Trump declares himself the President of Venezuela

[JLW]

This is how Trump envisions himself:

 

[Luckyone]

You seem to be unable to read or maybe it is because you read and do not understand. I am beginning to believe you are unable to think. I do not support Trump. I do not support any of the current stooges in government. To claim that Obama was better than Trump is crazy at best.

So prove that Trump is better than Obama! After all, there are 154historians that said the exact opposite! I am not the only one! Are you better at evaluating something that experts at history say differently?

 

[dudmuck]

Hahaha but you cannot actually prove that what I showed is wrong, can you.

Let’s see, did he or didn’t Trump say that he would take Greenland, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER? I showed a video with him saying it, can you prove he didn’t?

Trump Boasts He’s Taking Greenland ‘One Way or the Other’

The president has clarified he is interested in “acquiring, not leasing” the autonomous territory.

www.thedailybeast.com

 

[gtopa1]

Hahaha but you cannot actually prove that what I showed is wrong, can you.

Let’s see, did he or didn’t Trump say that he would take Greenland, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER? I showed a video with him saying it, can you prove he didn’t?

Popper and the Logic of Falsification
Popper used the asymmetry between verification (proving a positive universal claim) and falsification (proving a negative universal claim) to define his philosophy:

• Proving a positive (Verification) is a logical fallacy: You can observe a million white swans and it may increase your psychological belief that all swans are white, but it does not logically prove the universal law "All swans are white". The next swan you see could be a different color. This is the problem of induction, which Popper saw as logically invalid.
• Proving a negative (Falsification) is logically valid: However, observing just one black swan is logically sufficient to disprove the universal law "All swans are white". The reasoning is deductively sound:
  • If theory T ("All swans are white") is true, then observation O (a black swan) should not occur.
  • Observation O (a black swan) does occur.
  • Therefore, theory T is false.

The Role of Negative Evidence
For Popper, the goal of a scientist is not to seek evidence that confirms their hypothesis (confirmation bias), but to actively seek out negative evidence or "risky predictions" that have the potential to show the theory is wrong. He argued that theories that are resistant to negative evidence or can explain everything are not scientific, but rather pseudoscience (e.g., psychoanalysis and certain forms of Marxism at the time, which used ad hoc explanations to avoid refutation).
In essence, Popper elevated the process of proving a negative—the act of refutation—as the central, rational, and distinguishing feature of the scientific method. Science progresses not by accumulating "proofs" of truth, but by eliminating falsehoods through rigorous critical testing.
"Trump is the extreme." False.
Greg

 

[Mac1958]

When is the orange retard going to ACT like a president, of ANYTHING?

I think we learned the answer to that within a year of his first season term.

He's a child. A damaged, painfully needy child.

 

[Darlo kittu]

I get a laugh out of anyone that thinks illegals are in any way a boon to the country other then underpaid wage slaves. They use more government funds, they sit in emergency rooms and then usually disappear without paying a dime. They take up room in the classrooms causing higher numbers of pupils and more attention from a teacher because of their need for English being a second language and not well understood if at all. They take up jobs at lower pay. They even add to the crime rate in some cases.
But hey they are a low priority. Yeah right

And murder

 

[Darlo kittu]

I think we learned the answer to that within a year of his first season term.

He's a child. A damaged, painfully needy child.

Hey here is a test for you

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

I think we learned the answer to that within a year of his first season term.

He's a child. A damaged, painfully needy child.

Trump Says He Wants 'Ownership' of Greenland Because ...​

People.com
https://people.com › donald-trump-wants-ownership-gr...
8 hours ago — “Psychologically important for me," Trump answered. "Now, maybe another president would feel differently, but so far I've been right about everything".

"Because that’s what I feel is psychologically needed for success," Trump, 79, replied. "I think that ownership gives you a thing that you can’t do, whether you’re talking about a lease or a treaty. Ownership gives you things and elements that you can’t get from just signing a document, that you can have a base."

Trump doesn't care about US defense.
The orange retard wants to build hotels.

 

[Darlo kittu]

Trump Says He Wants 'Ownership' of Greenland Because ...​

View attachment 1205102
People.com
https://people.com › donald-trump-wants-ownership-gr...
8 hours ago — “Psychologically important for me," Trump answered. "Now, maybe another president would feel differently, but so far I've been right about everything".

"Because that’s what I feel is psychologically needed for success," Trump, 79, replied. "I think that ownership gives you a thing that you can’t do, whether you’re talking about a lease or a treaty. Ownership gives you things and elements that you can’t get from just signing a document, that you can have a base."

Trump doesn't care about US defense.
The orange retard wants to build hotels.

All this hate all because Trump beat Cackles

Damn you people never grew out of your adolescence

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

All this hate all because Trump beat Cackles

No, you retarded TROLL.

Trump has been a lying grifter, for longer than you've been alive.

Damn you people never grew out of your adolescence

 

[Darlo kittu]

View attachment 1205105
No, you retarded TROLL.

Trump has been a lying grifter, for longer than you've been alive.

I do hope you get the medical assistance you so desperately need

9

 

[scruffy]

Do you support such tactics?

The question is more whether the people of Venezuela support them. My opinion doesn't matter much since I can't stop Trump from mouthing off.

You have to admit though, this has been one of the more interesting regime changes in the last 50 years or so..Quick, cheap, and so far very effective.

 

[krichton]

The easiest way to destroy another country is for Trump to become president of it.

 

[Darlo kittu]

The easiest way to destroy another country is for Trump to become president of it.

