Free Agent Shooter w/ Should Look At

51 posts / 0 new
Last post
#1 Oct 4, 2017 8:57am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

Free Agent Shooter w/ Should Look At

He could create some problems in the locker room though:

Oct 4, 2017 8:59am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011
Oct 4, 2017 9:15am
ClipsAhoy
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 11 min ago
Joined: Jul 30, 2013

I would've really rolled over laughing if Trump would've pulled out his golf clubs and starting teeing off on the paper towels. 

Oct 4, 2017 9:16am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

ClipsAhoy wrote:

I would've really rolled over laughing if Trump would've pulled out his golf clubs and starting teeing off on the paper towels. 

Don't give him any ideas.

Oct 4, 2017 10:21am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011
Oct 4, 2017 11:40am
nuraman00
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 25 min ago
Joined: Oct 6, 2011

Why can't he bang in the paint like Zach Randolph?

Oct 5, 2017 8:30am
nuraman00
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 25 min ago
Joined: Oct 6, 2011

Paraphrasing from another board:  "He'll make the players build a wall on defense, and make the Spurs pay for it".

 

 

Oct 10, 2017 1:08pm
Rhy1244
Offline
Last seen: 36 min 6 sec ago
Joined: Oct 8, 2011

trapp76 wrote:

What a "fucking moron" lol:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/04/politics/tillerson-trump-moron/index.html

I don't get why this story is important.  Lots of people call their bosses moron, or worse.

I mean, privately, I bet most of congress thinks Trump is an idiot or at least hugely ignorant.

Oct 10, 2017 3:39pm
dane
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: Dec 29, 2012

Rhy1244 wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

What a "fucking moron" lol:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/04/politics/tillerson-trump-moron/index.html

I don't get why this story is important.  Lots of people call their bosses moron, or worse.

I mean, privately, I bet most of congress thinks Trump is an idiot or at least hugely ignorant.

As would anyone with the mental capacity to string three words together to form a sentence fragment.

 

Oct 10, 2017 5:30pm
tullabye
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: Nov 11, 2011

dane wrote:

Rhy1244 wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

What a "fucking moron" lol:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/04/politics/tillerson-trump-moron/index.html

I don't get why this story is important.  Lots of people call their bosses moron, or worse.

I mean, privately, I bet most of congress thinks Trump is an idiot or at least hugely ignorant.

As would anyone with the mental capacity to string three words together to form a sentence fragment.

 

Yeah because you guys have accomplished so much and are so smart while that idiot has only managed to build one of the most successful companies on the planet and become president of the US. What do you guys do,,, teach 6th graders or something? Lol.

Oct 10, 2017 6:46pm
Rhy1244
Offline
Last seen: 36 min 6 sec ago
Joined: Oct 8, 2011

tullabye wrote:

dane wrote:

Rhy1244 wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

What a "fucking moron" lol:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/04/politics/tillerson-trump-moron/index.html

I don't get why this story is important.  Lots of people call their bosses moron, or worse.

I mean, privately, I bet most of congress thinks Trump is an idiot or at least hugely ignorant.

As would anyone with the mental capacity to string three words together to form a sentence fragment.

 

Yeah because you guys have accomplished so much and are so smart while that idiot has only managed to build one of the most successful companies on the planet and become president of the US. What do you guys do,,, teach 6th graders or something? Lol.

You should never assume someone is smart or dumb because of their career.  

You should never assume wealth or the accumulation of wealth means intelligence.

 

 

Oct 10, 2017 7:46pm
tullabye
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: Nov 11, 2011

Rhy1244 wrote:

tullabye wrote:

dane wrote:

Rhy1244 wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

What a "fucking moron" lol:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/04/politics/tillerson-trump-moron/index.html

I don't get why this story is important.  Lots of people call their bosses moron, or worse.

I mean, privately, I bet most of congress thinks Trump is an idiot or at least hugely ignorant.

As would anyone with the mental capacity to string three words together to form a sentence fragment.

 

Yeah because you guys have accomplished so much and are so smart while that idiot has only managed to build one of the most successful companies on the planet and become president of the US. What do you guys do,,, teach 6th graders or something? Lol.

You should never assume someone is smart or dumb because of their career.  

You should never assume wealth or the accumulation of wealth means intelligence.

 

 

Sure. He graduated st the top of his class at Wharton, is one of the wealthiest people in the US and is the most powerful person in the world. Yet you guys think your brighter and that's okay. I just think your nuts.

