Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 04-15-2019, 05:37 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...is this your "GOTCHA" moment? You didn't think I absolutely knew that this was going to be your response to what I posted?

Good god you are predictable. I'm absolutely sure that there are people out there who might have thought that "aerial firefighting might be useful." But absolutely none of them expressed that opinion in the deranged and bizarre fashion that the "Leader of the fucking free world" did on twitter.
You said something stupid and easily-refutable, and you "knew" that I'd point out that it was stupid and easily-refutable? Bravo. Well done. Really, great job there.

And now you're trying to move the goalposts. Keep up the good work.

Last edited by HurricaneDitka; 04-15-2019 at 05:38 PM.
  #102  
Old 04-15-2019, 05:39 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
... I think he generally comes across as demented. As in, literally suffering from dementia. Decaying speech patterns and word usage, failing memory, rambling disjointed thought processes, blatant stupidity.
Same question to you as I asked the OP. What recent speech have you seen that most clearly suggested dementia to you?
  #103  
Old 04-15-2019, 05:42 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
You said something stupid and easily-refutable,
...LOL. Then refute it already. Post the twitter posts.

Quote:
and you "knew" that I'd point out that it was stupid and easily-refutable? Bravo. Well done. Really, great job there.
Thank you.

Quote:
And now you're trying to move the goalposts. Keep up the good work.
Goal posts haven't moved. We are in fucking IMHO. We aren't having a Great Debate.
  #104  
Old 04-15-2019, 05:46 PM
The Tooth is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Posts: 4,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Eh, there's probably better things he could do with his time. Do you think if we looked through tweets here we might find some that weren't the best use of BHO's time too?
Trump:Statesman indeed.

I don't see how anyone can claim to be patriotic when they don't have a problem with the head of state they helped elect being such a clueless dink.
__________________
"It would never occur to me to wear pink, just as it would never occur to Michael Douglas to play a poor person." - Sarah Vowell
  #105  
Old 04-15-2019, 05:48 PM
Colibri's Avatar
Colibri is offline
SD Curator of Critters
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Panama
Posts: 41,781
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Same question to you as I asked the OP. What recent speech have you seen that most clearly suggested dementia to you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colibri View Post
You don't follow the news much, evidently.
If you don't follow the news, we can't really help you.
  #106  
Old 04-15-2019, 05:49 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,121
You think quoting yourself claiming that I don't follow the news is evidence of something other than that you know how the quote function works? What's next "go Google it"?

Last edited by HurricaneDitka; 04-15-2019 at 05:50 PM.
  #107  
Old 04-15-2019, 05:52 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...LOL. Then refute it already. Post the twitter posts. ...
Here is one. Stupid "fact" refuted, agreed?
  #108  
Old 04-15-2019, 05:52 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
You think quoting yourself claiming that I don't follow the news is evidence of something other than that you know how the quote function works? What's next "go Google it"?
...aren't you supposed to be "easily refuting" me? Where are the tweets?
  #109  
Old 04-15-2019, 05:54 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Same question to you as I asked the OP. What recent speech have you seen that most clearly suggested dementia to you?
For the record I don't watch his speeches, because I don't hate myself, but I hear that he recently claimed not to know Wikileaks existed, which can be explained away many ways but every single way requires us to believe that Trump has one form of mental damage or another, crippling senility being the most charitable possible assumption.

But this is all beside the point. Taking the consensus we've reached, which is that Trump is stupid and insane, is there any chance that his stupidity and insanity could manifest in a way that results in a 'Jim Jones' situation?

My thinking is that the only such outcome that's even remotely likely (that is, an outcome where he gets himself and/or a bunch of his followers killed through suicidal actions) would be if he announces that the political event that boots him from office (impeachment or losing re-election) is illegitimate, calls it an illegal attempt to oust him from office, and demands that his MAGAts come defend him from ousting with as many guns as they can carry. At which point a percentage of them comply, attempt to occupy the white house, and learn that the military is both not amused and better armed than they are, resulting in some portion of his rallied followers getting killed. The only way Trump is imperiled in this situation is if they somehow get close to him and he gets caught in the crossfire, or if he somehow gets caught up in the situation and grabs a gun and shoots at the military too.

