NATO consists of Turkey members and nothing else? That is so not true. NATO consists of 30 or so countries from around the world.
The 2016 Election Primaries Thread
- Thread starter Plainview
- Start date
- Status
What do you means Turkey members?
You are right that NATO has over 30 members, The biggest being USA, Turkey has second biggest arm force. So the second biggest army in Nato (& 3X the next biggest one France) , & is possibility one of the biggest supporter of ISIS. Also noted how some Nato countries have very small armies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_NATO
Type "turkey support isis" or similar phase on youtube & decide for yourself if true. Do not take my word for it, decide & made your own analysis.
Here is one from Young Turk. I am not a fan of Cenk, but if even the mouthpiece of Turkey judge so, there are legitimate reason to the claim of Turkey supporting ISIS
At the minimal, there is sufficient data to at least question if true. I am fairly sure its true, at least certain people of the government, question is who?
Even if Turkey is not the 2nd most powerful NATO member, why are there no investigation?
Also not the America & NATO has been in Syria over a year, but it took Russia within a month to found survey videos of Oil Trucks from ISIS entering Turkish borders unchallenged & destroy them
You mean NATO did not spotted what Russia were capable of?
Here is the video conference of Russia presenting the evidence
here is the response from USA.
How can you have confidence of UN who put Saudi Arabic of human rights, a country that publicly execute people by beheading, disallow women to drive & have them covered up as Ninja, & *wait for it*, classify Atheist as terrorist. You cannot make this up, can you.
My point being these organisation like UN & NATO are not as clean as people hope they are, & many members have their own agenda that is not to the interest of humanity.
Look, this is a gaming forum, & I much prefer to make jokes & laugh at some fanboys. But I feel its importance to be informed, & its a shame the world is in the shape it is in, knowing that so much can be done if we held people accountable which many world leaders did not, if they are not themselves involve in shady dealing.
Last edited:
That day i thought of voting for trump, i then slapped the s*** out of myself and resumed my hate for both candidates in the this two party gang...
and now for the reason i dropped by
Hillary got short change for the Donut, or am I missing something. Come one, whats so funny? Oh, let me guess, the size of the hole means something. It got to mean something, just could put a finger on what...That day i thought of voting for trump, i then slapped the s*** out of myself and resumed my hate for both candidates in the this two party gang...
and now for the reason i dropped by
Then why did you only say NATO consists of Turkey members? That's kind of deceiving.
I said turkey is one of the major member of NATO. No where was the word "only" or any words that suggest so in my original and follow up post. ( I read them again) But If it was unclear before and sound like I was trying to mislead, that wasn't the intention & I apologize for the misunderstanding.
My point is these international organizations that we hold up to maybe more shady than we think.
I am sure it would be easy to stab 100 people at a club. Just a tool though guys!
Funny coming from someone ( & her Husband) that made over 153 millions from speaking fee!
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-paid-speeches/
I have no problem rich people being rich, if they earn their money honestly. Pewdiepie made a lot of money. Do I think he deserve the money, not sure, but I can respect he earn it fair & square.
Imagine if a pop star complain a Hollywood star actor being overpaid? That's what Hilary is doing, hypocrite
But I do understand why she do this. She wanted to appeal to the common people, teachers & educators & office worker. Just politics sales tactics. Most politicians uses this, Trump, CCruz, Berne, Obama etc.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-paid-speeches/
I have no problem rich people being rich, if they earn their money honestly. Pewdiepie made a lot of money. Do I think he deserve the money, not sure, but I can respect he earn it fair & square.
Imagine if a pop star complain a Hollywood star actor being overpaid? That's what Hilary is doing, hypocrite
But I do understand why she do this. She wanted to appeal to the common people, teachers & educators & office worker. Just politics sales tactics. Most politicians uses this, Trump, CCruz, Berne, Obama etc.
Seeing this crap... Wow! With ca taking full advantage of RealID they could track down all of those scum bags if they wanted to and if they're not in the system than maybe Trump is right and we do have a serious problem with violent illegal aliens...
