Mayor wants Trump to delay Phoenix rally

  • Thread starter Thread starter randomuser
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m trying very hard to understand the Trump supporters here who are in denial of reality.
I have three questions for you:

What has Trump accomplished since he was inaugurated?

How has he helped our country?

Should we abolish the three branches of government and replace with an autocracy with Trump as the head of state?
 
=Joyful Song;14854144]I’m trying very hard to understand the Trump supporters here who are in denial of reality.
Click to expand...
Ad hominem.
What has Trump accomplished since he was inaugurated?
Click to expand...
How has he helped our country?
Click to expand...
  1. Deregulation. We’ve more rules on the books than we’ve had in 80 years. They don’t all work and were killing job growth
  2. 1.1 million new jobs created
  3. Illegal immigration down almost 2/3 without one brick of the wall.
  4. Gorsuch as the SC pick
  5. Billions of dollars are coming back into this country from off-shore accounts.
Should we abolish the three branches of government and replace with an autocracy with Trump as the head of state?
Click to expand...
Absolutely not.
 
randomuser said:
Trump’s mouth is what keeps the chaos going - all he had to do was stick with the script his advisors gave him.
Click to expand...
In other words, you seem to be suggesting that Trump was elected as figurehead and Press Secretary, and that his advisors are the Collective President. Who elected Trump’s advisors?
 
SuperLuigi said:
Ad hominem.
not ad hominem, simply true. You haven’t read Johnston book of facts on Trump’s bio yet.
  1. Deregulation. We’ve more rules on the books than we’ve had in 80 years. They don’t all work and were killing job growth
    The Trump administration has promised to “cancel” or roll back environmental and energy regulations in an “aggressive way.” But its approach defies rationality and threatens public wellbeing.
  2. 1.1 million new jobs created
    Any changes we might see now are either part of the normal growth rate or the result of actions taken during Obama’s administration.
  3. Illegal immigration down almost 2/3 without one brick of the wall.
    Where does the 78 percent come from? From June 2016 to June 2017, apprehensions at the southwest border went down 53 percent.
  4. Gorsuch as the SC pick
    Republicans always play dirty:It was possible only after the Senate discarded longstanding rules meant to ensure mature deliberation and bipartisan cooperation in considering Supreme Court nominees. On Thursday, after Democrats waged a filibuster against Judge Gorsuch, denying him the 60 votes required to advance to a final vote, Republicans invoked the so-called nuclear option: lowering the threshold on Supreme Court nominations to a simple majority vote, and let’s also remember enduring eight years of obstruction.
  5. Billions of dollars are coming back into this country from off-shore accounts.
    ???
Absolutely not.
Click to expand...
It’s starting to happen.

 
not ad hominem, simply true. You haven’t read Johnston book of facts on Trump’s bio yet.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant. Still ad hominem.
The Trump administration has promised to “cancel” or roll back environmental and energy regulations in an “aggressive way.” But its approach defies rationality and threatens public wellbeing.
Click to expand...
Incorrect. Overregulation is a public danger and greatly limits job growth.
Any changes we might see now are either part of the normal growth rate or the result of actions taken during Obama’s administration.
Click to expand...
We didn’t have a normal growth rate under Obama. The only reason jobs were created under Obama were because states like North Dakota, Texas and Utah created jobs in spite of Obama.
Where does the 78 percent come from? From June 2016 to June 2017, apprehensions at the southwest border went down 53 percent.
Click to expand...
2/3 is 66%, not 78%.

insider.foxnews.com/2017/06/10/donald-trump-wall-not-built-illegal-immigration-border-crossings-are-down
Republicans always play dirty:It was possible only after the Senate discarded longstanding rules meant to ensure mature deliberation and bipartisan cooperation in considering Supreme Court nominees. On Thursday, after Democrats waged a filibuster against Judge Gorsuch, denying him the 60 votes required to advance to a final vote, Republicans invoked the so-called nuclear option: lowering the threshold on Supreme Court nominations to a simple majority vote, and let’s also remember enduring eight years of obstruction.
Click to expand...
Gorsuch was already confirmed to a lower court with votes by Obama, Clinton, Schumer, and several other Democrats.

It was the Democrats, not the Republicans, who refused to cooperate as the minority party.

Stopping Barack Obama’s wicked, anti-Catholic agenda was just, right and in-line with Catholic teaching.
 
Seamus_L said:
President Trump tweeted this after Barcelona foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/17/trump-cites-tale-gen-pershings-pigs-blood-bullets-that-historians-dismiss.html Tuesday is going to be interesting.
Click to expand...
UK Prime Minister Theresa May said her thoughts were with the victims, adding that “the UK stands with Spain against terror”.

