Poll of the Day > Trump may go down as the worst president.

(+) Yeah! (+)

Zeus posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

Zeus posted...

And quite a bit less bank-hating.

Trump is, more or less, unionist Reagan. I'd edited that out of #46, but it's a reasonably accurate assessment the more I think about it.

Explains why he retooled Reagan's slogan =p

Lil69Leo posted...

Andromicus posted...

dancer62 posted...

He has a long way to go to match Obama. A Black President could have been a great thing, but, instead, Obama set back race relations 60 years and declared war on the police.

How exactly did he say back relations? By calling out problems?

Hahaha. Obama was bad that's a good one.

You mean a bad one. Because he was bad. Or, at least, as mediocre as GWB.
---

Zeus posted...

You mean a bad one. Because he was bad. Or, at least, as mediocre as GWB.

Obama was Jimmy Carter Jr, at worst.
Arguably even less abysmal than Carter.

Questionmarktarius posted...

If anything, Trump is the second coming of Teddy Roosevelt, if not a bit more protectionist somehow.

I guess you can compare them since Teddy was an asshole too.
---

As an thespian and scholar, I will say he's easily the worst human being - and I know Micheal Cera, ok?
---

ClarkDuke posted...

As an thespian and scholar, I will say he's easily the worst human being - and I know Micheal Cera, ok?

Sure you do.
---

Revelation34 posted...

Questionmarktarius posted...

If anything, Trump is the second coming of Teddy Roosevelt, if not a bit more protectionist somehow.

I guess you can compare them since Teddy was an asshole too.

Let's look again at when America was "great" the first time.
It was the Eisenhower era (1953-1961), when the minimum wage was (adjusted) $11, and the top marginal tax rate was 90%.

I seem to have become Antifar...

Revelation34 posted...

ClarkDuke posted...

As an thespian and scholar, I will say he's easily the worst human being - and I know Micheal Cera, ok?

Sure you do.

Thanks for reiterating the fact, ok?
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

Let's look again at when America was "great" the first time.
It was the Eisenhower era (1953-1961), when the minimum wage was (adjusted) $11, and the top marginal tax rate was 90%.

First time was way earlier than that. And the 50s-60s were successful less become of government policy and more because the rest of the world was still recovering from WWII.
---

Zeus posted...

First time was way earlier than that.

What do you suppose that would be?

Washington era?
Jefferson era?
Teddy era?

That time we beat the fuck out of England, again?

He's the dumbest leader since the Habsburgs who were inbred to the point of being mentally handicapped (literally, mods...)
---

I'm always torn when this comes up. Trump's an idiot, no questions there, and I personally find him the most distasteful president of my lifetime (I know nothing of American presidential history prior to my birth, so that's the frame of reference I'm working with)... but he's so awful of a president, he's actually limiting the damage he could potentially be doing, particularly given that the Republicans are effectively unopposed at all levels of government.

Contrast him with the man who I thought, at the time, would for certain go down as the worst president in my lifetime, George W. Bush, whose misadventures in the Middle East killed thousands of Americans, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, added tens of trillions of dollars to the US debt and basically spelled the beginning of the end of the US as the leader of an unopposed global hegemony. His efforts to deregulate the banking sector were a huge factor in the 2008 economic crash, which helped pull the rest of the world into the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

So, I guess it depends how you characterize "worst". Trump is almost unarguably worse at his job, but Bush was far more destructive and worse for the country (and the world) as a whole.
---

Every week he has a new scandal that would have defined any other administration. He has so many though that no one even has time to really react before he moves on to the next terrible thing.
---

Mead posted...

Every week he has a new scandal that would have defined any other administration. He has so many though that no one even has time to really react before he moves on to the next terrible thing.

That's what makes him so awesome. He takes a licking and keeps on ticking.
---

minervo posted...

Mead posted...

Every week he has a new scandal that would have defined any other administration. He has so many though that no one even has time to really react before he moves on to the next terrible thing.

That's what makes him so awesome. He takes a licking and keeps on ticking.

He isnt awesome. Hes a ratfuck bastard
---

minervo posted...

Mead posted...