CIA director calls out Obamas BS and Backs up FBI chief Comeys admission that ISIS will sneak into the U.S. by blending in with Refugees , Namely the 10,000 unvettable Syrian Refugees that Obama is so desperate to bring in by the end of September that hes speeding up the process.... Get ready for more terrorist attacks and more attacks on the constitution the day after.
http://thehill.com/policy/national-...p-refugee-intake-to-hit-target-obama-promises
http://thehill.com/policy/national-...p-refugee-intake-to-hit-target-obama-promises
It's probably time for the CIA to submit it's budget. Just a way to scare people into pumping up more spending. You can't fight lone wolf home grown terrorist with tanks and planes.
Obama give me the impression of someone who are more inclined to pleasing people, & not offending people, than do the right thing.
He shutting down Q.Bay under pressure, releasing Terrorists that (surprise, surprise) went back to become terrorists! The right thing is to keep it open, but improve the treatment & make sure they have the right people etc
He pulled out of Middle East under pressure, even stupidly announced when! So what happened? Jihadist groups filled the void, & the biggest is ISIS (Yes, there are more than one Jihadist groups there), & then the refugee crisis, that sweep Europe. All the sacrifice of Americans soldiers that went to fight there for nothing!
The Obama that is more angry at Trump (like him or not) for calling out at him not calling Radical Islamic terrorism, *wait for it* Radical Islamic terrorism, then the shooter and Radical Islamic terrorism!!!
The same Obama that bow to the Saudi royals that execute gays!!!!! Not forgetting support terrorism worldwide, by spreading their radical version of Islam Wahhabism. Turning once okayish nations like Bangladeshi just decades ago into Islamist hotbed today.
The Obama on his high horse, tell us who is presidential or not, is going to be the worst president with the worst economy growth (of less than 3% GDP per year) in US history.
He shutting down Q.Bay under pressure, releasing Terrorists that (surprise, surprise) went back to become terrorists! The right thing is to keep it open, but improve the treatment & make sure they have the right people etc
He pulled out of Middle East under pressure, even stupidly announced when! So what happened? Jihadist groups filled the void, & the biggest is ISIS (Yes, there are more than one Jihadist groups there), & then the refugee crisis, that sweep Europe. All the sacrifice of Americans soldiers that went to fight there for nothing!
The Obama that is more angry at Trump (like him or not) for calling out at him not calling Radical Islamic terrorism, *wait for it* Radical Islamic terrorism, then the shooter and Radical Islamic terrorism!!!
The same Obama that bow to the Saudi royals that execute gays!!!!! Not forgetting support terrorism worldwide, by spreading their radical version of Islam Wahhabism. Turning once okayish nations like Bangladeshi just decades ago into Islamist hotbed today.
The Obama on his high horse, tell us who is presidential or not, is going to be the worst president with the worst economy growth (of less than 3% GDP per year) in US history.
I'm not sure how that could possibly be true when you go back literally one president and see one who inherited a budget surplus and a booming economy and left office with the nation losing 750,000 jobs a month and in serious danger of economic collapse. But, I suppose that since it was a Republican who drove us off the cliff, but we didn't actually crash until the Democrat was in office, we'll blame it all on Obama.
You'll note, I'm not saying he was the greatest president economically or otherwise. But you can't claim him to be the worst president in terms of the economy (no matter how narrowly you want to define the stats to make it appear so) when the guy right before him was such a miserable failure.
Well, he may not be the worst, depends on people's definition, but but I can't stand the hypocrisy of acting on moral high ground in front of America, & act he is done a great job, telling people how to be a good president, criticizing Americans, Christians, whites (cops) for racists, while keeping mum & bow down to Regime like Saudi Arabia, that execute gays, & kill apostates. Have you heard him criticize Saudi?
he could at least be more subtle & go quietly, like Bush.
Bush went quietly because he was unpopular and even Republicans wanted to distance themselves from him. That is not the case with Obama.
Bush was awful, he helped start obama's s***fest. Obama and congress has put this country into more debt than at any other time in history. 180+ trillion this country has obligated itself to and all these twits keep talking about is spending more! guys it is completely possible for Trump, Bush, clinton,clinton and obama to all be dumbs***s looking out for their own best interest while holding the power of the white house.
