Jump to content
Peter

Trump is the President

Recommended Posts

Trump says a lot of dumb crap on Twitter. That is not in dispute  

What should be in dispute is the idea that 190 deaths per million is a failure, while 1,500 should be applauded 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

Of course you're not.  Cuomo is a Democrat

No, Cuomo's political affiliation has no bearing on my desire (or lack of) to discuss him.

Trump's performance can easily be discussed without deflecting and turning this into a discussion about Cuomo.

Of course, you know that. But you repeatedly try to lure the discussion to the darkest depths of that rabbit hole .

And everyone, including you, knows why.

IJ Playbook 101.

Edited by Paul Every

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is 190 deaths per million too many?

How many do you think they should have had were it not for Trump's lethal incompetence?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

I note with amusement that you have ignored my remarks about Trump and the broader U.S... 

If you'd kept the conversation there, I may have. At this point, I'm not even sure about the comments your referencing.

TBH, there could have many been numerous reasons why I "ignored" them. From, I didn't read them (I haven't read every post on the thread), maybe I simply didn't disagree or perhaps just didn't consider them worthy of comment. Maybe I had some dishes in the sink that required washing.

Possibly other reasons as well, I don't know. Not even sure which of my reasons led to your amusement, but I'm channeling my inner Nancy and feeling glad your happiness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Paul Every said:

If you'd kept the conversation there, I may have. At this point, I'm not even sure about the comments your referencing.

TBH, there could have many been numerous reasons why I "ignored" them. From, I didn't read them (I haven't read every post on the thread), maybe I simply didn't disagree or perhaps just didn't consider them worthy of comment. Maybe I had some dishes in the sink that required washing.

Possibly other reasons as well, I don't know. Not even sure which of my reasons led to your amusement, but I'm channeling my inner Nancy and feeling glad your happiness.

You know the reason as well as I do 

Cognitive dissonance 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

You know the reason as well as I do 

Cognitive dissonance 

Recognising you have a problem is the first step.

Congratulations.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

Is 190 deaths per million too many?

How many do you think they should have had were it not for Trump's lethal incompetence?

When you say “per capita,” there’s many per capitas. It’s, like, per capita relative to what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Paul Every said:

Recognising you have a problem is the first step.

Congratulations.

 

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Paul Every said:

When you say “per capita,” there’s many per capitas. It’s, like, per capita relative to what?

I have not been saying per capita.  I've been saying per million 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IronJimbo said:

Trump says a lot of dumb crap on Twitter. That is not in dispute  

What should be in dispute is the idea that 190 deaths per million is a failure, while 1,500 should be applauded 

 

 

You'll have to explain what those figures refer to if you expect much of a reply.

1. Belgium 804 deaths/million population

9. US 289 deaths/million population

143 countries

So where is the line of failure? Top 8? Top 5?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Paul Every said:

You'll have to explain what those figures refer to if you expect much of a reply.

1. Belgium 804 deaths/million population

9. US 289 deaths/million population

143 countries

So where is the line of failure? Top 8? Top 5?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/

You tell me

Where is your condemnation of Philippe, given that Belgium's death rate is nearly three times that of the incompetent Trump's USA? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

You tell me

Where is your condemnation of Philippe, given that Belgium's death rate is nearly three times that of the incompetent Trump's USA? 

You're begging the question, I notice. However.....

Given Trump's competence of his management of covid, I'd say that line is somewhere below position 9. How far below is moot.

The Lancet appears to think so.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31140-5/fulltext

If you wish start a thread on Phillipe and Belgium, we can all read up on the topic discuss that there if that's you're interest. Or is Philippe your new Cuomo deflection?

So since I answered you, where is your line of failure on Trump's and the US' response?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you're quite happy to call Trump's response incompetent, but have no interest in other leaders who have done significantly worse?

That says more about you than it does about him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

So you're quite happy to call Trump's response incompetent, but have no interest in other leaders who have done significantly worse?

That says more about you than it does about him

Take it to the Belgium thread please

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

So you're quite happy to call Trump's response incompetent, but have no interest in other leaders who have done significantly worse?

That says more about you than it does about him

Certainly. Quite happy to discuss Trump's incompetency, (only occasionally, as it appears boundless and hence becomes tiresome). And a thread about Trump's presidency does seem the most appropriate place.

You may want to do a little reading prior to the Belgium thread. You've most probably thrown their monarch King Phillippe under the bus. Sophie Wilmes is the Belgian Prime Minister. Initially in a caretaker role, she was sworn into office on 16th March to lead her coalition minority government.  

The way Belgium counts their deaths certainly exaggerates their death toll compared to many other countries.

Ultimately though, you're being disingenuous by excusing Trump's failures by continuing to deflect, ("...but Cuomo", "....but Belgium"). It does nothing to progress reasoned and intelligent discourse. The fact that other heads of state, countries, officials or whomever may have made errors, does not in any way elevate Trump's performance to being an acceptable.

