Can we reasonably discuss Trump?

[Boss]

So..how can you be narcissistic without being a narcissist?

I don't do the semantics thing. One of the most maddening symptom of commiecratism is the way they destroy the language, and arbitrarily change definitions.

How can a woman be "sexy" and not be a whore?

Can people be "dishonest" and not be a liar?

Can you have "prejudice" but not be a racist?

Can you dislike meat but not be a vegan?

I can think of millions of examples to express my point but the bottom line is, I agree that semantics is a big way the left controls the dialogue. It's largely out of misrepresenting context. Words have meaning but they also have context.

Because I am "pro-life" doesn't mean I am a sexist who wants to control women's bodies. Because I am against illegal immigration doesn't mean I hate brown people.

 

[Pogo]

so who did you vote for dumbass? easy question

Darrell Castle for president. Republicans for everything else. I almost left the presidential selection blank but decided to throw a vote to the Constitution Party.

Now, in the spirit of full disclosure.... I knew that Alabama was an easy win for Trump and my vote wasn't going to matter. IF my state had been a toss-up state where there was ANY possibility of Hillary winning, I would have probably voted for Trump.

See? That's exactly the point I've been making about the negative effects of the Electoral College for the entire duration of this campaign. Finally you agree with me on something.

 

[Pogo]

Well, apparently, the word "racist" now means "disagrees with liberalism!" Because that is how it gets constantly applied to those who disagree with liberal positions.

------ aaaaaand right back to creating a strawman. Alt righty then.

 

[koshergrl]

So..how can you be narcissistic without being a narcissist?

I don't do the semantics thing. One of the most maddening symptom of commiecratism is the way they destroy the language, and arbitrarily change definitions.

How can a woman be "sexy" and not be a whore?

Can people be "dishonest" and not be a liar?

Can you have "prejudice" but not be a racist?

Can you dislike meat but not be a vegan?

I can think of millions of examples to express my point but the bottom line is, I agree that semantics is a big way the left controls the dialogue. It's largely out of misrepresenting context. Words have meaning but they also have context.

Because I am "pro-life" doesn't mean I am a sexist who wants to control women's bodies. Because I am against illegal immigration doesn't mean I hate brown people.

Actually, it would be more like..
"How can a woman sell her body, yet not be a whore?" (answer..she can't)
"Can people lie and not be a liar?" (no)
"Can you hate people of a particular color and not be racist?" (Nope).
"Can you live by vegan principles and not be a vegan?" (Negatory).

 

[sartre play]

For me there is so much disinformation from all sides that I just waited to see who he picked for his cabinet. be for I judged. was unhappy with Obamas wall street picks and don't like Trumps any better. also don't like that they have so much money, how can they relate to us & our needs. We never get a government run by the people for the people.

 

[Coyote]

I don't think Trump's a racist or homophobe. But a narcissist? Oh yes.

the most positive possibility is that he just doesn't give a shit about black people, which I guess is a step up from devoting your life to killing/enslaving them all, but its doesn't mean he's not a racist.

What specifically has he done that is racist?

 

[there4eyeM]

So..how can you be narcissistic without being a narcissist?

I don't do the semantics thing. One of the most maddening symptom of commiecratism is the way they destroy the language, and arbitrarily change definitions.

How can a woman be "sexy" and not be a whore?

Can people be "dishonest" and not be a liar?

Can you have "prejudice" but not be a racist?

Can you dislike meat but not be a vegan?

I can think of millions of examples to express my point but the bottom line is, I agree that semantics is a big way the left controls the dialogue. It's largely out of misrepresenting context. Words have meaning but they also have context.

Because I am "pro-life" doesn't mean I am a sexist who wants to control women's bodies. Because I am against illegal immigration doesn't mean I hate brown people.

Actually, it would be more like..
"How can a woman sell her body, yet not be a whore?" (answer..she can't)
"Can people lie and not be a liar?" (no)
"Can you hate people of a particular color and not be racist?" (Nope).
"Can you live by vegan principles and not be a vegan?" (Negatory).

Boss is correct in his comparisons. Schizoid does not mean schizophrenic, despite what might be assumed from so many posters. Narcissistic merely means as a narcissist would act without implying that the person referenced is always that way and, thus, a narcissist.

 

[Borillar]

Okay, so the election happened and the transition is over. Donald John Trump is officially our 45th President of the United States of America. Some of us supported him enthusiastically, some of us held our noses and voted for him, some of us couldn't vote for him, some of us opposed him strongly and some probably didn't care one way or another. But he's now the president and he'll be the president unless he dies or gets impeached. Love him or hate him, that's now a fact of life.

