Donald Trump

Duckwarrior · Post by **Duckwarrior** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:01 am

Why is nobody questioning why the POTUS is talking about "Last night's events in Sweden" which turn out to be based on a discredited Fox News report.

Because the people who voted for him don't care. They latched on to every way out conspiracy theory they were pedalled about Obama. Yet here he is, a buffoon embarrassing himself and demeaning the office he holds on a daily basis, and they don't care. He isn't a serious politician or even person. He is a pampered poseur who has been surrounded by people too afraid to say anything but yes for the last 50+ years.

As a European with another comedy government, I breathe a huge sigh of relief. Because the only country being led down a more certain path of woe than we are at the moment is the US. Thank God you don't have a smart operator who would capitalise on the EU & UK's gross ineptitude at this time.

Post by **zombywoof** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:18 am

sunrodent wrote:QUOTE (sunrodent @ Feb 19 2017, 01:54 PM) Hey, this was in response to phoenix side stepping the issue.

I'm not side-stepping. You asked if Islam is dangerous, I said "no more than any other religion, and less than some." That's not sidestepping, that's answering your question. A question which, if it were asked as a straight up "yes or no" would be a loaded question without a meaningful answer. If "yes" you quickly jump up and down going "see you agree with me" (which I definitely don't) and if "no" then I'm lying. So I cut you off at the knees and you complained about sidestepping... when really your problem is that I answered *more* than your question and it preempted any of your canned responses.

QUOTE With regards to President Trump he doesn't do the side step like America's other politicians i don't think he ever had to learn to talk like them.[/quote]
He doesn't really sidestep so much as babbles incoherently hoping his listeners are too stupid to pick up on his incompetence. And if you think he's doing anything but this:

QUOTE Speaking without saying anything.[/quote]

I have some goddamn bad news for youi.

sunrodent · Post by **sunrodent** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:23 am

phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Feb 20 2017, 04:18 AM) I'm not side-stepping. You asked if Islam is dangerous, I said "no more than any other religion, and less than some." That's not sidestepping, that's answering your question. A question which, if it were asked as a straight up "yes or no" would be a loaded question without a meaningful answer. If "yes" you quickly jump up and down going "see you agree with me" (which I definitely don't) and if "no" then I'm lying. So I cut you off at the knees and you complained about sidestepping... when really your problem is that I answered *more* than your question and it preempted any of your canned responses.

He doesn't really sidestep so much as babbles incoherently hoping his listeners are too stupid to pick up on his incompetence. And if you think he's doing anything but this:

I have some goddamn bad news for youi.

that's an answer.
although i would not have been excited to have you agree and i wouldn't want you to lie.

yes President Trump may babble and not express his feelings well (and that may be an understatement) i do believe he is a man who wants to do good for the American people and has a good heart. i could be wrong. Time will tell.

The truth is i am just discussing this here i am not looking to win or be right but to learn when i talk to people.

Post by **zombywoof** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:32 am

(Also not that you care, but you misused "whom." "That is proven by the fact that he offends so many people whom hear him talk." should be "That is proven by the fact that he offends so many people who hear him talk." There are four clauses in that sentence, and "who" is acting as the subject of the third clause ("who hear him talk", "who" is "hearing" DJT). It also gets awkward because "that" is used twice to refer to two different things inside the sentence.)

sunrodent · Post by **sunrodent** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 8:41 am

phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Feb 20 2017, 04:32 AM) (Also not that you care, but you misused "whom." "That is proven by the fact that he offends so many people whom hear him talk." should be "That is proven by the fact that he offends so many people who hear him talk." There are four clauses in that sentence, and "who" is acting as the subject of the third clause ("who hear him talk", "who" is "hearing" DJT). It also gets awkward because "that" is used twice to refer to two different things inside the sentence.)

see i learned something. I've clearly been grammatically incorrect.

Post by **zombywoof** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:00 am

In another 20 years you'd have been even more incorrect as "whom" is slowly leaving our language, but that's neither here or there.

sunrodent · Post by **sunrodent** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:06 am

phoenix1 wrote:QUOTE (phoenix1 @ Feb 20 2017, 05:00 AM) In another 20 years you'd have been even more incorrect as "whom" is slowly leaving our language, but that's neither here or there.

shouldn't that have been "here nor there" sir.

Post by **zombywoof** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:08 am

;D

(Seriously I spent a good five minutes deciding whether or not to nest that joke in there)

badpazzword · Post by **badpazzword** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:49 am

You now owe the internet oracle a sentence featuring the expression "xeither here xor there."

If you're saying it out loud you may not pronounce the leading x's as z's. No one knows what a "zylophone" is. You extremely weird people.

sunrodent · Post by **sunrodent** » Mon Feb 20, 2017 10:37 am

Sigh

https://youtu.be/3DgGsq6c-ec