gut;1828990 wrote:It is really funny to see people so passionately arguing who the bigger turd is. Safe bet in most cases the people arguing don't think their choice was an actual turd. They all sit there talking about voting against the other candidate so they don't have to defend their choice, but reality is most really wanted who they voted for.

The rest of America didn't care or turn out, and many who did voted fairly indifferently. A vote for Hillary and then Republican Congress seemed a fairly popular route...which should kind of make one question popular vote totals but that's a different thread.

Yeah, I know for myself, I voted for Johnson solely as a protest vote against both parties, but just from people I know and people I've seen talking on social media or the Internet in general, it seemed like only a tiny few on both sides actually were fans of either Trump or Hillary. Seemed like on the left, more liked Sanders and were either begrudgingly voting for Clinton or either going third party or not voting. On the right, it seemed more of pure partisan voting (or at least "just not her" voting) with only a few true Trump supporters (who tended to be the worst of anyone as far as actually being able to explain why, generally just parroting his latest soundbite).

superman;1828922 wrote:Trevor Noah is an anti-semite piece of shit.

Isn't he a quarter Jewish?

CenterBHSFan;1828955 wrote:Debatable lol!

But, in essence you are right. The People would have lost no matter who was elected.

I honestly just wish the houses of Congress would just be closely split, with the slight advantage split between them.

Heretic;1829047 wrote:Yeah, I know for myself, I voted for Johnson solely as a protest vote against both parties, but just from people I know and people I've seen talking on social media or the Internet in general, it seemed like only a tiny few on both sides actually were fans of either Trump or Hillary. Seemed like on the left, more liked Sanders and were either begrudgingly voting for Clinton or either going third party or not voting. On the right, it seemed more of pure partisan voting (or at least "just not her" voting) with only a few true Trump supporters (who tended to be the worst of anyone as far as actually being able to explain why, generally just parroting his latest soundbite).

It's odd. I see people saying they only viewed one as a preference in a comparison vacuum with the other. And yet, I see those same people singing the praises of the candidates shortly thereafter.

O-Trap;1829178 wrote:Isn't he a quarter Jewish?

I have no idea but if he is, he's pretty self hating based on his history.

superman;1829184 wrote:I have no idea but if he is, he's pretty self hating based on his history.

I don't know a ton about the guy, but what did he say?

O-Trap;1829178 wrote:Isn't he a quarter Jewish?

Regardless, maybe he should roll with being anti-semite. If Trump has a falling out with Bannon, he could get a pretty sweet job as his replacement!

O-Trap;1829189 wrote:I don't know a ton about the guy, but what did he say?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/trevor-noah-criticized-as-anti-785447&ved=0ahUKEwiirryi84DRAhVJ5GMKHbWbBEsQFggjMAI&usg=AFQjCNFmPLB3cAZb70aXJ_hUJfBHPGEwZQ&sig2=_WwPqw9Wr07-PgV6ReWfog

Heretic;1829194 wrote:Regardless, maybe he should roll with being anti-semite. If Trump has a falling out with Bannon, he could get a pretty sweet job as his replacement!

Totally.

superman;1829200 wrote:https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/trevor-noah-criticized-as-anti-785447&ved=0ahUKEwiirryi84DRAhVJ5GMKHbWbBEsQFggjMAI&usg=AFQjCNFmPLB3cAZb70aXJ_hUJfBHPGEwZQ&sig2=_WwPqw9Wr07-PgV6ReWfog

I read some racist stuff, though if he identifies with his own Jewish history at all, it'd be more self-deprecating.

When a comedian makes references to racial stereotypes as part of their public persona, it doesn't seem genuinely held as a belief. Off-color and in bad taste? Possibly, though less so if he also identifies with the segment he's mocking.

To take poor, off-color humor from a comedian and stretch it to anti-Semitism is pretty extreme a stretch.

O-Trap;1829203 wrote:I read some racist stuff, though if he identifies with his own Jewish history at all, it'd be more self-deprecating.