Every week he has a new scandal that would have defined any other administration. He has so many though that no one even has time to really react before he moves on to the next terrible thing.

That's what makes him so awesome. He takes a licking and keeps on ticking.

If your biggest boast for a leader is "He continually fucks things up, but never seems to suffer the consequences", I don't think that makes him as awesome as you seem to think...
---

Mead posted...

Every week he has a new scandal that would have defined any other administration. He has so many though that no one even has time to really react before he moves on to the next terrible thing.

The irony of this post is Hillary would have been exactly the same if not worse.
---

darkknight109 posted...

I'm always torn when this comes up. Trump's an idiot, no questions there, and I personally find him the most distasteful president of my lifetime (I know nothing of American presidential history prior to my birth, so that's the frame of reference I'm working with)... but he's so awful of a president, he's actually limiting the damage he could potentially be doing, particularly given that the Republicans are effectively unopposed at all levels of government.

Contrast him with the man who I thought, at the time, would for certain go down as the worst president in my lifetime, George W. Bush, whose misadventures in the Middle East killed thousands of Americans, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, added tens of trillions of dollars to the US debt and basically spelled the beginning of the end of the US as the leader of an unopposed global hegemony. His efforts to deregulate the banking sector were a huge factor in the 2008 economic crash, which helped pull the rest of the world into the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

So, I guess it depends how you characterize "worst". Trump is almost unarguably worse at his job, but Bush was far more destructive and worse for the country (and the world) as a whole.

You forgot Obama. Obama's disastrous foreign policy destabilized the rest of the region -- part of which includes massively ramping up a drone program that's killed countless civilians including children -- and prompted a massive refugee crisis. On domestic issues, Obama's unfettered criticism of police (especially before any facts were known) helped spawn the BLM movement which, in turn, led to widespread destruction in two major cities (certainly on a scale not seen since the LA Riots in the 90s) and got white folks lining up to join hate groups again.

darkknight109 posted...

His efforts to deregulate the banking sector were a huge factor in the 2008 economic crash, which helped pull the rest of the world into the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.

...which has more to do with Clinton's banking policies where he was attempting to ramp up home ownership rates. The Housing Bubble may have peaked while GWB was in office, but people were *already* warning about it in 2001 when he was coming into office.

Mead posted...

Every week he has a new scandal that would have defined any other administration. He has so many though that no one even has time to really react before he moves on to the next terrible thing.

Most of the scandals are complete bullshit, like the fake news story about him dumping his fish food where after running the story there was enough negative response that, deep into the story, they added a remark that the PM dumped his food first.

darkknight109 posted...

If your biggest boast for a leader is "He continually fucks things up, but never seems to suffer the consequences", I don't think that makes him as awesome as you seem to think...

Except withstanding concerted efforts to undermine his administration is a little impressive. Granted, at least *some* of the scandals seem to exist to take eyes away from other stuff he's doing.
---

Most of the scandals are complete bullshit, like the fake news story about him dumping his fish food where after running the story there was enough negative response that, deep into the story, they added a remark that the PM dumped his food first.

First Ive heard of that, must be something they only mentioned on Fox News
---

https://pics.me.me/orange-man-bad-upvote-pls-33956137.png
---

AwesomeTurtwig posted...

https://pics.me.me/orange-man-bad-upvote-pls-33956137.png

Thumb up arrow!
---

Mead posted...

Most of the scandals are complete bullshit, like the fake news story about him dumping his fish food where after running the story there was enough negative response that, deep into the story, they added a remark that the PM dumped his food first.

First Ive heard of that, must be something they only mentioned on Fox News

You either have the world's worst memory or are winding me up again because not only have I mentioned this to you multiple times but I've linked to the story itself. And the idea that Fox News would run a false story about Trump dumping fish food is a WTF claim. Once again, here's a link to Snopes, CNN (which updated with a buried mention several paragraphs in that Abe dumped his first), and Politifact which criticizes the coverage from sources like CNN.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/did-trump-impatiently-dump-fish-food-in-japanese-koi-pond/

https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/politics/donald-trump-koi-pond-japan/index.html

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/nov/06/donald-trump-and-fish-food-dump-how-early-reports-/

But his is the caliber of most of these "scandals" -- a distortion of what actually happened.
---

not only have I mentioned this to you multiple times but I've linked to the story itself.