Oct 10, 2017 7:56pm
Hitnrun24
Offline
Last seen: 23 min 40 sec ago
Joined: Dec 6, 2011

tullabye wrote:

Rhy1244 wrote:

tullabye wrote:

dane wrote:

Rhy1244 wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

What a "fucking moron" lol:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/04/politics/tillerson-trump-moron/index.html

I don't get why this story is important.  Lots of people call their bosses moron, or worse.

I mean, privately, I bet most of congress thinks Trump is an idiot or at least hugely ignorant.

As would anyone with the mental capacity to string three words together to form a sentence fragment.

 

Yeah because you guys have accomplished so much and are so smart while that idiot has only managed to build one of the most successful companies on the planet and become president of the US. What do you guys do,,, teach 6th graders or something? Lol.

You should never assume someone is smart or dumb because of their career.  

You should never assume wealth or the accumulation of wealth means intelligence.

 

 

Sure. He graduated st the top of his class at Wharton, is one of the wealthiest people in the US and is the most powerful person in the world. Yet you guys think your brighter and that's okay. I just think your nuts.

 

So he says at least

Oct 11, 2017 4:50am
dane
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: Dec 29, 2012

(1) He did not graduate at the top of his class at Wharton.  (2) He has had four bankruptcies, and had he invested the money he inherited in Mutual Funds, he would have much more than he has now  (i.e., you and I are in fact better at business).  But if your idea of success is acting like a belligerent a-hole, casually threatening nuclear war, groping women,  failing to put together a coherent thought or sequence of sentences (as his biographies all assert), and supporting neo-Nazis, then absolutely, he is your guy and there's no need to discuss further.

Oct 11, 2017 7:27pm
tullabye
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: Nov 11, 2011

[quote=dane]

(1) He did not graduate at the top of his class at Wharton.  (2) He has had four bankruptcies, and had he invested the money he inherited in Mutual Funds, he would have much more than he has now  (i.e., you and I are in fact better at business).  But if your idea of success is acting like a belligerent a-hole, casually threatening nuclear war, groping women,  failing to put together a coherent thought or sequence of sentences (as his biographies all assert), and supporting neo-Nazis, then absolutely, he is your guy and there's no need to discuss further.

[/quote

Oct 11, 2017 7:42pm
tullabye
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: Nov 11, 2011

tullabye]</p> <p>[quote=dane wrote:

(1) He did not graduate at the top of his class at Wharton.  (2) He has had four bankruptcies, and had he invested the money he inherited in Mutual Funds, he would have much more than he has now  (i.e., you and I are in fact better at business).  But if your idea of success is acting like a belligerent a-hole, casually threatening nuclear war, groping women,  failing to put together a coherent thought or sequence of sentences (as his biographies all assert), and supporting neo-Nazis, then absolutely, he is your guy and there's no need to discuss further.

 

Right. Keep on drinking the kool aid and denying the crimes on the left, which are rampant. You've got a boatload of problems, crimes and hypocracies In your own backyard staring you squarely in the face before you start spouting your delusional views.

Oct 11, 2017 9:03pm
Rhy1244
Offline
Last seen: 36 min 6 sec ago
Joined: Oct 8, 2011

tullabye]</p> <p>[quote=tullabye wrote:

dane wrote:

(1) He did not graduate at the top of his class at Wharton.  (2) He has had four bankruptcies, and had he invested the money he inherited in Mutual Funds, he would have much more than he has now  (i.e., you and I are in fact better at business).  But if your idea of success is acting like a belligerent a-hole, casually threatening nuclear war, groping women,  failing to put together a coherent thought or sequence of sentences (as his biographies all assert), and supporting neo-Nazis, then absolutely, he is your guy and there's no need to discuss further.

 

Right. Keep on drinking the kool aid and denying the crimes on the left, which are rampant. You've got a boatload of problems, crimes and hypocracies In your own backyard staring you squarely in the face before you start spouting your delusional views.

1) http://www.thedp.com/article/2017/02/trump-academics-at-wharton

Trump didn't make the  deans list, cum laude, summa cum laude or magna cum laude.

