vnatale wrote: ↑Mon Mar 30, 2020 1:30 am
Mitch Albom: Hey, President Donald Trump, her name is Gretchen Whitmer
She has a name. It is not "the woman." It is Gretchen Whitmer. And she's doing her job to protect Michiganders from the deadly coronavirus pandemic.
I agree, Trump should call her by her name. However...
Gretchen Whitmer hasn’t done anything that every Michigander doesn’t want her to do
That is an obviously false statement, which reveals the bias of the writer of the article and thus makes the entire article suspect. I bet that same reporter wrote about the angry, armed Michigan citizens protesting the lockdown measures. Some of which were indeed quite ridiculous (e.g. a store that's open and that normally sells an item, was forbidden from selling that item and had to remove it from shelves or cordon them off).
Fact checking Trump is something that the media should do, but maybe they should consider fact checking themselves while they're at it.
Love him or hate him I think it's apparent that Trump doesn't have the demeanor to be president. Sure the media goads him, but he puts himself out there by acting like a lunatic most of the time. His online presence and tweets are quintessentially troll like and his penchant for using demeanong playground nicknames for his opponents opens him up to a similar lack of respect from those of opposing party which then devolves into what we see today. This wasn't started by Democrats, he was doing this to Republican contenders in primary...acting like a bully, which I personally have no respect for.. The divisiveness he brings out of people is bad overall for all parties and Americans. Although I agree with some of his policies, he is a bad president.
In response to Twitter fact check controversy, I think unlike most of Trump's tweets, Jack Dorseys handling of firestorm sounded very presidential. Can't ever imagine such leadership and taking responsibility out of our current whiner in Chief.
Fact check: there is someone ultimately accountable for our actions as a company, and that’s me. Please leave our employees out of this. We’ll continue to point out incorrect or disputed information about elections globally. And we will admit to and own any mistakes we make.
8:47 PM · May 27, 2020 from
doodle wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 7:10 am
In response to Twitter fact check controversy, I think in sharp contrast to most of Trump's tweets, Jack Dorseys handling of firestorm sounded very presidential. Can't ever imagine such leadership and taking responsibility out of our current whiner in Chief.
Fact check: there is someone ultimately accountable for our actions as a company, and that’s me. Please leave our employees out of this. We’ll continue to point out incorrect or disputed information about elections globally. And we will admit to and own any mistakes we make.
8:47 PM · May 27, 2020 from
Jack Dorsey seems to be a reasonable and bland dude, but Twitter is a shit show. Trump is a wild man, but his policy stuff seems pretty reasonable to me.
Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 7:38 am
Jack Dorsey seems to be a reasonable and bland dude, but Twitter is a shit show. Trump is a wild man, but his policy stuff seems pretty reasonable to me.
Presentation and delivery matter....a lot. Like I said, I agree with many policies, but his delivery is abysmal. On top of that his personality shortcomings as an individual make him entirely ineffective as a president. He doesn't have the right demeanor for the position. He is much too sensitive to criticism and unable to effectively engage with opponents in any sort of constructive manner and that has dangerous ramifications in a nation as divided as ours is. He is much better suited for flamboyant reality television shows where such conflict is mere entertainment. He is doing a very poor job of representing the characteristics that I want to think of as American...honesty, transparency, level headedness, fairness, responsibility. He is a narcissistic, thin skinned, whiny, con man with a penchant for conspiracy theories who blames everyone else and will shoulder no responsibility for anything that goes wrong. Those qualities do not make for an effective leader....unless perhaps you favor a Caligula like leadership style.
I think it's apparent that Trump sinks to the level of the journalists he deals with. They act like real shitheads when they interact with him or talk about him, and he gives it back in kind. From what I've seen, when people act professional around him it looks like he mostly does as well.
But if presentation and delivery matter a lot to you, and you don't like Trump's, what else is there to say? You're entitled to your opinion.
Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Thu May 28, 2020 11:12 am
I think it's apparent that Trump sinks to the level of the journalists he deals with. They act like real shitheads when they interact with him or talk about him, and he gives it back in kind. From what I've seen, when people act professional around him it looks like he mostly does as well.
