It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

The Unjustified Hatred of Donald Trump

page: 20
120
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

Once again: you can't read.
It isn't a threat if I'm not DOING it and otherwise is to say it's a lie which I don't do willingly very well at all.
I don't like killing humans less than I don't like killing animals.
I have FAR better things things to do than RUMINATE of whom I want to kill.
Nor do I need to.
YOUR projections of meaning are REALLY bad ,NO wonder you wandered from GOD




posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 01:55 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




Being that they are people that you have probably never met, your ire would be unjustified still, you feel comfortable expressing your ire and believe that other's are justified in feeling the same.

That is hypocrisy.


It is irony, actually. Hypocrisy is when behavior doesn't conform to principles. I haven't done anything opposite my principles.



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 01:57 PM
link   
a reply to: windword




Trump's critics are not afraid or unjustified in their anti-Trump championship. Their opinions are not unjustified, they're based on Trumps own words and actions.


For instance?



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 01:58 PM
link   
After reading this thread I have found the only song that describes us all.



Humanity is Bonkers we are all so fecked and we think we have a choice about it.



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
It is irony, actually. Hypocrisy is when behavior doesn't conform to principles. I haven't done anything opposite my principles.

The semantic shimmy is predictable with you but you in fact said that these people deserve ire while at the same time claim that Trump doesn't, although the circumstances are the same (hate for people you do not know).



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: BlueAjah

Let me answer some of them, it is from horse own mouth, no twisting needed. He have no problem send you to die for Saudi cause as long he can make few bucks on it. Does muslim ban applies to Saudi buddies? They will be flying in his private jet (remember all Saudi's were protected on 9/11).



“Well, I would want to help Saudi Arabia,” he said. "I would want to protect Saudi Arabia. But Saudi Arabia is going to have to help us economically. - Trump


Trump: 'I would want to protect Saudi Arabia'

Trump made millions from Saudi government: report

You know why he won't release his Tax return? All his dealings with Saudi, Russia and China will come to light. Also, MIC is protecting him, so he is more sstablishment than any other candidates out there. None of his Saudi/Russia/China connection will be leaked out by Wikileaks or anyone else. So you wonder why? Who is MIC/Establishment supporting?

His supporters will jump off the cliff if he says so (or die in Iran for Saudi cause). Didn't he mock all of his supporters with this one line, no MSM twisting needed here -



Trump: I could 'shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters'





posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

He's had his entire career to do business the way it ought to be done, to do no harm. He has had his entire career to ensure he only employed American workers, had his entire career to lobby for the people, and do you know what he has done in that time?

Absorbed the benefits of employing overseas workers, doing bad business and harming good people, and made no effort on behalf of his country in the meantime.

His campaign means nothing. His time on the road means nothing. What matters is the way he has lived up to this point, because he did not want anything from people other than money before, but now he wants their votes, he wants power given to him, by them.

That means that his actions on the road are meaningless. He showed up places. That makes no difference what so ever. What difference has that made to the hundreds of thousands still living in tents? None. What difference has that made to the single parents working three jobs to feed their kids? None. They are still living in tents and working too hard for too little because those are the choices they have available.

He was not any use to these people before the campaign, he has not been during the campaign, and will not be after it.



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:03 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik




The semantic shimmy is predictable with you but you in fact said that these people deserve ire while at the same time claim that Trump doesn't, although the circumstances are the same (hate for people you do not know).


I never said we cannot hate Trump because we do not know him, but because such conclusions are based on insufficient information, card-stacking and the suppression of evidence. But your straw-mans are predictable.

Either way, the remark was a joke, not a display of behavior.

Your fallacy: Tu Quoque
edit on 28-10-2016 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:09 PM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

Again, propaganda-derived piffle. "Doing bad business"? "Employing oversees workers"? These are media talking points that dismiss the counter evidence, and dismiss his side of the story. This is an example of what the OP is about.



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
I never said we cannot hate Trump because we do not know him, but because such conclusions are based on insufficient information, card-stacking and the suppression of evidence. But your straw-mans are predictable.

You said hating Trump without knowing him is unjustifiable but hating those who perform, in nothing more than your opinion, piss-poor journalism and those who adhere to it is justified. That isn't a strawman, it is there in plain text.


Either way, the remark was a joke, not a display of behavior.

What remark? If it was what I quoted then you are backpedaling because that in no way looks like a punchline.

Sure some might say that your OP is a joke but not in a haha sort of way.

ETA: Not, Tu quoque. It is about the position on what is justifiable and not your actions. I honestly think you are just playing devil's advocate for the lulz.
edit on 28-10-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-10-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:17 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

No, they are things that actually happened, things his businesses do to make him rich as living hell, off the backs of those beneath him, and at the expense of solidarity with the people of the nation in which he lives.

