• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

The Trump Administration (just Trump) Thread

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Status
Not open for further replies.
caf said:
But he did try to alter the election in favor of Hillary Clinton.

The amount of campaign rallies Obama did for Hillary probably outnumbered the ones Hillary did herself.
Click to expand...

Is there a difference between campaigning for the Democratic nominee and accusing a foreign adversary of trying to alter the outcome of the election in favor of her opponent?

Call me crazy, but I'd say it's a touch different.
 
Huber. said:
Good job refuting all of Trumps great points.
Click to expand...

This is a fine trap set by Huber. You see, responding to what Trump spews only validates the idea that they are "points" at all, let alone great ones. The raving Tweets of a lunatic honestly should be ignored unless it can be used as evidence later.

Though I will agree, post less Tweets. Especially Trump Tweets, he has nothing but nonsense to bring to the table.
 
-Akronite- said:
This is a fine trap set by Huber. You see, responding to what Trump spews only validates the idea that they are "points" at all, let alone great ones. The raving Tweets of a lunatic honestly should be ignored unless it can be used as evidence later.

Though I will agree, post less Tweets. Especially Trump Tweets, he has nothing but nonsense to bring to the table.
Click to expand...

I too am curious as to all the great points Trump made:

DDQlRRPUwAAcImf.jpg
 
The Tweetstorm is pretty telling though. You see how he accuses Obama of "colluding or obstructing?" He's not just incompetent or weak this time, he's specifically colluding with Russia or obstructing our agencies from doing something about it.

Why would Donald make these wild accusations at the former president? Could it have to do with the fact that his team is under investigation for collusion? And that he's personally under investigation for obstruction? Why am I asking questions? This is so obvious and transparent, and he does this projection shit ALL THE TIME. If you support him or seriously think he's making "great points" here, you're either willfully ignorant, malignantly partisan, or simply a rube.
 
caf said:
But he did try to alter the election in favor of Hillary Clinton.

The amount of campaign rallies Obama did for Hillary probably outnumbered the ones Hillary did herself.
Click to expand...

AZ_ said:
Is there a difference between campaigning for the Democratic nominee and accusing a foreign adversary of trying to alter the outcome of the election in favor of her opponent?

Call me crazy, but I'd say it's a touch different.
Click to expand...

Curious if I'll ever get an answer to this.
 
AZ_ said:
Is there a difference between campaigning for the Democratic nominee and accusing a foreign adversary of trying to alter the outcome of the election in favor of her opponent?

Call me crazy, but I'd say it's a touch different.
Click to expand...

AZ_ said:
Curious if I'll ever get an answer to this.
Click to expand...

They are different. Ones factual and the other is as you say... An accusation. :chuckle:

To be honest though, if Russia wasn't changing votes or stuffing ballot boxes (which I don't think anyone is claiming), then what's the difference? They are both trying to persuade a target audience to vote for their canidate of choice through information and misinformation.

Just because one may be considered nefarious doesn't mean their methods are all that different.
 
caf said:
They are different. Ones factual and the other is as you say... An accusation. :chuckle:

To be honest though, if Russia wasn't changing votes or stuffing ballot boxes (which I don't think anyone is claiming), then what's the difference? They are both trying to persuade a target audience to vote for their canidate of choice through information and misinformation.

Just because one may be considered nefarious doesn't mean their methods are all that different.
Click to expand...
Hilary is pretty fucking nefarious herself. As are many of her constituents and the countries and corporations that backed her.
 
caf said:
They are different. Ones factual and the other is as you say... An accusation. :chuckle:

To be honest though, if Russia wasn't changing votes or stuffing ballot boxes (which I don't think anyone is claiming), then what's the difference? They are both trying to persuade a target audience to vote for their canidate of choice through information and misinformation.

Just because one may be considered nefarious doesn't mean their methods are all that different.
Click to expand...

Wait, what is the difference that a foreign adversary attempted to sway the election results to a candidate they viewed as more favorable?

Who hired an NSA adviser whom our own government believes was succeptible to blackmail?

You've really come a long way in normalization when you're equating that with a Democratic candidate stumping for a Democratic successor.

At this point it seems you'll convince yourself of anything your chosen news outles will tell you, huh?
 
AZ_ said:
Why are you pretending an endorsement is somehow on the same level of hacking servers, disseminating false information and compromising multiple top level associates of their chosen candidate?


Are you really trying to convince yourself these things are no different?

Macron was running against a fucking nazi.
Click to expand...

How can you say that Russia hacked the DNC servers when the servers were never given to and investigated by the Intelligence Community?

That's a pretty big leap of faith.

The only thing you can truthfully say about Russia's involvement at this point is that they likely pushed a narrative through media manipulation.
 
caf said:
How can you say that Russia hacked the DNC servers when the servers were never given to and investigated by the Intelligence Community?

That's a pretty big leap of faith.

The only thing you can truthfully say about Russia's involvement at this point is that they likely pushed a narrative through media manipulation.
Click to expand...

The forensic report was given to the intelligence community.

Don't move the goalposts to parroting this bullshit conspiracy theory about how the entire intelligence community is lying about the fact it's not really Russia. Talk about a leap of faith...

The intel community has been unanimous in their diagnosis that it was Russia.

Don't be dumb. You don't have to parrot everything you read from the Alex Jones wing of your party.
 
FWIW, Alex Jones isn't exactly a conservative
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-15: "Cavs Survive and Advance"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:15: Cavs Survive and Advance
Top