Donald Trump

[SebastianBlue]

It was easier to post the same response to two people wishing death on someone.

i am hardly trolling, but it is no doubt it’s the same Group of people who say this type of rubbish on BM and nothing gets said about it.

trump may not be everyone cup of tea, but I certainly wouldn’t wish death on the man.

And to add as I did post before, when Trump was elected out of the two (him and Clinton)

Trump was the better option out of the two.

Plenty gets said, and you were trolling, mate — you were literally meeting the exact definition, even if you weren’t aware of it. If you had quoted all of them in one post and responded that would have been different; it would have been a focused response to show your thoughts.

But instead you went about posting many individual (but basically the same) responses, and responded to those replying afterward with trite drivel meant to wind them up. If we had the anti-trolling features turned on you would have likely gotten an auto temp thread ban.

All of that said, though I think you are absolutely wrong with your assessment of the previous and current candidates, and have said as much already, that bit is a substantive contribution to the topic and thus I can have no issue as a mod if you continue with that sort of posting in the thread.

You’ll get great opposition to it — and rightly, in my mind — but as long as you keep from the previous posting and response pattern (and don’t personally abuse anyone), you’ll have no issue participating.

 

[Man_City_Loyal]

Plenty gets said, and you were trolling, mate — you were literally meeting the exact definition, even if you weren’t aware of it. If you had quoted all of them in one post and responded that would have been different; it would have been a focused response to show your thoughts.

But instead you went about posting many individual (but basically the same) responses, and responded to those replying afterward with trite drivel meant to wind them up. If we had the anti-trolling features turned on you would have likely gotten an auto temp thread ban.

All of that said, though I think you are absolutely wrong with your assessment of the previous and current candidates, and have said as much already, that bit is a substantive contribution to the topic and thus I can have no issue as a mod if you continue with that sort of posting in the thread.

You’ll get great opposition to it — and rightly, in my mind — but as long as you keep from the previous posting and response pattern (and don’t personally abuse anyone), you’ll have no issue participating.

be keen to see wht you use on the forum for anti trolling rulings?

inbox me if its something you can do?

and I know doubt will do, that’s the beauty of conversation.

 

[SebastianBlue]

be keen to see wht you use on the forum for anti trolling rulings?

inbox me if its something you can do?

and I know doubt will do, that’s the beauty of conversation.

No need for a PM, it’s the same reporting and collective mod review system as always (with Ric having the final word as the one who is ultimately responsible for what happens on the site).

Though, if it is especially blatant we can take action to intervene immediately and then report for other mod review to determine if we were correct to do so and if any further action needs to be taken (since immediate action is usually just a public/private warning like this discussion and/or a temp thread ban). Contrary to popular belief, we do try to avoid bans and do vigorously debate thread/forum bans for any user, with it often leading to no action (or a lifting of any temp ban) to see if the user can right the ship.

There are auto-intervention add-ons that would track the rate and relative uniqueness of posts by a user and thresholds can be set where a high enough rate of posting and/or duplicate posting will trigger an automatic temp thread ban. But those aren’t enabled on the site as Ric likes to have a human involved to be fair to everyone and have some accountability (which I agree with entirely).

For instance, if you feel I have been unfair calling you out on “trolling” you can raise your concerns with Ric, as you know exactly who was involved (rather than it just being a nameless, faceless algorithm).

It’s the same reason I always include my initials for any note sent to a user based on a mod action (ban, warning, post deleted/modified, etc). I am responsible for my moding and so take that bit of my presence on here very seriously.

 

[mat]

Trump is acting like a bad guy in one of those take your brain out Hollywood films.

He's openly telling us he's fixing the election. Yet some seem to have a conscious blindness to it. This includes some of the US media.

They have a powerful tool that has brought down governments all over the world and should use it now to stop this **** ironically turning the USA into 20th century Russia on steroids.

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

And to add as I did post before, when Trump was elected out of the two (him and Clinton)

Trump was the better option out of the two.

After three and a half years of his administration, do you still think that? How do you think America would be worse off now — I mean, would the economy, race relations, and health and safety of Americans be worse?

 

[SebastianBlue]

And this is one of the nicer (to Trump) adverts running right now.

 

[west didsblue]

It was easier to post the same response to two people wishing death on someone.

i am hardly trolling, but it is no doubt it’s the same Group of people who say this type of rubbish on BM and nothing gets said about it.

trump may not be everyone cup of tea, but I certainly wouldn’t wish death on the man.

And to add as I did post before, when Trump was elected out of the two (him and Clinton)

Trump was the better option out of the two.

Considering Trump has been directly responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans due to a combination of incompetence, deliberate inaction and literally encouraging the wrong behaviours, and the deaths of thousands of American allies who were abandoned to their fate after winning the war against IS for which he has taken personal credit, his own death would undoubtedly save many further lives and it is perfectly understandable that people would wish it to happen.

Ideally he should be removed from office and should stand trial for his crimes but realistically that’s not going to happen and it’s quite likely that he’s going to steal the election to inflict four more years of madness on the world, so his early demise is probably the best option.

As for him being a better choice than Clinton, as well as the above do you think she would have done absolutely nothing, other than trying to help Putin get Russia into the G8, once it became clear the Russians were paying the Taliban to kill US soldiers?

 

[super_city_si]

His brother, who he declares he loves dearly and is his best friend, lies in hospital on his death bed. What does trump do? Goes to his club for a round of golf.

certified sociopath.

 

[SebastianBlue]

And so they’re locking them closed instead.

 

[mat]

His brother, who he declares he loves dearly and is his best friend, lies in hospital on his death bed. What does trump do? Goes to his club for a round of golf.

certified sociopath.