I've been patient with those who supported Clinton and had to work through the shock of losing the election because I know how this feels. It takes you a while to work through the emotions and come to terms with things. In the meantime, you might say things that aren't very reasonable. I think we've all had time to let this soak in now and it's time we get on with the business of life.

I keep seeing these comments on social media and elsewhere about Trump being a racist, homophobe, misogynist, Hitler-like, etc. Whenever you question someone about such allegations, they just emote nonsense. They never can really tell me what the man said that supports such a charge. It's always a gross misinterpretation of something he said or did or an outright lie about something he never said or did. You have to twist things out of context and make false assumptions to reach this conclusion. When you have to do that, it's not reasonable. You're not making a reasoned argument.

Look, I totally get that a lot of people don't like his policy ideas. I understand an objection to things he has proposed doing or positions he has taken. I don't agree with Trump on everything, in fact, I couldn't actually cast my vote for him in the general. He said too many things that contradict my conservative principles and he just didn't meet my criteria to earn my vote. But he's not a racist. He's not a homophobe or misogynist. I see no comparison whatsoever to Hitler. I don't even think he is a narcissist. He's very confident in himself, I'll give you that. He can be very cocky and abrasively arrogant, and sometimes that can be construed as narcissism.

So now, if you have calmed down emotionally enough to reasonably discuss Trump, I am willing to entertain your thoughts on these allegations of whatever. This isn't a flame-fest or thread for you to emotively vent your frustration with the outcome of the elections. It's not about policies or politics in general, I realize many people disagree on his policies and politics. This is specifically for the reasoned discussion of Trump's personal views on race, gender, lifestyle, etc. It's time to put your evidence on the table and let's have a reasoned evaluation based on the facts.

Where's the fun in that?

 

[koshergrl]

So..how can you be narcissistic without being a narcissist?

I don't do the semantics thing. One of the most maddening symptom of commiecratism is the way they destroy the language, and arbitrarily change definitions.

How can a woman be "sexy" and not be a whore?

Can people be "dishonest" and not be a liar?

Can you have "prejudice" but not be a racist?

Can you dislike meat but not be a vegan?

I can think of millions of examples to express my point but the bottom line is, I agree that semantics is a big way the left controls the dialogue. It's largely out of misrepresenting context. Words have meaning but they also have context.

Because I am "pro-life" doesn't mean I am a sexist who wants to control women's bodies. Because I am against illegal immigration doesn't mean I hate brown people.

Actually, it would be more like..
"How can a woman sell her body, yet not be a whore?" (answer..she can't)
"Can people lie and not be a liar?" (no)
"Can you hate people of a particular color and not be racist?" (Nope).
"Can you live by vegan principles and not be a vegan?" (Negatory).

Boss is correct in his comparisons. Schizoid does not mean schizophrenic, despite what might be assumed from so many posters. Narcissistic merely means as a narcissist would act without implying that the person referenced is always that way and, thus, a narcissist.

No, you're wrong. And for that, I'm sorry. People no longer understand their own language anymore.

 

[Boss]

so who did you vote for dumbass? easy question

Darrell Castle for president. Republicans for everything else. I almost left the presidential selection blank but decided to throw a vote to the Constitution Party.

Now, in the spirit of full disclosure.... I knew that Alabama was an easy win for Trump and my vote wasn't going to matter. IF my state had been a toss-up state where there was ANY possibility of Hillary winning, I would have probably voted for Trump.

See? That's exactly the point I've been making about the negative effects of the Electoral College for the entire duration of this campaign. Finally you agree with me on something.

No, I don't agree with you on anything. Had the election been decided on popular vote, I would have voted for Trump and MILLIONS of others would have as well. Trump would have spent an enormous amount of money and campaign time in California and his home state of NY because those votes would have been crucial. He knew he wasn't going to win those states so it didn't matter. But all of this is an academic argument because we have a Constitution which outlines the Electoral College process for electing a president. We don't have another system.

 

[koshergrl]

so who did you vote for dumbass? easy question

Darrell Castle for president. Republicans for everything else. I almost left the presidential selection blank but decided to throw a vote to the Constitution Party.

Now, in the spirit of full disclosure.... I knew that Alabama was an easy win for Trump and my vote wasn't going to matter. IF my state had been a toss-up state where there was ANY possibility of Hillary winning, I would have probably voted for Trump.

See? That's exactly the point I've been making about the negative effects of the Electoral College for the entire duration of this campaign. Finally you agree with me on something.

