What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

***Official***President Donald Trump (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nearly every conversation devolves eventually into the following: 

Hey did you read the latest awful thing Trump has said or done? 

Are you whining again? He won. Get over it. 

Not whining, just really concerned about this, aren't you? 

Well what about when Clinton did this? Or what about when Obama did that? 

The two aren't even comparable! And anyhow why are you bringing up Clinton and Obama? We're talking about the here and now. What do you think of what Trump did? 

:lmao:

That's your response? Are you incapable of offering a real response or engaging in discussion? 

You're rude and condescending. This is why you lost and will continue to lose. 

Look can we please just discuss the issue at hand? I want to know what you think about what Trump said. Here is the link. 

That link is from the Washington Post. That's a false news site run by liberals. I don't trust anything they write; same with CNN, the New York Times and NBC news. 

But Trump repeated it in his latest tweet! What about that? 

:lmao:

 
TobiasFunke said:
"Hope and Change" was not a slogan as far as I remember. "Change we can believe in" was a slogan. Obama referred to making changes all the time after taking office, and made many of them.  The Hope thing came from a Fairey poster.  

So you misstated an Obama slogan he actually delivered on (you can debate the degree but he definitely made some big changes, e.g. ending the Iraq war and passing Obamacare) and then compared it to Trump explicitly ordering his people to drop his slogan before he even takes office because even he knows that his nominations directly contradict its basic premise.
Click to expand...
Think it was Palin that actually first used Hope and Change.

"That hopey-changey thing," said she.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet said:
Nearly every conversation devolves eventually into the following: 

Hey did you read the latest awful thing Trump has said or done? 

Are you whining again? He won. Get over it. 

Not whining, just really concerned about this, aren't you? 

Well what about when Clinton did this? Or what about when Obama did that? 

The two aren't even comparable! And anyhow why are you bringing up Clinton and Obama? We're talking about the here and now. What do you think of what Trump did? 

:lmao:

That's your response? Are you incapable of offering a real response or engaging in discussion? 

You're rude and condescending. This is why you lost and will continue to lose. 

Look can we please just discuss the issue at hand? I want to know what you think about what Trump said. Here is the link. 

That link is from the Washington Post. That's a false news site run by liberals. I don't trust anything they write; same with CNN, the New York Times and NBC news. 

But Trump repeated it in his latest tweet! What about that? 

:lmao:
Click to expand...
Since the advent of cable news this is pretty accurate just the names and sides change.

 
timschochet said:
Nearly every conversation devolves eventually into the following: 

Hey did you read the latest awful thing Trump has said or done? 

Are you whining again? He won. Get over it. 

Not whining, just really concerned about this, aren't you? 

Well what about when Clinton did this? Or what about when Obama did that? 

The two aren't even comparable! And anyhow why are you bringing up Clinton and Obama? We're talking about the here and now. What do you think of what Trump did? 

:lmao:

That's your response? Are you incapable of offering a real response or engaging in discussion? 

You're rude and condescending. This is why you lost and will continue to lose. 

Look can we please just discuss the issue at hand? I want to know what you think about what Trump said. Here is the link. 

That link is from the Washington Post. That's a false news site run by liberals. I don't trust anything they write; same with CNN, the New York Times and NBC news. 

But Trump repeated it in his latest tweet! What about that? 

:lmao:
Click to expand...
Almost makes you think it's pointless to engage them anymore. 

:tumbleweed:  

 
I've been thinking about the very bad, in fact perhaps seditious behavior of the liberal elite since the election. This follows the very bad behavior of globalist elitist 'pubs through the nomination, even a coup attempt after to take the nomination from Trump.

Both groups are really the same group. I'm not sure how many of their useful idiots get it. We the People are the enemy, always have been. It offends them that we have any power that they can't take away. It's gotten way beyond tolerable.

The good that has come of it is that we can stop talking about the "little folk" who are too uninformed or too dumb to understand what was going on. Both for the nomination and the election, the US population showed that we get it just fine. Trump spoke to people, and people responded. The elite, whether in enternment/media or government/business, continued to talk to each other and only leave their pedestals to tell their for all purposes slaves how to vote.

