Trump Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vouthon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thinking alone is not sufficient without accurate facts on which the thought is working. **By distrusting all sources of facts and information other than the one narrow group that feeds you information, you essentially put yourself at the mercy of that one source. It is the way all fanatic cults work. **“Don’t believe anyone else but us!”. Once they control the facts, they control the thought too.
Ah, yes.

And such “narrow group” control would be symptomatic of an insistence that other sources simply ought not be believed, yes?
Given what I pointed out above the question arises who is misinformed here. The media are doing the research so I don’t know what you mean by “doing real research”. Reading Breitbart, Drudge or Daily Caller? That won’t get you very far with the truth.
Apparently Al, you are being manipulated by a fanatical cult. According to Leaf, that is.

Where are those gatekeepers and referees when you need them? :cool:
 
I’ll let Leaf rebut this one if he is inclined to…
She, I think.

But who can tell in this world absent gatekeepers and referees to tell us what is the truth about such matters?

Or, at least, in a world where we are continually being reminded that there is no discernible truth about any and all matters.
 
Excerpt from Donald Trump’s op-ed in The Deseret News:

“We will also protect the rights of the unborn, one of our most sacred responsibilities. I am proudly pro-life and believe that every child must be given the opportunity to live in a safe home raised by a good family. Hillary Clinton disagrees; she supports spending your tax dollars to pay for abortions and has criticized those of us who are pro-life.”

m.deseretnews.com/article/865660230/Exclusive-Donald-Trump-Utah-can-help-make-America-great-again.html?pg=all?ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co.uk%2F

Also here is an except from an interview that Gov Mike Pence did on Fox News Sunday regarding abortion: nationalrighttolifenews.org/news/2016/08/mike-pence-ably-defines-his-pro-life-record-says-he-is-grateful-to-be-standing-with-donald-trump-in-his-strong-commitment-to-the-right-to-life/#.V7MerVR4WJI
 
Thinking alone is not sufficient without accurate facts on which the thought is working. By distrusting all sources of facts and information other than the one narrow group that feeds you information, you essentially put yourself at the mercy of that one source. It is the way all fanatic cults work. “Don’t believe anyone else but us!”. Once they control the facts, they control the thought too.
Well, no, facts without thinking are not facts – they are just bits of information we have no clue what to do with.

Which came first: the grubby facts or the chicken that scratches the ground for them?

:hmmm:

Silly question to ask an evolutionist, I guess. 😦
 
And Trump has donated almost $400,000 to democrats to help them further their causes. He claims it was to buy influence to do business in NY (pay for play anyone?) but would any serious pro-life conservative donate money to Hillary and the democratic party knowing they will always push an extreme abortion position forward?

I truly believe that Trump is a con-artist. He has no moral center other then enriching himself with more money and fame and will pretend to be anything he has to in order to do it.
Trump isn’t a serious prolifer. His VP appears to be. And Clinton IS a serious proabortioner. And let’s not pretend Clinton has a moral center other than enriching herself, as she’s already done with her “Foundation”, and her cronies.
I’m not sure I agree with mr. Shea about Hillary being the less of two evils. I think her stance on abortion is not compatible with Catholicism. But trump isn’t prolife. So it’s six of 1 half dozen of the other.

I feel duped though. The Republican Party was supposed to be the prolife party. But abortion didn’t matter much when it came to getting Trump as the candidate.
There’s a verifiable difference between Trump, who’s historically been nominally pro-“choice” and Clinton who has been pro-abortion for decades.

And to be fair to the GOP, in spite of their MANY failings at the national level, let’s not pretend Trump was the candidate the GOP leadership wanted as the nominee.
 
Thinking alone is not sufficient without accurate facts on which the thought is working. By distrusting all sources of facts and information other than the one narrow group that feeds you information, you essentially put yourself at the mercy of that one source. It is the way all fanatic cults work. “Don’t believe anyone else but us!”. Once they control the facts, they control the thought too.
The lack of credibility the media holds is the result of no one by the media. If they hadn’t been leftist hacks who manipulated information and reporting for decades, they would still have credibility. Don’t blame everyone else for your bad reputation.
 
Mr Shea should give up his blogging pen
They don’t advocate the same policies, not by a long shot.
Mark is a Hillary apologist
There is no worse moral decay than what’s already been discussed in Trump.

As Catholic Apologist Mark Shea says: Trump is vastly worse than Hillary because he advocates the same terrible policies she does on abortion and bellicosity and service of the 1% while also advocating still more terrible ideas besides. Hillary, for all her faults, does not advocate these or, when she does, it is in a much more muted form.–

patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2016/05/voting-to-support-a-lesser-evil-vs-voting-to-lessen-evil.html
 
Not only legal immigrants but their family members as well, who may have been born in the U.S. We’re in for some harrowing times if Trump becomes POTUS. Conservative constitutionalists should be the most disturbed by this.
Children should be raised by their parents, don’t you agree?
If they have a valid US birth certificate, they can come back as an adult.
 