What's his side of the story on overseas workers? You tell me how his employing people to make his clothing lines and other products, abroad, is justified by the Donald? Exceptionalism might account for it, but that is a defunct approach.

Putting his name to projects that are bound to go belly up, so investors will flock, then backing out himself before the whole thing blows up in the face of the actual property developer. Strong arming people out of their homes so that casinos which will eventually fail, can be built. Cutting off an old Scotswomans water by breaking pipes leading to her home, so that she is forced to collect water from a local stream in order to keep living in her house, which his golf course and hotel complex want to purchase.

Tell me, how are these things not bad business? How are they justified according to the Donald?

It's bull, you know it as well as I do.



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
I never said we cannot hate Trump because we do not know him, but because such conclusions are based on insufficient information, card-stacking and the suppression of evidence. But your straw-mans are predictable.

You said hating Trump without knowing him is unjustifiable but justify hating those who perform, in nothing more than your opinion, piss-poor journalism and those who adhere to it. That isn't a strawman, it is there in plain text.


Either way, the remark was a joke, not a display of behavior.

What remark? If it was what I quoted then you are backpedaling because that in no way looks like a punchline.

Sure some might say that your OP is a joke but not in a haha sort of way.


This is what I said:


I wonder if Trump has personally done anything to these people. The answer is almost certainly a “no”. They have never met the man, never talked to him, and thus, their hatred is not derived from any personal experience. One might expect that people would withhold judgement until they themselves had access to all the information, but that is asking too much for those emotionally invested in party and politics, as all the information seems to be the last of their concerns.


Their hatred isn't derived from any personal experience—that's it. I never said hating him without knowing him is unjustifiable. Straw-man.



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

We both know what you said. I didn't quote it all because there is no point.

The entire context does not change what I am pointing out because both situations are still; hating one person without "all the information" and hating another without "all the information".


I never said hating him without knowing him is unjustifiable.

It's in the title. Just accept that you made a mistake and move on.


edit on 28-10-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Indigo5




How strange that you seek to make any conclusions about someone's character or mental fitness etc. contingent on personally meeting them.

Would that not make electing Presidents a tad difficult? The requirement we meet personally before concluding anything?

All we know of Trump is what Trump shares in interviews, speeches and print...and he has shared an unprecedented amount with us in those forms...and for the express purpose so that we could reach conclusions.

This kind of desperate defense...don't judge him by what he says or does..don't judge him by his words, speeches or interviews...don't judge him at all unless you have met him???

That is what being a Trump supporter has left you with in your arsenal?

You haven't met him...so all conclusions are invalid?


Speaking in questions again? Of course, another straw-man.

No I never said it was invalid, only that you're basing your conclusions on card-stacking


I am not that type of information consumer...I can tell you where the cards were manufactured, when they arrived at the casino, who has touched them since arrival, the number of times they were shuffled and most importantly whether the cards are marked. MSM is simply my que to dig deep in every direction relevant to the story and compare both fringe and partisan spin to facts. This election cycle I understand more about Trump, his motives and origins than I know about my extended family. You are selling a rotten egg...alas..I am sorry your uncompromising ideology has burdened you with that task.



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: TonyS

To the concentration camps, which is what Liberal Fascists (i.e. progressives) have wanted all along. That is who they are. The brownshirt tactics say it all.
There is no bridging this divide. Hang on to your hat.


Concentration camps?


Well, you've outdone yourself this time. What a complete load of crap.

Liberals don't want to put people is camps.


Welcome to the party.



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit




No, they are things that actually happened, things his businesses do to make him rich as living hell, off the backs of those beneath him, and at the expense of solidarity with the people of the nation in which he lives.

What's his side of the story on overseas workers? You tell me how his employing people to make his clothing lines and other products, abroad, is justified by the Donald? Exceptionalism might account for it, but that is a defunct approach.

Putting his name to projects that are bound to go belly up, so investors will flock, then backing out himself before the whole thing blows up in the face of the actual property developer. Strong arming people out of their homes so that casinos which will eventually fail, can be built. Cutting off an old Scotswomans water by breaking pipes leading to her home, so that she is forced to collect water from a local stream in order to keep living in her house, which his golf course and hotel complex want to purchase.

Tell me, how are these things not bad business? How are they justified according to the Donald?

It's bull, you know it as well as I do.


Nonsense. He employs tens of thousands of people. That's called employment, as in giving people jobs, not slavery. They do not have to work for him.

