Trump is losing the debate acting like a raving lunatic

[SkepticThinker]

If the shooter was dead, why was secret service crowding around Trump, holding up their hands, and placing their bodies in the way of potential shooters? Afterall, according to you, they thought there was no other threat. How strange that they were acting as if another bullet could come at any moment. Please, we need your expert analysis to convince the rest of us as to why an evidently dangerous situation was actually considered by those involved to be perfectly safe.

The shooter was confirmed dead just after they swarmed around him.

You can hear them on the video saying the shooter is dead. Right before Trump stood up. Take a watch and listen. This isn't rocket science.

I make no such claim. But others have claimed that the bomb threats were racially motivated. When they discover the bomb threats come from other coutnries, they can't seem to bring themselves to say that those other countries are racist.

You have. Repeatedly. You have also repeatedly failed to acknowledge that these false assertions have been BAD for Springfield.

"temporary protected status" is a status given to immigrants (including illegal immigrants) by the Biden administration.

The law was passed in the 1990s. Biden/Harris didn't make it up.

Dole needed workers they couldn't find in the US. So they brought in the Haitians, whom have been a boon to the city of Springfield, as per the townspeople and their mayor.

It is used by the Biden administration as a way to legitimize illegal immigrants.

Nonsense. The stuff Trump is making up about them is meant to attempt to illegitimatize and dehumanize them, Hitler-style.

Having "temporary protected status" does not mean immigrants came to the U.S. legally, which is the lie that you are perpetuating here.

It sure does in this case.

I'm not perpetuating any lies. YOU are.

 

[Ponder This]

Temporary protection status is not new, it has been the law since 1990, what changes are the places that are covered and yes people here under TPS are here legally, they are not illegal immigrants.

The predecessor to Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is Extended Voluntary Departure (EVD), which was a discretionary authority used by the Attorney General to grant temporary permission to stay in the United States to nationals from countries facing turbulent conditions, before the Immigration Act of 1990 established TPS formally.

They are in the USA legally, regardless of the racism that you and other MAGAs feel.

No that is incorrect. You can read more about it here:

What Is Temporary Protected Status?

Temporary protected status has long been used as a humanitarian solution for migrants who are unable to return home safely, but efforts to give them a path to citizenship have reignited the debate ar…

www.cfr.org

I'm not perpetuating any lies. YOU are.

To set the record straight, temporary protected status is a designation given byt he government that allows immigrants not to be immediately returned to their country of origin and has nothing to do with whether or not they entered the U.S. legally or illegally. So your claim that because they were given temporary protected status, that means they did not enter the country illegally is bogus. Perhaps reconsider where you get your information and whether or not those sources have an interest in misinforming you.

They came with the bogus claims about Haitian immigrants. They died down as the claims were shown to be wrong.

You have. Repeatedly. You have also repeatedly failed to acknowledge that these false assertions have been BAD for Springfield.

The claims remain. Just because they aren't making national headlines anymore doesn't mean the claims have changed.
I see no acknowledgement from any of you of any of the problems Springfield has and continues to have as a result of illegal immigration (people who entered the U.S. illegally, regardless of their temporary protected status).

And finally, none of you seem to be able to admit that in the end, this attention helped Trump and hurt Harris, because while Trump brought the concerns of the citizens of Springfield to the national stage, Harris scoffed at those same concerns. And when people make fun of Trump for doing that it just hangs a lantern on the fact that Trump has the courage to bring forward the concerns of the citizens even if he gets laughed at for doing it, whereeas Harris isn't going to do anything to help the citizens of Springfield.

The Secret Service understand there could be more threats and they followed their training. Trump, being a total moron who has serious mental decline, stood up and raised his arms as if to ask to be shot again.

When tere is any doubt the Secret Service puts their bodies in the way.

The shooter was confirmed dead just after they swarmed around him.

You can hear them on the video saying the shooter is dead. Right before Trump stood up. Take a watch and listen. This isn't rocket science.