So Hillary is being crucified for ousting kadafi. But it was okay for Reagan to do so.
Also Afghanistan became the safe haven for terrorist while Reagan was in office. So I can't say his way of doing it was any better due to being in the same s**t hole today.
Interesting article, & his points are pretty convincing if you ask me. I cannot find major faults in his arguments.
Anyway, he is not trying to convince people to vote Trump, but rather clarified some of the (what he felt) weaker but popular arguments against him, like being racist & sexist & loose cannon. If your main beef with him is you do not believe in his tax cut policy, not believing he will bring more jobs, make life better for middle class (which I assume most people are here), pro life suggestions etc then this is not for you, but its a nice read nevertheless.
How to Un-Hypnotize a Rabid Anti-Trumper
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/146157026376/how-to-un-hypnotize-a-rabid-anti-trumper
Regular readers of this blog know I’m a trained hypnotist. I’ve been studying the ways of persuasion – in all its forms – for decades.
My background in persuasion is the reason I recognized last summer that Trump would exceed most people’s expectations. He was pitch-perfect on persuasion technique. If you don’t study persuasion, Trump’s actions appear random and even dangerous. If you do know how persuasion works, you probably realize Trump is in a league of his own.
You think I’m overstating the case for persuasion. Perhaps you think Trump is doing well for a variety of reasons that include his accurate reading of the Republican base.
But Trump’s accurate reading of the Republican base is part of the art of persuasion. None of what you see in Trump’s election success so far is luck or coincidence. It is technique. If you’re not trained to see it, the method is invisible.
For example, I have already used several persuasion techniques in the paragraphs above. If I were to see another writer use these same persuasion methods on me, I would recognize them. But most of you did not recognize the methods – at least not all of them – when I used them right in front of you.
Persuasion hides in plain sight.
Just for fun, I’ve un-hypnotized several rabid anti-Trumpers lately. It takes less than ten minutes, requires nothing but conversation, and you can probably pull it off just by reading how I did it. Here’s how.
Un-Hypnotizing a Rabid Anti-Trumper
When you encounter a rabid anti-Trumper, ask her what are the biggest concerns of a potential Trump presidency.
If “Supreme Court nominee” is one of the top objections, discontinue your persuasion for ethical reasons. This person has put some thought into the decision and has a legitimate opinion that is at least partly based on reason. I don’t recommend changing that person’s mind.
But if a person’s main objections to Trump include any the following four reasons, I would consider it ethical to apply persuasion.
Objection 1: Trump is a loose cannon who might offend other countries and maybe even start a nuclear war.
Objection 2: Trump is terrible at business because he has several bankruptcies.
Objection 3: Trump is a racist.
Objection 4: Trump is anti-women and anti-LGBT
If any of those four objections are behind an anti-Trumper’s opinion, you have ethical license to persuade, so long as you are sticking to facts and adding context. I’ll show you how to do that with each objection.
Objection 1: Trump is a loose cannon who might offend other countries and maybe even start a nuclear war.
Persuasion: Trump has five decades of acting rational in business dealings, and getting along with people all over the world, including China and Russia. By now you would have heard stories of Trump being a loose cannon in his business dealings if such a thing had happened. We are hearing no stories of that nature. And people don’t suddenly change character at age 70. (That last sentence is the important one.)
How risky is Trump? Consider that Trump has never had an alcoholic beverage. He was against the Iraq war. He doesn’t want boots on the ground in Syria. He wants a strong military to discourage war. Trump personally gains nothing from war, but he has a lot to lose, including every building with his name on it.
Putin already seems to like Trump. They are similar characters in terms of their persuasion talents. And it wouldn’t hurt to be on good terms with Russia while we go after ISIS. Trump seems to have that relationship covered.
Trump has been negotiating with the Chinese for years, with no problems yet. And the Chinese leaders are not children. They got their positions by being great deal-makers, like Trump. They might not want to negotiate against Trump, but they aren’t afraid of his personality type. Trump often tells us that his first bid in any negotiation is super-aggressive. China knows it too. They are not naive. They can tell the difference between a negotiator and a madman.
