Trump knocking down historic East Wing to build Ballroom - is this LEGAL?
- American Politics
- 204 Replies
I'm not even remotely fixated on it. It was a general, throwaway statement that seemed pretty not-debatable to me. I stated he was objectively unpopular. Somebody said he wasn't. I cited the metrics I used to arrive at his objective unpopularity, gave links, showed polls. Two people then hyper fixated on it because apparently acknowledging his objective unpopularity really, really bothers them, which is whatever because I'm well aware that this is more about making people who are a little too invested in an unpopular president feel less uncomfortable in being so all-in on an unpopular person. They'd rather just pretend he's great, we're great, they're great, he's a great guy, everybody loves him, blah blah blah. I've talked with enough people firmly down the Trump rabbithole to know a coping mechanism for uncomfortable truths that challenge their comfort level when I see them.I've been following the thread. I have no idea what you think labeling Trump "objectively unpopular" proves or why you've fixated on it. Perhaps you could succinctly summarize why you're belaboring this point.
At this point, the only thing that bothers me is that two adults don't seem to know what "objectively unpopular" means.
No. If you were involved with the thread and following the conversation, you would know that.Isn't that's that what we're talking about?
The difference being that you don't think I'm qualified because you don't like what I'm saying. I know myself to be qualified, however, because I have a degree in statistical analysis and interpretation, worked in the field for numerous years, and have received accolades for my work. On top of that, I've repeatedly proven I know what I'm talking about by citing my work.Cool. I don't think you're particularly qualified for this discussion either. Look at that! We have something in common after all.
The answer is in the statement I made:You stated that people were "crying in their Cheerios" over how his actions were affecting them. What exactly do you think they're "crying" about if not souring on Trump?
"It’s a statement that the red state people crying into their Cheerios over Trump doing something that impacts them badly have nothing to cry about as they were warned it would happen." Just because he has done something they don't like or is negatively impacting them doesn't mean they have soured on him as a whole. Obama did things I didn't like, but it didn't mean I stopped liking him as a president. It simply means he did things I don't agree with.
So, again... That statement is explaining why other people have expressed they have no sympathy over those crying into their Cheerios when they have the day they voted for. It was not a statement by me about something I believe that translates into an overall souring of Trump. That poster asked why other people have the "have the day you voted for" mentality, I explained why they do, that's it. I'm not really sure what your reading comprehension disconnect is, here.So you don't think people are "crying in their Cheerios"?
Uh, yes. I've been doing it this whole time. You're upset over a narrative you invented that I never said. That's not a personal attack, it's a statement of fact. And now you're upset that I'm pointing out you're upset by a narrative you invented. None of that is a personal attack, those are all reactions you are having to a totally made-up scenario you've concocted but attributed to me.My "feelings"? Are you incapable of engaging in an "objective" discussion without getting personal?
Stating a fact is playground banter? I said Biden was an unpopular president who, despite his unpopularity which you said was a lot, he was still popular for longer than Trump has been in either of his terms. Therefore, if you think Biden was unpopular for a majority of his presidency, you shouldn't be arguing that somehow Trump is popular when he was less popular than somebody you believe to be unpopular. And since the discussion is ranking popularity of presidents, it's playground banter to point out Trump comes out of the bottom?Again, what is the point? Stating that Biden was popular twice as long as Trump reeks of playground banter, and I have no idea what you think it proves.
I mean, I'm sorry understanding and repeating statistics feels mean to you... I guess? But most people are able to look at facts like this and not be personally offended by it. I'm not sure why you would find it playground insults to point out the obvious, unless you were Trump or somehow deeply invested personally in how his administration performs.
Now *that* is playground banter. One small step below saying "well if you like them so much why don't you marry them?"Alrighty then. Maybe you should go help the Democrats. They are clearly in need someone with your higher understanding, since they can't seem to figure out how to win elections.
Ignoring that you've shown, again, your complete lack of understanding on the meaning of the word "objectively" in a statistical application, the reason Fauci needed a preemptive pardon is because our President announced he will be seeking retribution and revenge for everybody he believes wronged him and since he doesn't have to worry about winning another election, that means he has nothing to lose and can behave as erratically as he chooses to (which we are currently seeing)."Objectively", Fauci was such a great and wonderful guy, he needed a pardon from Biden to excuse him from accountability for more than a decade of his career leading up to the pandemic.
So, you have no point to make and no means to refute what I said. Noted.If you want to keep misleading people on that point, that's certainly your prerogative.
SO you have no point to make, no means to refute what I said, and to admit as much is difficult for you so you'd rather ignore it. Noted again.Because this thread isn't about COVID, I'm going to ignore this Gish gallop, but suffice to say if people read your links closely, they'll see that the content at your links does not support your contrived summary of events.
Incorrect use of the word, again. You're just mad I'm not a sycophant for Trump and have the statistics to show that I'm not in the minority.If anyone is "fixating" on it, it's "objectively" you.
Actually, he did win the popular vote in 2024.
Again, being intentionally deceptive to make your argument appear stronger than it is. The fact that you'd outright lie to make it seem like you're making a point is just... Sad.Yes, they did, in 2024.
The most recent of which he won the popular vote.
What I said:
"He's run for president four times, yet has only won the popular vote once. Because we don't elect based off of popular vote, we do it based off the electoral college, it means he still got to be president because he won in the only metric that counts, and he did so twice." and then again later in the post I was clearly talking about the election he didn't win by popular vote as your point was that because he won an election twice, he must be popular.
TBH, we didn't agree but at least I thought you had intellectual integrity when it came to these discussions. Now... Not so much.
Holy. Cow. All it took was you dissecting my posts line-by-line, adopting COVID denyer ideology, saying I was wrong but not citing anything or citing things you clearly didn't read, and outright lie about things I've said, so that we could land at you FINALLY admitting that, yes, the man is objectively unpopular.The polls show that the majority of people think he is unpopular.
What. A. Journey. Just to arrive at the destination I was at the WHOLE time.
Upvote
0
