Anti-Trump Mega Thread!

[Andrezj Kolarov]

Envy? The reason the rich are rich is because they're a parasitic class which lives on the labor of their employees, otherwise it would be impossible for them to acquire such huge wealth, even if someone worked 24 hours a day for 100 years they wouldn't be able to even get close. It seems like you have just been hypnotized by Trump's "cult of personality" because he looks big and flashy and powerful, but you look at the actual material reality of where his money comes from, you're going to see probably hundreds of thousands of people working hard just to survive and provide for their family. They're the ones who have made Trump's wealth, not him personally, he may well have some managerial expertise and charisma, but those skills mean nothing without the workers below him who work at enterprises owned by him, without those people he would be nothing.

 

If Trump was a real patriot he would hand over his wealth back to the working class, back to those he stole it from.

 

I've seen Trump speaking and he's nothing but a demagogue who says things purely to make his own ego inflate or to humiliate his opponents, nothing he says is scientific or well thought out and he appeals purely to emotion. The way he belittles his opponents is the same style as a high-school bully.
 

 

They have their own money too so strings are less likely and they can get the message out.

So your antidote to the problem of American politics being owned by capital is to do away with all the pretense of having "independent" intermediaries and instead put capitalists directly in charge?

 

In ancient Athens (or Rome for that matter) in order to be elected you needed to own a certain amount of property, like land. In the US for an individual to be elected they need something like 100 million USD in order to pay for the campaign and advertising, it's essentially the same thing considering that it's impossible to amass that much wealth without having property of some kind, or by making yourself a puppet of those who do. De-facto there's a property qualification for US presidency.

Edited April 14, 2016 by Andrezj Kolarov

[Ayayay]

Thats not how it works and you know it. I'm not making up anything, the claim doesn't come from me. Most such things deal in estimations due to the nature of them (the total amount of people being unknown, the amount of cases unreported being unknown, so on) but it's telling that even the lowballers will put it at 60%. Someone is doing the raping, going, "well it's an estimation so it's made up" doesn't magically mean no one is getting raped. This is not a case of one end saying 5% and another saying 80%. 60& or 80%, both are horrible. I could easily concede that the number is 60% if I so wanted to, it's simply irrelevant if it's 60 or 80. 

>"I'm not delusional or making stuff up!!!!oneone"

>Makes up stuff and says I said things I never did

 

Estimates say up to one in six migrant women are rapes

All instances of rape reported in the amnesty report are not by other migrants

"Most migrants rapists" infers at the very least greater than 50%

Most reports of rape are not from migrants

Even giving you the benefit of the doubt, that 49% of the rapes committed are by migrants, would have it at less than 30% total

30% is less than 50%

Therefore most migrants would, in fact, not be rapists

 

GG no re

[Rozalia]

Envy? The reason the rich are rich is because they're a parasitic class which lives on the labor of their employees, otherwise it would be impossible for them to acquire such huge wealth, even if someone worked 24 hours a day for 100 years they wouldn't be able to even get close. It seems like you have just been hypnotized by Trump's "cult of personality" because he looks big and flashy and powerful, but you look at the actual material reality of where his money comes from, you're going to see probably hundreds of thousands of people working hard just to survive and provide for their family. They're the ones who have made Trump's wealth, not him personally, he may well have some managerial expertise and charisma, but those skills mean nothing without the workers below him who work at enterprises owned by him, without those people he would be nothing.

 

If Trump was a real patriot he would hand over his wealth back to the working class, back to those he stole it from.

 

I've seen Trump speaking and he's nothing but a demagogue who says things purely to make his own ego inflate or to humiliate his opponents, nothing he says is scientific or well thought out and he appeals purely to emotion. The way he belittles his opponents is the same style as a high-school bully.

 

So your antidote to the problem of American politics being owned by capital is to do away with all the pretense of having "independent" intermediaries and instead put capitalists directly in charge?

 

In ancient Athens (or Rome for that matter) in order to be elected you needed to own a certain amount of property, like land. In the US for an individual to be elected they need something like 100 million USD in order to pay for the campaign and advertising, it's essentially the same thing.

 

Everybody knows the basics of how such things work. However people want to be successful too, they like success. Saying what you do is all well and good, but it will not motivate anybody but the already converted and those completely at "breaking point" if you will. I believe the rich can be a part of society, they don't need wiping out... things just need to equalised, they have to do things correctly, and a start to that is defeating the globalists. If they are not defeated (nationally, doesn't have to be global) then nothing can be done. 