Objection 2: Trump is terrible at business, as proven by his several bankruptcies.
Persuasion: Ask how many bankruptcies Trump has had. Most people say between 5-10. Then ask how many entities Trump has his name on. The answer is about 500. Then ask if that is a good performance for an entrepreneur who is often trying things in new fields.
(Asking questions in that fashion is good persuasion technique. It removes the adversarial frame and gives the person a sense of coming to a new conclusion without pressure.)
Then explain how licensing works. Trump puts his name on various products and he gets paid even if the product or company does poorly in the end. That’s an example of Trump taking the LEAST risk in a deal. The other parties take larger risks and frequently fail. Trump gets paid either way. All parties to the deals have lawyers who review everything. Trump isn’t taking advantage of people with his licensing deals. Licensees are knowingly accepting the riskier side of the deal because they also have the biggest potential upside.
Trump doesn’t like risk. We see it in lots of ways. For example, Trump has never been in a physical fight. He asked his wives to sign prenups. He creates separate entities so some can go bankrupt without bringing down the rest. He licenses his name so he gets paid even if the company buying the license does not make a profit. And he diversifies his portfolio to reduce exposure to any one risk.
Based on everything we see, Trump consistently tries hard to avoidrisk in everything he does. And people don’t change character at age 70.
The exceptions to Trump’s risk-avoidance include some of the provocative stuff he is saying during the campaign. That behavior looks risky to most observers, but it was exactly what got him the Republican nomination. Evidently, Trump takes risks when doing so makes sense.
Objection 3: Trump is a racist.
Trump has never mentioned race beyond pointing how how many African-Americans and Latinos support him. Ask your anti-Trumper to offer evidence otherwise. Then point out…
Mexico is a country, not a race.
Islam is open to all races.
If the topic of Judge Curiel comes up, point out that all human beings are biased by their life experiences. Ask anti-Trumpers if they think Curiel would be comfortable at his next family gathering if his verdict favors Trump. (Notice the question form of persuasion again.)
Acknowledge that Trump was offensive when he attacked the judge’s parental connections to Mexico. But note that it is also good persuasion and good legal strategy. It puts the judge in the tough spot of either siding with Trump or appearing biased if he does not.
Then point out that only the Democrats are talking about race. And all of that race talk has been divisive. Trump has literally never said a negative thing about race during this election.
(Professional pundits will talk about Trump’s so-called “racist dog-whistles,” but normal voters do not mention it. They don’t know what it means.)
Objection 3.1: But Trump wants to discriminate based on religion!
Persuasion: Clarify to the subject of your persuasion that Trump only wants to discriminate against non-citizens. That is literally the job description of a president.
For context, point out that Islam is unique among religions in that it includes an order from God that Muslims should overthrow any government that is not compatible with Islam. Moderate Muslims around the world ignore that part of the religion, but refugees are coming from places where it is considered mandatory.
I don’t think other religions have a mandatory requirement to overthrow the government. So comparisons to other religions are nonsense. And the job of the president includes knowing when to make exceptions.
If you think we can screen Muslim immigrants well enough to stop all of the terrorists and future revolutionaries, just think about any job in which you had coworkers. Remember how incompetent some of them were? Those are the types of people screening immigrants. Does that feel safe to you?
Objection 4: Trump is anti-women and anti-LGBT
Persuasion:
Trump is the only candidate calling out Islam for its followers’ views on women and the LGBT community.
Trump wants women to have the right to own guns to protect themselves.
Trump is the only candidate concerned about crimes against women that are perpetrated by illegal immigrants from Mexico.
Trump has a long business record of promoting women to executive positions in his company. He was doing it years before it was fashionable.
The women in his personal life – including his ex-wives – seem to like him.
Trump is offensive in the way he has talked about women. But keep in mind that Trump has offended nearly everyone at some point.
The way to know your persuasion is working is that your subject will change the topic instead of addressing your point.
Example:
You: Mexico is not a race.
Subject: Well, Trump also had bankruptcies.
Don’t allow the topic to change. Instead, say again whatever you said just before it did. Make each point about three times, with slightly different wording each time. After the third restatement of your point, without an objection from your subject, allow the topic to change. It means you won.