But that's more of the IJ Playbook. Which quite eloquently says something about you.

 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IronJimbo said:

So you're quite happy to call Trump's response incompetent, but have no interest in other leaders who have done significantly worse?

That says more about you than it does about him

 

1 hour ago, Parkside said:

Take it to the Belgium thread please

He has a point. This is the trump thread. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering that the tone of politics worldwide (including Australia) has moved to become more of a popularity contest than any real display of skill or abilities required to become a leader, its no surprise that the world is full of politicians who would seriously struggle in a battle of wits with an Iguana.

Like him or hate him, for all his political faults (and he has many) Donald Trump seems to be the one person who has worked the system out better than anybody else. Realistically he has a decent chance of getting a 2nd term purely on the basis that people have a massive distrust of politicians and they've worked out that he most definitely isn't one.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

New York and New Jersey aside, U.S. deaths per million is more like 190

 

But you can't put them aside, 'cause they're part of the US.  It's like saying Australia has had 0 positive tests for covid 19 and no deaths, as long as you just look at the township of Banana, and forget the rest of the country.  Just having some fun IJ.  Everything's a shitshow around the world and we're all trying to do what we think is best.  Those Belgians, they're nuts..... Only thing worse are the Dutch! (my inlaws are Dutch)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, goughy said:

But you can't put them aside, 'cause they're part of the US.  It's like saying Australia has had 0 positive tests for covid 19 and no deaths, as long as you just look at the township of Banana, and forget the rest of the country.  Just having some fun IJ.  Everything's a shitshow around the world and we're all trying to do what we think is best.  Those Belgians, they're nuts..... Only thing worse are the Dutch! (my inlaws are Dutch

 

Edited by BarryBevan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BB, I wasn't replying to you in any way!  I can't fathom what you are going through there.  And I wasn't making light of this in any way.  My reply was specific to ij, and that one comment of his, with a couple of comments so he knows I'm not having a serious dig at him.

I do apologise that I upset/frustrated you.  It wasn't my intention.  Sorry mate.

Edited by goughy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, goughy said:

BB, I wasn't replying to you in any way!  I can't fathom what you are going through there.  And I wasn't making light of this in any way.  My reply was specific to ij, and that one comment of his, with a couple of comments so he knows I'm not having a serious dig at him.

I do apologise that I upset/frustrated you.  It wasn't my intention.  Sorry mate.

Its okay I was more venting at some of the earlier posts. Trump, we can come back anytime, so we choose to be here, come back to what though I really worry about jobs in Australia. But I don't have to stay in a state with 44K cases, but that's where I am.

On Trump, I can't see how he seems to be wearing the blame for COVID, has he made mistakes, yes, but so have many others. Our schools were shut before NZ or OZ closed anything, sports were off while people were going to to go the sharks game.

So much of this is unknown and the only people not caught out were nations like SK and Taiwan who are very well prepared for and drill for bio and nuclear attack. Only posted the trump link as it was a list of things they actually did.

No one has a clue about the election and other than those who love politics the average person is trying to a: not die and b: feed their families, so who ever answers those questions best wins office!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Joe Biden I can’t see getting much exposure or traction on TV. 
 

Trump will win easy.  Ironically.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, -- AJ -- said:

Considering that the tone of politics worldwide (including Australia) has moved to become more of a popularity contest than any real display of skill or abilities required to become a leader, its no surprise that the world is full of politicians who would seriously struggle in a battle of wits with an Iguana.

Like him or hate him, for all his political faults (and he has many) Donald Trump seems to be the one person who has worked the system out better than anybody else. Realistically he has a decent chance of getting a 2nd term purely on the basis that people have a massive distrust of politicians and they've worked out that he most definitely isn't one.

 

Spot on

You can now add the media to the list of entities that people have a massive distrust of now.  Trump has been calling them on their bullshit, which is why they hate him nearly as much as Nancy Pelosi and Paul Every

Speaking of calling out the media for their bullshit, I'm developing a very large crush on Kayleigh McEnaney...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IronJimbo said:

 

Speaking of calling out the media for their bullshit, I'm developing a very large crush on Kayleigh McEnaney...

 

I totally agree with you.  
 

she is awesome. The very best Press Person He has had in 4 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Peter said:

I totally agree with you.  
 

she is awesome. The very best Press Person He has had in 4 years. 

How many press persons has he had in 4 years? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

You can now add the media to the list of entities that people have a massive distrust of now.  Trump has been calling them on their bullshit, which is why they hate him.

Of course noone trusts the media. It's not like they are trying to sell us something that we dont want... ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Donald Trump has shown himself to be a showman. I don’t think he’s a serious candidate. … It’s a sideshow. It’s not within the mainstream of candidates. … I’m here to tell you he’s not going to be anywhere near the top 5. He made that pretty clear when the most important thing he said in his speech was ‘I am rich, I am rich’ repeatedly.” — McEnany, summer of 2015 on CNN

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mike Del said:

How many press persons has he had in 4 years? 