When a comedian makes references to racial stereotypes as part of their public persona, it doesn't seem genuinely held as a belief. Off-color and in bad taste? Possibly, though less so if he also identifies with the segment he's mocking.

To take poor, off-color humor from a comedian and stretch it to anti-Semitism is pretty extreme a stretch.

There's two ways to look at taking tweets from a comedian literally to call him an anti-semite.

1. It's a sarcastic comeback to all the SJW trash decrying Trump based on random tweets and comments, by doing the same thing to someone considered a more left-wing TV presence.

2. Superman is SJW trash.

It all depends on how serious he was with his post!

Heretic;1829205 wrote:There's two ways to look at taking tweets from a comedian literally to call him an anti-semite.

1. It's a sarcastic comeback to all the SJW trash decrying Trump based on random tweets and comments, by doing the same thing to someone considered a more left-wing TV presence.

2. Superman is SJW trash.

It all depends on how serious he was with his post!

I get #1 a little bit. Despite the notion that Trump's tweets are less overtly for the purpose of entertainment, there does still seem to be a pretty large element of showmanship to what he "is." As such, it's not a stretch to say that what he says in the socialsphere might be as much for the purpose of eliciting a reaction as, say, a comedian. Just toward different ends.

Think a golden-haired Kardashian. All publicity is good for business.

#2 might be true of almost everyone when you go after their favorite hobby horse.

It's hard to read a comedian's (or a bit actor's ... see Peewee Herman, for example) shtick into their more serious worldview, because the point of a comedy routine isn't to reveal oneself. Ask Daniel Whitney (Larry the Cable Guy).

It's easier to do with non-entertainers, but while Trump is certainly not a conventional entertainer, he does seem to draw publicity from his public persona, and I assume he knows how to make that good for business.

O-Trap;1829208 wrote:I get #1 a little bit. Despite the notion that Trump's tweets are less overtly for the purpose of entertainment, there does still seem to be a pretty large element of showmanship to what he "is." As such, it's not a stretch to say that what he says in the socialsphere might be as much for the purpose of eliciting a reaction as, say, a comedian. Just toward different ends.

Think a golden-haired Kardashian. All publicity is good for business.

#2 might be true of almost everyone when you go after their favorite hobby horse.

It's hard to read a comedian's (or a bit actor's ... see Peewee Herman, for example) shtick into their more serious worldview, because the point of a comedy routine isn't to reveal oneself. Ask Daniel Whitney (Larry the Cable Guy).

It's easier to do with non-entertainers, but while Trump is certainly not a conventional entertainer, he does seem to draw publicity from his public persona, and I assume he knows how to make that good for business.

Thought of today's press conference from the President Elect?

Some highlights below:
1. Claims to not know Carter Page - Carter Page was Trump's foreign policy advisor
2. Not releasing tax returns because "I won. I became President"
3. Says he has no deals with Russia - Trump son said in June 2016 "Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets,"
4. "I am going to be the greatest jobs producer that God ever created." - Narcissism with no results
5. Blaming the intelligence agencies for doing their job
6. Leaving the press conference early and letting his personal attorney take over
7. Still bringing up Hillary Clinton, campaigning is over
8. Wall being built with US dollars, will make Mexico pay for it?
9. Compares US to Nazi Germany

LOL

QO, conservatives?

Ended news conference with "You're fired."

I laughed my ass off at that.

MAGA

Automatik;1832364 wrote:MAGA

This movie gets more 'real' with each passing year.

2020 can't come soon enough.

ptown_trojans_1;1832362 wrote:Ended news conference with "You're fired."

I laughed my ass off at that.

Did he really smh? What was the context?

like_that;1832374 wrote:Did he really smh? What was the context?

Yeah, it was the last thing he said before he left. He said, referring to the documents on his business on the table,
"I want to thank everybody. So this is all — just so you understand, these papers — because I’m not sure that was explained properly. But these papers are all just a piece of the many, many companies that are being put into trust to be run by my two sons that I hope at the end of eight years, I’ll come back and say, oh, you did a good job. Otherwise, if they do a bad job, I’ll say, “You’re fired.”
Good-bye, everybody. Good-bye."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/us/politics/trump-press-conference-transcript.html?_r=0

sleeper;1832360 wrote:Thought of today's press conference from the President Elect?