Let me know how it works out.
—
Note: I endorsed Hillary Clinton for my personal safety, because I live in California. But my political views do not align with any of the candidates for president.
Personally, I would do better under a Clinton presidency. If Clinton gets elected, no one will blame me for anything she does in office. But if Trump wins, my blogging about his persuasion skills will make it look like my fault every time he does something you don’t like. I don’t need that trouble.
Also, as a top one-percenter, I’m winning under the current system. Trump is the only candidate who has the persuasion skills to increase tax rates on the rich, so #imwithher, for selfish reasons.
—
If you think this blog post has some persuasion in it, you should see my book.
Anyway, he is not trying to convince people to vote Trump, but rather clarified some of the (what he felt) weaker but popular arguments against him, like being racist & sexist & loose cannon. If your main beef with him is you do not believe in his tax cut policy, not believing he will bring more jobs, make life better for middle class (which I assume most people are here), pro life suggestions etc then this is not for you, but its a nice read nevertheless.
How to Un-Hypnotize a Rabid Anti-Trumper
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/146157026376/how-to-un-hypnotize-a-rabid-anti-trumper
Regular readers of this blog know I’m a trained hypnotist. I’ve been studying the ways of persuasion – in all its forms – for decades.
My background in persuasion is the reason I recognized last summer that Trump would exceed most people’s expectations. He was pitch-perfect on persuasion technique. If you don’t study persuasion, Trump’s actions appear random and even dangerous. If you do know how persuasion works, you probably realize Trump is in a league of his own.
You think I’m overstating the case for persuasion. Perhaps you think Trump is doing well for a variety of reasons that include his accurate reading of the Republican base.
But Trump’s accurate reading of the Republican base is part of the art of persuasion. None of what you see in Trump’s election success so far is luck or coincidence. It is technique. If you’re not trained to see it, the method is invisible.
For example, I have already used several persuasion techniques in the paragraphs above. If I were to see another writer use these same persuasion methods on me, I would recognize them. But most of you did not recognize the methods – at least not all of them – when I used them right in front of you.
Persuasion hides in plain sight.
Just for fun, I’ve un-hypnotized several rabid anti-Trumpers lately. It takes less than ten minutes, requires nothing but conversation, and you can probably pull it off just by reading how I did it. Here’s how.
Un-Hypnotizing a Rabid Anti-Trumper
When you encounter a rabid anti-Trumper, ask her what are the biggest concerns of a potential Trump presidency.
If “Supreme Court nominee” is one of the top objections, discontinue your persuasion for ethical reasons. This person has put some thought into the decision and has a legitimate opinion that is at least partly based on reason. I don’t recommend changing that person’s mind.
But if a person’s main objections to Trump include any the following four reasons, I would consider it ethical to apply persuasion.
Objection 1: Trump is a loose cannon who might offend other countries and maybe even start a nuclear war.
Objection 2: Trump is terrible at business because he has several bankruptcies.
Objection 3: Trump is a racist.
Objection 4: Trump is anti-women and anti-LGBT
If any of those four objections are behind an anti-Trumper’s opinion, you have ethical license to persuade, so long as you are sticking to facts and adding context. I’ll show you how to do that with each objection.
Objection 1: Trump is a loose cannon who might offend other countries and maybe even start a nuclear war.
Persuasion: Trump has five decades of acting rational in business dealings, and getting along with people all over the world, including China and Russia. By now you would have heard stories of Trump being a loose cannon in his business dealings if such a thing had happened. We are hearing no stories of that nature. And people don’t suddenly change character at age 70. (That last sentence is the important one.)
How risky is Trump? Consider that Trump has never had an alcoholic beverage. He was against the Iraq war. He doesn’t want boots on the ground in Syria. He wants a strong military to discourage war. Trump personally gains nothing from war, but he has a lot to lose, including every building with his name on it.
Putin already seems to like Trump. They are similar characters in terms of their persuasion talents. And it wouldn’t hurt to be on good terms with Russia while we go after ISIS. Trump seems to have that relationship covered.