More lies
---

Zeus posted...

You forgot Obama. Obama's disastrous foreign policy destabilized the rest of the region -- part of which includes massively ramping up a drone program that's killed countless civilians including children -- and prompted a massive refugee crisis.

While Obama's middle east policy left much to be desired, it was nowhere near as bad as Bush's. Not by a fucking mile.

Again, I'll point out that Bush launched a pair of wars - one of which had absolutely no justification - that led to a six digit body count and more or less planted the seeds of sectarian strife that would one day yield ISIS. Nothing Obama did comes even close to touching that.

As for the refugee crisis, that had very little to do with anything Obama did and much more to do with Syria. And while Obama setting and consequently ignoring his famous "red lines" was damaging to both America's standing and the cause of the Syrian rebels, at least some of the blame goes to Congress, since Obama did the proper thing and requested Congressional approval to conduct combat operations, which he did not receive. For whatever it's worth, Syria was a puzzle with no good options (kill Assad and you invite a takeover by the militant Islamists that made up the most effective of the anti-Assad groups; prop up the moderate rebels and there's an excellent chance of starting a civil war and/or risking those arms falling into the wrong hands) - Obama's reluctance to get involved may have been the least bad of all of them.

As a silver lining, Obama also managed to broker a nuclear agreement with Iran that, by all indications, had stopped their nuclear program and bolstered the status of a moderate reformist president that stood in opposition to the fanatical anti-Western nutjobs like the one that held the post before him.

Zeus posted...

On domestic issues, Obama's unfettered criticism of police (especially before any facts were known) helped spawn the BLM movement which, in turn, led to widespread destruction in two major cities (certainly on a scale not seen since the LA Riots in the 90s) and got white folks lining up to join hate groups again.

If the police don't like negative press, maybe they should stop shooting unarmed people. Just saying.

Remember, kids, don't blame the victim.

Zeus posted...

...which has more to do with Clinton's banking policies where he was attempting to ramp up home ownership rates. The Housing Bubble may have peaked while GWB was in office, but people were *already* warning about it in 2001 when he was coming into office.

You pointing out that this was an issue in 2001 and Bush let it expand and fester for seven years (including opposing a Republican-backed housing and finance reform bill in 2005 and overriding William Donaldson's attempts at regulating mutual and hedge funds) until it exploded is not a point in his favour.

And you're talking about Clinton being the booster of home ownership? Have you forgotten Bush's hard-on for "Ownership Society" and all the bullshit blather he spat out about how important it was for people to own their own homes?

Also, as a reminder, it was the Republicans that demanded repeal of Glass Stegall during the Clinton years.

Zeus posted...

Most of the scandals are complete bullshit, like the fake news story about him dumping his fish food where after running the story there was enough negative response that, deep into the story, they added a remark that the PM dumped his food first.

Two things here: a story isn't "fake news" if it's true (and this was, even if you don't like *how* it was reported). Secondly, no one called this a scandal and it barely registered with any of the reputable news organizations.
---

Remember, kids, don't blame the victim.

Its kinda his thing tbh
---

Its bizarre that Icoyar of all people would hate the IRS.
---

Revelation34 posted...

Mead posted...

Every week he has a new scandal that would have defined any other administration. He has so many though that no one even has time to really react before he moves on to the next terrible thing.

hilaREEEEEEEEEE

It's like people know Trump sucks, so they keep going back to their bogeywoman to reassure themselves.
---

Phantom_Nook posted...

Revelation34 posted...

Mead posted...

Every week he has a new scandal that would have defined any other administration. He has so many though that no one even has time to really react before he moves on to the next terrible thing.

hilaREEEEEEEEEE

It's like people know Trump sucks, so they keep going back to their bogeywoman to reassure themselves.

https://imgur.com/d81mzQ8
---

darkknight109 posted...

While Obama's middle east policy left much to be desired, it was nowhere near as bad as Bush's. Not by a fucking mile.