French President Emmanuel Macron said: “We remain united and determined.”

US President Donald Trump said:“The United States condemns the terror attack in Barcelona, Spain, and will do whatever is necessary to help. Be tough & strong, we love you!” Then he ruined it with another tweet:Study what General Pershing of the United States did to terrorists when caught. There was no more Radical Islamic Terror for 35 years!
 
Super Luigi, you bore me with your imperious denial. My views are relevent. The facts are correct.
 
SuperLuigi said:
One of the things pointed out: Just because Trump isn’t at the White House doesn’t mean he’s not working.

Same could have potentially been said of Obama.

In Trump’s case, he’s already done a lot, and could do more if Congress could its act together.
Click to expand...
Very true. I didn’t mean to imply he was not working. I meant to say that in this case the considerable expense of moving the President and his staff to a remote location is necessary for the proper maintenance of the White House, which has suffered neglect because previous presidents have not submitted themselves to such an inconvenience.

It might be somewhat less inconvenient when you happen to own a resort you can retire to, but I don’t fault Mr. Trump for that. He really ought to get credit for taking care of the White House as it ought to have been maintained but was not. (The repair list and the number of presidents who have kicked the maintenance can down the road was rather appalling, to be blunt.)
 
Joyful_Song said:
Yes, we all know the White House is being renovated now, what about the rest of the time he’s been in office (or supposed to have been)

Tracking the President’s Visits to Trump Properties January thru August 14th.
Ethics experts say Trump’s visits to properties owned, managed or branded by the Trump Organization amount to free publicity for the company and blur the line between his family business and presidential duties.

70
Number of days on which he visited at least one Trump property

138
Number of days he did not visit a Trump property
Click to expand...
I would have thought that “obviously hypocritical considering all the criticism Trump leveled at Obama for taking time off of work” would have covered that. If you want to go all emoluments clause about it, fine, as long as you ar clear that you are advancing your point and going beyond mine. The White House needed the work, in some aspects the state of the building was appalling, and so the President gets a pass on this particular absence, without any implications covering other absences.

Did you think he would go to Camp David? This is not what other Presidents did, and they were much more fond of getting out in nature with nothing to do but walk nature trails than Mr. Trump is.
 
Theo520 said:
Joyful, so you clearly don’t know the definition of ‘ad hominem’ - look it up.

Glad to see you actually agreed all the other points were factual.
Click to expand...
Actually, Joyful appears to be correct here. The claim seems to be that there are Trump supporters and some of them are in denial and not that they must be in denial because they are Trump supporters. The claim here might be wrong (I don’t think it is), but it’s certainly not an ad hominem.
 
jesucated said:
Actually, Joyful appears to be correct here. The claim seems to be that there are Trump supporters and some of them are in denial and not that they must be in denial because they are Trump supporters. The claim here might be wrong (I don’t think it is), but it’s certainly not an ad hominem.
Click to expand...
So you need to read up on ad hominem as well.

Whether an insult is true or false is irrelevant in determining whether it’s an ad hominem.
 
Theo520 said:
So you need to read up on ad hominem as well.

Whether an insult is true or false is irrelevant in determining whether it’s an ad hominem.
Click to expand...
OK, you have posted several times that others don’t know what an ad hominem attack is, but have failed to say what it is, other than the patronizing “look it up.” Well, here is what it really is. An ad hominem is a fallacious argument that passes judgement on what someone says based only on who they are.

What Joyful said was that Trump supporters are in denial. That may or may not be true, but it is certainly not an ad hominem because it is just a standalone statement.
 
Theo520 said:
So you need to read up on ad hominem as well.

Whether an insult is true or false is irrelevant in determining whether it’s an ad hominem.
Click to expand...
An ad hominem is not an insult. Ad hominem names a strategy, sometimes fallacious, in which attacking the person making an argument is substituted for taking on the argument itself. That’s not what the poster was doing.
 
jesucated said:
An ad hominem is not an insult. Ad hominem names a strategy, sometimes fallacious, in which attacking the person making an argument is substituted for taking on the argument itself. That’s not what the poster was doing.
Click to expand...
it s a feature of the forum, and Theo is by no means the worst offender, to deflect form posts by fallaciously and illogically naming some logical fallacy. Part of the sourness.
 
dvdjs said:
it s a feature of the forum, and Theo is by no means the worst offender, to deflect form posts by fallaciously and illogically naming some logical fallacy. Part of the sourness.
Click to expand...
I’ve noticed that. 🙂

And you’re correct, there are far worse offenders!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top