 

And what good would that do exactly? To who exactly too? Give it to the government and well... what are the corrupt puppets going to do with it? It'll disappear in a day. Give it the people directly and how many people will that actually help? Even he doesn't have enough money for it to be meaningful. Give it to charity and... well they got their own issues. Look at guys like Soros for an example. He could do as you say if he wanted to, but he doesn't. Instead he funds terrible groups that incite violence and push his mad ideology. He knows how to put his money to good use. 

 

What does it really matter if he's curt? He has to be in a crooked game where the establishment in politics and media are totally against you so you got to play hardball. People like Jeb! may look all pathetic and you might feel a bit sorry for him because mean old Trump schlonged him... but he's a killer, a corrupt bastard. Rubio? Puppet, or robot as people called him after his blue screen. Cruz? Christian Jihadist who raises the bible high, puts it down, and then cheats on his wife with 5 different women. They're all bad people. His style gets results. Jeb! was the uncrowned king before Trump, and after Trump people see him as a joke. 

Also remember that demagogue is just a cheap word thrown around, don't be like them. If a leader appeared who believed in everything you do, he'd be labeled a demagogue too. While it is often a true enough word to throw at someone, it is a word they've successfully put a lot of venom in it. A populist (what demagogue's tend to be) says what the common person wants, the people that are supposed to be represented. By arming such words with venom they've essentially crafted the narrative that if you want to bring about what the common man wants then... you're wrong, the establishment knows better. 

 

You're actually incorrect. In America you don't actually need your own money, donors can cover that but of course that brings corruption naturally. In fact Trump while the richest competitor has spent significantly less than the competition. Jeb! alone spent some 130 odd million in 3 elections while Trump spent I believe not even a tenth of that and Jeb! was completely eradicated every time. Trump is rich yes, but it's his own money so he spends it quite a lot more wisely it seems.

 

>"I'm not delusional or making stuff up!!!!oneone"

>Makes up stuff and says I said things I never did

 

Estimates say up to one in six migrant women are rapes

All instances of rape reported in the amnesty report are not by other migrants

"Most migrants rapists" infers at the very least greater than 50%

Most reports of rape are not from migrants

Even giving you the benefit of the doubt, that 49% of the rapes committed are by migrants, would have it at less than 30% total

30% is less than 50%

Therefore most migrants would, in fact, not be rapists

 

GG no re

 

Again you're attacking a word or two I used instead of the full message. You're trying to lowball something when I repeatadly tell you it doesn't matter if it's 60 or 80, it wouldn't even matter if it was 40 or 20. Such things can be addressed, but you have not yet addressed the matter of the rapes. Why have you focused more time on attacking estimations, estimations you've claim I've made up when they're not my own, instead of addressing the rapes. Because you don't care about the rapes. You think if you can convince people the 80% is nonsense and it's whatever % you want, that devalues what I said. It doesn't. The people certainly have rapists in their group, they're certainly all criminals. That is that.

 

Again you're going for lowballs purposely and then attacking me as making things up because I'm also not lowballing it. If you're going to do that you don't need me in this conversation because clearly you're having one on your own just fine. You have ignored the majority of my posts thus far where it was inconvenient to attack trifles. When you can tell me why we shouldn't reduce the numbers of such rapes, get back to me. 

[Rozalia]

[Ayayay]

My posts have always been about whether or not most illegals are rapists bit since that's what we were arguing baby.

 

Image about trump calling most illegals rapists

He actually said "and some, I assume, are good people" as an afterthought. Get gud m80 and stop sucking trump dick.

 

 

 
Fallacy Bingo
 
Ad Hominem + Srawman:

Calling me a rapist and supporter thereof

Argument from Repetition:
Accusing me of supporting rape
Moral High Ground:
"Rape is bad, therefore I'm right"
Appeal to Emotion:
"Building a wall will stop rape and death"
Cherry picking:

"I'm going to ignore both my posted sources and the English language to pretend a word means something it doesn't necessarily mean"

Confirmation Bias:

Pretty clear that Rosey "knows" and refuses to be persuaded by facts or evidence (see above)

Proof by Assertion:

"I keep saying building a wall will stop all migrants and rape thereof, therefore it must be true"

Burden of Proof:

Falls onto Rosey and he is incapable of proving that migrants are raping each other

False Dichotomy:

"If you don't support the border wall, you must support rape"

Bulverism:

Thinks I support an open border policy (inb4 Rosey disputes this since it's the easiest one to try and disprove for him)

Moving the goalposts:

Look up

 

 

Getting bored/tired and don't feel like finishing the bingo card, other people are more than welcome to continue. Dammit Rosey, why couldn't you have just called me Hitler five posts ago? ugh

 

 

 

One last thing, using the 80% figure in my post, the total still comes out at 40% which is less than 50%. So yes, most migrants are still not rapists using the most liberal of your estimations.

