Trump protecting his golf course from Global Warming

[Political Junky]

Guess he believes in global warming after all.

Donald Trump wants to build a wall – to save his golf course from global warming | Dana Nuccitelli

 

[ABikerSailor]

Yeah. He tells his base and constituents that there is no such thing as global climate change, and that he will remove restrictions on energy exploration and drilling.

Yet............when it comes to his personal investments, he believes what the scientists say.

Trump's the businessman, do you really think that he would spend money on a wall that he didn't believe he needed?

 

[Katzndogz]

Beach erosion happens all the time. It has nothing to do with the hoax of global warming.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Beach erosion happens all the time. It has nothing to do with the hoax of global warming.

The reason specified on the permit to build the wall didn't say "beach erosion", it said "rising sea levels".

 

[Katzndogz]

Beach erosion happens all the time. It has nothing to do with the hoax of global warming.

The reason specified on the permit to build the wall didn't say "beach erosion", it said "rising sea levels".

What do you think beach erosion is?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Beach erosion happens all the time. It has nothing to do with the hoax of global warming.

The reason specified on the permit to build the wall didn't say "beach erosion", it said "rising sea levels".

What do you think beach erosion is?

Beach erosion doesn't require a tall wall to stop it. All that's required is a bunch of those cement jacks looking things (you remember playing jacks, right), to break up the tide. You've never been around many seaports, have you? Me? I spent 20 years in the Navy, so I kinda understand the difference.

 

[Political Junky]

Drumpf's bagger friends will defend anything he says.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Yet............when it comes to his personal investments, he believes what the scientists say.

Which scientists? The ones who receive grant money to push a hypothesis or the ones who do research and mainly object to the extreme policies enacted to prevent alleged AGW?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

When did climate change become a political issue?

Its like a new cause for the Fat Earth Society.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

When did climate change become a political issue?

Its like a new cause for the Fat Earth Society.

You mean global warming. It became political as soon as democrats recognized the opportunity to demonize the fossil fuel industry who are generally regarded to be friendly with repubs. Climate change is the misnomer term adopted to combat reason when AGW propagandists are confronted with facts that conflict with AGW theory.

 

[Blackrook]

Wow, this isn't going to hurt Trump at all. You guys aren't even going to come close to hurting him if this is really the best you can do.

 

[JimBowie1958]

When did climate change become a political issue?

Its like a new cause for the Fat Earth Society.

Disagreeing with human driven Climate Change is now the equal of believing in a flat Earth?

roflmao

 

[JimBowie1958]

Wow, this isn't going to hurt Trump at all. You guys aren't even going to come close to hurting him if this is really the best you can do.

I hope they keep attacking Trump on this subject, just like their Hate America First demonstrators, it will drive hundreds of thousands of new voters to Trump.

 

[Blackrook]

Why do you need permission from the government to build a wall around your golf course? That's what I want to know.

 

[Blackrook]

Proving that Trump says one thing on the campaign trial and does another thing entirely in his business life won't hurt him. He has already admitted to this, calling it the "Art of the Deal."

 

[JimBowie1958]

Proving that Trump says one thing on the campaign trial and does another thing entirely in his business life won't hurt him. He has already admitted to this, calling it the "Art of the Deal."

Ones opponents making convenient abuse of quotations out of context and mysterious thaumaturgy of what he does comes nowhere close to being him 'saying one thing but doing another', genius.

 

[Blackrook]

Proving that Trump says one thing on the campaign trial and does another thing entirely in his business life won't hurt him. He has already admitted to this, calling it the "Art of the Deal."

Ones opponents making convenient abuse of quotations out of context and mysterious thaumaturgy of what he does comes nowhere close to being him 'saying one thing but doing another', genius.

There are plenty of other examples. For example, he used to be great supporters of the Clintons, and generously contributed to them. Now, he calls Hillary "corrupt Hillary" because she takes the kind of generous campaign contributions that up until just recently, he was giving to her.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Ones opponents making convenient abuse of quotations out of context and mysterious thaumaturgy of what he does comes nowhere close to being him 'saying one thing but doing another', genius.

There are plenty of other examples. For example, he used to be great supporters of the Clintons, and generously contributed to them. Now, he calls Hillary "corrupt Hillary" because she takes the kind of generous campaign contributions that up until just recently, he was giving to her.

Accusing a person of 'saying one thing but doing another' has as a necessary condition of concurrency.

What some one did 20 years ago might contradict what they say now, but it doesnt fall under the rubric of inconsistent speech vrs behavior as they may have, since that time long ago, simply changed their minds.

 

[Blackrook]

Ones opponents making convenient abuse of quotations out of context and mysterious thaumaturgy of what he does comes nowhere close to being him 'saying one thing but doing another', genius.

There are plenty of other examples. For example, he used to be great supporters of the Clintons, and generously contributed to them. Now, he calls Hillary "corrupt Hillary" because she takes the kind of generous campaign contributions that up until just recently, he was giving to her.

Accusing a person of 'saying one thing but doing another' has as a necessary condition of concurrency.

What some one did 20 years ago might contradict what they say now, but it doesnt fall under the rubric of inconsistent speech vrs behavior as they may have, since that time long ago, simply changed their minds.

Trump doesn't change his mind, he never has his mind made up to begin with. According to his philosophy, everything is a negotiation, EVERYTHING, including where you stand on important issues. So he can say one thing in the morning, the opposite that evening, and not be lying either time. He expects people to know that about him, it's all in his book "The Art of the Deal."

 

[JimBowie1958]

Trump doesn't change his mind, he never has his mind made up to begin with. According to his philosophy, everything is a negotiation, EVERYTHING, including where you stand on important issues. So he can say one thing in the morning, the opposite that evening, and not be lying either time. He expects people to know that about him, it's all in his book "The Art of the Deal."

You are failing to distinguish between negotiables and non-negotiables.

Every strategy in approaching a potential deal has non-negotiable items implied if not stated such as 'We will not take a financial loss'.

Non-negotiables are relevant to each individual negotiation, for example with the above non-negotiable, there may be a time when one is willing to take a lesser loss than a greater loss, or to take a loss in one negotiation for a more valuable opportunity in another negotiation.

That people are will to negotiate does not prove that they will negotiate ANYTHING and EVERYTHING.