I rest my case, they knew there could be other threats.
And the moment demonstrated that Trump had concern for the people gathered at the rally and that he had the courage to assure them despite the potential risk.

It's been a fun debate! However, I think that because the election is around the corner, there won't be much point in further argument on this issue. Feel free to say your final piece!

 

[Martin]

The Farting Trumpet is bonkers mental and MAGA are one sandwich short of a picnic.

 

[shunyadragon]

Trump was doing OK until he mentioned that cats and dogs were being eaten by people in Springfield, Ohio. After that he's been ranting an raving incoherent stream of consciousness nonsense, lying about one thing or another. Trump can't maintain a line of thought. I almost feel bad for him.

Harris is doing quite well in hitting Trump where it hurts. Trump's face is showing it is working. Trump is trying to hit back but he has nothing.

This all true, but at present Trump may win the election based his support from the extreme fundamentalist Christian believers that want him to win at all costs,

 

[Pogo]

To set the record straight, temporary protected status is a designation given byt he government that allows immigrants not to be immediately returned to their country of origin and has nothing to do with whether or not they entered the U.S. legally or illegally. So your claim that because they were given temporary protected status, that means they did not enter the country illegally is bogus. Perhaps reconsider where you get your information and whether or not those sources have an interest in misinforming you.


The claims remain. Just because they aren't making national headlines anymore doesn't mean the claims have changed.
I see no acknowledgement from any of you of any of the problems Springfield has and continues to have as a result of illegal immigration (people who entered the U.S. illegally, regardless of their temporary protected status).

And finally, none of you seem to be able to admit that in the end, this attention helped Trump and hurt Harris, because while Trump brought the concerns of the citizens of Springfield to the national stage, Harris scoffed at those same concerns. And when people make fun of Trump for doing that it just hangs a lantern on the fact that Trump has the courage to bring forward the concerns of the citizens even if he gets laughed at for doing it, whereeas Harris isn't going to do anything to help the citizens of Springfield.




I rest my case, they knew there could be other threats.
And the moment demonstrated that Trump had concern for the people gathered at the rally and that he had the courage to assure them despite the potential risk.

It's been a fun debate! However, I think that because the election is around the corner, there won't be much point in further argument on this issue. Feel free to say your final piece!

I didn't say anything about their possibly being guilty of a misdemeanor illegal entry charge though that does not even apply to those who show up at a border check point, I said that they have an accepted legal status for their presence in the US.

As for the garbage about Springfield, it is on the level of telling kids there is a monster under their bed.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The claims remain. Just because they aren't making national headlines anymore doesn't mean the claims have changed.
I see no acknowledgement from any of you of any of the problems Springfield has and continues to have as a result of illegal immigration (people who entered the U.S. illegally, regardless of their temporary protected status).

And finally, none of you seem to be able to admit that in the end, this attention helped Trump and hurt Harris, because while Trump brought the concerns of the citizens of Springfield to the national stage, Harris scoffed at those same concerns. And when people make fun of Trump for doing that it just hangs a lantern on the fact that Trump has the courage to bring forward the concerns of the citizens even if he gets laughed at for doing it, whereeas Harris isn't going to do anything to help the citizens of Springfield.

No, you want to change what the problems supposedly are. The Republican mayor of Springfield does not seem to think that there are any major problems. If you admit that you were wrong about the silly eating the pets claim then we can possibly discuss other problems. That one was refuted so fast that your head should still be spinning.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I didn't say anything about their possibly being guilty of a misdemeanor illegal entry charge though that does not even apply to those who show up at a border check point, I said that they have an accepted legal status for their presence in the US.

As for the garbage about Springfield, it is on the level of telling kids there is a monster under their bed.

Are you claiming that I wasted $29.99?

