State of the Union

[turtlespeed 212]

33 minutes ago, billvon said:

So you are vindicated in posting something that wasn't true?

I know you claim to not be a Trump supporter but you sure sound like one.

I didn't post something that wasn't true.

[billvon 2,396]

21 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I didn't post something that wasn't true.

Your words - "She said it was the courteous thing to do, because she couldn't control her temper." That is not true.  (A lie, in common parlance.)

[SkyDekker 1,121]

On 2/4/2020 at 6:50 PM, brenthutch said:

I expected Trump to pull down his pants, take a dump and start throwing turds at the Dems, I could have not been more wrong.  He is killing it!

However, if we look at one of the few numbers Trump may actually understand, viewership of SoTU was down 21% compared to 2019.

[turtlespeed 212]

1 minute ago, billvon said:

Your words - "She said it was the courteous thing to do, because she couldn't control her temper." That is not true.  (A lie, in common parlance.)

She said, "It was the courteous thing to do, considering the alternative."

You can see the distinction?  It's what quotation marks are for. 

I see you get that - you used them correctly above.

[billvon 2,396]

4 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

However, if we look at one of the few numbers Trump may actually understand, viewership of SoTU was down 21% compared to 2019.

And most of the TV coverage has been of Pelosi, not Trump.

[billvon 2,396]

3 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

She said, "It was the courteous thing to do, considering the alternative."

 

Exactly!  She said it was the courteous thing to do, considering the alternative - truth.  "She said it was the courteous thing to do, because she couldn't control her temper" -  not true.  Now you are getting it.

[gowlerk 1,905]

34 minutes ago, billvon said:

Exactly!  She said it was the courteous thing to do, considering the alternative - truth.  "She said it was the courteous thing to do, because she couldn't control her temper" -  not true.  Now you are getting it.

Of course, I'd love to know what was the alternative she had under consideration. Anyone care to guess?

[turtlespeed 212]

23 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

Of course, I'd love to know what was the alternative she had under consideration. Anyone care to guess?

I showed a gif earlier.

[turtlespeed 212]

59 minutes ago, billvon said:

Exactly!  She said it was the courteous thing to do, considering the alternative - truth.  "She said it was the courteous thing to do, because she couldn't control her temper" -  not true.  Now you are getting it.

By ripping up the documents she showed the world she couldnt control her temper.

Perhaps she controlled a bit of it - but that is splitting hairs.

[billvon 2,396]

11 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

By ripping up the documents she showed the world she couldnt control her temper.

If you think that wasn't a planned, scripted event - I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.  For very cheap.

[turtlespeed 212]

Just now, billvon said:

If you think that wasn't a planned, scripted event - I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.  For very cheap.

If it was - then she has even less respect than she did.

Deliberate Trumpiness - Mmmmmmm - That's what we need in every office of the government now!!!

 

[gowlerk 1,905]

14 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Deliberate Trumpiness - Mmmmmmm - That's what we need in every office of the government now!!!

You've pretty much got it.

[billvon 2,396]

2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

If it was - then she has even less respect than she did.

You have always had zero respect for her and always will - so no change there.  

Quote

Deliberate Trumpiness - Mmmmmmm - That's what we need in every office of the government now!!!

Yes, the voting populace has made that clear.  Give em what they want.

[mistercwood 287]

2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

If it was - then she has even less respect than she did.

Deliberate Trumpiness - Mmmmmmm - That's what we need in every office of the government now!!!

 

And why not? Being "above" that kind of behaviour has had exactly zero benefit. Trump absolutely trashing all norms and running the office like his personal piggy-bank has had exactly zero consequence.

What motive is there at this point to not simply join in?

The bar. Has been. Set.

[nigel99 143]

2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

If it was - then she has even less respect than she did.

Deliberate Trumpiness - Mmmmmmm - That's what we need in every office of the government now!!!

 

That is exactly what the US population appears to have chosen. Clear the swamp and fill it with half wit tv personalities. 
 

The rest of the world can now sit and wait for a US president to fire off a nuke ‘for the ratings man’

[jakee 1,254]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

She's also as mentally ill as Trump is!

YOU just hate trump so you are not able to view it objectively.

That simply reflects back the extreme bias and hatred of the Dems that YOU bring into every discussion. 

 

Stack any single random day of twitter outbursts from Trump against any breaches of decorum from Pelosi over 3 decades in office and see who comes out ahead.

[billvon 2,396]

50 minutes ago, mistercwood said:

And why not? Being "above" that kind of behaviour has had exactly zero benefit. Trump absolutely trashing all norms and running the office like his personal piggy-bank has had exactly zero consequence.

What motive is there at this point to not simply join in?  The bar. Has been. Set.

Yep.  In the last election, when Trump went low, the democrats went high.  They won't make that mistake again.

[brenthutch 383]

16 minutes ago, billvon said:

Yep.  In the last election, when Trump went low, the democrats went high.  They won't make that mistake again.

"Never wrestle with a pig, you both get dirty and the pig likes it."   Good luck.

Edited February 7, 2020 by brenthutch

[ryoder 1,381]

19 minutes ago, billvon said:

Yep.  In the last election, when Trump went low, the democrats went high.  They won't make that mistake again.

The Democrats need to hire Bill Maher to run the presidential campaign:

 

[turtlespeed 212]

1 hour ago, mistercwood said:

And why not? Being "above" that kind of behaviour has had exactly zero benefit. Trump absolutely trashing all norms and running the office like his personal piggy-bank has had exactly zero consequence.

What motive is there at this point to not simply join in?

The bar. Has been. Set.

Motive?  Self Respect.

[billvon 2,396]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

Motive?  Self Respect.

Self respect is great when you can afford it.  When Trump is the alternative, it's not a good tradeoff.

[mistercwood 287]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

Motive?  Self Respect.

But why do the Dem's have to have/show that, and the Republican's don't? This is my point. One party is held accountable for behaviour, the other is not. There are no positives to playing nice and now no negatives to playing dirty, so fuck it, they may as well play dirty.

This is what your nation chose.

[brenthutch 383]

Bill Clinton paved that road 

[mistercwood 287]

1 minute ago, brenthutch said:

Bill Clinton paved that road 

Bullshit. Clinton is/was a sleazebag but he didn't make literally millions of dollars by pissing off to his own hotels every weekend and charging taxpayers for it (as one very basic, very brief example).

Trump has broken every norm of the office he holds since most of them aren't actual official rules, because everyone knew that this just isn't how things are supposed to be done.

[TriGirl 268]

25 minutes ago, mistercwood said:

Trump has broken every norm of the office he holds since most of them aren't actual official rules, because everyone knew that this just isn't how things are supposed to be done.

It's called leading by example, and respecting the office.  He does neither.