 

 

Oct 11, 2017 9:17pm
Rhy1244
Offline
Last seen: 36 min 6 sec ago
Joined: Oct 8, 2011

tullabye]</p> <p>[quote=tullabye wrote:

dane wrote:

(1) He did not graduate at the top of his class at Wharton.  (2) He has had four bankruptcies, and had he invested the money he inherited in Mutual Funds, he would have much more than he has now  (i.e., you and I are in fact better at business).  But if your idea of success is acting like a belligerent a-hole, casually threatening nuclear war, groping women,  failing to put together a coherent thought or sequence of sentences (as his biographies all assert), and supporting neo-Nazis, then absolutely, he is your guy and there's no need to discuss further.

 

Right. Keep on drinking the kool aid and denying the crimes on the left, which are rampant. You've got a boatload of problems, crimes and hypocracies In your own backyard staring you squarely in the face before you start spouting your delusional views.

trump failed businesses:  http://www.snopes.com/2016/08/01/donald-trumps-bankruptcies/

He's failed and succeeded.  With no baseline to determine if it is track record is good or not...

Trump vs the S&P500

Trump lost...by a lot.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/why-probably-better-investing-donald-233020366.html

 

Much of Trump's genius is in real estate and branding.  He brands probably better than anyone.  

Oct 12, 2017 5:08am
dane
Offline
Last seen: 2 months 1 week ago
Joined: Dec 29, 2012

OK.   My bad.  There's a special OT for politics.   And the reason I follow sports now is it keeps me from watching the news and constantly posting the meme:  "Don't try arguing with a Trump supporter:  you're not the Dumb Fuck Whisperer."

Oct 12, 2017 8:14am
tullabye
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: Nov 11, 2011

dane wrote:

OK.   My bad.  There's a special OT for politics.   And the reason I follow sports now is it keeps me from watching the news and constantly posting the meme:  "Don't try arguing with a Trump supporter:  you're not the Dumb Fuck Whisperer."

There were two choices and she was a pathetic, corrupt and lazy candidate without a message. Left still hasn't gotten over it. Move on until your next chance but the so called progressives better stop with all the bs hurting the country otherwise your party will just continue to sink.

Oct 12, 2017 9:12am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

tullabye]</p> <p>[quote=tullabye wrote:

dane wrote:

(1) He did not graduate at the top of his class at Wharton.  (2) He has had four bankruptcies, and had he invested the money he inherited in Mutual Funds, he would have much more than he has now  (i.e., you and I are in fact better at business).  But if your idea of success is acting like a belligerent a-hole, casually threatening nuclear war, groping women,  failing to put together a coherent thought or sequence of sentences (as his biographies all assert), and supporting neo-Nazis, then absolutely, he is your guy and there's no need to discuss further.

 

Right. Keep on drinking the kool aid and denying the crimes on the left, which are rampant. You've got a boatload of problems, crimes and hypocracies In your own backyard staring you squarely in the face before you start spouting your delusional views.

Moron

Oct 12, 2017 9:13am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

Trump is a daddy's boy that was born into daddy's money. Never earned a thing in his life.

Unlike our last president, who was a self made man that came from nothing.

Oct 12, 2017 10:02am
Mistwell
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 41 min ago
Joined: Oct 17, 2011

trapp76 wrote:

Trump is a daddy's boy that was born into daddy's money. Never earned a thing in his life.

Unlike our last president, who was a self made man that came from nothing.

I agree with you on Trump. You're wrong on Obama. He went to literally the most elite private school in the state of Hawaii. I've visited. It's high end ivy league type prep school. He grew up in the upper middle class, his grandparents on his mom's side (who they lived with for a time) had quite a bit of money (mom had been a VP of a bank), both his parents had college degrees (dad went to Harvard, mom went to UW and finished at UH, both had post-graduate degrees as well), and he then went to straight highest end colleges after prep school. He had a leg up in life. He never in his life lived poor. He also never "self-made" his millions, they all came because he was President, as influence buying. I am not bashing for that, but that's absolutely what happened. Barack Obama lived a privileged life. Not near AS privileged as Donald Trump of course, but he was not a self made man either. 

Now VP Joe Biden? He did more to be a self-made man at least. VP Mike Pence as well. Both worked their way up in life a heck of a lot more than either President Obama or President Trump.

Oct 12, 2017 11:10am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

Mistwell wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

Trump is a daddy's boy that was born into daddy's money. Never earned a thing in his life.

Unlike our last president, who was a self made man that came from nothing.

Barack Obama lived a privileged life. Not near AS privileged as Donald Trump of course

You probably can't name 100 people in the world who had a more privileged life than Donald Trump. Obama isn't even in the same universe.