No, I don't agree with you on anything. Had the election been decided on popular vote, I would have voted for Trump and MILLIONS of others would have as well. Trump would have spent an enormous amount of money and campaign time in California and his home state of NY because those votes would have been crucial. He knew he wasn't going to win those states so it didn't matter. But all of this is an academic argument because we have a Constitution which outlines the Electoral College process for electing a president. We don't have another system.

And those people who are agitating are protesting DEMOCRACY and ELECTIONS.

 

[there4eyeM]

Hmmm...

...must be alt.fact.

 

[Boss]

So..how can you be narcissistic without being a narcissist?

I don't do the semantics thing. One of the most maddening symptom of commiecratism is the way they destroy the language, and arbitrarily change definitions.

How can a woman be "sexy" and not be a whore?

Can people be "dishonest" and not be a liar?

Can you have "prejudice" but not be a racist?

Can you dislike meat but not be a vegan?

I can think of millions of examples to express my point but the bottom line is, I agree that semantics is a big way the left controls the dialogue. It's largely out of misrepresenting context. Words have meaning but they also have context.

Because I am "pro-life" doesn't mean I am a sexist who wants to control women's bodies. Because I am against illegal immigration doesn't mean I hate brown people.

Actually, it would be more like..
"How can a woman sell her body, yet not be a whore?" (answer..she can't)
"Can people lie and not be a liar?" (no)
"Can you hate people of a particular color and not be racist?" (Nope).
"Can you live by vegan principles and not be a vegan?" (Negatory).

Well all you're doing is distorting what I posted to make your point. If you don't want to see my point that's fine. Just say so. No need to go through all these gymnastics. I was simply trying to present examples of context. People can be less than truthful and not be liars... Women can be very sexy and sensual without being whores. Everyone I know of has prejudices... no one is beyond that... but everyone is not a racist. You can dislike meat but not be a vegetarian. And... someone can convey the perception of narcissism yet not be a narcissist.

Now... if you want to rigidly apply the dictionary definition of narcissism, you can make the argument that it fits Donald Trump's behavior. But this requires disregarding context and that's the whole problem with the liberal left's semantics game. I don't know why you're arguing with me on something we agree on?

 

[Dr Grump]

You're obeying Democrats. They love having countries stick it in our face for doing things like blocking nuclear ships. How did you not get that? Did you need a Democrat to explain it to you?

Huh? It had nothing to do with democrats. It was the will of the people. Back then most NZers didn't even know what a democrat was.....Lange (the PM at the time) promised during that particular election he would not allow nuke powered US warships in our harbour. We said "yep, you'll do"..plus we'd just had about 7 years of our version of Raygun in power and were sick of him. So no.

Using your analogy, you voted in Trump because Farange and Le Pen told your righties to vote for Trump. Is that what happened? They followed the Europeans like little sheep? baaa!

 

[koshergrl]

So..how can you be narcissistic without being a narcissist?

I don't do the semantics thing. One of the most maddening symptom of commiecratism is the way they destroy the language, and arbitrarily change definitions.

How can a woman be "sexy" and not be a whore?

Can people be "dishonest" and not be a liar?

Can you have "prejudice" but not be a racist?

Can you dislike meat but not be a vegan?

I can think of millions of examples to express my point but the bottom line is, I agree that semantics is a big way the left controls the dialogue. It's largely out of misrepresenting context. Words have meaning but they also have context.

Because I am "pro-life" doesn't mean I am a sexist who wants to control women's bodies. Because I am against illegal immigration doesn't mean I hate brown people.

Actually, it would be more like..
"How can a woman sell her body, yet not be a whore?" (answer..she can't)
"Can people lie and not be a liar?" (no)
"Can you hate people of a particular color and not be racist?" (Nope).
"Can you live by vegan principles and not be a vegan?" (Negatory).

Well all you're doing is distorting what I posted to make your point. If you don't want to see my point that's fine. Just say so. No need to go through all these gymnastics. I was simply trying to present examples of context. People can be less than truthful and not be liars... Women can be very sexy and sensual without being whores. Everyone I know of has prejudices... no one is beyond that... but everyone is not a racist. You can dislike meat but not be a vegetarian. And... someone can convey the perception of narcissism yet not be a narcissist.

Now... if you want to rigidly apply the dictionary definition of narcissism, you can make the argument that it fits Donald Trump's behavior. But this requires disregarding context and that's the whole problem with the liberal left's semantics game. I don't know why you're arguing with me on something we agree on?

Because I don't agree. I hate it when people throw words around without being cognizant of what they mean.