There is speculation Trump is trying to cover up his brother died of Covid 19.

As he’s treated Bidens condolences by retweeting a video of him stammering it wouldn’t surprise me.

 

[idahoblues]

There is speculation Trump is trying to cover up his brother died of Covid 19.

As he’s treated Bidens condolences by retweeting a video of him stammering it wouldn’t surprise me.

That was the first thought in my mind, The Rona got him!

 

[kaz7]

he was the the better option out of the two available at the time. And yet to see a better one in this current run up.

but shame on you wishing death on someone

I do for psychopaths

 

[kaz7]

There is speculation Trump is trying to cover up his brother died of Covid 19.

As he’s treated Bidens condolences by retweeting a video of him stammering it wouldn’t surprise me.

That was my thought,he wouldn't want it known his brother died of covid,if he did,will his loss soften him up or give him empathy? Probably not

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

That was my thought,he wouldn't want it known his brother died of covid,if he did,will his loss soften him up or give him empathy? Probably not

It wouldn't be the first GOP official to lie about a relative dying of COVID-19.

Stephen Miller's grandmother died of COVID-19. Her son blames the Trump administration.

"With the death of my mother, I'm angry and outraged at [Miller]."

www.motherjones.com

I seriously wouldn't be surprised if his visit to his brother wasn't to get him to sign some legal paperwork, or as heartless as it may sound to get his family to sign an NDA over the cause of death.

EVERYTHING in Trump's life is transactional.

 

[penguins4kompany]

Considering Trump has been directly responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans due to a combination of incompetence, deliberate inaction and literally encouraging the wrong behaviours, and the deaths of thousands of American allies who were abandoned to their fate after winning the war against IS for which he has taken personal credit, his own death would undoubtedly save many further lives and it is perfectly understandable that people would wish it to happen.

Ideally he should be removed from office and should stand trial for his crimes but realistically that’s not going to happen and it’s quite likely that he’s going to steal the election to inflict four more years of madness on the world, so his early demise is probably the best option.

As for him being a better choice than Clinton, as well as the above do you think she would have done absolutely nothing, other than trying to help Putin get Russia into the G8, once it became clear the Russians were paying the Taliban to kill US soldiers?

You believe that about the Russians paying the taliban do you?

Considering Trump has been directly responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans due to a combination of incompetence, deliberate inaction and literally encouraging the wrong behaviours, and the deaths of thousands of American allies who were abandoned to their fate after winning the war against IS for which he has taken personal credit, his own death would undoubtedly save many further lives and it is perfectly understandable that people would wish it to happen.

Ideally he should be removed from office and should stand trial for his crimes but realistically that’s not going to happen and it’s quite likely that he’s going to steal the election to inflict four more years of madness on the world, so his early demise is probably the best option.

As for him being a better choice than Clinton, as well as the above do you think she would have done absolutely nothing, other than trying to help Putin get Russia into the G8, once it became clear the Russians were paying the Taliban to kill US soldiers?

I don't think it's ever been corroborated that the Russians paid the taliban to kill American troops. Just more Russia gate hyperbole from the mass media akin,though in a totally different sphere, to the world cup scaremongering as another example.

 

[Bigga]

Considering Trump has been directly responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of Americans due to a combination of incompetence, deliberate inaction and literally encouraging the wrong behaviours, and the deaths of thousands of American allies who were abandoned to their fate after winning the war against IS for which he has taken personal credit, his own death would undoubtedly save many further lives and it is perfectly understandable that people would wish it to happen.

Ideally he should be removed from office and should stand trial for his crimes but realistically that’s not going to happen and it’s quite likely that he’s going to steal the election to inflict four more years of madness on the world, so his early demise is probably the best option.

As for him being a better choice than Clinton, as well as the above do you think she would have done absolutely nothing, other than trying to help Putin get Russia into the G8, once it became clear the Russians were paying the Taliban to kill US soldiers?

Can I ask where this vitriol and accusation when Obama was dropping bombs on thousands of innocents in the Middle East??

'Crimes' seem to be quite subjective on these boards. Going by this assessment of 'crimes' there's a few 'leaders' in the West that should stand trial for that definition than just #45.

And I don't like the fucker.

 

[Bigga]

You believe that about the Russians paying the taliban do you?

I don't think it's ever been corroborated that the Russians paid the taliban to kill American troops. Just more Russia gate hyperbole from the mass media akin,though in a totally different sphere, to the world cup scaremongering as another example.

It is shite. Like the Dems rehashing of 'Russiagate' for 2020.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

You believe that about the Russians paying the taliban do you?

I don't think it's ever been corroborated that the Russians paid the taliban to kill American troops. Just more Russia gate hyperbole from the mass media akin,though in a totally different sphere, to the world cup scaremongering as another example.

The intelligence supporting reports of Russian commanders funding Talliban fighters to kill coalition troops in Afghanistan was reported as 'highly probable or highly likely'. Whilst this is not 'almost certain' (the highest level of probability for intelligence at >90%), highly probable or highly likely is still 75-85% in the associated probability range.

When you consider the qualitative term 'realistic possibility' is 25-50% then highly probable or highly likely is more than enough to inform front line commanders that troops lives are at threat and to take action to prevent such attacks.

I'm not a betting man, but if I were a troop commander on the ground in Afghanistan I wouldn't like those odds one little bit.

 

[Vic]

upset? No.

an adult wishing death on someone? grow up.

It's a relatively simple concept. If a tyrant causes death, is there a moral argument for his death? How bad does a tyrant have to be for him to be assassinated? What criteria would you use? In your answer, give examples from (a) the English civil war, (b) the French Revolution, (c) the War of Independence.

Or even just the trolley dilemma.

Trolley problem - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org