 

[F1fan]

This all true, but at present Trump may win the election based his support from the extreme fundamentalist Christian believers that want him to win at all costs,

Trump certainly is skilled at appealing to the worst of those who consider him a viable candidate. Christians voting for him don't realize the hypocrisy and irony of their vote. But then again it was Catholics and Lutherans who committed the Holocaust, so being rational is not a guaranteed property of believers.

 

[F1fan]

To set the record straight, temporary protected status is a designation given byt he government that allows immigrants not to be immediately returned to their country of origin and has nothing to do with whether or not they entered the U.S. legally or illegally. So your claim that because they were given temporary protected status, that means they did not enter the country illegally is bogus. Perhaps reconsider where you get your information and whether or not those sources have an interest in misinforming you.

Then it sounds as if these migrants need to behave themselves and not break laws which could mean they are sent back. Heck, that's one hell of an incentive for migrants to be exceptional citizens.

The claims remain. Just because they aren't making national headlines anymore doesn't mean the claims have changed.
I see no acknowledgement from any of you of any of the problems Springfield has and continues to have as a result of illegal immigration (people who entered the U.S. illegally, regardless of their temporary protected status).

The claims are all you MAGAs have, and you offer no evidence. That is why no rational mind takes these claims seriously. It only makes MAGAs look stupid if they keep making these bogus claims.

And finally, none of you seem to be able to admit that in the end, this attention helped Trump and hurt Harris, because while Trump brought the concerns of the citizens of Springfield to the national stage, Harris scoffed at those same concerns. And when people make fun of Trump for doing that it just hangs a lantern on the fact that Trump has the courage to bring forward the concerns of the citizens even if he gets laughed at for doing it, whereeas Harris isn't going to do anything to help the citizens of Springfield.

This must be how right wing disinformation is spinning it. No rational and stable person thinks more highly of Trump for his attacks and lies about Haitians in Springfield. Harris is the only mentally stable candidate running. That you keep reminding us of Trump's instability and lies tells us you have been duped by right wing propaganda.

I rest my case, they knew there could be other threats.
And the moment demonstrated that Trump had concern for the people gathered at the rally and that he had the courage to assure them despite the potential risk.

You have no case. You have bogus claims and a disturbed criminal candidate.

It's been a fun debate! However, I think that because the election is around the corner, there won't be much point in further argument on this issue. Feel free to say your final piece!

It's not as if this forum is highly influential. Most members are quite rooted in truth and sanity and are voting for Harris. Trump isn't fit, and not a sound option.

 

[SkepticThinker]

To set the record straight, temporary protected status is a designation given byt he government that allows immigrants not to be immediately returned to their country of origin and has nothing to do with whether or not they entered the U.S. legally or illegally. So your claim that because they were given temporary protected status, that means they did not enter the country illegally is bogus. Perhaps reconsider where you get your information and whether or not those sources have an interest in misinforming you.

So, in other words, they are legal. They are legally allowed to be in the US and to work.

The claims remain. Just because they aren't making national headlines anymore doesn't mean the claims have changed.

Yes, the claims that Trump and Vance made about them eating cats and dogs remain.
That doesn't make them true.
Why you still believe they are true is beyond reason.

I see no acknowledgement from any of you of any of the problems Springfield has and continues to have as a result of illegal immigration (people who entered the U.S. illegally, regardless of their temporary protected status).

I've already acknowledged they've had some issues with housing and resources.
Their issue is NOT with migrants eating their cats and dogs.
Temporary Protected Status means they are currently considered to be legal and are allowed to work.

And finally, none of you seem to be able to admit that in the end, this attention helped Trump and hurt Harris, because while Trump brought the concerns of the citizens of Springfield to the national stage, Harris scoffed at those same concerns. And when people make fun of Trump for doing that it just hangs a lantern on the fact that Trump has the courage to bring forward the concerns of the citizens even if he gets laughed at for doing it, whereeas Harris isn't going to do anything to help the citizens of Springfield.

