Donald Trump Presidency Thread

Started by Silent Master94 pages

Of the two posts that preceded my comment, which one mentioned Bernie?

Edit: I see you edited.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Of the two posts that preceded my comment, which one mentioned Bernie?

Edit: I see you edited.

Are you saying Blakev is racist, he he as apologised and foresworn any comments like that. Why are you making really offnsive insults to trigger people imo. Calling people racists is a place we shouldn't be going, particularly since Bada's announcement.

I've put SM on ignore.

Originally posted by Blakemore
I've put SM on ignore.
Good choice he has accused me of being angry because I posted a giph and called you a racist. He is just trolling clearly.

Originally posted by Blakemore
I've put SM on ignore.

I get it, you want to stay in your echo chamber.

Originally posted by Silent Master
I get it, you want to stay in your echo chamber.
He has made it clear he is avoiding a confrontation s and m, why are you badgering him? You just called the guy a racist out of the blue ffs. He isn't looking for an echo chamber.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
He has made it clear he is avoiding a confrontation s and m, why are you badgering him? You just called the guy a racist out of the blue ffs. He isn't looking for an echo chamber.

Never said he was a racist, just that he supports racists(Biden). which he does.

Biden isn't a racist; you're a weasel.

Of course he is

this might be a short thread

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
this might be a short thread
Have some flowers bro. flowers

CNN now:

"While it's important to believe doctors, there is a long history of presidents not being honest about their health and using doctors for political reasons."

Ok. Now why can't this work both ways?

You can't chant "believe the science" when it works for your side, and claim "They are lying to us" when it doesn't.

Either you trust a doctors statements, or you don't.

has to do with context. skepticism toward an official statement by a person who happens to be a doctor does not equate to skepticism toward medical science

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
has to do with context. skepticism toward an official statement by a person who happens to be a doctor does not equate to skepticism toward medical science
This right here.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
has to do with context. skepticism toward an official statement by a person who happens to be a doctor does not equate to skepticism toward medical science

Doctors are converyers of medical wisdom, though.

Doubting Trumps doctors words is akin to admitting doctors can be pressured by political concerns. That being the case, it casts doubt on the entire information disseminating process.

Who can be pressured, and who is honest enough to resist pressure for the common good?

Originally posted by cdtm

Doubting Trumps doctors words is akin to admitting doctors can be pressured by political concerns. That being the case, it casts doubt on the entire information disseminating process.

Who can be pressured, and who is honest enough to resist pressure for the common good?

seems like a slippery slope fallacy. doctors are human beings and under extreme individual pressure like this could easily tell what they see as a "noble lie" or just do what they're told by their boss, which is something else humans typically do

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
seems like a slippery slope fallacy. doctors are human beings and under extreme individual pressure like this could easily tell what they see as a "noble lie" or just do what they're told by their boss, which is something else humans typically do

All too true, unfortunately. About human nature.

There's this other thing they said nagging at me. Trumps doctor said he refuses to go into details on his treatment. The host on CNN asked "WHAT??!: in shock.

Now, is he even ALLOWED to discuss details? I thought they were bound by confidentiality agreements.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/04/magazine/cnn-had-a-problem-donald-trump-solved-it.html

Dated but still relevent Times article, on Donald Trump ans CNN's symbiotic relationship with each other.

In the Times words, CNN was "struggling for survival" before Trump brought his one man reality TV show personality into the presidential race.

Makes you wonder what happens to CNN's future, when Trump is finished as president.

Originally posted by cdtm
CNN now:

"While it's important to believe doctors, there is a long history of presidents not being honest about their health and using doctors for political reasons."

Ok. Now why can't this work both ways?

You can't chant "believe the science" when it works for your side, and claim "They are lying to us" when it doesn't.

Either you trust a doctors statements, or you don't.

LMAO @ anyone at CNN accusing others of not being honest. 😂

Originally posted by cdtm
Doctors are converyers of medical wisdom, though.

Doubting Trumps doctors words is akin to admitting doctors can be pressured by political concerns. That being the case, it casts doubt on the entire information disseminating process.

Who can be pressured, and who is honest enough to resist pressure for the common good?

The thing about medical science is it's been tested, verified, debated and replicated with controlled variables and can be replicated again by anyone given the right conditions according to the theories already established.

That's why it's called science.