***Official Political Discussion Thread***

Floyd was makin' some of the people in that room feel some kind of way.

He's rich so it's not a surprise he's ok with Trump (He might even know Trump from hosting his fights) but he does have a few good points.
A lot of folks that were asleep on politics woke up in a frenzy during this election & you have to wonder what all the reasons are for that...

At what point in the last decade or so was Trump not seen as a tacky rich moron? Practically the whole world's reaction to his candidacy announcement was that it had to be some sort of joke or elaborate trolling attempt. DoJ lawsuit, Central Park 5, birtherism, ... ?
His mental state and intellect seems to have degraded very significantly in the more recent years but that's not saying much.
 
At what point in the last decade or so was Trump not seen as a tacky rich moron? Practically the whole world's reaction to his candidacy announcement was that it had to be some sort of joke or elaborate trolling attempt. DoJ lawsuit, Central Park 5, birtherism, ... ?

Floyd saying no one was calling Don racist let's me know just how much he knows.
 
At what point in the last decade or so was Trump not seen as a tacky rich moron? Practically the whole world's reaction to his candidacy announcement was that it had to be some sort of joke or elaborate trolling attempt.

Some may have seen him as tacky rich but that is different than the title of racist that Floyd spoke about.

It was known that Trump went bankrupt before but he hasn't been known specifically as a dimwit or moron for decades.
That is a new addition to the gimmick.
 
Floyd saying no one was calling Don racist let's me know just how much he knows.

How long has NT been up in arms over Donald Trump's racism? Not that long imo. Compared to his career as a celebrity.
Old newspaper clippings from the '70's being looked at for the first time by many in decades does not mean he has been
known as a racist for a long time.
 
At what point in the last decade or so was Trump not seen as a tacky rich moron? Practically the whole world's reaction to his candidacy announcement was that it had to be some sort of joke or elaborate trolling attempt. DoJ lawsuit, Central Park 5, birtherism, ... ?
His mental state and intellect seems to have degraded very significantly in the more recent years but that's not saying much.
Decade? More like the past 30 years. He's always been seen as a classless clown with a taste for tasteless gilded objects and a butt-of-all-jokes hair transplant.
 
Some may have seen him as tacky rich but that is different than the title of racist that Floyd spoke about.

It was known that Trump went bankrupt before but he hasn't been known specifically as a dimwit or moron for decades.
That is a new addition to the gimmick.
Trump been known to be a moron for many years even in my country, prior to the election. It's not like he hasn't been pretty well known throughout and outside of the US for numerous years.
However I think birtherism is what truly propelled him into the realm of a global laughing stock.
 
On a more serious note, Tyson sums up nicely a point I made earlier in this thread about people unable to appreciate scientific conclusions. They insist that their opinion is somehow still valid when it is at odds with reality.

Just how is reality defined in every situation though?

And of course there are perhaps things that are true in this universe that science can not prove. Things even above the scientific method.
I'm sure DeGrasse would not argue that though. In fact I've seen him admit such over the years. But that's not a political conversation.
 
Trump been known to be a moron for many years even in my country, prior to the election. It's not like he hasn't been pretty well known throughout and outside of the US for numerous years.

People systematically deny housing to minorities every day, b.
 
How long has NT been up in arms over Donald Trump's racism? Not that long imo. Compared to his career as a celebrity.
Old newspaper clippings from the '70's being looked at for the first time by many in decades does not mean he has been
known as a racist for a long time.
Yes and no.

I definitely agree that it didn't get the mainstream coverage it deserved until he ran for president.

At the same time, many comments and actions that would normally be overlooked or ignored from an average citizen were subjected to a justifiably harsher spotlight once donald became a potential candidate for leader of the free world.

This is of course ignoring the racist birther crap that should have been fully condemned from day one. And the central park 5 bull**** that should have landed donald in prison for slander from day 1 if we had fairness in our legal system.
 
Trump has been a clown for YEARS.
Trump been known to be a moron for many years even in my country, prior to the election. It's not like he hasn't been pretty well known throughout and outside of the US for numerous years.
However I think birtherism is what truly propelled him into the realm of a global laughing stock.

He was previously the drunk uncle you laughed at for his ridiculous statements, while now he's president of the US :smh:
 
How long has NT been up in arms over Donald Trump's racism? Not that long imo. Compared to his career as a celebrity.
Old newspaper clippings from the '70's being looked at for the first time by many in decades does not mean he has been
known as a racist for a long time.

It became more of a pressing issue when he became president. Donald Trump the housing discriminating scam artist doesn't carry as much weight as Donald Trump the alt right white supremacist figurehead. I think the majority of us didn't care enough about dude to be looking into his life like that.

Even if he hasn't been known as a racist for a long time, if he just became one during his election cycle he's still a racist. If somebody just became a klansman yesterday I'm not gonna ask when he bought his robes.
 
No one thought Donald Trump was racist the same way no one thought Donald Sterling was racist.
People weren't "up in arms" about Sterling being racist either until the tape came out. But those who knew, knew.
I honestly don't see how it matters when people get upset and accusations are lobbied if they're supported by evidence.
Both Trump and Sterling had a long history of evidence leading up until the moments mass public outrage began.
Saying "Oh but no one was saying it back in the 70s" isn't only incorrect, it's a pointless statement that proves or disproves nothing.
 