Oct 12, 2017 11:35am
Rhy1244
Offline
Last seen: 36 min 6 sec ago
Joined: Oct 8, 2011

trapp76 wrote:

Mistwell wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

Trump is a daddy's boy that was born into daddy's money. Never earned a thing in his life.

Unlike our last president, who was a self made man that came from nothing.

Barack Obama lived a privileged life. Not near AS privileged as Donald Trump of course

You probably can't name 100 people in the world who had a more privileged life than Donald Trump. Obama isn't even in the same universe.

That's moving the goalpost.  You can see where you said Obama was self made and came from nothing.   Unless you mean in some metaphysical sense...like from the cosmic dust, Obama grew up privileged and not from nothing.

Oct 12, 2017 1:30pm
Mistwell
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 41 min ago
Joined: Oct 17, 2011

trapp76 wrote:

Mistwell wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

Trump is a daddy's boy that was born into daddy's money. Never earned a thing in his life.

Unlike our last president, who was a self made man that came from nothing.

Barack Obama lived a privileged life. Not near AS privileged as Donald Trump of course

You probably can't name 100 people in the world who had a more privileged life than Donald Trump. Obama isn't even in the same universe.

True. And? I was addressing your comment that Barack Obama was a, "self made man that came from nothing." That can be false as well. And it is. He was not self made, and he did not come from nothing, and that remains the facts despite Trump coming from a different universe of privilege.

When you live on the bottom, both their lives are universes away. The idea that Barack Obama, ivy league kid whose educated (Harvard-level) parents and grandparents made sure he never "had" to work hard to eat, somehow came from nothing is ludicrous. 

And to be clear it's just you calling President Obama a self-made man. In his book HE doesn't describe his life that way, and he talks about how he felt he grew up in a life of privilege as well. It's only you who has built this fantasy that somehow Barack Obama came from nothing. 

You'd do better to focus on Joe Biden if you're looking for someone who started a lot lower than he ended. Though even his family was back to being middle class by the time he was in school. Even Joe Biden ended up at a private prep school (Archmere Academy​). 

Oct 13, 2017 7:29am
tullabye
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: Nov 11, 2011

trapp76 wrote:

Trump is a daddy's boy that was born into daddy's money. Never earned a thing in his life.

Unlike our last president, who was a self made man that came from nothing.

idiot

Oct 13, 2017 10:25am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

Mistwell wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

Mistwell wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

Trump is a daddy's boy that was born into daddy's money. Never earned a thing in his life.

Unlike our last president, who was a self made man that came from nothing.

Barack Obama lived a privileged life. Not near AS privileged as Donald Trump of course

You probably can't name 100 people in the world who had a more privileged life than Donald Trump. Obama isn't even in the same universe.

The idea that Barack Obama, ivy league kid whose educated (Harvard-level) parents and grandparents made sure he never "had" to work hard to eat, somehow came from nothing is ludicrous.  

If you don't think Obama had very very difficult obstacles to overcome in order to become president, obstacles that nobody has ever had to overcome before him in fact............you're as big of a fucking moron as the fucking moron in the white house and his fucking moron supporters.

Anyway, the point is, there is a daddy's boy in the white house, who is probably the most privileged president in american history.

Oct 13, 2017 10:24am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

tullabye wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

Trump is a daddy's boy that was born into daddy's money. Never earned a thing in his life.

Unlike our last president, who was a self made man that came from nothing.

idiot

Moron

Oct 13, 2017 10:26am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

Mistwell wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

Mistwell wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

Trump is a daddy's boy that was born into daddy's money. Never earned a thing in his life.

Unlike our last president, who was a self made man that came from nothing.

Barack Obama lived a privileged life. Not near AS privileged as Donald Trump of course

You probably can't name 100 people in the world who had a more privileged life than Donald Trump. Obama isn't even in the same universe.

True. 

Good, glad we agree.

Oct 13, 2017 2:30pm
Mistwell
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 41 min ago
Joined: Oct 17, 2011

trapp76 wrote:

 

If you don't think Obama had very very difficult obstacles to overcome in order to become president, obstacles that nobody has ever had to overcome before him in fact.....

If you would stop being a moving target that would be just swell Trapp.