[Rozalia]

Getting bored/tired and don't feel like finishing the bingo card, other people are more than welcome to continue. Dammit Rosey, why couldn't you have just called me Hitler five posts ago? ugh

 

 

 

One last thing, using the 80% figure in my post, the total still comes out at 40% which is less than 50%. So yes, most migrants are still not rapists using the most liberal of your estimations.

 

Because even if it were 40% instead of 80% (you are running on estimation yourself but whatever) it makes such a large difference to the main crux of the matter. 

 

Posting a image with fallacies is low energy stuff. Most of those I see no instance and many apply to you yourself, simply posting such a thing doesn't mean it's true. Cherry picking for one was what I called you out on earlier in fact, several times and which you've ignored some 3 times now to keep repeating yourself (oh look another one). I'm wise to your type of "debate" as is anybody who has seen you at work. It's weak, boring, and won't cut the mustard with me. I've dealt with worse.

 

Lets check your barrage anyway for some fun. Everybody knows I like to have fun MAGGLE! 

 

Ad Hominem + Srawman:

Calling me a rapist and supporter thereof

 

 

Hahaha. Laughable. 

 

Confirmed rapist supporter. You a rapist too? Nasty guy.

 

Yes I was fully serious here. Give me a break. Dishonest people. Sad! Considering a large part of your "fallacies bingo" is based on this joke comment I made, it's all fallen apart for you from the get go. 

 

Argument from Repetition:

 

Again, you've been repeating yourself. In turn I've repeated that you shouldn't ignore what I posted which means... I'm repeating myself so I have committed a fallacy! Oh boy. 

 

Appeal to Emotion:

"Building a wall will stop rape and death"

 

 

Intervening against Nazi Germany will stop genocide. Oh look I mentioned Nazis, Godwins Law! Give me a break. 

 

You've fallen into the pitfall where you've knocked off some lesser people by shouting "got you, you did a fallacy so I win" that you fail to see that doing a fallacy doesn't necessarily mean the person is wrong. You could claim appeal to emotion in virtually anything. Support a Social policy to help the poor and say it will help them and they should be helped? Fallacy. Saying the government shouldn't interfere as people should be freer, liberty and such. Fallacy. There is a difference between saying that is based on circumstances and logic that it will reduce something, like the mentioned rapes. And for example saying we should let refugees flood into Europe because it will help them and is the "good" thing to do. One has some basis to it, while the other is simply emotion because damage is all letting them in will do. Context is everything.

 

 

Moral High Ground:

"Rape is bad, therefore I'm right"

 

Again, targeting a joke. Poor show.

 

Confirmation Bias:

Pretty clear that Rosey "knows" and refuses to be persuaded by facts or evidence (see above)

 

Pretty sure I provided the sources myself. Another one that applies to yourself naturally.

 

Proof by Assertion:

"I keep saying building a wall will stop all migrants and rape thereof, therefore it must be true"

 

Where did I say all? It will take the spirit out of most, some will naturally still try but it will be reduced. In fact this is the main part that those against the wall I have to argue against, for they believe in some sort of mad absolutism where if it doesn't stop all then it's worthless. Overall if less people are trying then rape numbers derived from the amount of people will also be reduced. This is very simple logic. If 8 in 10 are raped and they number 100,000, but you reduce that 100,000 to... lets say 10,000, then the overall number will have been reduced even if the percentages have not. 

 

Burden of Proof:

 

This one makes pretty clear you're just trying to stretch and nail as many as you can, no matter how weak. I provided the sources for one. Two with it all ultimately being estimations if me going by the high estimations is falling into a fallacy then you going for the lowballed estimations are too. 

 

False Dichotomy:

"If you don't support the border wall, you must support rape"

 

Man that one really triggered you. Targeting a joke comment I made, again.