That's the thing. Bush, and all presidents in my lifetime TBH was a warmonger. But I can't help but think, if we have bipartisan warmongers, what do they know that I don't?

Really give it some thought. Obama, Trump, Bush (W and HW), Reagan. How can we know what they learned once they know everything we can say about this country? I tend to give them some leeway since they all act similarly here

Topic also reminds me of a pretty humorous Obama joke:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJ1YNW8MRLw" data-time="

Which, of course, became even funnier after the election.

Mead posted...

not only have I mentioned this to you multiple times but I've linked to the story itself.

More lies

If you're legitimately having these kinds of memory issues, you probably need to see a doctor. I've referenced the story -- often in response to you -- plenty of times since it happened.

darkknight109 posted...

While Obama's middle east policy left much to be desired, it was nowhere near as bad as Bush's. Not by a fucking mile.

Again, I'll point out that Bush launched a pair of wars - one of which had absolutely no justification - that led to a six digit body count and more or less planted the seeds of sectarian strife that would one day yield ISIS. Nothing Obama did comes even close to touching that.

GWB toppled two countries and was involved in the reconstruction. Obama helped to topple even *more* countries -- which he did try to reconstruct -- and took an active hand in turning Syria into a perpetual warzone that spurred the worst migrant crisis in at least recent memory. His administration's actions have included bombing wedding processions (which led to a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the US), killing people because they were around the same height as Osama Bin Laden, and destroying hospitals.

And, by your same logic, NONE of Obama's actions were justified. And, while you laughably try to attribute ISIS in the weakest, most disingenuous way ever, the organization's roots predate GWB. However, until Obama destabilized the entire region (and in some cases ARMED affiliated groups) and allowed them to flourish otherwise we wouldn't have heard all that much of them.

darkknight109 posted...

As for the refugee crisis, that had very little to do with anything Obama did and much more to do with Syria.

...which Obama has actively turned into a perpetual warzone despite -- by your previous logic -- the US having no personal stake in the conflict. If the US wasn't continually bombing Syria and arming terrorist groups, there'd be far fewer migrants fleeing the country and the civil war might have wrapped up a long while ago.

darkknight109 posted...

Obama's reluctance to get involved may have been the least bad of all of them.

An argument that only works had he NOT gotten involved. Instead, he delayed and then involved himself in the worst way possible after involuntarily committing US action through his reckless declarations. Had any other president (save maybe Clinton) done the same, you'd be absurdly on their case.

darkknight109 posted...

If the police don't like negative press, maybe they should stop shooting unarmed people. Just saying.

Remember, kids, don't blame the victim.

Remember kids, if a guy has grabbed an officer's gun after attacking him, he's still unarmed because the officer is the one with the gun >_>

If you're going to talk about victim-blaming, you could fault Obama for that since he repeatedly blamed victims of attacks for defending themselves. However, I'm not even talking about the shootings, this shit happened with non-shootings, too. Remember Beergate? (Mead doesn't. Mead doesn't remember anything, apparently.) Obama had a very long history of just blaming cops before hearing anything which only exacerbated things and created new problems while solving abso-fucking-lutely nothing.
---

darkknight109 posted...

You pointing out that this was an issue in 2001 and Bush let it expand and fester for seven years (including opposing a Republican-backed housing and finance reform bill in 2005 and overriding William Donaldson's attempts at regulating mutual and hedge funds) until it exploded is not a point in his favour.

So basically no matter what, you just want a way to spin this to blame GWB? And spin every other pre-Trump event to blame GWB?

But sure, MAYBE he could have done something about Clinton's mess earlier. And MAYBE he should have done something about a lot of Clinton's other messes as well, like when rolled people from state benefits programs to federal disability programs which is something that's going to bite us in the ass eventually as well. However, inaction is less damning than action and blame generally belongs to the people who set the bomb rather than the guy running things when the bomb blows up.

darkknight109 posted...

And you're talking about Clinton being the booster of home ownership? Have you forgotten Bush's hard-on for "Ownership Society" and all the bullshit blather he spat out about how important it was for people to own their own homes?