Prooftexting is not a virtue.
It’s only from countries where we don’t have access to appropriate screening data from the country of origin. We can assess the terrorist risk of Muslims from EU countries for example, but not Syria.
He did:
“Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on,”

cnn.com/2015/12/07/politics/donald-trump-muslim-ban-immigration/

You said you don’t believe the media:
  1. a bad strategy to get to the truth
  2. you really don’t have to believe the media on this one anyway. Trump said above words himself at a rally in December 2015, or rather he abbreviated it:
“Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until we can figure out what is going on,”

There is video footage of Trump saying this. Look it up. Should be on Youtube somewhere.
 
In case anyone is interested in fact checking:

Donald Trump traveled to Youngstown, Ohio, to deliver what was billed as a “major” speech on how to deal with the threat posed by the Islamic State terrorist group, a.k.a. ISIS. For reasons known only to Trump, he continued to repeat false statements that have been repeatedly debunked in the past. So here’s a roundup of some of the more notable claims made in the speech. As is our practice, we don’t award Pinocchios in roundups, but readers by now should be able to tell the real whoppers.
“This summer there’s been an ISIS attack launched outside the war zones of the Middle East — hard to believe — every 84 hours.”
washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/08/16/fact-checking-donald-trumps-major-speech-on-the-islamic-state/?wpisrc=n
 
Excerpt from Donald Trump’s op-ed in The Deseret News:

“We will also protect the rights of the unborn, one of our most sacred responsibilities. I am proudly pro-life and believe that every child must be given the opportunity to live in a safe home raised by a good family. Hillary Clinton disagrees; she supports spending your tax dollars to pay for abortions and has criticized those of us who are pro-life.”

m.deseretnews.com/article/865660230/Exclusive-Donald-Trump-Utah-can-help-make-America-great-again.html?pg=all?ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co.uk%2F
I noticed that Mr. Trump doesn’t say that every child must be given the opportunity to live in a safe home “raised by a father and a mother.” I feel pretty sure that he doesn’t have any problem with children being raised by two fathers or two mothers. His views of LGBT people seem to be relatively positive although he has said that he thinks that Obergefell v. Hodges should be overturned (but I think he’s mostly just pandering to his conservative supporters on that issue).
 
Mr Shea should give up his blogging pen
They don’t advocate the same policies, not by a long shot.
Mark is a Hillary apologist
“Mark is a Hillary apologist”: This facile dismissal of a view you do not agree with is not based on facts.

He very much dislikes Hillary and even calls her “terrible”. He only finds Trump much, much worse – which he is.

I recommend to everyone reading Mark Shea’s excellent column. Here is the link again:

patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2016/05/voting-to-support-a-lesser-evil-vs-voting-to-lessen-evil.html
 
In case anyone is interested in fact checking:

Donald Trump traveled to Youngstown, Ohio, to deliver what was billed as a “major” speech on how to deal with the threat posed by the Islamic State terrorist group, a.k.a. ISIS. For reasons known only to Trump, he continued to repeat false statements that have been repeatedly debunked in the past. So here’s a roundup of some of the more notable claims made in the speech. As is our practice, we don’t award Pinocchios in roundups, but readers by now should be able to tell the real whoppers.
“This summer there’s been an ISIS attack launched outside the war zones of the Middle East — hard to believe — every 84 hours.”
washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/08/16/fact-checking-donald-trumps-major-speech-on-the-islamic-state/?wpisrc=n
This criticism of what Hillary Clinton did in Libya is especially interesting (it shows real chutzpah on Trump’s part): “The failures in Iraq were compounded by Hillary Clinton’s disaster in Libya. President Obama has since said he regards Libya as his worst mistake.”

As the Washington Post article points out, BuzzFeed has uncovered a video of Trump supporting the intervention in Libya in which he said:

“Gaddafi in Libya is killing thousands of people. Nobody knows how bad it is, and we’re sitting around. We have soldiers all over the Middle East, and we’re not bringing them in to stop this horrible carnage, and that’s what it is: It’s a carnage …. Now, we should go in, we should stop this guy, which would be very easy and very quick.”
 
“Mark is a Hillary apologist”: This facile dismissal of a view you do not agree with is not based on facts.

He very much dislikes Hillary and even calls her “terrible”. He only finds Trump much, much worse – which he is.

I recommend to everyone reading Mark Shea’s excellent column. Here is the link again:

patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2016/05/voting-to-support-a-lesser-evil-vs-voting-to-lessen-evil.html
I would differ with the assessment that it’s an “excellent column”. Essentially all he does is utter conclusions of his own without laying a foundational basis for any of his rather shrill accusations against Trump. That’s just a tirade, not a reasoned argument.

In the absence of Shea laying a foundation for his conclusions and his resorting to name-calling in the article, it leaves one to wonder just what his real reasons for supporting Hillary Clinton are.

Perhaps someday he’ll include that in his memoirs; “Why I really supported Hillary Clinton” perhaps might be the title of the chapter.
 