 

Bulverism:

Thinks I support an open border policy (inb4 Rosey disputes this since it's the easiest one to try and disprove for him)

 

 

Well no. I know some people will argue simply for the sake of arguing. I think this reflects much more badly on yourself then it would on me. If I took you as honest and thus was guilty of this then... so what? I took your words in good faith and you were arguing just for the sake of it the whole time. You would have fooled me I guess, good job?

 

Moving the goalposts:

Look up

 

It's based on estimations. You've consistently ignored what I've said to repeat yourself and use just the source you wanted. Like I said, you're arguing with yourself so if someone is doing the moving it's you. You're not even letting me play on that particular field. 

 

So in closing you have a lot more volume to your posts, but this is kid's stuff and much poorer than the norm. I've met a lot of the type who think rattling off a list of fallacies means they're some expert debaters and oh so smart. It's a joke. Now as we know you will argue something simply for the sake of arguing and thus I can't even be sure you actually disagree with me, you could for all I know but simply want to provoke as you do. I think we can indeed leave it here. Still, I thank you for the added activity to the thread.

 

Oh... and remember

 

#BuildTheWall

[Rozalia]

[Clarke]

I think Metro's wife's boyfriend got Metro into hating Trump, he would of course be going back to Mexico but I think they're expecting. 

[Andrezj Kolarov]

dumb picture

How about you stop cherry-picking dumb people you find on the internet (of the millions/billions out there) as evidence that the political cause they (apparently?) support is bad? Because some guy at an anti-Trump political rally used [anti-white] racism at his opponent that means that all opponents of Trump are exactly like him and he represents all these millions of people, because you said so.

 

It's just like that ridiculous "cuckold" meme from 4chan, "Wait you don't support imperialist invasions of foreign countries, abolition of welfare, mass deportations and a brutal repressive police force which murders dissidents [and everything else on the GOP manifesto], that means you're a cuck and your wife !@#$ black men!! hehehe derpherp". It's literally the lowest, most crass and most mentally deficient form of discourse I've ever seen. You know that someone's must be really !@#$ed up when apparently their entire brain revolves around the fear of black men "stealing" white women. To think of all the beautiful, articulate and eloquent works of philosophers and theorists we have, and yet look at what our politics have devolved to.

 

What makes it even more pathetic Rozalia is that you keep using Trump's own manner of speech and his own phrases like you're trying to be just like him. I'd laugh if I didn't pity you.

Edited April 16, 2016 by Andrezj Kolarov

[Rozalia]

How about you stop cherry-picking dumb people you find on the internet (of the millions/billions out there) as evidence that the political cause they (apparently?) support is bad? Because some guy at an anti-Trump political rally used [anti-white] racism at his opponent that means that all opponents of Trump are exactly like him and he represents all these millions of people, because you said so.

 

It's just like that ridiculous "cuckold" meme from 4chan, "Wait you don't support imperialist invasions of foreign countries, abolition of welfare, mass deportations and a brutal repressive police force which murders dissidents [and everything else on the GOP manifesto], that means you're a cuck and your wife !@#$ black men!! hehehe derpherp". It's literally the lowest, most crass and most mentally deficient form of discourse I've ever seen. You know that someone's must be really !@#$ed up when apparently their entire brain revolves around the fear of black men "stealing" white women. To think of all the beautiful, articulate and eloquent works of philosophers and theorists we have, and yet look at what our politics have devolved to.

 

What makes it even more pathetic Rozalia is that you keep using Trump's own manner of speech and his own phrases like you're trying to be just like him. I'd laugh if I didn't pity you.

 

Please. The Liberal Tyranny's (as I like to call it) foot-soldiers are infested with those self hating cucks.

 

Wow... you are wrong in so many places. You sure you're not really one of them instead of a National Communist? A Communist who is Nationalistic shouldn't be saying such garbage I know that much, very odd. It has nothing to do with anything you just said, but beyond that... Trump is the least aggressive candidate running and that includes Bernie who wants to "oppose" Putin, while Trump wants to be friends with him. Welfare again, Trump is the most for it for the Republicans, so much so that Cruz thought calling Trump a Liberal when he said he wouldn't let people die in the street was a hard hitting attack. Mass deportations I suppose you are correct in that Trump wants that, or more specifically to uphold the law. Repressive police force? How many times have violent Bernie supporters inferred in Trump's rallies? Is Bernie getting violent Trump protesters interrupting his rallies constantly? Look, people supporting the police over some (in America) black thug are not for police death squads. Like how people who laughed off the charge's against Trump's boy Corey aren't for beating women, they just aren't so possessed by the Liberal disease that a slight touch on a woman equals, "He must be fired from his job, then imprisoned that woman beating scum". 