Again, I don't think that this is likely - he's going to choke on a hamburger long before his term ends politically. But if he was going to 'go Jim Jones', this is the only way I can imagine up that it could possibly happen.
  #110  
Old 04-15-2019, 05:54 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Here is one. Stupid "fact" refuted, agreed?
...that was posted an HOUR ago. Anything after the President posted doesn't count.
  #111  
Old 04-15-2019, 05:56 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
What recent speech have you seen that most clearly suggested dementia to you?
Only last week he said "oranges" three times instead of "origins", and also said his father was born in Germany, when he was born in New York.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The President of the United States
“I hope they now go and take a look at the oranges, the oranges of the investigation, the beginnings of that investigation,” Mr Trump said.
...
“The Mueller report I wished covered the oranges, how it started, the beginnings of the investigation, how it started. It didn’t cover that, and for some reason none of that was discussed.”
  #112  
Old 04-15-2019, 06:04 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
For the record I don't watch his speeches, because I don't hate myself, but I hear that he recently claimed not to know Wikileaks existed, which can be explained away many ways but every single way requires us to believe that Trump has one form of mental damage or another, crippling senility being the most charitable possible assumption. ...
Here's the Wikileaks Q&A. It's not exactly claiming "not to know Wikileaks existed", but you don't watch his speeches either, so, while I appreciate your candor, I'm not sure I'll be placing a lot of value in your opinion about his mental health.

Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
But this is all beside the point. Taking the consensus we've reached...
That word may not mean what you think it means.
  #113  
Old 04-15-2019, 06:07 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,076
The lengths that some will go to in order to defend the indefensible, and rationalize the irrational, is both sad and amusing.
  #114  
Old 04-15-2019, 06:07 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...that was posted an HOUR ago. Anything after the President posted doesn't count.
Why in the hell would that "not count"? Your claim was:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
... Only a single person made a call for sending in the tankers. That fact alone is objectively bizarre.
Nothing there says anything about President Trump being first. You claimed he was the only one to suggest it ("only a single person ..."). Of course it counts.

Last edited by HurricaneDitka; 04-15-2019 at 06:09 PM.
  #115  
Old 04-15-2019, 06:08 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
Only last week he said "oranges" three times instead of "origins", and also said his father was born in Germany, when he was born in New York.
Do you have a link to a video of the speech? Or did the word "oranges" appear in the text of a speech? If so, again, is there a link?
  #116  
Old 04-15-2019, 06:15 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Do you have a link to a video of the speech? Or did the word "oranges" appear in the text of a speech? If so, again, is there a link?
Here's video of him saying "oranges". Here's video about his father, and the quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald Trump
“My father is German, was German, and born in a very wonderful place in Germany so I have a great feeling for Germany.”
  #117  
Old 04-15-2019, 06:19 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Here's the Wikileaks Q&A. It's not exactly claiming "not to know Wikileaks existed", but you don't watch his speeches either, so, while I appreciate your candor, I'm not sure I'll be placing a lot of value in your opinion about his mental health.
If we're going for candor, let's just admit you never put any value in ANY opinion about Trump's mental health that doesn't already align with your own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
That word may not mean what you think it means.
So much for my attempt to drag this thread back on topic.
  #118  
Old 04-15-2019, 06:35 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
If we're going for candor, let's just admit you never put any value in ANY opinion about Trump's mental health that doesn't already align with your own. ...
From what I've seen, pretty much all of those opinions come from people that either don't have any medical experience, or have not interacted with President Trump in any way that would provide them an opportunity for a real diagnosis, or both. Yeah, you're pretty much spot on that I never put any value in those opinions.
  #119  
Old 04-15-2019, 06:36 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Why in the hell would that "not count"? Your claim was:
...that wasn't my claim actually.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
I scrolled through about a couple of hundred comments on the fire today. Only a single person made a call for sending in the tankers. That fact alone is objectively bizarre.
See the bolded bit?