I would differ with the assessment that it’s an “excellent column”. Essentially all he does is utter conclusions of his own without laying a foundational basis for any of his rather shrill accusations against Trump. That’s just a tirade, not a reasoned argument.
It is a reasoned argument, easy to see for anyone not biased towards Trump.
 
**Poll: Clinton leads Trump by 9 in Florida
**

Buoyed by support among white women and the state’s growing and diverse population, Hillary Clinton has opened up a startling nine-point lead over Donald Trump among likely voters in the contentious and historically battleground state of Florida, according to the results of a Monmouth University survey out Tuesday.

The Democratic nominee surged to 48 percent in a general election matchup with Trump, who took just 39 percent in a state where he makes his second home at Mar-a-Lago. Another 6 percent said they will vote for Libertarian nominee Gary Johnson, while 1 percent chose the Green Party’s Jill Stein and 5 percent said they were undecided among those candidates. In the POLITICO Battleground States Polling Average, Clinton now leads by more than five points—46.2 percent to 41 percent.

The former secretary of state holds the support of 92 percent of self-identified Democrats in the poll, while just 4 percent said they are voting for Trump. About 79 percent of self-identified Republicans, meanwhile, said they would support their party’s nominee, while 12 percent said they will vote for Clinton and 5 percent for another candidate. Independents preferred Clinton over Trump 47 percent to 30 percent, with 11 percent going for Johnson and 2 percent for Stein.

Clinton leads Trump by 50 points among Hispanic, black and Asian voters surveyed, groups that collectively make up one-third of the state’s electorate—69 percent to 19 percent for Trump. Among white voters, Trump leads by 14 points—51 percent to 37 percent. But among white women, Clinton leads 49 percent to 39 percent, while Trump holds a larger 40-point edge among white men, 64 percent to 24 percent. Trump leads white voters with (50 percent to 36 percent) and without a college degree (51 percent to 39 percent).

The nearly double-digit topline edge follows a spate of post-convention surveys in swing states showing Clinton growing or maintaining her advantage over the Republican nominee. But in Florida, Clinton’s lead before Tuesday’s poll had not exceeded six points, as Suffolk University’s poll of a slightly larger sample showed earlier this month.Clinton holds narrow three-point leads over Trump on issues related to the economy and jobs (49 percent to 46 percent), as well as the threat of terrorism on American soil (48 percent to 45 percent).

Despite Clinton’s strong nine-point advantage in the state, the public’s general impression of her in Florida is hardly any better than it is of Trump. While 33 percent see Trump favorably to 54 percent who do not, just 36 percent have a positive opinion of Clinton, with 50 percent unfavorable. And despite the Democratic presidential candidate’s significant lead, incumbent Republican Sen. Marco Rubio holds leads of five points and 11 points over his Democratic challengers, Reps. Patrick Murphy and Alan Grayson, respectively.

Monmouth University conducted the survey from Aug. 12-15, surveying a random sample of 402 likely voters. The margin of error for the total sample is plus or minus 4.9 percentage points.
 
There’s an interesting new article in Nate Silver’s Five Thirty Eight, “Election Update: Clinton’s Lead Is Clear And Steady”:
Here are the eight most recently conducted national polls, according to our database:
DATE POLLSTER CLINTON’S MARGIN
Aug. 9-15 USC Dornsife/LA Times +3.4
Aug. 11-14 Morning Consult +6.0
Aug. 8-14 SurveyMonkey +6.0
Aug. 7-13 UPI/CVOTER +3.5
Aug. 7-11 Ipsos +5.2
Aug. 9-10 Rasmussen Reports +3.0
Aug. 9 Gravis Marketing +5.0
Aug. 6-9 YouGov +6.0
Average +4.8
Most recent national polls
Note: As of 10 a.m. on Aug. 16.
These surveys have a few things in common. Other than Gravis Marketing, which doesn’t poll the race on a set schedule, they’re all daily or weekly tracking polls. Also, they were all conducted online, via automated calls (“robopolls”) or through some combination thereof; there are no traditional telephone polls in the bunch.
And they seem to tell a consistent story about where the race stands. All of them have Clinton up by about 5 percentage points, give or take a percentage point or two.1
That’s not bad for Clinton, but it might seem to suggest that her lead over Trump has abated. A week or so ago, we were seeing leads for Clinton in the mid- to high single digits, with occasional forays into the double digits. Overall, she seemed to be ahead by 7 to 8 percentage points.
So what’s changed? Is Clinton’s convention bounce finally wearing off? Actually, pretty much nothing has changed, according to these polls. Because while we were seeing our fair share of 8- and 10-point leads for Clinton, we generally weren’t seeing them from this group of pollsters, which are (with a couple of exceptions) a Trump-leaning bunch.
fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-clintons-lead-is-clear-and-steady/

I know that Trump had been leading for a long time in the USC Dornsife/LA Times poll which made that poll seem like an outlier to me, but now Clinton is even leading in that poll.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top