...because Clinton pushed legislation, INCLUDING a law that exempted credit swaps that excluded from the regulations (in addition to loosening housing regulations) yet you criticize the government under Bush for weakening the things exempted anyway.

darkknight109 posted...

Two things here: a story isn't "fake news" if it's true (and this was, even if you don't like *how* it was reported). Secondly, no one called this a scandal and it barely registered with any of the reputable news organizations.

So basically you favor truthiness over truth? Overlooking the very deliberate distortion of the story -- which is what makes it fake news -- there's the simple fact it shouldn't been a story in the first place. And, of course, that's not counting that many media outlets blamed Trump for behaving inappropriately despite Abe doing the same thing first (also makes it fake news) and, given that was the premise to the story, the story shouldn't have run in the first place (again, fake news). Otherwise I guess I should note that you don't consider CNN a reputable news organization.

Of course, by your "logic," the doctored Zimmerman 911 phone wasn't fake news either because Zimmerman said "he looks black" since you apparently don't think that the removal of context and selectively highlighting statements to distort an event counts as fake news because hey, it happened!

At any rate, this is EXACTLY the caliber of many of the "scandals" and "controversies" that have dogged the Trump administration. Had Obama received anything close to this treatment, media outlets would have run stories saying, "President suggests saving money by getting rid of meat inspectors," in regards to a facetious, offhand remark he made in an argument.... which, by the way, would meet the "kinda true" criteria for truth you seem to believe in so, in your book, it wouldn't be fake news.

Mead posted...

Remember, kids, don't blame the victim.

Its kinda his thing tbh

To quote Mead:

Mead posted...

More lies

---

If you're legitimately having these kinds of memory issues, you probably need to see a doctor. I've referenced the story -- often in response to you -- plenty of times since it happened.

Calling you out on this bullshit. Prove me wrong.
---

Mead posted...

If you're legitimately having these kinds of memory issues, you probably need to see a doctor. I've referenced the story -- often in response to you -- plenty of times since it happened.

Calling you out on this bullshit. Prove me wrong.

So you won't see a doctor Mead?

IronicFool posted...

Mead posted...

If you're legitimately having these kinds of memory issues, you probably need to see a doctor. I've referenced the story -- often in response to you -- plenty of times since it happened.

Calling you out on this bullshit. Prove me wrong.

So you won't see a doctor Mead?

Oh I will, but not because he said to!
---

In defense of Trump....

If you actually sat someone down and asked them to rationally, intelligently, and with evidence....explain why they thought Trump is the worst president in American history......they would probably resort to vague, emotional, inaccurate claims of him being sexist and racist.

Because that's all they have.

And even that is really reaching.

People who oppose Trump oppose him because they are projecting many aspects of human society they hate....onto one man. Whether he is actually guilty of those things or not.

He wants to enforce our border with Mexico. A totally legal and totally rational thing for any president to want to do. A country is nothing without its border and laws that regulate who comes in and who comes out.

But, for whatever reason, a lot of Liberals and progressives interpreted this as Trump hating anyone with brown skin. Therefore he's a racist monster.

He slept with a pornstar, and joked about how power and fame allows you to grab women by the pussy. Therefore he is instantly unfit to run this country because he hates and objectifies women.

Get off your high horse. You act like you have never heard real men speak with their real male friends in real, private, casual conversation. You are just looking for something to be triggered by.

Trump could discover the cure for cancer tomorrow, and distribute it to the entire world for FREE....and Liberals would still find some way to spin it around and hate him for it. "He's only doing it so we all live longer and pay more taxes so he can live in his high castle!" Umm what? lmao. Or some shit. Trust me, they'd find a way.

I also fucking LOVE all the hypicrisy and double-standards when it comes to criticizing our president. Stormy Daniels wrote a book, detailing her sexual encounters with Trump. She mocked his pathetic love-making abilities and compared his tiny penis with Toad from Mario Kart. Everyone laughed. Stormy Daniels was even a guest on several late night shows.