That gives the bit you quoted context.

Out of a couple of hundred comments that I scrolled through about the fire only a single person made a call for sending in the tankers.

In order to refute that: you would have to review the couple of hundred comments that I scrolled through to find counter-examples. As you have zero access to my brain: I highly doubt that you will be able to do so.

As I said: predictable. I worded my post carefully. And you did exactly as I expected you to do. I hope you had fun using the twitter search algorithm.


Quote:
Nothing there says anything about President Trump being first. You claimed he was the only one to suggest it ("only a single person made a call for sending in the tankers"). Of course it counts.
Here's the education lesson for you.

Twitter is infested with bots and political activists who signal boost things the President of the United States says for political gain. So it is to be expected that 3 hours after the President's comment there will be twitter accounts posting things that are either in support of or repeating the messaging coming from the White House. A twitter account with 29 followers that posts stuff like:

Quote:
Government knows #Refugees bring #measlesoutbreak. People are purposely spread around the country, why?

Good for #Election2020, #bigpharma, control over #VaccinesWork, or just inept?

Citizens suffer.

@FoxNews

@CNN

@nytimes

#FoxAndFriends #CNN
and

Quote:
In one TV commercial, #KeithOlbermann was probably responsible for more #turkey deaths than one hunter.
and

Quote:
If earth is 4.5 Billion yrs old and people have only tracked temperature for 150 yrs (50 accurately), who can claim hottest year ever? What about the other 4,499,999,850 yrs?
is very likely to post in exclusive support of the Presidents messaging. No matter what the President says. Quoting obvious propaganda does not refute what I said.

It is unlikely this particular twitter account would have posted in support of "flying tankers" if it weren't for the fact that the President had posted about it a few hours earlier.

But none of that matters, because this post wasn't one of the ones I scrolled through on twitter, so this doesn't refute anything I said.
  #120  
Old 04-15-2019, 06:42 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...that wasn't my claim actually.



See the bolded bit?

That gives the bit you quoted context.

Out of a couple of hundred comments that I scrolled through about the fire only a single person made a call for sending in the tankers.

In order to refute that: you would have to review the couple of hundred comments that I scrolled through to find counter-examples. As you have zero access to my brain: I highly doubt that you will be able to do so.

As I said: predictable. I worded my post carefully. And you did exactly as I expected you to do. I hope you had fun using the twitter search algorithm.




Here's the education lesson for you.

Twitter is infested with bots and political activists who signal boost things the President of the United States says for political gain. So it is to be expected that 3 hours after the President's comment there will be twitter accounts posting things that are either in support of or repeating the messaging coming from the White House. A twitter account with 29 followers that posts stuff like:



and



and



is very likely to post in exclusive support of the Presidents messaging. No matter what the President says. Quoting obvious propaganda does not refute what I said.

It is unlikely this particular twitter account would have posted in support of "flying tankers" if it weren't for the fact that the President had posted about it a few hours earlier.

But none of that matters, because this post wasn't one of the ones I scrolled through on twitter, so this doesn't refute anything I said.
I don't think you worded it half-as-carefully as you seem to think so, nor carefully enough to make your claim what you think it is. For anyone interested, here is the whole paragraph from the post:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Of course it was deranged. Of course it was bizarre. Do you know how many other people watching this logged onto twitter to suggest, with exclamation marks, to "send in the planes?" I scrolled through about a couple of hundred comments on the fire today. Only a single person made a call for sending in the tankers. That fact alone is objectively bizarre.
Your interesting informational tidbit about how many comments you scrolled through does not modify the claim you make in the penultimate sentence. It reads to me like:

'Do you know how many people on twitter suggested it? I did a half-assed search and I could only find one.'

"well, here's another one" is a perfectly reasonable rebuttal to your lone "fact".