That is, in no way shape or form, in any way the argument you made or which I was responding to. And you fucking well know it. Nice strawman, did you build that all by yourself? You said he was a  "self made man that came from nothing". Had you made this completely other argument, that he had to overcome difficult obstacles to become President, I would have agreed with you (and the biggest obstacle he had to overcome was named Hillary Clinton in my opinion). But you didn't make that argument. You're making it now to avoid having to admit you were wrong, but that's been years of standard operating procedure for you. 

Oct 16, 2017 2:31pm
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

Mistwell wrote:

and the biggest obstacle he had to overcome was named Hillary Clinton in my opinion. 

OMFG

Oct 16, 2017 3:44pm
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011
Oct 16, 2017 5:23pm
Mistwell
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 41 min ago
Joined: Oct 17, 2011

trapp76 wrote:

Mistwell wrote:

and the biggest obstacle he had to overcome was named Hillary Clinton in my opinion. 

OMFG

You disagree? You think it was easy for a black first term Senator to beat the establishment overwhelming favorite in Hillary Clinton when he won the nomination? I think him winning the nomination was harder than beating either McCain or Romney. 

Oct 16, 2017 6:36pm
tullabye
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: Nov 11, 2011

Love the picture of Hillary all over Harvey Weinstein, both hands affectionately on his chest, and her not speaking out against him until a two sentence statement to the press five days later. She now don't give back the hundreds of thousands he donated to her saying it was already spent. She of course doesn't want to talk about her husbands predatory past  Such a phony, total untrustworthy hypocrite and a joke of s champion for women's rights. I'm also sure the pictures of Weinstein with the Obamas and their endorsements of him as well as Chucky Schumer in his Sunday best hobnobbing with him have been taken off their walls.  Speaks volumes about the left and their supposed moral authority.

Oct 16, 2017 11:06pm
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

tullabye wrote:

Love the picture of Hillary all over Harvey Weinstein, both hands affectionately on his chest, and her not speaking out against him until a two sentence statement to the press five days later. She now don't give back the hundreds of thousands he donated to her saying it was already spent. She of course doesn't want to talk about her husbands predatory past  Such a phony, total untrustworthy hypocrite and a joke of s champion for women's rights. I'm also sure the pictures of Weinstein with the Obamas and their endorsements of him as well as Chucky Schumer in his Sunday best hobnobbing with him have been taken off their walls.  Speaks volumes about the left and their supposed moral authority.

At least the dems didn't nominate Harvey Weinstein as their actual presidential candidate, that would have been way worse.

Not to mention good ole Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reily and Eric Bolling over at fox news grabbin em by the pussy too.

Oct 17, 2017 12:27am
tullabye
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: Nov 11, 2011

Yeah instead the dems nominated the enabler and fraud. She's a loser though just like her stupid fan base.

Oct 17, 2017 5:47am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

tullabye wrote:

Yeah instead the dems nominated the enabler and fraud. She's a loser though just like her stupid fan base.

Obsessed with Hillary just as much as the moron in chief.

Oct 17, 2017 9:25am
Mistwell
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 41 min ago
Joined: Oct 17, 2011

trapp76 wrote:

tullabye wrote:

Love the picture of Hillary all over Harvey Weinstein, both hands affectionately on his chest, and her not speaking out against him until a two sentence statement to the press five days later. She now don't give back the hundreds of thousands he donated to her saying it was already spent. She of course doesn't want to talk about her husbands predatory past  Such a phony, total untrustworthy hypocrite and a joke of s champion for women's rights. I'm also sure the pictures of Weinstein with the Obamas and their endorsements of him as well as Chucky Schumer in his Sunday best hobnobbing with him have been taken off their walls.  Speaks volumes about the left and their supposed moral authority.

At least the dems didn't nominate Harvey Weinstein as their actual presidential candidate, that would have been way worse.

Not to mention good ole Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reily and Eric Bolling over at fox news grabbin em by the pussy too.

They nominated Bill Clinton. They basically set up the nation to accept this sort of thing, decades ago. And people still in denial over what Bill Clinton did to women are partisan assholes. It's time already. We all know those women were not all lying. We all know he was in fact sexually harassing many women. It's time to stop pretending for partisan points. 

Oct 17, 2017 9:37am
VFHS
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 4 min ago
Joined: Mar 8, 2013

For the record, the idea that Trump "should have just invested in mutual funds" is dumb. Mutual funds would be worthless without entrepreneurs like Trump who take risks and build things. There are plenty of things to criticize him for, so it's annoying when people consistently pick the dumbest and most trivial talking points.