If Hillary Clinton had won the presidency, and some college fling of hers waaay back when, came forward and compared her vagina to a moldy Arby's sandwich.......feminists would have lost their shit. There would have been protests on the streets. Death threats. Actual violence. The man who said that would probably be in prison. His entire life would be ruined. People would take to social media and demand he be fired from whatever job he currently has. His boss/company would be backed into a corner and HAVE to fire him....because they don't want the world thinking their employee's beliefs "reflect those of the company." Women's Rights activists would scream to the heavens that body-shaming women is sexist and intolerant and has no place in this world! #MeToo. #PositiveSelfImage. #FemalePride. "Body shaming the female president is evil and speaks volumes of the patriarchal rape culture we live in today." etc. etc.

But body-shaming Trump is "comedy gold" apparently.

The hypocritical double standards are painfully obvious.
---

Zeus posted...

Obama helped to topple even *more* countries -- which he did try to reconstruct -- and took an active hand in turning Syria into a perpetual warzone that spurred the worst migrant crisis in at least recent memory.

"Even more countries" being which ones? Because the only country that the US took all that active a role in was Libya, and even that was only to help along a revolution that was already underway (and which started as peaceful demonstrations that were violently suppressed by a psychotic dictator) - that's a far cry from invading a nation with essentially zero justification, which is what Bush did in Iraq.

And he "took an active hand" in Syria? Fucking what? The most common critique of Obama by Trump fanboys who all swooned when he launched ~$50 million dollars of Tomahawk missiles into Syria (in a flashy, but ultimately pointless chest-thumping exercise) was that he didn't take an active enough hand and allowed Assad to wholesale slaughter his own populace.

And that's ignoring the fact that even that wasn't wholly Obama's doing. He told Congress that he wasn't going to act without Congressional approval, since this was effectively an act of war and Congress was supposed to be involved - he faced solid disapproval on that front and Congress refused to authorize him to do much of anything.

What exactly do you think he did that somehow turned Syria into a slaughterhouse? Because when the fighting was spiralling into full-blown war, the US refused to send lethal aid to the moderate rebels, instead offering training and non-lethal military gear (despite other US allies sending weapons and other lethal equipment).

Zeus posted...

And, while you laughably try to attribute ISIS in the weakest, most disingenuous way ever, the organization's roots predate GWB.

ISIS came about because conflicts in Syria (which Obama did not start) and Iraq (which George W. Bush did) left a power vacuum that allowed the group to flourish. By the way, most of their weapons? Looted from the Iraqi army, which were originally supplied by - you guessed it - Mr. Bush.

Zeus posted...

If the US wasn't continually bombing Syria and arming terrorist groups, there'd be far fewer migrants fleeing the country and the civil war might have wrapped up a long while ago.

Dude, are you fucking kidding me? How little do you know about this conflict?

The only bombing done in Syria was done against ISIS; not one fucking bomb was dropped against the Syrian regime (and remember, ISIS came to the fore *after* the Syrian war started, carving out a chunk of the country to be part of their new caliphate).

Don't you remember the "Red Line"? And how every Republican was losing their minds after Syria violated it and Obama didn't bomb them in response?

Zeus posted...

An argument that only works had he NOT gotten involved.

And he didn't.

Zeus posted...

Had any other president (save maybe Clinton) done the same, you'd be absurdly on their case.

You must have missed the part up there where I was on Obama's case about this and where I said that his Middle East policies had much to be desired.

Try reading my posts instead of responding to what you believe I probably said.
---

Zeus posted...

If you're going to talk about victim-blaming, you could fault Obama for that since he repeatedly blamed victims of attacks for defending themselves.

You mean like where he said, of the officer that shot Michael Brown and was subsequently acquitted: "The finding that was made was that it was not unreasonable to determine that there was not sufficient evidence to charge Officer Wilson. That was an objective, thorough, independent federal investigation. [...] We may never know exactly what happened. But Officer Wilson like anybody else who is charged with a crime benefits from due process and a reasonable doubt standard."

Doesn't sound particularly critical to me.

Or are you talking about the death of Eric Garner, which was another crime that directly led to the formation of BLM? Kinda hard to defend the cops on that one, given that they choked a man to death with an illegal chokehold, then denied doing so despite the fact that there are photos of them holding Garner in said chokehold.