But if presentation and delivery matter a lot to you, and you don't like Trump's, what else is there to say? You're entitled to your opinion.
The other way around I think....the journalists sink to Trump's level. He bullies and disrespects people and then acts outraged when no one shows him any respect. His style is corrosive to this country and undermines what good policy ideas he might have... I don't really think that qualifies as an opinion anymore. Can half the American population not identify his glaring personality defects as a leader? I'm truly surprised that style means so little to so many people...especially those phisophical utilitarians here who should be able to recognize how detrimental he is to conservative culture here precisely because he is such a blowhard.
Right, these are all good points in a primary (in which I've voted against Trump every time) but in the general, your option comes down to him and one other person.
Good to see Twitter standing up again to presidents ineptitude to grasp anything that happens in America beyond the sphere of his white privilege and labeling his tweet this morning of "when the looting starts, the shooting starts' as promoting violence. No one is condoning the looting, however what he said truly has the ability to escalate the violence enormously. It's unbelievable how incredibly inept this man is. At this point, yes...you vote for Hillary. If Scooby Doo ran for president I'd vote for him.
Last edited by doodle on Fri May 29, 2020 11:23 am, edited 1 time in total.
I should also mention that I disagree with almost everything the Democrats stand for. What happened to the Republican party? So sad what it has been transformed into.
No one is condoning the looting? Colin Kaepernick for one, and until expressly disclaimed, Nike and everybody else who's been carrying his water are endorsing the looting.
Don't see anything wrong with "when the looting starts, the shooting starts".
I've read a lot of articles about suburban women being turned off by Trump's style and that he's going to lose because of it. I'm guessing these voters will want somebody who prevents rioting and looting in the street rather than encouraging it. We'll see what happens.
So much in life comes down to personal responsibility. Trump understands this. The left doesn't and that seems to include Twitter and the rest of social media.
If you want to label personal responsibility as white privilege, then I don't know what to tell you. Maybe look in the mirror and ask who are the real racists. I'd love it if the media never used racial adjectives again. Just say that Human A did whatever to Human B. We don't need to know what color their skin is. All we need to know is what their actions were. We don't need the media trying to read their minds either.
However, if the media is going to use racial adjectives, they should do it every time. Currently, they only do it when a white person does something bad to a black person, not when the reverse happens.
And what do you think is going to happen when a couple rednecks take the president's tweet as permission to start shooting? You are going to see a race war erupt that will make 1991 in LA look like nothing. You want to ramp up the hatred and tension in this country even more, start have civilians and police shooting more black people.
stuper1 wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 12:20 pm
So much in life comes down to personal responsibility. Trump understands this. The left doesn't and that seems to include Twitter and the rest of social media.
If you want to label personal responsibility as white privilege, then I don't know what to tell you. Maybe look in the mirror and ask who are the real racists. I'd love it if the media never used racial adjectives again. Just say that Human A did whatever to Human B. We don't need to know what color their skin is. All we need to know is what their actions were. We don't need the media trying to read their minds either.
However, if the media is going to use racial adjectives, they should do it every time. Currently, they only do it when a white person does something bad to a black person, not when the reverse happens.
I don't disagree that personal responsibility matters, but you evidently have not worked around enough black people to hear the stories of what they have to endure. I have worked with many professionals who are routinely profiled for walking in the wrong neighborhoods, driving down the street, or just standing around in the wrong location.
Living in a diverse society comes at the cost of many more issues with social cohesiveness. This is a problem the Democrats ignore...diversity has upsides, but also many downsides. Either way, the president is making matters worse.
Black professionals have to endure this kind of treatment because a large percentage of crime is done by black people. It's that simple. Even black cops treat black people with more care than they treat white people. If you want to call that racism, then fine, call it racism, but it's not going to stop. It's just cops being smart about protecting themselves. It will stop when black people as a collective whole make themselves appear to be no more threatening than white people. They are the ones who need to make that happen. I don't think that rioting and burning down buildings is helping their cause.