It would ve faster to export liberalism

Open offices for NOW, gay groups, the traines, NAACP, Center for Progress, and watch how fast those countries go to hell

 

[Maxdeath]

So prove that Trump is better than Obama! After all, there are 154historians that said the exact opposite! I am not the only one! Are you better at evaluating something that experts at history say differently?

Again fool. I never claimed he was better. I claimed he had not bombed any hospitals, he had not dropped as many bombs. Which means he should at the very least be considered to be on equal footing unless you are politically partisan. Look I get it you are an uninformed democrat that believes everything the democrats tell you is true.

 

[Darlo kittu]

Again fool. I never claimed he was better. I claimed he had not bombed any hospitals, he had not dropped as many bombs. Which means he should at the very least be considered to be on equal footing unless you are politically partisan. Look I get it you are an uninformed democrat that believes everything the democrats tell you is true.

Eh Obozo was not the magnanimous hero you think he was

 

[Luckyone]

Popper and the Logic of Falsification
Popper used the asymmetry between verification (proving a positive universal claim) and falsification (proving a negative universal claim) to define his philosophy:

• Proving a positive (Verification) is a logical fallacy: You can observe a million white swans and it may increase your psychological belief that all swans are white, but it does not logically prove the universal law "All swans are white". The next swan you see could be a different color. This is the problem of induction, which Popper saw as logically invalid.
• Proving a negative (Falsification) is logically valid: However, observing just one black swan is logically sufficient to disprovethe universal law "All swans are white". The reasoning is deductively sound:
  • If theory T ("All swans are white") is true, then observation O (a black swan) should not occur.
  • Observation O (a black swan) does occur.
  • Therefore, theory T is false.

The Role of Negative Evidence
For Popper, the goal of a scientist is not to seek evidence that confirms their hypothesis (confirmation bias), but to actively seek out negative evidence or "risky predictions" that have the potential to show the theory is wrong. He argued that theories that are resistant to negative evidence or can explain everything are not scientific, but rather pseudoscience (e.g., psychoanalysis and certain forms of Marxism at the time, which used ad hoc explanations to avoid refutation).
In essence, Popper elevated the process of proving a negative—the act of refutation—as the central, rational, and distinguishing feature of the scientific method. Science progresses not by accumulating "proofs" of truth, but by eliminating falsehoods through rigorous critical testing.
"Trump is the extreme." False.
Greg

You are truly a dumb Trump supporter.

Since you evidently believe what you are saying and sending this response, I am going to use it to prove my statement above.

Your post (about Popper) says the following: "For Popper, the goal of a scientist is not to seek evidence that confirms their hypothesis (confirmation bias), but to actively seek out negative evidence or "risky predictions" that have the potential to show the theory is wrong."

I am NOT seeking evidence to prove my theory. My theory came about by seeing Trump doing that he IS DOING and comparing it to all other presidents we have ever had.

First of all, here is the definition of "extreme": "Extreme" means at the farthest point, the highest degree, or far beyond what's usual, normal, or reasonable,

1) Trump has had the biggest turnover of Cabinet members of any other president
2) Trump has lied more than any other president
3) Trump has done more actions against the government than any other president
4) Trump has the highest number of billionaires working for (or with him) than any other president
5) Trump has failed to pass more legislation through Congress than any other president
6) Trump has generated more disunity and protests than any other president
7) Trump has done more to hurt Democracy than any other president
8) Trump has generated more nations to be against us than any other president

I could go on but that is sufficient evidence to prove that Trump is an extreme, given that the words "more than anyone" prove the definition of extreme.

This not seeking evidence but showing the evidence that exists.

For example, and using your post: "all swans are white" can be disproven if one black swan is found.

Now it is up to you to prove that the above examples are wrong. In other words, show me that Trump has not done any of the things above in a category of "more than any other president we have ever had"

 

[Maxdeath]

Eh Obozo was not the magnanimous hero you think he was

View attachment 1205226

Actually I consider most of the presidents in the last fifty years almost in the same category. The only one that was worse was our last one. I do not consider any of them to be worth even voting into office but I pretty much hold my nose and vote for who I consider to be the better of the worst.

 

[Darlo kittu]

Actually I consider most of the presidents in the last fifty years almost in the same category. The only one that was worse was our last one. I do not consider any of them to be worth even voting into office but I pretty much hold my nose and vote for who I consider to be the better of the worst.

You do change your views as fast as a stripper gets dressed during a raid

First you post Onozo did not drop.many bombs now you backtrack. Like Bill Clinton. I guess it depends on your definition of many

 

[Luckyone]

Again fool. I never claimed he was better. I claimed he had not bombed any hospitals, he had not dropped as many bombs. Which means he should at the very least be considered to be on equal footing unless you are politically partisan. Look I get it you are an uninformed democrat that believes everything the democrats tell you is true.

First of all, I am not a Democrat. I am an Independent. In fact, up to 2008, I was a registered Republican for 35 years. It is when the extreme right took over (when Obama was elected) that I switched to being Independent. I am a centrist by nature.

Secondly, I NEVER believe what anyone ever says. I do the research on data, statistics, and facts, added to the fact that I have my own 80-years of living experience where I have personally experienced all of these things and found the reasons for them and therefore was able to solve them. In other words, the solutions I came up with worked to where I solved the problem.

To me, life is about competence in finding the solutions to the problems being faced. Listening to others tell you what to do will not solve the problems if the solution does not actually work.

Show me with actual data, statistics, and facts (not with words) where I have stated something that is incorrect!!!!