Or maybe you're not talking about those. Who knows. You'll have to specify if you want to get your point across, there have been a lot of cops killing unarmed black people in the last few years, so it gets kind of hard to remember them after a while.

Zeus posted...

However, I'm not even talking about the shootings, this shit happened with non-shootings, too. Remember Beergate?

Yeah, I remember Beergate. I remember it was a dumb fucking thing for the cops to do, especially considering the guy had ID proving that the house was his, and Obama said exactly that (specifically that the cops "acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home"). If the cops don't like getting their knuckles rapped like that, maybe they shouldn't be doing stupid shit like they did.

Zeus posted...

But sure, MAYBE he could have done something about Clinton's mess earlier.

Did you miss the part where I pointed out that it was the Republicans - not Clinton and the Democrats - that pushed for the repeal of the Glass Stegall act that got this whole train rolling in the first place? And that the results of that - and the mergers of banks and other financial institutions into supergroups that were able to selectively dodge regulation and start aggressively pursuing high risk loans - happened on Bush's watch. It was on him to do something about it - and several times during his administration, various people from Congress to his own cabinet attempted it, only to be shut down by him and his advisors - and the fact that he didn't means yes, I'm going to put the lion's share of the blame on him.
---

Zeus posted...

Overlooking the very deliberate distortion of the story -- which is what makes it fake news -- there's the simple fact it shouldn't been a story in the first place.

Can you please learn what "fake news" actually means?

Fake news is deliberately manufactured falsehoods, typically published and spread with the intent of furthering a political goal. Russia published a tonne of it in the leadup to the 2016 election to try and get Trump elected and they've continued doing so since then to help sow discord over various social issues.

Fake news is not the same as news presented with a political slant. We already have a perfectly good term for that: "yellow journalism".

Zeus posted...

Otherwise I guess I should note that you don't consider CNN a reputable news organization.

I don't follow CNN, so I don't have an opinion on them.

Zeus posted...

Of course, by your "logic," the doctored Zimmerman 911 phone wasn't fake news either because Zimmerman said "he looks black" since you apparently don't think that the removal of context and selectively highlighting statements to distort an event counts as fake news because hey, it happened!

When the fuck did we start talking about this?

Seriously, if you're going to go all free-flowing stream of consciousness on us, go do it somewhere else.

Zeus posted...

At any rate, this is EXACTLY the caliber of many of the "scandals" and "controversies" that have dogged the Trump administration.

Trump has plenty of *actual* scandals and controversies for people to talk about, including but not limited to:
-Had affairs with multiple porn stars and attempted to buy their silence, potentially violating election laws in doing so
-Has had seven members (and counting) of his campaign staff charged with crimes ranging from lying to the FBI to tax fraud
-Has had several cabinet members resign in disgrace over misuse of public funds
-Made inappropriate comments to, then subsequently fired, James Comey in an attempt to curtail investigations into Trump and members of his staff
-Has refused to relinquish control of his businesses and is being sued for violating federal emoluments laws
-Started several trade wars, mostly with allies; meanwhile, a country can straight-up assassinate a US resident with only a mild (and much delayed) scolding from the president (who then quickly shuts down any talk of sanctions or cancelling of military contracts), and that same president speaks highly of some of the worst dictators and human rights abusers on the planet (Putin, Duterte, Kim, etc).

Believe me, contrary to your characterization, there's a lot wrong with this administration that, realistically, should have a lot of people in jail.
---

GreenKnight127 posted...

If you actually sat someone down and asked them to rationally, intelligently, and with evidence....explain why they thought Trump is the worst president in American history......they would probably resort to vague, emotional, inaccurate claims of him being sexist and racist.

Personally, I think he's the worst president because he is plainly unqualified for the job, lacking in intelligence, integrity, honesty, and even the slightest modicum of decency. Don't get me wrong, the racism and sexism thing is really shitty too, but it's actually fairly far down on the list of reasons why Trump shouldn't be president; his complete incompetence is at the top.
---

Hilarious how he tries to change the subject when he paints himself into a corner
---

Phantom_Nook posted...

It's like people know Trump sucks, so they keep going back to their bogeywoman to reassure themselves.