Oct 17, 2017 10:25am
mannycoon
Offline
Last seen: 59 min 14 sec ago
Joined: Nov 2, 2011

VFHS wrote:

For the record, the idea that Trump "should have just invested in mutual funds" is dumb. Mutual funds would be worthless without entrepreneurs like Trump who take risks and build things. There are plenty of things to criticize him for, so it's annoying when people consistently pick the dumbest and most trivial talking points.

What has he actually built successfully?  He's very successful at personal branding and selling his celebrity, but not much else.  He's basically a more successful Kim Kardashian.  Most buildings with the Trump name on them are just paying for branding, not actually being built by him, his multiple bankruptcies were from the time he was trying to do things himself rather than selling his fame.  He's not Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos or Mark Zuckerberg or the Walton family or Sheldon Adelson or whoever.

Oct 17, 2017 10:43am
mannycoon
Offline
Last seen: 59 min 14 sec ago
Joined: Nov 2, 2011

trapp76 wrote:

At least the dems didn't nominate Harvey Weinstein as their actual presidential candidate, that would have been way worse.

I read article around election time, that talked about how the public in general is more offput by hypocrisy than bad deeds on their own and as result a lot of people saw Trump's being a shameless, unapologetic dirtbag as more honest and appealing than Clinton (even though blatant bullshitting and dishonesty is one of the things Trump is most unapologetic about), especially given so much of Clinton's campaign was driven by identity politics and shaming bad behavior.  Maybe the Clintons aren't as shitty as Trump and they are likely way more competent at the day to day political process, but for the most part people don't like being lectured, especially by people they see behaving badly themselves.  I don't think its surprising that given the choice of two dirtbags, the one that was less likely to shame you about your own bad behavior was the one chosen by many people, even if his own behavior was the worst of the two options. 

Clinton was probably about the worst possible candidate to run against Trump.  I think someone with a cleaner past like Biden or someone less focused on identity and more focused on economics like Sanders, both would have matched up better in the key states Clinton lost like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.  Alternatively I think Clinton's campaign could have been more successful if she focused more how her political experience could benefit people despite her flaws rather focusing how awful Trump was, everyone already knew Trump was awful and he didn't hide from it.

Oct 17, 2017 10:59am
tullabye
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: Nov 11, 2011

trapp76 wrote:

tullabye wrote:

Yeah instead the dems nominated the enabler and fraud. She's a loser though just like her stupid fan base.

Obsessed with Hillary just as much as the moron in chief.

It was your party that was obsessed. How's your 401k doing... you probably panicked and sold though. 

Oct 17, 2017 11:20am
tullabye
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 27 min ago
Joined: Nov 11, 2011

mannycoon wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

At least the dems didn't nominate Harvey Weinstein as their actual presidential candidate, that would have been way worse.

I read article around election time, that talked about how the public in general is more offput by hypocrisy than bad deeds on their own and as result a lot of people saw Trump's being a shameless, unapologetic dirtbag as more honest and appealing than Clinton (even though blatant bullshitting and dishonesty is one of the things Trump is most unapologetic about), especially given so much of Clinton's campaign was driven by identity politics and shaming bad behavior.  Maybe the Clintons aren't as shitty as Trump and they are likely way more competent at the day to day political process, but for the most part people don't like being lectured, especially by people they see behaving badly themselves.  I don't think its surprising that given the choice of two dirtbags, the one that was less likely to shame you about your own bad behavior was the one chosen by many people, even if his own behavior was the worst of the two options. 

Clinton was probably about the worst possible candidate to run against Trump.  I think someone with a cleaner past like Biden or someone less focused on identity and more focused on economics like Sanders, both would have matched up better in the key states Clinton lost like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.  Alternatively I think Clinton's campaign could have been more successful if she focused more how her political experience could benefit people despite her flaws rather focusing how awful Trump was, everyone already knew Trump was awful and he didn't hide from it.

The dems are so dishonest. From not turning over the servers after the supposed Russian interference to feeding Hillary debate questions, to doing everything unethically possible to derail Bernie. Not to mention the blatant dishonesty and criminality of crooked Hillary. If they had just let things take their normal course without their cheating ways Bernie might have actually made it. So dishonest and stupid...party has no one to blame but themselves. They aren't honest enough to do that though so  they come up with every excuse in the book. Hillary is a very bad person and far worse than the president. To all the butt hurt dems who STILL can't come to grip with the results "Sorry losers but those two were the choices presented". Next time  put the kool aid down for a minute before you start celebrating.