Lying to the world and telling everyone on national television that Haitian migrants are eating peoples' cats and dogs was extremely harmful to the town of Springfield. And not only that, it's absolutely, completely false. It took Trump zero courage to make up a story and lie to everyone about it. He does that on a daily basis. It's basically is M.O.

What nonsense.

I rest my case, they knew there could be other threats.

You rest your case? On what? Did you even read what I wrote?

And the moment demonstrated that Trump had concern for the people gathered at the rally and that he had the courage to assure them despite the potential risk.

It's wild to me that you actually believe that.

You didn't watch the video again did you? Didn't bother listening to hear the Secret Service tell Trump that they shooter had been taken out and it was clear now? Of course not. You really think they'd let him stand up and move him if they thought there was still an active shooter? And you really, seriously believe Trump would stand up if he still thought there was a threat?

Who needs facts, amirite? You and Trump are just going to make stuff up anyway, apparently.

Seriously, go watch the video again.

It's been a fun debate! However, I think that because the election is around the corner, there won't be much point in further argument on this issue. Feel free to say your final piece!

Done.

Happy voting!

 

[Sargonski]

Then it sounds as if these migrants need to behave themselves and not break laws which could mean they are sent back. Heck, that's one hell of an incentive for migrants to be exceptional citizens.

The claims are all you MAGAs have, and you offer no evidence. That is why no rational mind takes these claims seriously. It only makes MAGAs look stupid if they keep making these bogus claims. An

This must be how right wing disinformation is spinning it. No rational and stable person thinks more highly of Trump for his attacks and lies about Haitians in Springfield. Harris is the only mentally stable candidate running. That you keep reminding us of Trump's instability and lies tells us you have been duped by right wing propaganda.

You have no case. You have bogus claims and a disturbed criminal candidate.

It's not as if this forum is highly influential. Most members are quite rooted in truth and sanity and are voting for Harris. Trump isn't fit, and not a sound option.

This post contains mostly disjointed name calling and Ad Hom Fallacy .. and the rest is just unsupported stupid in conjunction with the aforementioned - " any with sanity voting Harris" --- "Harris the only mentally stable candidate" "MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA"

followed by "You have no case . bogus claims - more personal invective" an argument nowhere to be found.

"Any with Sanity" - think that putting forth a valid argument is a good thing -- Personal invective and demonization of the messenger fallacy .. not such a good thing. .. Surely we can agree on this much.

"Any with Sanity Voting for Genocide Joe" who is still the president .. and flaky Kammy Kam supports and is thus responsible for all of his actions. .. How is voting for the co-conspiritor to the Holocaust the "Sane Vote" ? Kamala is still the VP .. Right ! .. currently involved up to her neck in the Holocaust .. well past complicity war crimes - crimes against humanity .. as smokin Joe was tagged for in Yemen .. no stranger to such crimes .

Help me do understand your definition of "Sanity" .. because all I see is Orwellian Doublespeak kind of Sanity. That is where everything is backwards in case you are unfamiliar with 1984.

Explain how aiding abetting . to the point of conducting a Holocaust and anti semetic extermination program is "Sanity" ?

To set the record straight, temporary protected status is a designation given byt he government that allows immigrants not to be immediately returned to their

Lets get the record strate on the new definition of Sanity .. in this black vs white ... up is down Orwellian paradigm

 

[Subduction Zone]

This post contains mostly disjointed name calling and Ad Hom Fallacy .. and the rest is just unsupported stupid in conjunction with the aforementioned - " any with sanity voting Harris" --- "Harris the only mentally stable candidate" "MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA"

followed by "You have no case . bogus claims - more personal invective" an argument nowhere to be found.

"Any with Sanity" - think that putting forth a valid argument is a good thing -- Personal invective and demonization of the messenger fallacy .. not such a good thing. .. Surely we can agree on this much.

