Poll
35%
25%
30%
10%
Re: Will Trump have a mental breakdown in office?
Originally posted by |King Joker|
His increasingly erratic behavior is pointing to something of the sort, so I'm curious what KMC thinks. Any mental / nervous breakdown incoming? 🙂
What behavior do you feel he has shown that was absent prior to the election?
Seems to me Trump has been..Trump lol. For better or for worse. I can't point to anything nutty he's done in the post election days that I would have been utterly shocked to see him do prior to the election.
I'll vote no. I suppose anything is possible, but I'm no shrink so whether I say no or yes doesn't mean much. I don't feel he'd be in anymore danger of a mental breakdown than the other people who tried to become president in this election.
Originally posted by |King Joker|
True for the most part I suppose, though I feel like his constant outbursts of 'FAKE NEWS
Considering the number of people on the left who shout about fake news, if this pointed to mental instability then we have a whole lot of mentally unstable folk on both sides.
Anyways, shouldn't he be ticked at fake news? Look at this bullshit with John McCain and Buzzfeed. Buzzfeed originates some report saying Russia has compromising information of Trump.
It can't be substantiated at all. The people who shout "they say the source is a credible british intelligence agent" ignore the variety of errors in the report, as well as just the overall lack of evidence.
Yet..news sites are running with it, and of course people are assuming it is true because the media said it.
Why is it that it seems you can only be pissed over fake news if you're from the left? Nobody gives a shit unless the fake news harmed Hilary Clinton. I'm not saying you personally believe that, I'm just noticing people have zero problems with fake news unless it hurts those they support.
Another question: people are upset about stuff about the DNC being leaked, etc. What are the chances they will be upset about shit about Trump being leaked?
and actually responding to Meryl Streep via Twitter has me a tad more concerned about his temperament than perveiously.
It's nothing new for Trump to respond to people who specifically call him out in public. She calls him out without having the balls to say his name. She shows hypocrisy by preaching tolerance and patting herself and fellow libs on the back for their tolerance, but then of course takes a shot at football and MMA fans.
To me? I'm glad Trump isn't afraid to call these people on their stupid bullshit. Like it or not these dumbass celebrities do have some influence. So when they try to open their mouths about politics, it's fair game for anyone(including Trump) to respond.
Originally posted by Robtard
Remember, Podesta's emails about aliens giving humanity zero-point energy and blood orgies and semen filled pastries etc were all true just cos someone printed them. Weird stories about Trump, well, those need to be confirmed first. Such is the workings of Surtur's mind.
If you're gonna be stupid at least pick better examples. Podesta has said plenty of shit about aliens and ufos, outside of the wikileaks.
A lot of ufologists wanted a Hilary Clinton victory, and why? Because they thought her team would do the most to declassify shit with UFO's.
But don't bother to point that out. Also by all means try to compare the wikileaks to an issue where even the people reporting on it flat out say they can't verify it.
Because you're Robtard, and as long as you can come in and thump on your chest? You don't give a shit if the stuff you say makes any actual sense. But let me guess: triggered?
Originally posted by Robtard
Remember, Podesta's emails about aliens giving humanity zero-point energy and blood orgies and semen filled pastries etc were all true just cos someone printed them. Weird stories about Trump, well, those need to be confirmed first. Such is the workings of Surtur's mind.
Let's be real. Those docs came ftom John McCain. He's old and bitter. Now, pizzagate on the other hand
Originally posted by Unoriginal
Let's be real. Those docs came ftom John McCain. He's old and bitter. Now, pizzagate on the other hand
Plus if we're being real they are flat out saying they can't be verified. Buzzfeed is, most news places are.
I missed the part of wikileaks where they posted the emails, but said they can't be verified as legit.
Originally posted by jaden101
Probably when he finds out his dad conspired with Justin Trudeau's alleged real dad to assassinate JFK
Originally posted by Surtur
If you're gonna be stupid at least pick better examples. Podesta has said plenty of shit about aliens and ufos, outside of the wikileaks.A lot of ufologists wanted a Hilary Clinton victory, and why? Because they thought her team would do the most to declassify shit with UFO's.
But don't bother to point that out. Also by all means try to compare the wikileaks to an issue where even the people reporting on it flat out say they can't verify it.
Because you're Robtard, and as long as you can come in and thump on your chest? You don't give a shit if the stuff you say makes any actual sense. But let me guess: triggered?
Look at you desperately focus of the UFO nonsense. The orgies, cum cakes etc., you bought it all, just because someone printed it and you hate Clinton.
You still can't figure out that the very nature of Wikileaks means the emails can't be verified.
When it comes to Clinton, it's all true until proven false. When it comes to Trump, you demand proof. That's clown tactics, sport.
Originally posted by Robtard
Look at you desperately focus of the UFO nonsense. The orgies, cum cakes etc., you bought it all, just because someone printed it and you hate Clinton.
Lmao, look at you desperately trying to deflect, after always whining about other people deflecting.
Did I go on and on about orgies and shit? No? Okay lol. Did we see the DNC coming out to say these emails weren't real? Not that I ever saw.
You still can't figure out that the very nature of Wikileaks means the emails can't be verified.
You still can't figure out this isn't the same as the people who provided it flat out saying "we can't verify this". If Julian Assange had, at the very beginning, prefaced the first release with "I have no idea if these are legit" you'd have a point. Did he do that? If he did not, why do you continue attempting to draw up these false equivalencies? Either Julian Assange did say that or you are legitimately unaware he didn't. Or you just don't care enough to be accurate.
When it comes to Clinton, it's all true until proven false. When it comes to Trump, you demand proof. That's clown tactics, sport.
When it comes to things where even the people reporting it say it can be verified? Yeah, I want them verified. But you can continue to try to downplay the obvious differences and your own hypocritical bullshit.
Yes, you believed all the emails leaks.
More backflips. Unless the person releasing claims they're BS, they're true now; this is your standard? Lolz. Do you every go back and read what you write? You'd probably laugh at yourself if you did.
IMO, the thread should be renamed "Will Surtur have a mental breakdown defending his defenseless stances?" Imho, yes.
Originally posted by Robtard
Yes, you believed all the emails leaks.More backflips. Unless the person releasing claims they're BS, they're true now; this is your standard? Lolz. Do you every go back and read what you write? You'd probably laugh at yourself if you did.
Holy shit, more pot calling the kettle black. I never said that was my standard. I'm pointing out the differences in the comparisons you are trying to use, but you can't handle that, you never can. It's why you revert to the same cliched bullshit every time.
I want this shit verified because even the people putting it out said they couldn't verify it. Julian Assange did not say he couldn't verify the wikileaks, nor did Podesta or Hilary ever come out and tell the world the emails were not real. You drew a false equivalency, failed miserably, and then you are the one commenting about going back and reading the things one says? Is that a joke?
IMO, the thread should be renamed "Will Surtur have a mental breakdown defending his defenseless stances?" Imho, yes.
Lol right.