Oct 17, 2017 11:51am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

tullabye wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

tullabye wrote:

Yeah instead the dems nominated the enabler and fraud. She's a loser though just like her stupid fan base.

Obsessed with Hillary just as much as the moron in chief.

It was your party that was obsessed. 

Says the person who tried to make a Harvey Weinstein story about Hillary.

Oct 17, 2017 11:56am
trapp76
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 34 min ago
Joined: Oct 28, 2011

mannycoon wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

At least the dems didn't nominate Harvey Weinstein as their actual presidential candidate, that would have been way worse.

I read article around election time, that talked about how the public in general is more offput by hypocrisy than bad deeds on their own and as result a lot of people saw Trump's being a shameless, unapologetic dirtbag as more honest and appealing than Clinton (even though blatant bullshitting and dishonesty is one of the things Trump is most unapologetic about), especially given so much of Clinton's campaign was driven by identity politics and shaming bad behavior.  Maybe the Clintons aren't as shitty as Trump and they are likely way more competent at the day to day political process, but for the most part people don't like being lectured, especially by people they see behaving badly themselves.  I don't think its surprising that given the choice of two dirtbags, the one that was less likely to shame you about your own bad behavior was the one chosen by many people, even if his own behavior was the worst of the two options. 

Clinton was probably about the worst possible candidate to run against Trump.  I think someone with a cleaner past like Biden or someone less focused on identity and more focused on economics like Sanders, both would have matched up better in the key states Clinton lost like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.  Alternatively I think Clinton's campaign could have been more successful if she focused more how her political experience could benefit people despite her flaws rather focusing how awful Trump was, everyone already knew Trump was awful and he didn't hide from it.

I agree about Hillary not being a great candidate, I liked Obama over her and Bernie over her..........but she did get 2 mill more votes than Trump did. Remember, Trump didn't win because he got more votes than Hillary (he didn't), he won because Hillary didn't inspire Dem voters to turn out like Obama did. Too many people didn't vote at all...............and now the disaster we have in the white house is on those morons, just as much as the morons who actually voted for the moron in chief, like that moron tullabye.

Oct 17, 2017 1:25pm
Rhy1244
Offline
Last seen: 36 min 6 sec ago
Joined: Oct 8, 2011

mannycoon wrote:

trapp76 wrote:

At least the dems didn't nominate Harvey Weinstein as their actual presidential candidate, that would have been way worse.

I read article around election time, that talked about how the public in general is more offput by hypocrisy than bad deeds on their own and as result a lot of people saw Trump's being a shameless, unapologetic dirtbag as more honest and appealing than Clinton (even though blatant bullshitting and dishonesty is one of the things Trump is most unapologetic about), especially given so much of Clinton's campaign was driven by identity politics and shaming bad behavior.  Maybe the Clintons aren't as shitty as Trump and they are likely way more competent at the day to day political process, but for the most part people don't like being lectured, especially by people they see behaving badly themselves.  I don't think its surprising that given the choice of two dirtbags, the one that was less likely to shame you about your own bad behavior was the one chosen by many people, even if his own behavior was the worst of the two options. 

Clinton was probably about the worst possible candidate to run against Trump.  I think someone with a cleaner past like Biden or someone less focused on identity and more focused on economics like Sanders, both would have matched up better in the key states Clinton lost like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan.  Alternatively I think Clinton's campaign could have been more successful if she focused more how her political experience could benefit people despite her flaws rather focusing how awful Trump was, everyone already knew Trump was awful and he didn't hide from it.

Interesting. I don't suppose you could remember the article so I could read it?

 

Oct 17, 2017 2:14pm
VFHS
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 4 min ago
Joined: Mar 8, 2013

mannycoon wrote:

VFHS wrote:

For the record, the idea that Trump "should have just invested in mutual funds" is dumb. Mutual funds would be worthless without entrepreneurs like Trump who take risks and build things. There are plenty of things to criticize him for, so it's annoying when people consistently pick the dumbest and most trivial talking points.