Those are my thoughts for today. I wonder if there's any era more interesting in history than what we've seen these past two years. And it's still playing out. 

 
butcher boy said:
I've been thinking about the very bad, in fact perhaps seditious behavior of the liberal elite since the election. This follows the very bad behavior of globalist elitist 'pubs through the nomination, even a coup attempt after to take the nomination from Trump.

Both groups are really the same group. I'm not sure how many of their useful idiots get it. We the People are the enemy, always have been. It offends them that we have any power that they can't take away. It's gotten way beyond tolerable.

The good that has come of it is that we can stop talking about the "little folk" who are too uninformed or too dumb to understand what was going on. Both for the nomination and the election, the US population showed that we get it just fine. Trump spoke to people, and people responded. The elite, whether in enternment/media or government/business, continued to talk to each other and only leave their pedestals to tell their for all purposes slaves how to vote.

Those are my thoughts for today. I wonder if there's any era more interesting in history than what we've seen these past two years. And it's still playing out. 
Click to expand...
This post, minus the mention of Donald Trump, could be taken word for word from any Nuremberg rally of the 1930s. Not exaggerating. 

 
timschochet said:
This post, minus the mention of Donald Trump, could be taken word for word from any Nuremberg rally of the 1930s. Not exaggerating. 
Click to expand...
Now you're not helping. Like, tim, you.

It could just as easily be said of democracy as a whole.

demos - of the people

kratia - rule

Greek. 

I know you hate populism, but what in butcher boy's post outside the buzzphrase "liberal elite" didn't sound anything like the Enlightenment arguments for property rights and press rights?  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
butcher boy said:
I've been thinking about the very bad, in fact perhaps seditious behavior of the liberal elite since the election. This follows the very bad behavior of globalist elitist 'pubs through the nomination, even a coup attempt after to take the nomination from Trump.

Both groups are really the same group. I'm not sure how many of their useful idiots get it. We the People are the enemy, always have been. It offends them that we have any power that they can't take away. It's gotten way beyond tolerable.

The good that has come of it is that we can stop talking about the "little folk" who are too uninformed or too dumb to understand what was going on. Both for the nomination and the election, the US population showed that we get it just fine. Trump spoke to people, and people responded. The elite, whether in enternment/media or government/business, continued to talk to each other and only leave their pedestals to tell their for all purposes slaves how to vote.

Those are my thoughts for today. I wonder if there's any era more interesting in history than what we've seen these past two years. And it's still playing out. 
Click to expand...
Fortunately the President elect nor any of his cabinet nominees are from the elitist classes, that would just make your post weird. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IMO, "Drain the Swamp" has more expected and tangible outcomes than "Hope and Change".  We'll see if he gets away with another one.

 
butcher boy said:
I've been thinking about the very bad, in fact perhaps seditious behavior of the liberal elite since the election. This follows the very bad behavior of globalist elitist 'pubs through the nomination, even a coup attempt after to take the nomination from Trump.

Both groups are really the same group. I'm not sure how many of their useful idiots get it. We the People are the enemy, always have been. It offends them that we have any power that they can't take away. It's gotten way beyond tolerable.

The good that has come of it is that we can stop talking about the "little folk" who are too uninformed or too dumb to understand what was going on. Both for the nomination and the election, the US population showed that we get it just fine. Trump spoke to people, and people responded. The elite, whether in enternment/media or government/business, continued to talk to each other and only leave their pedestals to tell their for all purposes slaves how to vote.

Those are my thoughts for today. I wonder if there's any era more interesting in history than what we've seen these past two years. And it's still playing out. 
Click to expand...
Help me understand this.  What makes liberals elite or elitists?  I hear this all the time from conservatives, but it doesn't make sense to me.  Am I elite because I'm liberal?  Is it a college education that makes someone an elitist?  The bulk of liberals are just normal middle-class people that I would hardly consider to be society's elites.