Trump has been negotiating with the Chinese for years, with no problems yet. And the Chinese leaders are not children. They got their positions by being great deal-makers, like Trump. They might not want to negotiate against Trump, but they aren’t afraid of his personality type. Trump often tells us that his first bid in any negotiation is super-aggressive. China knows it too. They are not naive. They can tell the difference between a negotiator and a madman.
Objection 2: Trump is terrible at business, as proven by his several bankruptcies.
Persuasion: Ask how many bankruptcies Trump has had. Most people say between 5-10. Then ask how many entities Trump has his name on. The answer is about 500. Then ask if that is a good performance for an entrepreneur who is often trying things in new fields.
(Asking questions in that fashion is good persuasion technique. It removes the adversarial frame and gives the person a sense of coming to a new conclusion without pressure.)
Then explain how licensing works. Trump puts his name on various products and he gets paid even if the product or company does poorly in the end. That’s an example of Trump taking the LEAST risk in a deal. The other parties take larger risks and frequently fail. Trump gets paid either way. All parties to the deals have lawyers who review everything. Trump isn’t taking advantage of people with his licensing deals. Licensees are knowingly accepting the riskier side of the deal because they also have the biggest potential upside.
Trump doesn’t like risk. We see it in lots of ways. For example, Trump has never been in a physical fight. He asked his wives to sign prenups. He creates separate entities so some can go bankrupt without bringing down the rest. He licenses his name so he gets paid even if the company buying the license does not make a profit. And he diversifies his portfolio to reduce exposure to any one risk.
Based on everything we see, Trump consistently tries hard to avoidrisk in everything he does. And people don’t change character at age 70.
The exceptions to Trump’s risk-avoidance include some of the provocative stuff he is saying during the campaign. That behavior looks risky to most observers, but it was exactly what got him the Republican nomination. Evidently, Trump takes risks when doing so makes sense.
Objection 3: Trump is a racist.
Trump has never mentioned race beyond pointing how how many African-Americans and Latinos support him. Ask your anti-Trumper to offer evidence otherwise. Then point out…
Mexico is a country, not a race.
Islam is open to all races.
If the topic of Judge Curiel comes up, point out that all human beings are biased by their life experiences. Ask anti-Trumpers if they think Curiel would be comfortable at his next family gathering if his verdict favors Trump. (Notice the question form of persuasion again.)
Acknowledge that Trump was offensive when he attacked the judge’s parental connections to Mexico. But note that it is also good persuasion and good legal strategy. It puts the judge in the tough spot of either siding with Trump or appearing biased if he does not.
Then point out that only the Democrats are talking about race. And all of that race talk has been divisive. Trump has literally never said a negative thing about race during this election.
(Professional pundits will talk about Trump’s so-called “racist dog-whistles,” but normal voters do not mention it. They don’t know what it means.)
Objection 3.1: But Trump wants to discriminate based on religion!
Persuasion: Clarify to the subject of your persuasion that Trump only wants to discriminate against non-citizens. That is literally the job description of a president.
For context, point out that Islam is unique among religions in that it includes an order from God that Muslims should overthrow any government that is not compatible with Islam. Moderate Muslims around the world ignore that part of the religion, but refugees are coming from places where it is considered mandatory.
I don’t think other religions have a mandatory requirement to overthrow the government. So comparisons to other religions are nonsense. And the job of the president includes knowing when to make exceptions.
If you think we can screen Muslim immigrants well enough to stop all of the terrorists and future revolutionaries, just think about any job in which you had coworkers. Remember how incompetent some of them were? Those are the types of people screening immigrants. Does that feel safe to you?
Objection 4: Trump is anti-women and anti-LGBT
Persuasion:
Trump is the only candidate calling out Islam for its followers’ views on women and the LGBT community.
Trump wants women to have the right to own guns to protect themselves.
Trump is the only candidate concerned about crimes against women that are perpetrated by illegal immigrants from Mexico.
Trump has a long business record of promoting women to executive positions in his company. He was doing it years before it was fashionable.
The women in his personal life – including his ex-wives – seem to like him.