What has he actually built successfully?  He's very successful at personal branding and selling his celebrity, but not much else.  He's basically a more successful Kim Kardashian.  Most buildings with the Trump name on them are just paying for branding, not actually being built by him, his multiple bankruptcies were from the time he was trying to do things himself rather than selling his fame.  He's not Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos or Mark Zuckerberg or the Walton family or Sheldon Adelson or whoever.

He's a multibillionaire with a successful global real estate empire. His brand wouldn't be worth anything in the first place if it wasn't backed by actual expertise in his field. I'm sure you've done better, though.

I'm just saying, Trump's critics really should stop arguing that someone who's worth $3.5 billion knows nothing about money. It's a losing argument that his supporters will rightfully laugh at.

Oct 17, 2017 8:16pm
Rhy1244
Offline
Last seen: 36 min 6 sec ago
Joined: Oct 8, 2011

 

 

VFHS wrote:

mannycoon wrote:

VFHS wrote:

For the record, the idea that Trump "should have just invested in mutual funds" is dumb. Mutual funds would be worthless without entrepreneurs like Trump who take risks and build things. There are plenty of things to criticize him for, so it's annoying when people consistently pick the dumbest and most trivial talking points.

What has he actually built successfully?  He's very successful at personal branding and selling his celebrity, but not much else.  He's basically a more successful Kim Kardashian.  Most buildings with the Trump name on them are just paying for branding, not actually being built by him, his multiple bankruptcies were from the time he was trying to do things himself rather than selling his fame.  He's not Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos or Mark Zuckerberg or the Walton family or Sheldon Adelson or whoever.

He's a multibillionaire with a successful global real estate empire. His brand wouldn't be worth anything in the first place if it wasn't backed by actual expertise in his field. I'm sure you've done better, though.

I'm just saying, Trump's critics really should stop arguing that someone who's worth $3.5 billion knows nothing about money. It's a losing argument that his supporters will rightfully laugh at.

Kim Karadashian is worth 150 mill.  She has a globally known media brand.  She must know lots about money and other stuff.

You are right.  Kim k could also be a good president.  We are dumb to think Kim k couldn’t pass a basic Econ class.

 

Oct 17, 2017 8:28pm
Mistwell
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 41 min ago
Joined: Oct 17, 2011

Just a warning Rhy. If jinxes are real and you just summoned Kim Karadashian to be President of the United States, I will hunt you down and force you to watch every episode of every show she's ever been on. Don't think I won't. 

Oct 19, 2017 11:46am
Hitnrun24
Offline
Last seen: 23 min 40 sec ago
Joined: Dec 6, 2011

Rhy1244 wrote:

 

 

VFHS wrote:

mannycoon wrote:

VFHS wrote:

For the record, the idea that Trump "should have just invested in mutual funds" is dumb. Mutual funds would be worthless without entrepreneurs like Trump who take risks and build things. There are plenty of things to criticize him for, so it's annoying when people consistently pick the dumbest and most trivial talking points.

What has he actually built successfully?  He's very successful at personal branding and selling his celebrity, but not much else.  He's basically a more successful Kim Kardashian.  Most buildings with the Trump name on them are just paying for branding, not actually being built by him, his multiple bankruptcies were from the time he was trying to do things himself rather than selling his fame.  He's not Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos or Mark Zuckerberg or the Walton family or Sheldon Adelson or whoever.

He's a multibillionaire with a successful global real estate empire. His brand wouldn't be worth anything in the first place if it wasn't backed by actual expertise in his field. I'm sure you've done better, though.

I'm just saying, Trump's critics really should stop arguing that someone who's worth $3.5 billion knows nothing about money. It's a losing argument that his supporters will rightfully laugh at.

Kim Karadashian is worth 150 mill.  She has a globally known media brand.  She must know lots about money and other stuff.

You are right.  Kim k could also be a good president.  We are dumb to think Kim k couldn’t pass a basic Econ class.

 

 

Exactly. I don't get why people automatically think people who are rich have this elite knowledge. The point that Trump's money came from branding is a forgotten one when it comes to people defending his wealth. He marketed the hell out of himself, I will give it to him that he is somewhat of a marketing expert. But getting his own show did wonders to his brand and in turn brought in money for him, arguably more than anything else he's done has.

 

He was relentless though, even calling in to day time shows pretending to be his own publicist before people knew his voice and who he was. Not claiming he's incompetent in the area, I'm sure he knows more than the average person due to his experience, but you're kidding yourself if you don't think the branding wasn't the key and most major advantage that he had that just isn't available to 99.9% of the population.