Narcissism is characterized, primarily, by a LACK OF EMPATHY and a fragile ego. To say someone is "narcissistic" is to say they lack empathy and have an ego that is easily bruised. They are anti-social, and I see NOTHING in Trump that screams "NARCISSIST" to me. He bloviates, but that isn't a characteristic of a narcissist. He doesn't back down when he thinks he's right, also not a characteristic of a narcissist. He apologizes when he's wrong, his family, kids and employees all seem to adore him...none of those indicate narcissism.

So why the fuck say he's narcissistic?

OBAMA is a narcissist. He cannot speak without self aggrandizing. Compare their usage of the word "I" in their speeches, that pretty much says it all. Obama has no empathy..he has repeatedly said he has no problem with mowing over people to establish an ideology. THAT'S narcissism. And I suspect his interpersonal relationships are shitty. At any rate, you don't hear people saying what a fab guy he is..they never have. And they never will. I suspect his kids will be hot messes. Those are indicators of narcissm.

Just because someone says something you don't like, and has the chops to defend it, isn't the defining characteristic of a narcissist.

 

[kaz]

I didn't say he's sexist, you did. I said he's a pig. What is wrong with you? Can't read or no long term memory. So seriously, you read his "locker room" talk and that doesn't back up that he's a pig? You have some serious woman issues, don't you?

LOL... He's trying to use MY argument and he still can't win. That's pretty pathetic.

Of course Trump is a pig.... Most men ARE pigs. It's just the nature of the beast. Unless they are pussy-whipped, mocha-latte-drinking basement dwellers, they behave like men. Sometimes, men talking candidly to other men, make crude comments about women. I bet he wouldn't have made that comment had Melania been standing next to him and I bet when the tape became public he had some 'splainin' to do on the home-front... but there again, she's still standing proudly by her man, because REAL men know how to handle their women.

The man had a woman literally running the most important thing he's ever done in his life... his campaign for president. No woman has EVER successfully ran such a campaign before her but that fact didn't bother him in the least. THAT alone should tell ANY reasonable person that the man is simply not prejudiced against women. Period!

He's too stupid to know the difference between sexist and a pig. It's funny on the pig part though as you say most of us are. Women say they want a guy who isn't one, then when one isn't, they aren't interested ... Just part of the nature of a male/female world. That's entirely different than sexist though as we agree, we aren't forcing anything on anyone

 

[kaz]

You're obeying Democrats. They love having countries stick it in our face for doing things like blocking nuclear ships. How did you not get that? Did you need a Democrat to explain it to you?

Huh? It had nothing to do with democrats. It was the will of the people. Back then most NZers didn't even know what a democrat was.....Lange (the PM at the time) promised during that particular election he would not allow nuke powered US warships in our harbour. We said "yep, you'll do"..plus we'd just had about 7 years of our version of Raygun in power and were sick of him. So no.

Using your analogy, you voted in Trump because Farange and Le Pen told your righties to vote for Trump. Is that what happened? They followed the Europeans like little sheep? baaa!

No, my logic was nothing like that. It's just that I can't tell the difference between you and any other Democrat American leftist, you're the same identical animal. You're just following orders

 

[Dr Grump]

No, my logic was nothing like that. It's just that I can't tell the difference between you and any other Democrat American leftist, you're the same identical animal. You're just following orders

Sure i am.And you just a typical faux libertarian - all smug and smarmy thinking you know best, but when in fact you're just as full of shit as the rest of us.

 

[kaz]

No, my logic was nothing like that. It's just that I can't tell the difference between you and any other Democrat American leftist, you're the same identical animal. You're just following orders

Sure i am.And you just a typical faux libertarian - all smug and smarmy thinking you know best, but when in fact you're just as full of shit as the rest of us.

What difference does it make if I think I know best? Even if I get my way, I'm not removing your choices. On the other hand the leftist Americans you parrot give me no such consideration if you get your way. That is the fundamental difference between us

 

[Fang]

sure? what do you wanna know specifically? I'm guessing your looking for info you can't find on google alone right?

No, I am honestly trying to get to the bottom of what is causing all this overblown emotional anguish with some in our society. I don't understand it. This man has been in the public eye for 50 years and has never shown any indication of racism as far as I know, but suddenly he's a flaming racist. Same with women... yeah, he's been married a few times but so what? Homophobia? He's the most pro-LGBT candidate to ever win an election. So what is the root of all this? Where is it coming from? Is it simply about politics and nothing else? Is it because he's pro-life? Supports the 2nd Amendment? Wants to stop illegal immigration?

I think he is being falsely and irrationally judged based on hyperbole and rhetoric... nothing more. You've chosen to attack him personally because you don't agree with him politically. That's what I think.

It's because he's a Republican and Liberals are a bunch demented, hypocritical, whiny pieces of garbage. That's not flaming, that's the truth.