubt Deranged handles many of these personalities.

 

Only Deranged knows what Twitter is and can easily sugar coat Trumps intent.

 

Hey Deranged - hustle buddy - run to the moderators again - you big baby.

 

 

Jesus Christ. All people you people never bring any context or anything to post. Besides you're Trump hate. I might agree with you if bring solid info. But not just by pure hate.  Hell I like Jrober38 he try to bring info sometimes way too over played at lease respect him. You bring nothing to these boards besides you're hate. 

 

I'm a independent. I look at real facts and truth over hateful crap. 

[BillStime]

Just now, Buffalo Bills Fan said:

 

Jesus Christ. All people you people never bring any context or anything to post. Besides you're Trump hate. I might agree with you if bring solid info. But not just by pure hate.  Hell I like Jrober38 he try to bring info sometimes way too over played at lease respect him. You bring nothing to these boards besides you're hate. 

 

I'm a independent. I look at real facts and truth over hateful crap. 

 

I bring stuff all the time - just asked Deranged... he hates it cuz its not sugar coated Trump news.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

More fake news from the source. Something I've never done once on here  Ever. 

 

 

Yes, **YOU** have... and you did.

[Foxx]

https://twitter.com/KamVTV/status/1251194488824963081

 

 

[BuffaloHokie13]

5 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Yes, **YOU** have... and you did.

Nah, that was me. Some of your ***** is just plain over the top and makes the conversation incredibly uncomfortable. Get a grip, attack the facts. Leave the personal, especially the non-board related, crap out of it. The passive aggressive using people's name stuff has absolutely no place here and it's completely disrespectful. 

[Deranged Rhino]

7 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Yes, **YOU** have... and you did.

 

Nope. Never once have I complained to a mod about another poster or asked action to be taken. 

 

Why would I do that, when I can stomp you much more easily myself and expose your limited intelligence and piss poor reasoning in an attempt to inform and educate others? You're lying. And you know you're lying. 

 

Because you're terrible at this.

[SectionC3]

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Interesting.  Lots of words to dig through there, but I do agree that bias plays a factor in perception.  I just thought it would be much more clear based on your presentation, where you said "...when I look at clips of TRUMP'S OWN WORDS".   With the emphasis added, it appeared you were indicating it was a slam dunk, no need for context, the words proved the case.  In fact, I'd argue that most reasonable people who concur that Trump did not say the Covid-19 issue was a hoax, if for no other reason than a person with your point of view concedes he did not.  That leads me to my point, which is---with all the reasons to dislike Trump, to rage at his presidency, etc, why bother including something that requires bias, multiple paragraphs to explain, and phrases like 'semantical gymnastics' to hammer home the point? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

With respect, I don't think it requires bias.  I'll draw an analogy to the question of intent in criminal law.  Rare is it that a criminal explicitly announces his or her intent.  Normally that mental state has to be established through circumstantial evidence, that is, implicitly.  The determination whether that mental state has been established always is a question of fact.  

 

The concept is the same here.  Did Trump come out and say, "I declare COVID-19 to be a hoax!!"  Surely he did not.  But I watched those clips.  The gist of that evidence is that Trump talked about the virus, and characterized it as "their new hoax," or something very close to that.  As far as I'm concerned . . . we're "there" in terms of this guy characterizing the issue as a "hoax."  

 

That said, your point is an interesting one, well-presented, and intellectually fair.  Well done. 

29 minutes ago, Foxx said:

https://twitter.com/KamVTV/status/1251194488824963081

 

 

 

Holy eff.  More nonsense.  Which "people" is Kambree (whoever that is) referring to?

[SectionC3]

1 hour ago, Foxx said:

our death rate is 4.1% of confirmed cases.

 

i'm not big in the "if" scenario but 'if' we removed the NYC stats from the equation here in the states. our death rate would be slashed by roughly a third. which would bring us down, not quite to Germany's level but pretty close.

 

outside of the above, being we are the world leader in a great many ways, with a great many factors in that equation, that we should have rates where they are at is not completely out of the question. 

 

lastly, to lay the blame completely at the presidents feet is just not being truly genuine. the blame for whatever you wish to cast lies across the entire political spectrum of the US.

 

Lots of "ifs" in this scenario.  If our testing was better, our numbers outside of NYC likely would be higher.  Our death rate likely would be lower.  And we likely would be closer to being out of this than we are.  

 

You're right about the spreading of blame.  There will be plenty of it to go around when this is done, as there should be.  In the meantime, I return to the point that the "buck" stops at the desk of the President of the United States, whether he wants to admit it or not.  His leadership during this pandemic has been an abject failure. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by SectionC3

[Buffalo Bills Fan]

1 minute ago, SectionC3 said:

 

Lots of "ifs" in this scenario.  If our testing was better, our numbers likely would be higher.  And we likely would be closer to being out of this than we are.  