"Any with Sanity Voting for Genocide Joe" who is still the president .. and flaky Kammy Kam supports and is thus responsible for all of his actions. .. How is voting for the co-conspiritor to the Holocaust the "Sane Vote" ? Kamala is still the VP .. Right ! .. currently involved up to her neck in the Holocaust .. well past complicity war crimes - crimes against humanity .. as smokin Joe was tagged for in Yemen .. no stranger to such crimes .

Help me do understand your definition of "Sanity" .. because all I see is Orwellian Doublespeak kind of Sanity. That is where everything is backwards in case you are unfamiliar with 1984.

Explain how aiding abetting . to the point of conducting a Holocaust and anti semetic extermination program is "Sanity" ?



Lets get the record strate on the new definition of Sanity .. in this black vs white ... up is down Orwellian paradigm

Where is one single case of an ad hominem fallacy? I am betting that you do not understand the concept. Where is there even any "name calling"?

 

[Sargonski]

Where is one single case of an ad hominem fallacy? I am betting that you do not understand the concept. Where is there even any "name calling"?

Yeah .... ohhhh .. ooohhh you lost another bet .. and it is obviously you who does not know what Ad Hom Fallacy is if you could not find it.

"The claims are all you MAGAs have, and you offer no evidence. That is why no rational mind takes these claims seriously. It only makes MAGAs look stupid if they keep making these bogus claims."

------------------------
What part of Ad Hom fallacy .. attacking the messenger rather than addressing the truth or falsehood of the message .. is not crystal clear ? Now have a nice day .. and perhaps you might review philosophy 101 - Introduction to Logic - Logic , logical fallacy, what constitutes a valid argument .. the basics they manage not to teach through 12 years of school so no bad on your part for not knowing these things .. but now is your opportunity to learn what you missed.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yeah .... ohhhh .. ooohhh you lost another bet .. and it is obviously you who does not know what Ad Hom Fallacy is if you could not find it.

"The claims are all you MAGAs have, and you offer no evidence. That is why no rational mind takes these claims seriously. It only makes MAGAs look stupid if they keep making these bogus claims."

------------------------
What part of Ad Hom fallacy .. attacking the messenger rather than addressing the truth or falsehood of the message .. is not crystal clear ? Now have a nice day .. and perhaps you might review philosophy 101 - Introduction to Logic - Logic , logical fallacy, what constitutes a valid argument .. the basics they manage not to teach through 12 years of school so no bad on your part for not knowing these things .. but now is your opportunity to learn what you missed.

Where is the ad hominem fallacy? You do not even seem to understand the concept. You have the wrong definition of a an ad hominem fallacy. It is incomplete. You forgot a very very important part of it.

Even just "name calling" is not an ad hominem fallacy on its own. But I do not even see any name calling in that post. You really need to work on your philosophy 101. You at best are using a simplified high school version.

If you want to support a claim it is always a good idea to quote and link a valid source.

Would you like to try again or do you want me to show you, with links, how you screwed up?

 

[F1fan]

This post contains mostly disjointed name calling and Ad Hom Fallacy .. and the rest is just unsupported stupid in conjunction with the aforementioned - " any with sanity voting Harris" --- "Harris the only mentally stable candidate" "MAGA MAGA MAGA MAGA"

Harris IS the only rational option for president. She is the only one who is stable. This is an observable fact.

followed by "You have no case . bogus claims - more personal invective" an argument nowhere to be found.

A factual statement on my part.

"Any with Sanity" - think that putting forth a valid argument is a good thing -- Personal invective and demonization of the messenger fallacy .. not such a good thing. .. Surely we can agree on this much.

There are social norms that Trump and MAGAs violate. This is observed.

"Any with Sanity Voting for Genocide Joe" who is still the president .. and flaky Kammy Kam supports and is thus responsible for all of his actions. .. How is voting for the co-conspiritor to the Holocaust the "Sane Vote" ? Kamala is still the VP .. Right ! .. currently involved up to her neck in the Holocaust .. well past complicity war crimes - crimes against humanity .. as smokin Joe was tagged for in Yemen .. no stranger to such crimes .