 
George Jefferson Airplane said:
I think that was in response to her daughter getting knocked up.  She hoped she didn't have to change her position on abortion.  The daughter now on tour preaching abstinence is about as hilarious as hypocrisy gets. 
Click to expand...
Yeah, I was just saying she mish-mashed the slogans in a derogatory way so that Hope and Change is now thought of as an Obama slogan. I think Tobias is right. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dickies said:
Help me understand this.  What makes liberals elite or elitists?  I hear this all the time from conservatives, but it doesn't make sense to me.  Am I elite because I'm liberal?  Is it a college education that makes someone an elitist?  The bulk of liberals are just normal middle-class people that I would hardly consider to be society's elites.
Click to expand...
"Liberal elite" is generally colloquially referred to on the right as those that control education (especially higher education), the media, and now, to a great degree, industry. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dickies said:
Help me understand this.  What makes liberals elite or elitists?  I hear this all the time from conservatives, but it doesn't make sense to me.  Am I elite because I'm liberal?  Is it a college education that makes someone an elitist?  The bulk of liberals are just normal middle-class people that I would hardly consider to be society's elites.
Click to expand...
It's a narcissistic sense of elitism.  Years and years of lying, dissembling, propaganda, haranguing actions against Conservatives, and their arrogance undid them. And they don’t even realize the full significance of it. They just can’t and won’t understand it because their elitism won’t let them.

They only congregate amongst their tightly cloistered selves and they mistakenly believe that this country, 50 STATES in number, are at the beck and call of twenty or so complex and congested infestations of cities and counties in this county.

They can’t understand it because they really are islands of insanity that exist in a world by itself, even amidst a country so vast it boggles the mind. Their undoing was them forgetting they were just a cog in a machine crafted to protect a Union - not rats concentrated in a few cities.

 
Okay, let's forget the incendiary nature of butcher boy's post. 

Was political correctness and the condescension of those within institutions instructive in understanding the rise of Trump among the people?

Is there a cognitive elite in this country that results (to a degree) in income inequality? Is IQ heritable? Do they cloister in certain areas?

Is there a tension in the city and country, and population, in American history and literature from the Romans? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Da Guru said:
Since the advent of cable news this is pretty accurate just the names and sides change.
Click to expand...
Again, totally untrue.  Supporters of every candidate or elected official from both parties have been willing to engage on the issues pretty much since I've been on this board and also in the "real world" in my experience.  The empty rhetoric that Tim accurately summarizes is unique to Trump supporters.

 
rockaction said:
Now you're not helping. Like, tim, you.

It could just as easily be said of democracy as a whole.

demos - of the people

kratia - rule

Greek. 

I know you hate populism, but what in butcher boy's post outside the buzzphrase "liberal elite" didn't sound anything like the Enlightenment arguments for property rights and press rights?  
Click to expand...
To be fair, he's responding to someone who thinks Hollywood celebrities making a video asking people to vote a certain way is a seditious coup attempt.

 
Henry Ford said:
To be fair, he's responding to someone who thinks Hollywood celebrities making a video asking people to vote a certain way is a seditious coup attempt.
Click to expand...
See, that's putting words in his mouth. Does he believe that? Is Hollywood not a billion dollar industry that could be considered "elite?"

 
rockaction said:
Okay, let's forget the incendiary nature of butcher boy's post. 

Was political correctness and the condescension of those within institutions instructive in understanding the rise of Trump among the people?

Is there a cognitive elite in this country that results (to a degree) in income inequality? Is IQ heritable? Do they cloister in certain areas?

Is there a tension in the city and country, and population, in American history and literature from the Romans? 
Click to expand...
Sort of if I understand your question - at the least, the perception of it was;

Yes, if you're using this term in the Bell Curve sense; Sort of, but not entirely, and there's a tendency for heritable intelligence to regress to the mean; Probably, everyone does;

I don't think I understand this question fully, but Country Mouse/City Mouse is pretty constant across various societies..

 
rockaction said:
See, that's putting words in his mouth. Does he believe that? Is Hollywood not a billion dollar industry that could be considered "elite?"
Click to expand...
He said that liberal elites are being perhaps seditious and engaging in a coup attempt.  What do you think he's talking about?

 
sho nuff said:
If its the campaign...would they then go after Pence too?  Try to prop up Ryan into power?
Click to expand...
We're deep into hypothetical territory here but that would probably depend on timing and at what level people knew what was happening. If it was Manafort, say, that was found to be communicating with them early on, Pence might get a pass. 

For the record, I think it's going to be difficult to prove this. In part because the Trump campaign has so many ties to Russia already. Just an odd meeting or phone call isn't going to establish anything. Information would probably need to come from Russia or Wikileaks, who would seem to have a vested interest in not having that information come out. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford said:
Sort of if I understand your question - at the least, the perception of it was;

Yes, if you're using this term in the Bell Curve sense; Sort of, but not entirely, and there's a tendency for heritable intelligence to regress to the mean; Probably, everyone does;

I don't think I understand this question fully, but Country Mouse/City Mouse is pretty constant across various societies..
Click to expand...
1) Exactly. What is perception in politics? The old phrase is that perception is reality.  