 

You're right about the spreading of blame.  There will be plenty of it to go around when this is done, as there should be.  In the meantime, I return to the point that the "buck" stops at the desk of the President of the United States, whether he wants to admit it or not.  His leadership during this pandemic has been an abject failure. 

 

Right. Russia daily cases went up third second behind USA, and Germany in testing.  Death rate is low for Russia tho. Could be many factors. Agree with some things you said and some others said. Just a pretty complex virus.

[Deranged Rhino]

Just now, SectionC3 said:

 

With respect, I don't think it requires bias.  I'll draw an analogy to the question of intent in criminal law.  Rare is it that a criminal explicitly announces his or her intent.  Normally that mental state has to be established through circumstantial evidence, that is, implicitly.  The determination whether that mental state has been established always is a question of fact.  

 

The concept is the same here.  Did Trump come out and say, "I declare COVID-19 to be a hoax!!"  Surely he did not.  But I watched those clips.  The gist of that evidence is that Trump talked about the virus, and characterized it as "their new hoax," or something very close to that.  As far as I'm concerned . . . we're "there" in terms of this guy characterizing the issue as a "hoax."  

 

That said, your point is an interesting one, well-presented, and intellectually fair.  Well done. 

 

One of Trump's biggest flaws is his stream of consciousness style of speaking. It's so unlike anything the country has seen before from their politicians, let alone a president. Think back to every other POTUS press conference (regardless of occupant or party), they're all sanitized and handled. The moment a Clinton/Bush/Obama/Carter started to speak "off the cuff", there would be a handler right there to either usher them away from the press or (artfully) nudge them back on course. That doesn't happen with Trump. 

 

That is -- imo -- both a weakness and strength of Trump. It's a weakness because it makes it very easy for his political enemies (which every POTUS has) to clip seemingly damning sound-bytes and put them on blast for multiple news cycles until the public forgets the full context (if they ever knew it in the first place) and only remembers the damning words. It also is a weakness because the majority of centrists/independents/non-partisans (who are the majority in this country I still believe) who don't have time or the interest to follow the minutia of any news cycle, come away turned off or scared when they only see/hear Trump through the lens of these sound-bytes. 

 

But it's also a strength (imo) because as someone who values transparency, this kind of unfiltered access to the president's thought process is a breath of fresh air. It takes a bit of time and work to get used to his style, but once you do it becomes MUCH easier to understand what he's saying and why he's saying in the explosive way that he tends to do. He literally starts thoughts -- then stops in the middle of a sentence, changes topics (sometimes wildly) to use as an example of the point he was making (but had yet to land) -- then shifts back to original point/question without filling in the blank. But if you take the time to consider what he's actually saying in those breaks and leaps, it always tends to be less explosive/crazy than the jumbled version sounds at first blush. 

 

That's why, with Trump more than perhaps any other president, it's much more important to focus on the actual actions he takes over the words he says (or how those words are reported/circulated by the media). His actions, despite the hype and fear pushed by the messengers in our society, have been in line with an old fashioned centrist liberal much more so than a right wing authoritarian. 

 

Just my two cents. 

[Albwan]

10 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

With respect, I don't think it requires bias.  I'll draw an analogy to the question of intent in criminal law.  Rare is it that a criminal explicitly announces his or her intent.  Normally that mental state has to be established through circumstantial evidence, that is, implicitly.  The determination whether that mental state has been established always is a question of fact.  

 

The concept is the same here.  Did Trump come out and say, "I declare COVID-19 to be a hoax!!"  Surely he did not.  But I watched those clips.  The gist of that evidence is that Trump talked about the virus, and characterized it as "their new hoax," or something very close to that.  As far as I'm concerned . . . we're "there" in terms of this guy characterizing the issue as a "hoax."  

 

That said, your point is an interesting one, well-presented, and intellectually fair.  Well done. 

 

Holy eff.  More nonsense.  Which "people" is Kambree (whoever that is) referring to?

BS..... he said...

What's True

During a Feb. 28, 2020, campaign rally in South Carolina, President Donald Trump likened the Democrats' criticism of his administration's response to the new coronavirus outbreak to their efforts to impeach him, saying "this is their new hoax." During the speech he also seemed to downplay the severity of the outbreak, comparing it to the common flu.

What's False

Despite creating some confusion with his remarks, Trump did not call the coronavirus itself a hoax.

 

You are a liar or just plain lazy.