Trump is offensive in the way he has talked about women. But keep in mind that Trump has offended nearly everyone at some point.
The way to know your persuasion is working is that your subject will change the topic instead of addressing your point.
Example:
You: Mexico is not a race.
Subject: Well, Trump also had bankruptcies.
Don’t allow the topic to change. Instead, say again whatever you said just before it did. Make each point about three times, with slightly different wording each time. After the third restatement of your point, without an objection from your subject, allow the topic to change. It means you won.
Let me know how it works out.
—
Note: I endorsed Hillary Clinton for my personal safety, because I live in California. But my political views do not align with any of the candidates for president.
Personally, I would do better under a Clinton presidency. If Clinton gets elected, no one will blame me for anything she does in office. But if Trump wins, my blogging about his persuasion skills will make it look like my fault every time he does something you don’t like. I don’t need that trouble.
Also, as a top one-percenter, I’m winning under the current system. Trump is the only candidate who has the persuasion skills to increase tax rates on the rich, so #imwithher, for selfish reasons.
—
If you think this blog post has some persuasion in it, you should see my book.
Some of those points in his defense are highly convoluted.
Its like, "Yeah he shot a white child, which goes to show he is pro black children."
Its like, "Yeah he shot a white child, which goes to show he is pro black children."
Some of the argument are vague. It does give thinking points for people to investigate further. The problem is, many people take things at face value becuase they already have a bias.
Off topic a bit. You be surprise how easy it is to convince people, who already wanted to be convinced. I made intensive study on subject on misleading argument & hopefully publish it into a book, as I seen too many time pro lairs are able to effectively influence people. But thats not a piority now.
In any case, as I always said, use your own judgment, do not already have a bias (its hard) before getting a conclusion. Double check on what people said.
Also, if perfectly okay, not to come to a conclusion if you are unsure. Like if someone asked me if Michael jackson was a Child molester, my answer is I do not know, because I have not seen enough evidence on both side to suggest so.
Also even if you like a candidate, or hate another one, you do not have to defend/attack his/her every accusation, you do not have to accept every policies suggested. Accept that sometimes people are right, sometimes wrong,
I don't know how much it warrants investigating further. For example:
That's kinda a r******d "persuasion" point, as he's stating this, to cater to a crowd, that ALSO has negative views on the LGBT community. Anti-homsexuality isn't a muslim problem, it's a god of abraham problem. Keep in mind, that here in America, the largest voice against the LGBT community has been from Christians, not muslims.
Ummm...no. He's literally promoted the idea of racial profiling americans as well as surveillance of american mosques.
We're talking about americans here. American muslims don't believe this, if anything, most of the 3+million muslims in this country, are very peaceful. Contrast that to the very real fact that must crime/murderers in this country are people that consider themselves some kind of christian.
Trump is good at making money for himself. He's not good with dealing with people. He's never been good at being politically correct. Running a country is not the same as running a business.
Most rational people on both sides want women to have the right to own guns for protection. Many democrats are gun owners too. The question is, whether or not certain people should have access to guns.
Nonsense.
He's made them rich, what's not to like?
Again, nonsense. Everyone tries to keep the topic on point with Trump, and he never seems to address anything, and quite often, doubles down on his idiocy even when called out for being factually incorrect.
That's just some examples, the list was long.....point is, at face value AND digging deeper, we see that really, that whole list has no real merit. Anti-Trumpers have valid points, and their arguments are not weak. Anyone claiming that they're weak arguments are really trying to deflect the realities of what kind of person Trump is.
Poor Kid thought he was going to save the world from the evil Trumpinator who despite being a benign public figure for decades was only found out to be a Racist, Misogynist, Xenophobic, Sexist, Islamophobe, Homophobe, Arachnaphobe just two months after Running against Democrats in the presidential campaign. Little did he know he had simply been brainwashed by the MSM and Democrats.
He drove all the way across the country! You have to applaud the kid's incredible resolve to save the world, BUT......it's such a darn shame that nobody told him he could just cast a vote in the comforts of his own district when the time comes and with the joint efforts of at least 51% of the country this evil foe can be kaboshed with the simple flick of a switch.
- Status