-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Obama: "I’d invite Mr. Trump to stop whining...."
- Thread starter Sunstone
- Start date
Lighthouse
Well-Known Member
It is becoming very redundant.
I hope this comes up in the debate.
Very early on, Trump admitted that he whines. That he whines and whines and eventually gets his way.
I can see how it might work in the business world, where you're trying to connive and wheedle deals all over the place--not sure that would work in politics...don't recall ever seeing another politician successfully whine so much...
I can see how it might work in the business world, where you're trying to connive and wheedle deals all over the place--not sure that would work in politics...don't recall ever seeing another politician successfully whine so much...
Lighthouse
Well-Known Member
I don't, haha. I think the sex and rigging's are getting old for many. I think many would like to see more substance on policies. I understand the entertainment also sells though.
Lighthouse
Well-Known Member
To be fair, everyone whines to a degree.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
It is pretty abundantly clear that Trump's "policies" would be an absolute disaster. Millions of lost jobs, protectionism, ridiculous increases to the national debt, etc. I mean, Hillary's plans are nowhere near perfect, but Trump's would be severely damaging to the future of this country. That in addition to him not having any idea as to what he's talking about, he should be happy that policy isn't being discussed.
Satans_Serrated_Edge
Deicidal
You'll have 4 years to find out, then 4 more when he is re-elected.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
lol ... not bloody likely. He's got less and less of a chance by the day. He is an absolute embarrassment to his own party.
Kartari
Active Member
Hi leibowde,
He seems to be good at one thing: appearing confident about the nonsense which comes forth from his mouth. He's not even a very good con artist imho, yet many continue to believe his foolish conspiracy theories, his ignorant ramblings, deeply faulty policies, and whitewash his obvious misogyny and racism. That so many continue to have more faith in him than in Clinton is rather frightening.
I can only hope you are right!
He seems to be good at one thing: appearing confident about the nonsense which comes forth from his mouth. He's not even a very good con artist imho, yet many continue to believe his foolish conspiracy theories, his ignorant ramblings, deeply faulty policies, and whitewash his obvious misogyny and racism. That so many continue to have more faith in him than in Clinton is rather frightening.
I can only hope you are right!
Thought the comments were fair. Obama was asked a question about what he thought about the elections being rigged and he said basically to stop whining and win votes. Trump himself is trying to campaign using the idea not only that the voting system will be rigged but that the media is rigged against him, so he tweeted about it all weekend. The Dems seem more confident the system will be fair despite all the crap with hacks and such though we hear talk of "russia tampering" from Dems. Hillary's camp isn't really confirming the emails but I don't blame them for being mad about being hacked which is a completely different from Trumps own words being recorded.
Lighthouse
Well-Known Member
You sound like Trump with the word "disaster."
I don't think it's abundantly clear. Many of his policies, ones in politics agree with. Many are similar to what Hillary has. We hear the same assumptions from both sides year in and year out. We've never seen Donald in action in politics. It is all speculation at this point.
Lighthouse
Well-Known Member
You don't think the media is being one-sided?
It would be disastrous if we go by his word, which isn't just speculation.You sound like Trump with the word "disaster."
I don't think it's abundantly clear. Many of his policies, ones in politics agree with. Many are similar to what Hillary has. We hear the same assumptions from both sides year in and year out. We've never seen Donald in action in politics. It is all speculation at this point.
I think the hacks and info release have been one sided which could easily be rigged for Trump. The media gets the stories out.
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
Gullible much?
One sided, in that they favor Democrats over Republicans? Absolutely not. The media is amoral. They only care about ratings and controversy brings in ratings. So the media starts to cover wikileaks and the Billy Bush fiasco with about the same intensity. Clinton doesn't say a thing about the wikileaks and so deflates that controversy. The media allows the story to die without even a harumpf. Clinton played it smart, acted like she was in charge and didn't rise to the bait. Trump, on the other hand, goes on the attack, doubles down, blames Clinton, blames Bill, blames Bush, blames his mama and otherwise turns his fairly inconsequential controversy into a media circus. The media, smelling blood in the water, figures out how to add a bit more chum and make it even more fun for everyone. No, not because they want Trump to lose, but because they get to laugh and laugh all the way to the bank because their patsy, er, Trump is too stupid to see how he's being played like an orange fiddle with small hands. Obviously, not the kind of guy we want in the White House.