[Doc]

13 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

With respect, I don't think it requires bias.  I'll draw an analogy to the question of intent in criminal law.  Rare is it that a criminal explicitly announces his or her intent.  Normally that mental state has to be established through circumstantial evidence, that is, implicitly.  The determination whether that mental state has been established always is a question of fact.  

 

The concept is the same here.  Did Trump come out and say, "I declare COVID-19 to be a hoax!!"  Surely he did not.  But I watched those clips.  The gist of that evidence is that Trump talked about the virus, and characterized it as "their new hoax," or something very close to that.  As far as I'm concerned . . . we're "there" in terms of this guy characterizing the issue as a "hoax."  

 

That said, your point is an interesting one, well-presented, and intellectually fair.  Well done. 

 

Holy eff.  More nonsense.  Which "people" is Kambree (whoever that is) referring to?

 

You watched those clips and came away with your impression based on your biases. 

[SectionC3]

16 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

You watched those clips and came away with your impression based on your biases. 

 

Doc, with respect, the only bias I have is for the truth. 

 

***

 

Just re-watched the clip, this time on You Tube.  I stand by my characterization.  This is a write-up from Politico, but it's an accurate summary:

 

“The Democrats are politicizing the coronavirus. They're politicizing it,” he said. “They don't have any clue. They can't even count their votes in Iowa. No, they can't. They can't count their votes. One of my people came up to me and said, ‘Mr. President, they tried to beat you on Russia, Russia, Russia.’ That did not work out too well. They could not do it. They tried the impeachment hoax.”

 

Then Trump called the coronavirus “their new hoax.”

 

If Trump didn't refer to the virus as a hoax (I think the Politico article should have used the word referred, which might have been better in this instance), then I'm not sure what he was talking about.  I say this kindly: enlighten me.  I suspect you'll try to say that unspecified Democratic efforts to politicize the virus in an unspecified way are the hoax, not the virus itself.  I see that approach as an exercise of gymnastics.  I also see it as contradictory to the tone the president otherwise took w/r/t the issue during that time period, which essentially was to try wish the virus away.  See this link: https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/trumps-statements-about-the-coronavirus/

 

 

Edited April 17, 2020 by SectionC3

[Buffalo Bills Fan]

6 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

One of Trump's biggest flaws is his stream of consciousness style of speaking. It's so unlike anything the country has seen before from their politicians, let alone a president. Think back to every other POTUS press conference (regardless of occupant or party), they're all sanitized and handled. The moment a Clinton/Bush/Obama/Carter started to speak "off the cuff", there would be a handler right there to either usher them away from the press or (artfully) nudge them back on course. That doesn't happen with Trump. 

 

That is -- imo -- both a weakness and strength of Trump. It's a weakness because it makes it very easy for his political enemies (which every POTUS has) to clip seemingly damning sound-bytes and put them on blast for multiple news cycles until the public forgets the full context (if they ever knew it in the first place) and only remembers the damning words. It also is a weakness because the majority of centrists/independents/non-partisans (who are the majority in this country I still believe) who don't have time or the interest to follow the minutia of any news cycle, come away turned off or scared when they only see/hear Trump through the lens of these sound-bytes. 

 

But it's also a strength (imo) because as someone who values transparency, this kind of unfiltered access to the president's thought process is a breath of fresh air. It takes a bit of time and work to get used to his style, but once you do it becomes MUCH easier to understand what he's saying and why he's saying in the explosive way that he tends to do. He literally starts thoughts -- then stops in the middle of a sentence, changes topics (sometimes wildly) to use as an example of the point he was making (but had yet to land) -- then shifts back to original point/question without filling in the blank. But if you take the time to consider what he's actually saying in those breaks and leaps, it always tends to be less explosive/crazy than the jumbled version sounds at first blush. 

 

That's why, with Trump more than perhaps any other president, it's much more important to focus on the actual actions he takes over the words he says (or how those words are reported/circulated by the media). His actions, despite the hype and fear pushed by the messengers in our society, have been in line with an old fashioned centrist liberal much more so than a right wing authoritarian. 

 

Just my two cents. 

 

Post of the day. Agree DR.

[Doc]

12 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Doc, with respect, the only bias I have is for the truth. 

 

With all due respect, everyone claims that.

[BillStime]

58 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Nah, that was me. Some of your ***** is just plain over the top and makes the conversation incredibly uncomfortable. Get a grip, attack the facts. Leave the personal, especially the non-board related, crap out of it. The passive aggressive using people's name stuff has absolutely no place here and it's completely disrespectful. 

Deranged Rhino - I cannot keep up with all your handles. 

 

[SectionC3]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

With all due respect, everyone claims that.

 

With respect, I think my track record, particularly in this thread, is to provide fact-based analysis.  Take a look at my prior post and tell me where I'm wrong.  I ask you kindly.