Last edited by HurricaneDitka; 04-15-2019 at 06:43 PM.
  #121  
Old 04-15-2019, 06:54 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
For anyone interested
...I very much doubt that anyone is interested in this any more, apart from you. But by all means, if you feel the need to keep on digging, keep on digging.

Quote:
Your interesting informational tidbit about how many comments you scrolled through does not modify the claim you make in the penultimate sentence. It reads to me like:

'Do you know how many people on twitter suggested it? I did a half-assed search and I could only find one.'
Except I "didn't do a half-assed search."

I spent about an hour scrolling through my twitter feed. Everybody I follow was talking about the fire. Nobody was suggesting we send in the water tankers. Until the President of the United States decided to share his opinion. Then people started talking about how deranged and bizzare that was.

So "how it reads to you" is a very different thing to what I both actually wrote, and what I actually did. This is really starting to get embarrassing for you. I'm literally cringing on your behalf. You can stop now if you like.

Quote:
"well, here's another one" is a perfectly reasonable rebuttal to your lone "fact".
Except that it isn't. I'm glad to have cleared that up for you.
  #122  
Old 04-15-2019, 06:55 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 12,113
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
From what I've seen, pretty much all of those opinions come from people that either don't have any medical experience, or have not interacted with President Trump in any way that would provide them an opportunity for a real diagnosis, or both. Yeah, you're pretty much spot on that I never put any value in those opinions.
Wanna know a secret? I'm not a mechanic.

Wanna know something else? If I see flames erupting from beneath the hood of a car, I'm going to feel confident in an armchair diagnosis that there's something wrong with the engine. And this confidence comes despite the fact that I'm not a mechanic!

Your argument that people have "not interacted" with Trump highlights how incredibly flimsy a curtain you're trying to hide Trump behind. Trump is an incredibly public figure. Between his prominent political position, frequent press interactions, and constant tweeting of every stream of consciousness in his coiffed head, he might be the most publicly exposed person on the planet. So when I hear you say we haven't had enough contact with him to diagnose the flames blasting out from under the hood, what that really tells me is that you know damn well that he can't withstand scrutiny, so you're trying to dodge that by pretending that all scrutiny of this absurdly public person is inherently invalid for...reasons...that you can't articulate...because they're nonexistent.

So yeah. We DO have a consensus that his brain is misfiring on at least half its cylinders, because if you didn't think so too you wouldn't attempt to use this flimsy fig leaf to shield his cognitive modesty.

And now that we're clear on that, can we get back on topic? This nonsense about you trying to defend his insanity is way more boring than wild and baseless speculation about a universe where he jumps the rails for once and all.

Last edited by begbert2; 04-15-2019 at 06:56 PM. Reason: typos
  #123  
Old 04-15-2019, 06:56 PM
BigT's Avatar
BigT is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: "Hicksville", Ark.
Posts: 35,985
You have previously stated that you do not support Trump, HD. So why do you go to such lengths to defend him from the indefensible?

This board exists to fight ignorance. And here you are, defending the President of the United States for being profoundly ignorant. You're defending a man who has trouble speaking in compete sentences.

Why this misplaced loyalty?
  #124  
Old 04-15-2019, 07:03 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
... So "how it reads to you" is a very different thing to what I both actually wrote, and what I actually did. This is really starting to get embarrassing for you. I'm literally cringing on your behalf. You can stop now if you like. ...
I'm good continuing. Whether you're cringing, laughing, or hanging your head in shame at the embarrassingly-bad argument you're making here is really irrelevant to me.

What you literally wrote was:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
... Of course it was deranged. Of course it was bizarre. Do you know how many other people watching this logged onto twitter to suggest, with exclamation marks, to "send in the planes?" I scrolled through about a couple of hundred comments on the fire today. Only a single person made a call for sending in the tankers. That fact alone is objectively bizarre.
The "objectively bizarre" "fact" that you refer to in the last sentence: what was it? Not, apparently, that President Trump was the only person who made a call for sending in tankers? Do you know what "objectively" means? Because now it sounds like you're trying to say that the subjective nature of your personal review of some minuscule fraction of Twitter traffic should translate into something 'objective', which it does not. It's meaningless. Virtually nobody cares what you looked at on Twitter, or didn't look at. You made a claim that "Only a single person made a call for sending in the tankers" and that claim is "objectively" false.
  #125  
Old 04-15-2019, 07:05 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,952
Quote:
Originally Posted by hurricaneditka View Post
i'm good continuing. Whether you're cringing, laughing, or hanging your head in shame at the embarrassingly-bad argument you're making here is really irrelevant to me.