2) Yes. Okay.

3) You get exactly what I'm saying. It's also what he's saying, dressed up.  It goes back to Roman satirists like Juvenal. It also helps our understanding of our Constitutional structure, which you know more about than I. 

 
rockaction said:
Now you're not helping. Like, tim, you.

It could just as easily be said of democracy as a whole.

demos - of the people

kratia - rule

Greek. 

I know you hate populism, but what in butcher boy's post outside the buzzphrase "liberal elite" didn't sound anything like the Enlightenment arguments for property rights and press rights?  
Click to expand...
The Elightenment arguments for property rights, press rights, and individual rights in general were not an argument for democracy. True democracy, minus constitutional protection of individual rights, is antithetical to those rights. 

What Butcher Boy just argued for is rule by the masses, and history shows that in vitally leads to authoritarianism. Again his post would fit right in with those rallies. 

 
timschochet said:
The Elightenment arguments for property rights, press rights, and individual rights in general were not an argument for democracy. True democracy, minus constitutional protection of individual rights, is antithetical to those rights. 

What Butcher Boy just argued for is rule by the masses, and history shows that in vitally leads to authoritarianism. Again his post would fit right in with those rallies. 
Click to expand...
What about Rousseau's arguments aren't Enlightenment or democratic, minus constitutional protection?  

Careful here. 

 
rockaction said:
1) Exactly. What is perception in politics? The old phrase is that perception is reality.  

2) Yes. Okay.

3) You get exactly what I'm saying. It's also what he's saying, dressed up.  It goes back to Roman satirists like Juvenal. It also helps our understanding of our Constitutional structure, which you know more about than I. 
Click to expand...
There's an old phrase that cheaters never prosper, too.  Both are pretty much bull#### in my opinion.

And of course.  As a "liberal elite" who lives in a rural area, I can say unequivocally that the the rural/urban split in the vote (regarding services and funding and issues) is much more defining than liberal/conservative.  People who live in urban areas tend to be more liberal but it isn't the liberals so much ####ting on the rural areas; it's the city folk, whether liberal or conservative.

 
Arsenal of Doom said:
We're deep into hypothetical territory here but that would probably depend on timing and at what level people knew what was happening. If it was Manafort, say, that was found to be communicating with them early on, Pence might get a pass. 

For the record, I think it's going to be difficult to prove this. In part because the Trump campaign has so many ties to Russia already. Just an odd meeting or phone call isn't going to establish anything. Information would probably need to come from Russia or Wikileaks, who would seem to have a vested interest in not having that information come out. 
Click to expand...
 They'd have a vested interest in keeping it silent until they stop getting what they want...then look out.  This is one (of many) problems with sidling up with them...you have nothing on them that they would care be out in the open.  

 
As a matter of fact, we used to have a professor who taught us Rousseau this way. "Imagine in our constitutional republic we have a bundle of rights that nobody can vote on. Then take it away." 

Rousseau is indeed, per tim, considered authoritarian by many on the right, but he's an Enlightenment author and a democratic one. tim hasn't responded because he perfectly defined what he was arguing against. I'll respond for him.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
We're a Locke/Rousseau hybrid. This helps explain Trump in a way. 

We're democratic, by nature populists and not aristocratic. This helps explain Trump in a way. 

There are ways to have constructive conversations and nobody's having them but Henry, really. And SID.

 
Arsenal of Doom said:
I believe I saw reports of them offering to pay legal fees, that's not really the same thing. 

The harassment was, of course, uncalled for. 
Click to expand...
Probably. That's a heck of a grey area, just like everything else in this election, down to the fact that I haven't head one proposal from Donald Trump that I seriously think he can deliver on other than from the appointments to his executive and his ability to have a legislature that, while not friendly, shares his party's name.  

 
rockaction said:
Probably. That's a heck of a grey area, just like everything else in this election, down to the fact that I haven't head one proposal from Donald Trump that I seriously think he can deliver on other than from the appointments to his executive and his ability to have a legislature that, while not friendly, shares his party's name.  
Click to expand...
The E.C. is weird and archaic. I think IK made a good point yesterday that if the E.C. isn't going to overturn Trump, there's really no point in continuing to have it, since we are (hopefully) unlikely to see a more clear example of an unfit demagogue elected in our lifetimes. Not the allocation of EC votes by state, which is a separate issue, just the process of having a second, binding, vote after the non-binding general election.