How many did Obama have?  Or even Bush?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's on his 4th.  Obama had 3 over two terms, Bush had 4.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, goughy said:

He's on his 4th.  Obama had 3 over two terms, Bush had 4.

He's doing his thing for gender equality. Before him there had only ever been 2 female press secretaries. He's more than doubled that number already.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Peter said:

How many did Obama have?  Or even Bush?

Sorry, just asking about Trump, thought I was on the Trump thread

On 23/05/2020 at 5:27 PM, Peter said:

 

He has a point. This is the trump thread. 

👍

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, goughy said:

He's on his 4th.  Obama had 3 over two terms, Bush had 4.

I’d expect it would be a pretty tough gig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New York Times front page(s).

Chilling memorial to but a fraction of the 100 000 lives lost.

(Putting aside politics, I only posted here because it's a sombre reflection of the current state of the US)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Peter said:

Meanwhile trump supporters. 

 

 

That clip was posted a month ago.   I wonder if any of them have changed their thoughts yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Paul Every said:

New York Times front page(s).

Chilling memorial to but a fraction of the 100 000 lives lost.

Including at least one murder victim, according to CNN...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

Including at least one murder victim, according to CNN...

Speaking of "murder victims", WTF is Trump going on about with his tweets on Joe Scarborough? Shouldn't Twitter be censoring baseless innuendo accusing people of murder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Toolish said:

 

That clip was posted a month ago.   I wonder if any of them have changed their thoughts yet?

Doubt it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IronJimbo said:

Including at least one murder victim, according to CNN...

Nice take home message.

You must be very popular at funerals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Paul Every said:

Nice take home message.

You must be very popular at funerals.

Sorry for pointing out the #fakenews in your article 

Perhaps you should choose a more reliable source 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

Sorry for pointing out the #fakenews in your article 

Perhaps you should choose a more reliable source 

FFS.

The New York Times front page endeavours to humanise and pay respect to the enormity of 100 000 people whose lives have been lost. To provide solace and compassion to the many families left behind, and to a city that has grieved this year like no other on the planet.

Yet your only response is to hone in on an inaccuracy that represents 0.001% of the gravity and tragedy.

Perhaps you could read through the other 999 names, (of those to which you don't object), and give thought to the words of those who loved them and will forever feel their loss. Then read it all again. Then read it another 98 times in an attempt to comprehend the enormity of so many people's suffering.

Then consider the propriety of your responses.

 

 

  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Paul Every said:

FFS.

The New York Times front page endeavours to humanise and pay respect to the enormity of 100 000 people whose lives have been lost. To provide solace and compassion to the many families left behind, and to a city that has grieved this year like no other on the planet.

Yet your only response is to hone in on an inaccuracy that represents 0.001% of the gravity and tragedy.

Perhaps you could read through the other 999 names, (of those to which you don't object), and give thought to the words of those who loved them and will forever feel their loss. Then read it all again. Then read it another 98 times in an attempt to comprehend the enormity of so many people's suffering.

Then consider the propriety of your responses.

 

 

Here we go...

'You disagree with me politically, which means you don't care about other people as much as I do'

Want a sugar cube for your high horse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please don't behave like a contrary ****er just for the sake of it. Or attempt to put words in my mouth.

I pointedly stated my initial NYT post was apolitical, as have been my subsequent responses.

Deliberately or otherwise, you wish to ignore the merit of the piece to make some obscure and irrelevant point. 

I stand by what I've written. Nothing more to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The New York Times quickly corrected their error and all later editions of the paper were amended and an apology printed. There online edition was also amended.  

Edited by Mike Del

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the sincerity of the NYT article  highlighted by Paul actually being questioned anywhere?
The article states the name, age and home town of the deceased, plus a little info about each one, what they enjoyed doing, hobbies ect. The article has no mention of politics at all.
 

 

 

Edited by Mike Del

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mike Del said:

Is the sincerity of the NYT article  highlighted by Paul actually being questioned anywhere?
The article states the name, age and home town of the deceased, plus a little info about each one, what they enjoyed doing, hobbies ect. The article has no mention of politics at all.
 

No, it's just pretty standard virtue signalling

Their ideological comrades in the east have picked up the ball and are running with it though

https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1189344.shtml

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, IronJimbo said:

No, it's just pretty standard virtue signalling

Their ideological comrades in the east have picked up the ball and are running with it though

https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1189344.shtml

So why attempt to cast doubts on the article? It’s been praised around the world as a compassionate and sincere piece.
Seriously, is it necessary to continually argue just for the sake of arguing IJ? 

 

  

Edited by Mike Del
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Mike Del said:

So why attempt to cast doubts on the article? It’s been praised around the world as a compassionate and sincere piece.

Job done then

Yay NYT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...