What you literally wrote was:



The "objectively bizarre" "fact" that you refer to in the last sentence: What was it? Not, apparently, that president trump was the only person who made a call for sending in tankers? Do you know what "objectively" means? Because now it sounds like you're trying to say that the subjective nature of your personal review of some minuscule fraction of twitter traffic should translate into something 'objective', which it does not. It's meaningless. Virtually nobody cares what you looked at on twitter, or didn't look at. You made a claim that "only a single person made a call for sending in the tankers" and that claim is "objectively" false.
...LOL

Life's too short man. Walk away.
  #126  
Old 04-15-2019, 07:07 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
You have previously stated that you do not support Trump, HD. So why do you go to such lengths to defend him from the indefensible?

This board exists to fight ignorance. And here you are, defending the President of the United States for being profoundly ignorant. You're defending a man who has trouble speaking in compete sentences.

Why this misplaced loyalty?
Is it possible you've confused me with some other poster? I've not been shy about sharing the fact that I voted for President Trump and am generally glad that he's the president rather than HRC. I don't support 100% of everything he's done, and some of his individual actions / decisions downright annoy / frustrate me, but if I've made some general statement to the effect that I "do not support Trump", I can't recall it.

Last edited by HurricaneDitka; 04-15-2019 at 07:08 PM.
  #127  
Old 04-15-2019, 07:09 PM
nearwildheaven is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 12,276
"Going Jim Jones" would probably, in this case, involve the "football".
  #128  
Old 04-15-2019, 07:10 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 33,076
That "my dad was born in Germany" stuff is... something. Frightening or hilarious or both. More clearly amusing are the attempts to rationalize it.
  #129  
Old 04-15-2019, 07:12 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 13,121
Quote:
Originally Posted by nearwildheaven View Post
"Going Jim Jones" would probably, in this case, involve the "football".
The OP gave several examples of what it meant that don't involve nuclear weapons:

Quote:
Could he hole himself up in the West Wing with his henchmen, and hold out in a Waco-style siege? Could he incite his Twitter followers into armed revolt? Could he retreat to Mar-a-Lago with his devotees?
I agree with begbert2 (I think we agree on this at least) that none of that seems the least bit likely. Nuking someone just because he loses an election seems even less-so.

Last edited by HurricaneDitka; 04-15-2019 at 07:12 PM.
  #130  
Old 04-15-2019, 07:12 PM
purplehorseshoe is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas, USA
Posts: 9,819
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
Here's video of him saying "oranges". Here's video about his father, and the quote:
HurricaneDitka, please explain how you support the leadership of the man in the link. If you have a moment more, some words clarifying the lack of senility would be appreciated.
__________________
I can haz sig line?
  #131  
Old 04-15-2019, 07:13 PM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by begbert2 View Post
My thinking is that the only such outcome that's even remotely likely (that is, an outcome where he gets himself and/or a bunch of his followers killed through suicidal actions) would be if he announces that the political event that boots him from office (impeachment or losing re-election) is illegitimate, calls it an illegal attempt to oust him from office, and demands that his MAGAts come defend him from ousting with as many guns as they can carry. At which point a percentage of them comply, attempt to occupy the white house, and learn that the military is both not amused and better armed than they are, resulting in some portion of his rallied followers getting killed. The only way Trump is imperiled in this situation is if they somehow get close to him and he gets caught in the crossfire, or if he somehow gets caught up in the situation and grabs a gun and shoots at the military too.
Trump already calls things that might challenge his presidency, such as the Mueller report, "illegal" and an "attempted coup", so it's not unreasonable to surmise that he might say the same at other future times that his presidency may be threatened, such as an election, impeachment or end of his two-term limit. We already know from 2016 that he views elections as "rigged", anyway.