I don't see any ethical issue with offering to pay legal fees since the rules around faithless electors are obscure, vary by state, and if the outcome changed it would definitely have become a protracted series of legal battles.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
rockaction said:
As a matter of fact, we used to have a professor who taught us Rousseau this way. "Imagine in our constitutional republic we have a bundle of rights that nobody can vote on. Then take it away." 

Rousseau is indeed, per tim, considered authoritarian by many on the right, but he's an Enlightenment author and a democratic one. tim hasn't responded because he perfectly defined what he was arguing against. I'll respond for him.  
Click to expand...
I didn't respond because I was driving.  :)

As you suspected I'm not a huge fan of Rousseau. To call him an Enlightenment writer just because that was the era he lived in may be misleading: shall we refer to Hegel and Marx as Enlightenment writers? You see my point. 

As the historian Norman Davies has argued, democracy is amoral. A group of cannibals would no doubt elect a cannibal to lead them. We saw this play out in Iraq when we attempted to replace its old regime with a democracy. The results were entirely predictable: Sunnis voted for Sunnis, Shiites voted for Shiites, and Kurds voted for Kurds. The Shiites  were the majority so they won and immediately began to repress the rights of everyone else. Amoral system- Rousseau would have loved it. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
butcher boy said:
I've been thinking about the very bad, in fact perhaps seditious behavior of the liberal elite since the election. This follows the very bad behavior of globalist elitist 'pubs through the nomination, even a coup attempt after to take the nomination from Trump.

Both groups are really the same group. I'm not sure how many of their useful idiots get it. We the People are the enemy, always have been. It offends them that we have any power that they can't take away. It's gotten way beyond tolerable.

The good that has come of it is that we can stop talking about the "little folk" who are too uninformed or too dumb to understand what was going on. Both for the nomination and the election, the US population showed that we get it just fine. Trump spoke to people, and people responded. The elite, whether in enternment/media or government/business, continued to talk to each other and only leave their pedestals to tell their for all purposes slaves how to vote.

Those are my thoughts for today. I wonder if there's any era more interesting in history than what we've seen these past two years. And it's still playing out. 
Click to expand...
In what world is Trump not considered part of the elite??

 
butcher boy said:
It's a narcissistic sense of elitism.  Years and years of lying, dissembling, propaganda, haranguing actions against Conservatives, and their arrogance undid them. And they don’t even realize the full significance of it. They just can’t and won’t understand it because their elitism won’t let them.

They only congregate amongst their tightly cloistered selves and they mistakenly believe that this country, 50 STATES in number, are at the beck and call of twenty or so complex and congested infestations of cities and counties in this county.

They can’t understand it because they really are islands of insanity that exist in a world by itself, even amidst a country so vast it boggles the mind. Their undoing was them forgetting they were just a cog in a machine crafted to protect a Union - not rats concentrated in a few cities.
Click to expand...
First off, I appreciate you actually responding to me.  It doesn't happen too often in here.

Second, I disagree with everything you say here, and I don't think elitism is the proper label.  You are correct that I don't understand because I feel I do my best to educate myself on all sides of major issues and don't put up with lying from politicians even if it is one I generally support.  I don't think anyone is claiming that this country revolves around a small handful of cities, but I do recall Trump saying he won the popular vote if you get rid of CA.  As for "islands of insanity" I live in the SF Bay Area, which probably qualifies as an island of insanity to you, but we are not all alike.  Not everyone here is liberal, and even liberals have differing opinions on a lot of issues.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Kiddnets
How did you become a fan of your favorite team(s)?
2 3
Replies
108
Views
2K
ConstruxBoy
ConstruxBoy
Caveman33
No One's Making Fun of Scooter Kids Anymore
Replies
2
Views
128
Major
Major
fatness
FBI finds largest cache of "finished explosive devices" in FBI history
Replies
18
Views
1K
Snoopy
Snoopy

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top