Even putting his other actions and statements aside, birtherism clearly defined Trump as a bonafide racist from the very first day he pushed that nonsense. I don't see how anyone could possibly even begin to submit any form of rational argument against that. And I am not aware of any evidence he has learned anything from that experience.
 
Just how is reality defined in every situation though?

And of course there are perhaps things that are true in this universe that science can not prove. Things even above the scientific method.
I'm sure DeGrasse would not argue that though. In fact I've seen him admit such over the years. But that's not a political conversation.

Had to unignore content to see this one. You don't really deserve a response with the incredibly childish way you attacked Belgium earlier in this thread, but...

Did you watch the video? The education system has an influence on people's ability to understand the scientific method and how it applies to the world around them.

At this point in time, around 97% of scientists whose field of study concerns global weather patterns, climate, anything you might directly associate with this topic are in consensus. To deny the overwhemling amount of proof in front of us that we have caused major environmental problems by dumping an excess of carbon into the atmosphere is irresponsible.

Then there's the issue that certain people with other agendas have made a deliberate effort to convolute facts. You can't see 98 studies pointing you in the direction of one answer, then find one that's inconclusive and one that points the other way, and claim to be intellectually honest.

This is what I mean by reality.
 
I'd be curious to see what New Yorkers in the 70's thought of whether donald and his father were racist.

I would be surprised if people said he wasn't.
 
Had to unignore content to see this one. You don't really deserve a response with the incredibly childish way you attacked Belgium earlier in this thread, but...

Did you watch the video? The education system has an influence on people's ability to understand the scientific method and how it applies to the world around them.

At this point in time, around 97% of scientists whose field of study concerns global weather patterns, climate, anything you might directly associate with this topic are in consensus. To deny the overwhemling amount of proof in front of us that we have caused major environmental problems by dumping an excess of carbon into the atmosphere is irresponsible.

Then there's the issue that certain people with other agendas have made a deliberate effort to convolute facts. You can't see 98 studies pointing you in the direction of one answer, then find one that's inconclusive and one that points the other way, and claim to be intellectually honest.

This is what I mean by reality.
to piggybank off this, people tried to make a similar argument about smoking and cancer for decades. that it just was too difficult to prove, etc etc.

the same scientists that the tobacco used to propagate this disinformation campaign are now being hired by the fossil fuel industry.

it's funny how we always talk about staying "woke" and not falling victim to DC insiders, but then when we have a clear-cut case of this happening (smoking then, climate change and vaccines now) people want to pull a double-fake and act like the obvious industry shills with clear financial incentives and who are bucking the overwhelming scientific consensus (of a community that has little to no financial incentive) are somehow the ones telling the truth.

and of course the ones making these judgments are about as informed about science and research and climate as your drunk obese uncle yelling at the television on Sunday is on football.
 
At what point in the last decade or so was Trump not seen as a tacky rich moron?

im glad you bring it up..

he was nominated for Emmys, Hollywood wouldn't of done that had they felt a type of way about him then because its a awards your peers vote on you for.

plus da urban culture been had a appreciation/liking to him a decade back as already shown multiple times.

da roast of Donald Trump was only a few years ago too.

it really was when he ran for Pres than da tides shifted (others will say him shadin Obama years ago various ways were da first micro cracks.)
 
to piggybank off this, people tried to make a similar argument about smoking and cancer for decades. that it just was too difficult to prove, etc etc.

the same scientists that the tobacco used to propagate this disinformation campaign are now being hired by the fossil fuel industry.

it's funny how we always talk about staying "woke" and not falling victim to DC insiders, but then when we have a clear-cut case of this happening (smoking then, climate change and vaccines now) people want to pull a double-fake and act like the obvious industry shills with clear financial incentives and who are bucking the overwhelming scientific consensus (of a community that has little to no financial incentive) are somehow the ones telling the truth.

and of course the ones making these judgments are about as informed about science and research and climate as your drunk obese uncle yelling at the television on Sunday is on football.

Used to have "scientists" and "doctors" telling people back in the day that a cigarette a day was good for you and helped clear out your lungs >D
 
to piggybank off this, people tried to make a similar argument about smoking and cancer for decades. that it just was too difficult to prove, etc etc.

the same scientists that the tobacco used to propagate this disinformation campaign are now being hired by the fossil fuel industry.

it's funny how we always talk about staying "woke" and not falling victim to DC insiders, but then when we have a clear-cut case of this happening (smoking then, climate change and vaccines now) people want to pull a double-fake and act like the obvious industry shills with clear financial incentives and who are bucking the overwhelming scientific consensus (of a community that has little to no financial incentive) are somehow the ones telling the truth.

and of course the ones making these judgments are about as informed about science and research and climate as your drunk obese uncle yelling at the television on Sunday is on football.

Good link there, I'm not surprised some of the same folks are involved in denying the relationship between a societal cost everyone is paying and an industry benefitting from it.

Another great example is the same people being involved in the processed/fast food industry. Ever read Salt Sugar Fat? Amazing book.

Part of my issue with a certain section of the "stay woke" crowd is their conspiratorial tilt. It saps them of common sense because of some desire to be the-smartest-guy-in-the-room.
 
Back
Top Bottom