Alternative venues to the White House for some final conflagration would be Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago. At 58-floors, Trump Tower would be quite a defensible location with commanding views - think the movie Die Hard. Mar-a-Lago seems like the more obvious analogue for the Jonestown compound, and the frequency with which Trump visits his "southern White House" suggests he views it as his retreat from the reality of life in Washington. So that would be the place I can most likely see Trump going "Jim Jones", were he to do so.
  #132  
Old 04-15-2019, 08:13 PM
Monty's Avatar
Monty is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 22,548
Good grief, Ditka. There is really no positive way to spin Trump's latest nonsense to this:

Quote:
Originally Tweeted by President Obama

I'm still asking you to believe - not in my ability to bring about change, but in yours. I believe in change because I believe in you.

That's a short, succinct, wonderful, and uplifting message. In 26 words, well under the 240 character limit of Twitter, glorying in the optimism the man brought to public life, to the presidency, and to the country. That's what I miss from the Obama years.
  #133  
Old 04-15-2019, 08:17 PM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 22,073
Ditka argues in support of people who make policy believing that science is for Democrats.

Cite: https://www.salon.com/2019/04/10/sci...tion-revealed/
  #134  
Old 04-15-2019, 08:34 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 8,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walken After Midnight View Post
The speeches given by Donald Trump, at the rallies he regularly holds in front of his fans, are becoming more and more deranged and bizarre. I increasingly find myself being reminded of listening to the tape recordings made of Jim Jones amongst his devotees in Jonestown. Trump, too, has developed a strong, almost messianic, personality cult among his "base", and one gets the impression that his followers would follow him to the end of the Earth (perhaps literally).

While there is a possibility that Trump will become President-for-Life, the higher probability, from where we stand now, must surely be that one day he will be removed from office, through election defeat, two-term limit or impeachment. With other cults in history, there is often a friction point where the cultists' world and the real world collide and things get real messy - Jim Jones with the Jonestown Massacre and David Koresh at Waco are a couple of examples that spring to mind.

Do you think that such a point will happen with Trump? Trump is suspected to have acted with criminal conduct in many aspects of his life, both non-political and political. There are still many ongoing investigations into these areas, and he may face criminal charges when his presidency expires. If Trump feels the walls closing in - perhaps he knows he's going to jail when his presidency ends - do you think he might, to use a phrase, "go loco"? Could he hole himself up in the West Wing with his henchmen, and hold out in a Waco-style siege? Could he incite his Twitter followers into armed revolt? Could he retreat to Mar-a-Lago with his devotees? Perhaps with vats full of Diet Coke...?
In the short-term - the next 2-8 years - I'm a pessimist. Beyond that, I'm somewhat of an optimist in that i think people will eventually wise up and put an end to this shit.

I do think that until/unless circumstances change dramatically, the only way he leaves is by losing a landslide election - and if he loses, God do I hope he loses in a landslide that is indisputable. If he were to lose in a tight race or were it to end in an EC "tie" and were he to lose in the House of Reps, it would be pandemonium.

But if he's in office for a 2nd term, I seriously doubt he'd be allowed to stay a third. It's possible for a president to destroy some democracy for all and all democracy for some but not all democracy for all, and I suspect his policies will eventually be so costly that all will be confronted with reality. Unfortunately the damage that can be done between now and then is substantial, and some if it might be permanent.
  #135  
Old 04-15-2019, 09:20 PM
bobot's Avatar
bobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Chicago-ish
Posts: 7,583
Flying water tankers!
Must act quickly!
  #136  
Old 04-15-2019, 09:48 PM
El_Kabong's Avatar
El_Kabong is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Smack Dab in the Middle
Posts: 15,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobot View Post
Flying water tankers!
Must act quickly!
How about we fill up a bunch of 737 MAX jetliners with water and crash them into Notre Dame? They're just sitting around doing nothing anyway.