Some highlights below:
1. Claims to not know Carter Page - Carter Page was Trump's foreign policy advisor
2. Not releasing tax returns because "I won. I became President"
3. Says he has no deals with Russia - Trump son said in June 2016 "Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets,"
4. "I am going to be the greatest jobs producer that God ever created." - Narcissism with no results
5. Blaming the intelligence agencies for doing their job
6. Leaving the press conference early and letting his personal attorney take over
7. Still bringing up Hillary Clinton, campaigning is over
8. Wall being built with US dollars, will make Mexico pay for it?
9. Compares US to Nazi Germany

LOL

QO, conservatives?

All are smh worthy especially #8 and anybody who believed it. That will go up there with "if you want your plan you can keep it."

You have been quite perturbed the last couple days. You're obviously trying to make a point, but I can't seem to figure out who this is directed to. I might be missing somebody, but I can only think of 3 posters who legitimately wanted Trump to be our president. QO is in the 3, but it's hard to count him because he would keep up his schtick regardless of who won the GOP primary. Is this another example of sleeper making up arguments? I don't think you're going to find many right leaning posters here bending backwards to defend trump. Especially not as much as Obama supporters did for him.

ptown_trojans_1;1832375 wrote:Yeah, it was the last thing he said before he left. He said, referring to the documents on his business on the table,
"I want to thank everybody. So this is all — just so you understand, these papers — because I’m not sure that was explained properly. But these papers are all just a piece of the many, many companies that are being put into trust to be run by my two sons that I hope at the end of eight years, I’ll come back and say, oh, you did a good job. Otherwise, if they do a bad job, I’ll say, “You’re fired.”
Good-bye, everybody. Good-bye."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/11/us/politics/trump-press-conference-transcript.html?_r=0

So he ended the press conference with "Good-bye"

bases_loaded;1832378 wrote:So he ended the press conference with "Good-bye"

The last thing he said at the podium was you're fired. He then moved away and left saying good bye.
Still. The President elect ended saying his freaking catch phase? Come on.
I just started laughing.

like_that;1832376 wrote:All are smh worthy especially #8 and anybody who believed it. That will go up there with "if you want your plan you can keep it."

You have been quite perturbed the last couple days. You're obviously trying to make a point, but I can't seem to figure out who this is directed to. I might be missing somebody, but I can only think of 3 posters who legitimately wanted Trump to be our president. QO is in the 3, but it's hard to count him because he would keep up his schtick regardless of who won the GOP primary. Is this another example of sleeper making up arguments? I don't think you're going to find many right leaning posters here bending backwards to defend trump. Especially not as much as Obama supporters did for him.

I don't like Trump.

sleeper;1832389 wrote:I don't like Trump.

Yes, I know. That doesn't answer the question.

like_that;1832397 wrote:Yes, I know. That doesn't answer the question.

He's decided to become the QQ for this four (or eight) year period?

Heretic;1832400 wrote:He's decided to become the QQ for this four (or eight) year period?

No thanks. I post my own opinions and understand what fake new is.

like_that;1832397 wrote:Yes, I know. That doesn't answer the question.

Definitely QO.

sleeper;1832403 wrote:No thanks. I post my own opinions and understand what fake new is.

That's true -- he is overly reliant on posting any link he possibly could find, regardless of whether they were legit or some wing-nut right wing blog.

In the context of disliking Trump and wanting to give a dissenting opinion that could potentially be taken seriously, though, the pure-ass SJW-esque Obama stuff (greatest African American president of my lifetime) does seem to divert from that point. At least, QQ is a consistent, to-the-point blindly partisan dolt to the degree where one gets the idea he looks at the letter next to a person's name before deciding how to react to anything they say or do.