None of this is factual, so we throw it out.

Help me do understand your definition of "Sanity" .. because all I see is Orwellian Doublespeak kind of Sanity. That is where everything is backwards in case you are unfamiliar with 1984.

Are you confused by social norms and behavioral standards?

Explain how aiding abetting . to the point of conducting a Holocaust and anti semetic extermination program is "Sanity" ?

It isn't. But there are white supremacists who support Trump, and we have to wonder why.

Lets get the record strate on the new definition of Sanity .. in this black vs white ... up is down Orwellian paradigm

You're not satisfied with the normal definition? Is there a personal reason you want the definition of sanity to be redefined?

 

[Sargonski]

Where is the ad hominem fallacy? You do not even seem to understand the concept. You have the wrong definition of a an ad hominem fallacy. It is incomplete. You forgot a very very important part of it.

Even just "name calling" is not an ad hominem fallacy on its own. But I do not even see any name calling in that post. You really need to work on your philosophy 101. You at best are using a simplified high school version.

If you want to support a claim it is always a good idea to quote and link a valid source.

Would you like to try again or do you want me to show you, with links, how you screwed up?

I gave you the citation The claims are all you MAGAs have, and you offer no evidence. That is why no rational mind takes these claims seriously. It only makes MAGAs look stupid if they keep making these bogus claims." ..

If you can not find the Ad Hom Fallacy .. then it is you who lacks understanding of the concept. .. Clearly there is some claim that this bloke thinks is false .. more than one claim apparently .. but one at a time ..

that one is a might be a"Maga" followed by derogatory comments on Maga .. .. does not show any claim to be false. Ad Hom Fallacy .. attacking the messenger .. with false accusation "Strawman fallacy" .. and pretending this unrelated quality shows a claim true..

Thats how they explain it in Philosophy 101 "Logic 101" friend .. no need to google to prove to yourself that you are wrong .. you should already have realized your folly .. and be through grudging acceptence towards enlightenment.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Harris IS the only rational option for president. She is the only one who is stable. This is an observable fact.

A factual statement on my part.

There are social norms that Trump and MAGAs violate. This is observed.

None of this is factual, so we throw it out.

Are you confused by social norms and behavioral standards?

It isn't. But there are white supremacists who support Trump, and we have to wonder why.

You're not satisfied with the normal definition? Is there a personal reason you want the definition of sanity to be redefined?

Oh darn. You seem to have missed the Ad Hominem Fallacy as well.

I have noticed that the accusation of using an Ad Hominem Fallacy is wrong an amazingly high percentage of the time.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I gave you the citation The claims are all you MAGAs have, and you offer no evidence. That is why no rational mind takes these claims seriously. It only makes MAGAs look stupid if they keep making these bogus claims." ..

If you can not find the Ad Hom Fallacy .. then it is you who lacks understanding of the concept. .. Clearly there is some claim that this bloke thinks is false .. more than one claim apparently .. but one at a time ..

that one is a might be a"Maga" followed by derogatory comments on Maga .. .. does not show any claim to be false. Ad Hom Fallacy .. attacking the messenger .. with false accusation "Strawman fallacy" .. and pretending this unrelated quality shows a claim true..

Thats how they explain it in Philosophy 101 "Logic 101" friend .. no need to google to prove to yourself that you are wrong .. you should already have realized your folly .. and be through grudging acceptence towards enlightenment.

No, I understand it far better than you do. I see that you still did not find a reliable link that supports you.

An honest statement is never an Ad Hominem Fallacy,. He is missing a key part of the fallacy. He was merely stating facts.

You have failed twice now to support your claim properly. You could not even own up to your failure after it was explained to you. I will give you one more chance, and the whether you provide a source or not I will explain to you how you failed with a proper spirce/

EDIT: Where is the strawman fallacy? Oh my. It only gets worse.