Back to (ahem) the actual thread subject. Trump, for prtty much his entire adult life, has been all about avoiding personal discomfort as much as possible. Going all Jim Jones would result in a high risk of personal discomfort, so in my view there's no way he'll go the last mile no matter what his fortunes hold in the next few years. The most that's likely to happen (and I in no way trivialize this) is that he says something on Twitter or in a speech that some mook interprets as a call to take out one or more prominent Democrats, at which point Trump a) emits a series of feverish tweets claiming that he never actually said that; and b) his army of ever-busy lawyers fire off a bunch of cease and desist letter threatening lawsuits to anyone who deigns to slander our noble President by claiming he might share some responsibility.
  #137  
Old 04-16-2019, 02:07 AM
Monty's Avatar
Monty is offline
Straight Dope Science Advisory Board
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Beijing, China
Posts: 22,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
But if he's in office for a 2nd term, I seriously doubt he'd be allowed to stay a third. It's possible for a president to destroy some democracy for all and all democracy for some but not all democracy for all, and I suspect his policies will eventually be so costly that all will be confronted with reality. Unfortunately the damage that can be done between now and then is substantial, and some if it might be permanent.

He cannot even run for a third term. Hopefully, he won't even finish his current term.
  #138  
Old 04-16-2019, 02:16 AM
Isamu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Osaka
Posts: 6,140
Quote:
Originally Posted by purplehorseshoe View Post
HurricaneDitka, please explain how you support the leadership of the man in the link. If you have a moment more, some words clarifying the lack of senility would be appreciated.
I'm guessing he is a single issue voter.
  #139  
Old 04-16-2019, 05:22 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 8,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monty View Post
He cannot even run for a third term. Hopefully, he won't even finish his current term.
Understood, but some people are talking about whether he would declare himself president for life, and while I am dead certain that he wants to remake the US government in his image, pulling off president-for-life is a stretch. He could probably make it so that he can strongly influence his successor. He could sow chaos in ways we might not be able to foresee. But I don't quite see the US turning into Algeria, and even if it does, as the people there have shown, there comes a point when even in dictatorships, people can demand an ouster. But at the same time, let's not kid ourselves: there's risk that comes with protest.

Last edited by asahi; 04-16-2019 at 05:24 AM.
  #140  
Old 04-16-2019, 07:13 AM
SOJA is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Sunny Southern California
Posts: 138
One would hope so and take his supporters with him. They'd be cleansing the human species.
  #141  
Old 04-16-2019, 08:08 AM
Ashtura is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,983
Quote:
Could he hole himself up in the West Wing with his henchmen, and hold out in a Waco-style siege? Could he incite his Twitter followers into armed revolt? Could he retreat to Mar-a-Lago with his devotees? Perhaps with vats full of Diet Coke...?
Could he? Yeah. And monkeys might fly outta my ass. I gotta give it to some of you folks, you have great imaginations. Seriously, you should write for Hollywood.

Last edited by Ashtura; 04-16-2019 at 08:11 AM.
  #142  
Old 04-16-2019, 08:30 AM
JohnT's Avatar
JohnT is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 22,073
To answer the OP, by 2025... if he makes it that long... Trump will be too damned old and tired to continue.
  #143  
Old 04-16-2019, 08:43 AM
Walken After Midnight is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 4,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
Could he? Yeah. And monkeys might fly outta my ass. I gotta give it to some of you folks, you have great imaginations. Seriously, you should write for Hollywood.
Thanks!