Believe me, if Clinton had been elected, or if Biden or another Democrat gets elected, the racial divide won't get any better than it has been under Trump. If you think Trump is making things worse, then one of those folks will make him look like a piker. If anyone knows how to use divide-and-conquer racial politics to their advantage, it's Democrats.
Xan wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 12:06 pm
Don't see anything wrong with "when the looting starts, the shooting starts".
Agreed. My first impression upon reading Trump's tweet in context was that it's a warning akin to "Settle down, everyone, or you're going to hurt yourselves" rather than an attempt to incite violence. Could he have used better wording? Probably. But that's not the same thing as intending to incite violence.
We can all agree that Trump doesn't mince words. If he really wanted to incite violence, it would be painfully obvious in his tweet's wording. There would be no room for linguistic debate.
Xan wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 12:06 pm
Don't see anything wrong with "when the looting starts, the shooting starts".
Agreed. My first impression upon reading Trump's tweet in context was that it's a warning akin to "Settle down, everyone, or you're going to hurt yourselves" rather than an attempt to incite violence. Could he have used better wording? Probably. But that's not the same thing as intending to incite violence.
We can all agree that Trump doesn't mince words. If he really wanted to incite violence, it would be painfully obvious in his tweet's wording. There would be no room for linguistic debate.
Totally disagree. His words are incendiary...like dropping gasoline on a fire. Communication matters...otherwise we could just grunt and bang each other over the head. Trump has no communicative skills. Besides, this George Floyd fellow bounced a check....the guy in the Whitehouse has defaulted on millions...if not billions of debt. I have worked with construction workers who flat up told me he refused to pay them for work they did. Honest guys these, I worked with them for years. Trump is a con man, and I'm shocked how few people are totally ok with him representing them.
Tortoise wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 1:41 pm
Agreed. My first impression upon reading Trump's tweet in context was that it's a warning akin to "Settle down, everyone, or you're going to hurt yourselves" rather than an attempt to incite violence. Could he have used better wording? Probably. But that's not the same thing as intending to incite violence.
Here's Trump's explanation in his own words:
"Looting leads to shooting, and that’s why a man was shot and killed in Minneapolis on Wednesday night - or look at what just happened in Louisville with 7 people shot. I don’t want this to happen, and that’s what the expression put out last night means. It was spoken as a fact, not as a statement. It’s very simple, nobody should have any problem with this other than the haters, and those looking to cause trouble on social media. Honor the memory of George Floyd!" https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 3932894208
And that's maybe why he shouldn't communicate sensitive messages regarding situations like this over a platform like Twitter. These subjects require more than 150 characters. The man doesn't have the presence to lead us through this in any sort of unified way. His strategy is to scapegoat and pit people against one another. This is not effective leadership.
Xan wrote: ↑Fri May 29, 2020 12:06 pm
Don't see anything wrong with "when the looting starts, the shooting starts".
Agreed. My first impression upon reading Trump's tweet in context was that it's a warning akin to "Settle down, everyone, or you're going to hurt yourselves" rather than an attempt to incite violence. Could he have used better wording? Probably. But that's not the same thing as intending to incite violence.
We can all agree that Trump doesn't mince words. If he really wanted to incite violence, it would be painfully obvious in his tweet's wording. There would be no room for linguistic debate.
Totally disagree. His words are incendiary...like dropping gasoline on a fire. Communication matters...otherwise we could just grunt and bang each other over the head. Trump has no communicative skills. Besides, this George Floyd fellow bounced a check....the guy in the Whitehouse has defaulted on millions...if not billions of debt. I have worked with construction workers who flat up told me he refused to pay them for work they did. Honest guys these, I worked with them for years. Trump is a con man, and I'm shocked how few people are totally ok with him representing them.
You don't think Clinton and Biden are con-artists?
Give us an honest, polite, conservative politician, and I'm sure we'd be happy to vote for him or her. As it is, we pick the lesser of evils. You can have a big-government con-artist (Clinton or Biden) or a possibly slightly-smaller-government con-artist (Trump).