Trump does suck. Hillary would have been worse.

Zeus posted...

Of course, by your "logic," the doctored Zimmerman 911 phone wasn't fake news either because Zimmerman said "he looks black" since you apparently don't think that the removal of context and selectively highlighting statements to distort an event counts as fake news because hey, it happened!

That doesn't really matter since he got away with murder in that case anyway.
---

That doesn't really matter since he got away with murder in that case anyway.

Hes also using that one thing to totally disregard the fact that the man killed a minor that he was told by the 911 operator to stop following

Zeus is just the type to defend actual Nazis and child killers though, cant help himself
---

darkknight109 posted...

-Had affairs with multiple porn stars and attempted to buy their silence, potentially violating election laws in doing so

Oh my god, I need to come clean here. I still frequent 4chan and there was a running joke that Trump lived out everyone's fantasy and was basically a demigod. Someone watched Girl Next Door and we all agreed that it was based on Trump's life. No one could believe it when everyone started taking pissgate seriously. You are literally believing something because someone watched a movie. It's made up bullshit that you took a heaping spoonful of.

I don't think Trump is the omg best prez evar! I also don't think he's the worst. He middling at best, if not lower. But you need to stop believing every bad thing you hear about him. Every time I see someone say this, no matter how eloquently, I know they're a fool whose opinion I can safely ignore. Ico is less of a moron.

IronicFool posted...

No one could believe it when everyone started taking pissgate seriously. You are literally believing something because someone watched a movie. It's made up bullshit that you took a heaping spoonful of.

I find it oddly hilarious that I now have to qualify that, no, I'm talking about the *porn stars* he slept with, not the Russian hookers (which, admittedly, is just an allegation at this point with no concrete proof).

Stormy Daniels? Karen McDougal? Those names ring any bells? If not, I take it you don't follow the news all that closely.
---

darkknight109 posted...

I'm talking about the *porn stars* he slept with, not the Russian hookers

Oh. I don't know about that but I am super drunk right now so I could be wrong.

But I'm pretty sure it was porn stars because of the plot of the Girl Next Door movie that we came up with.

Actually, thinking about it, I'm like 90% sure that the pissgate thing came from porn star sex bullshit. I'm pretty sure both are made up bullshit but I know for a fact that pissgate is a joke.

IronicFool posted...

darkknight109 posted...

I'm talking about the *porn stars* he slept with, not the Russian hookers

Oh. I don't know about that but I am super drunk right now so I could be wrong.

But I'm pretty sure it was porn stars because of the plot of the Girl Next Door movie that we came up with.

For your reading pleasure:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stormy_Daniels%E2%80%93Donald_Trump_scandal
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karen_McDougal#Alleged_affair_with_Donald_Trump

tl;dr versions:

Stormy Daniels: Trump had sex with Daniels in 2006, then had his lawyer, Michael Cohen, pay her $130k to sign a non-disclosure agreement in 2016 a month before the election to prevent her from going public with the allegations (Daniels also alleges she was threatened in front of her daughter as additional coercion).
---

DPsx7 posted...

I'm just gonna say you're wrong. We needed a change and so far it's working.

This.

I'm certainly not a fan of some of his rhetoric that he uses at times. He does also say dumb stuff on Twitter, although he seems to have been a little more reserved on there lately, which is nice.

But his actual policy has been rather decent. And he has governed pretty conservatively, which has surprised me.

Obama and Carter are two of the worst presidents.

BeerOnTap posted...

DPsx7 posted...

I'm just gonna say you're wrong. We needed a change and so far it's working.

This.

I'm certainly not a fan of some of his rhetoric that he uses at times. He does also say dumb stuff on Twitter, although he seems to have been a little more reserved on there lately, which is nice.

But his actual policy has been rather decent. And he has governed pretty conservatively, which has surprised me.

Obama and Carter are two of the worst presidents.

Yeah you just need to look at the stock market to see what a great job Trump is doing
---

IronicFool posted...

But I'm pretty sure it was porn stars because of the plot of the Girl Next Door movie that we came up with.

Why would you even admit to this much less expect it to be taken seriously
---