No-one in the thread is saying that Trump will definitely "go loco", but, given what we know of him, I personally find it more outlandish that someone would rule out all possibility of him reaching some psychological crisis point, or that he would attempt to incite his followers in some way in the interests of self-protection. Indications that he might are most definitely there.
  #144  
Old 04-16-2019, 09:33 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashtura View Post
Could he? Yeah. And monkeys might fly outta my ass. I gotta give it to some of you folks, you have great imaginations. Seriously, you should write for Hollywood.
Hollywood would have rejected the story of his campaign and Presidency. The Asylum wouldn't have touched it with a ten foot pole. Uwe Boll would have trashed it, and Ed Wood...well, maybe Ed Wood would have taken it on.
Nothing that has been suggested in this thread is as crazy as what has already happened.
  #145  
Old 04-16-2019, 09:40 AM
Velocity is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 13,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
But if he's in office for a 2nd term, I seriously doubt he'd be allowed to stay a third.
He wouldn't want to stay for a 3rd. Most presidents can't wait to be out the door by the time eight years is up. He would be 78 years by then, thoroughly exhausted and worn out, perhaps just want to spend his remaining years chilling in Mar-a-Lago. The guy has physical and mental limits like anyone else.
  #146  
Old 04-16-2019, 09:43 AM
Procrustus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Pacific NW. ¥
Posts: 11,814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu View Post
I'm guessing he is a single issue voter.
What issue would that be?

Hillary's emails?

Pissing off liberals?

Destroying the moral fabric of the United States?
  #147  
Old 04-16-2019, 10:35 AM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Hollywood would have rejected the story of his campaign and Presidency. The Asylum wouldn't have touched it with a ten foot pole. Uwe Boll would have trashed it, and Ed Wood...well, maybe Ed Wood would have taken it on.
Nothing that has been suggested in this thread is as crazy as what has already happened.
Bullshit. There is a constant level of crazy in this country. No matter who is sittting POTUS or running for the office, there is crazy. It doesn't help that the wingnuts from both parties have spun wild tales of the opposition POTUS refusing to step down at least since the Nixon era. Get a grip on yourself. Trump is an idiot and a buffoon and has been a lousy POTUS, but you are working yourself up mostly, I think, because you enjoy being worked up.
  #148  
Old 04-16-2019, 11:21 AM
Akaj's Avatar
Akaj is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: In the vanishing middle
Posts: 501
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
Bullshit. There is a constant level of crazy in this country. No matter who is sittting POTUS or running for the office, there is crazy. It doesn't help that the wingnuts from both parties have spun wild tales of the opposition POTUS refusing to step down at least since the Nixon era. Get a grip on yourself. Trump is an idiot and a buffoon and has been a lousy POTUS, but you are working yourself up mostly, I think, because you enjoy being worked up.
Yes, there is a constant level of crazy, but none of the prior POTUSes have wallowed in it like this one. I also don't think any of these wacky outcomes will happen, but if I were taking bets I'd put the odds closer to 1000-to-1, as opposed to a billion-to-1 for past administrations.
__________________
I'm not expecting any surprises.
  #149  
Old 04-16-2019, 11:25 AM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 60,069
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumpup View Post
Bullshit. There is a constant level of crazy in this country. No matter who is sittting POTUS or running for the office, there is crazy.
Is this the "Law Of Political Equality" you right-wingers trot out whenever your people go over the top? Do you actually believe there is some sort of natural force that guarantees that if one side is bad, the other side must be equally bad, and that this "fact" excuses said behaviour? That if one of yours fucks it up royally all you have to say is "You are just as bad as we are!" and your saying so makes it true? Your President is a dangerous, self-serving, bigoted, money-grubbing habitual liar who has brought the crazy to a dangerous new level, all your piteous hand-waving notwithstanding.

Last edited by Czarcasm; 04-16-2019 at 11:28 AM.
  #150  
Old 04-16-2019, 12:31 PM
guizot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: An East Hollywood dingbat
Posts: 8,445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Do you actually believe there is some sort of natural force that guarantees that if one side is bad, the other side must be equally bad, . . .
Do you want to know what sleazy things Trump has done, is doing, or is about to do? They will be precisely what he accuses others of doing, at the top of his lungs. It's like clockwork.

The idea is that, when he gets exposed, unthinking people will confuse who has done what, and end up saying: "On well, they ALL do it, so it doesn't matter." The evidence is right here in this thread.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017