Yes he employs some oversees workers to manufacture clothing, just like nearly every business that deals in clothing. He does it because it is too expensive to manufacture clothing in the US. He has a responsibility to his family and employees to keep the employed, not send the company into a spiral due to making horrible decisions, for instance, making ties in the US.

It wasn't Trump building the golf course, inadvertently breaking a well. The contractor broke it and immediately fixed it within 24 hours. This is the same family that wouldn't sell their property to Trump to build the golf-course.

All nonsense, and your heart is overriding your reason.



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

You do not apparently, because you keep asserting otherwise.

Tu Quoque

Just admit you're wrong, fallacious, and move on.



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: ker2010

originally posted by: angeldoll
There are people who believe the Earth is flat, although all evidence shows that to be false.
People who believe the US didn't put a man on the moon in 1969.
People who believe that when Nelson Mandela went to prison and disappeared for a while, that he actually died, and now believe there is some sort of time glitch, like the matrix, because they can't get their facts straight, or are particularly susceptible to all manner of absurd so-called conspiracy theories.

Now we have people who believe Hillary Clinton is some kind of ninja serial killer, the Clinton Foundation exists to launder their ill-begotten gains, she is about to drop dead any minute from a variety of diseases and on and on.

Nothing can be done about those people. They will have to find their own way, and put these childish and foolish notions aside. Some can't become more intelligent, but some can grow up and put all this nonsense aside.

In the meantime, it's futile to try to reason with them.


Nonsense as in? The bottom line is your queen Hillary is quite possibly the most corrupt politician to ever run for the presidency.

Tell us what blinds you to this fact? Is it because she is a woman? Does her reproductive organs give her a pass in your eyes?

Mrs. Clinton handled classified information carelessly. Her Husband Bill Clinton met privately with U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch at the Phoenix Airport while Hillary was still under investigation for emails.

Thousand of emails deleted and multiple devices were destroyed by hammers..

Even if all the other stuff about her is conspiracy, the mishandling of classified information should exclude her from running for president of the USA.

Had me, you, my son in the military done what she had we would be in deep doo-doo. But she is apparently above the same laws we have to adhere by or be punished.

Why are you giving her a pass? Because she is a woman!? LOL




BREAKING NEWS READ AND WEEP!!!

www.yahoo.com...


WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI informed Congress Friday it is investigating whether new emails that have emerged in its probe of Hillary Clinton's private server may contain classified information. The FBI said in July its investigation was finished.

The disclosure raises the possibility of the FBI reopening the criminal investigation involving the Democratic presidential nominee just days before the election, although it is not clear if that will happen.

Clinton's campaign didn't immediately respond to request for comment.

In a letter sent to congressional leaders, FBI Director James Comey says that new emails have come to light recently that have prompted investigators to take another look at the sensitive government information that flowed through the private email sever Clinton used while serving as secretary of state.


It gets better, guess who gave the emails? Humas former husband..

Anthony Weiner .



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Just because you're ignoring Trump's blatant narcissistic behavior, habitual lying, constant derogatory attacks on women, ignorance of foreign military agreements, ridiculous and stupid rhetoric such as (he knows more about ISIS than our own generals), painting all minorities with a broad brush, his blatant buying of political favors, his bankruptcies, stiffing workers out of money, scamming students with a fake real estate school, producing his own products overseas while condemning others for doing so, accusations of forcing himself on women (where there's smoke there's fire), his rhetoric of hate, his extremely poor childish temperament, his refusal to be honest and transparent by submitting his taxes...

This certainly doesn't mean voters who have any sense of values, expect their leaders to be intelligent and competent, who can relate to their everyday struggles should conform to your negligent way of thinking.

These are the character traits you want for the leader of the United States? You sure are setting the bar extremely low! Whether you like it or not, people judge a person by their character and actions. Donald Trump doesn't lead by example and to think he has the American people's interest at heart is really gullible. A billionaire and even a multi-millionaire like Clinton can't relate to the everyday struggles of hard working Americans.

The last thing I would do is defend or make a case for either of these self-serving, dishonest and scandal laden candidates. Especially an idiot like Donald Trump.



posted on Oct, 28 2016 @ 02:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: windword




Your hypocritical stance.


If you can show me where I'm being hypocritical, that would help.


At your core Les..though you are too close to it to see it.

A man who relishes in verbosity and turn of phrase, who prides himself on his intellectualism...reduced to claiming that words do not mean what they mean...in defense of an Orange Oaf.

Every weak defense you offer, premised in tangled logic and adorned in resplendent language is hypocritical...for you are one who knows better than most the vileness of Trump's rhetoric, and yet work so hard to twist it into something near palatable.
edit on 28-10-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
120
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join