Me? I make my money off of controversy just like other media. I'm guilty of stirring the pot at the right time to increase traffic to ScubaBoard. I'm not as dumb as Trump is orange!
Last edited:
leibowde84
Veteran Member
What about the fact that the experts in economics seem to all agree that has proposed policies would end up costing the country millions of jobs due, in part, to the fact that protectionism has been shown time and time again to be destructive. Also, his tax policies would increase the debt far more than any democratic plan has in the past. So, how does this lead you to believe that we have no way of judging his plans? Obviously there is no certainty in life, so we can't know for sure, but there is definitely plenty to judge.You sound like Trump with the word "disaster."
I don't think it's abundantly clear. Many of his policies, ones in politics agree with. Many are similar to what Hillary has. We hear the same assumptions from both sides year in and year out. We've never seen Donald in action in politics. It is all speculation at this point.
Kartari
Active Member
Hi leibowde,
Let's not forget that Trump's policies are not well thought out or researched to begin with. It's clear from the months of statements he's made that he actually just makes up things on the spot when he's asked (i.e. his claim that women should be arrested for having abortions being among the more obvious ones). But take the Mexican wall idea for instance. I explored this elsewhere on this forum, but his rhetoric and the beliefs of his supporters notwithstanding, illegal immigration has actually been in overall slight decline over the past decade, with more illegals leaving the country than entering. This is a known fact. His wall, if actually implemented, would cost us perhaps $50 billion and might actually deter the decline!
He seems to have trouble grasping the concept of a fact, however, and indeed has no qualms making up complete nonsense in order to emotionally appeal to ignorant Americans. So, given that his policies are fundamentally based on ignorant rhetoric and erroneous information, that alone would logically lead any reasonable and informed person to expect disaster from his policies.
Let's not forget that Trump's policies are not well thought out or researched to begin with. It's clear from the months of statements he's made that he actually just makes up things on the spot when he's asked (i.e. his claim that women should be arrested for having abortions being among the more obvious ones). But take the Mexican wall idea for instance. I explored this elsewhere on this forum, but his rhetoric and the beliefs of his supporters notwithstanding, illegal immigration has actually been in overall slight decline over the past decade, with more illegals leaving the country than entering. This is a known fact. His wall, if actually implemented, would cost us perhaps $50 billion and might actually deter the decline!
He seems to have trouble grasping the concept of a fact, however, and indeed has no qualms making up complete nonsense in order to emotionally appeal to ignorant Americans. So, given that his policies are fundamentally based on ignorant rhetoric and erroneous information, that alone would logically lead any reasonable and informed person to expect disaster from his policies.
I'm glad Trump is bringing up the rigged rhetoric. If anyone but non-candidate brings it up, it is downplayed or ignored.
Excerpt from link in OP:
So, if things aren't going well for Obama in getting things done, it's okay to blame Pubs in Congress, and whine about them / that situation? That's what it takes to do the job? I'm sure I can find other things Obama has whined about while acting as POTUS. Other things he's blamed others for. Thus, not really accurate what he conveyed or is hypocrisy more likely.
If anyone thinks the difference is something along lines of Pubs did actually obstruct, then IMO that is missing the point, cause elections for POTUS really are stacked/rigged.
Excerpt from link in OP:
So, if things aren't going well for Obama in getting things done, it's okay to blame Pubs in Congress, and whine about them / that situation? That's what it takes to do the job? I'm sure I can find other things Obama has whined about while acting as POTUS. Other things he's blamed others for. Thus, not really accurate what he conveyed or is hypocrisy more likely.
If anyone thinks the difference is something along lines of Pubs did actually obstruct, then IMO that is missing the point, cause elections for POTUS really are stacked/rigged.