 

Anyway Those Liberals insulted are the type who are willing to put virtually anyone over their own people. Their first thoughts when many of their own are killed/raped is to worry about the coming "Islamophobia" for just one example. Then you got the special cases, like the man raped who then felt sorry for the rapist because it meant he was going to be deported and that shouldn't happen, oh the terrible life he condemned the rapist to. It's a mental disease more like, but lets call it cuckoldry if we're nice. The black man thing I've previously explained, it's simply easier to get the message across. I know in regards to Sweden for example they are using middle easterners as those cucking the Swedes. 

Their own people are the "wife", which they let get screwed all with a smile on their face. Useful idiots of those who wish to eliminate borders so they can get richer than ever. More could be said on the matter but thats a basic part of it. 

 

Look at my posts. I assure you there is no problem. 

[Rozalia]

[Rozalia]

[Rozalia]

[Rozalia]

[Rozalia]

[Rozalia]

[Ayayay]

 

-snip-

See? This is why no one really likes you. Most people would've saw the picture, called me hitler, and it would've been funny. But noooo, not you. At least I'm funny when I'm an !@#$, you're just annoying and boring.

 

Btw, I used both of your sources (read the last line of the last post) so if you have a problem with it it's your own fault because you gave me the sources, lmao.

 

Also, you're literally a !@#$ !@#$ and the world would be better off if you killed yourself, you should take out your family too since incest is a sin and it's pretty obvious you're busy !@#$ your sister on the side. Ha ha, just kidding, you can't touch me because I said it was a joke and I'm totally not serious 

 

 

If you can answer the following two items I will literally give you all the money and resources in my nation:

1. Show me where I have used a fallacy thingy before to "knock some people out" lmao 

2. Show me where most migrants are rapists (Again, the first thing I said. I would also like to point out that, again, neither of your sources said migrants where raping each other and that women had already confessed to being raped, why would they admit to criminals and gangs but not fellow migrants if true? And again sexual violence is not rape, you gave both sources, show me where in them.)

 

!@#$ it, new number two, show me where Trump said "some migrants are rapists" since you can't wrap your head around what I've been pointing at the entire time.

Edited April 19, 2016 by Metro

[Rozalia]

See? This is why no one really likes you. Most people would've saw the picture, called me hitler, and it would've been funny. But noooo, not you. At least I'm funny when I'm an !@#$, you're just annoying and boring.

 

Btw, I used both of your sources (read the last line of the last post) so if you have a problem with it it's your own fault because you gave me the sources, lmao.

 

Also, you're literally a !@#$ !@#$ and the world would be better off if you killed yourself, you should take out your family too since incest is a sin and it's pretty obvious you're busy !@#$ your sister on the side. Ha ha, just kidding, you can't touch me because I said it was a joke and I'm totally not serious 

 

 

If you can answer the following two items I will literally give you all the money and resources in my nation:

1. Show me where I have used a fallacy thingy before to "knock some people out" lmao 

2. Show me where most migrants are rapists (Again, the first thing I said. I would also like to point out that, again, neither of your sources said migrants where raping each other and that women had already confessed to being raped, why would they admit to criminals and gangs but not fellow migrants if true? And again sexual violence is not rape, you gave both sources, show me where in them.)

 

!@#$ it, new number two, show me where Trump said "some migrants are rapists" since you can't wrap your head around what I've been pointing at the entire time.

 

No you didn't, even if you used a tiny bit of the first it's quite irrelevant. I posted bits that contradicted what you said and you carried on like it just didn't exist, so ignoring all of it or 99% it's the same difference.

 

??? That supposed to matter to me? You got to try a lot harder than that.

 

I know your type, you wouldn't go to that well of the "fallacy bingo" otherwise. It won't work with me and thats that.

 

I'm not going to play your games as we are done as you so wanted. If you're going to be dishonest and argue simply for the sake of it then I ain't going to give you the satisfaction, very simple. Good day. 

[Rozalia]

People actually thinking Trump was getting under 50%. 

 

[Rozalia]

[Rozalia]

[Rozalia]

 

Trump is 10-0 against both Bernie and Clinton, his high energy combos are too much to handle for such low energy characters.

[The Governor]

Trump wants to implement a tax cut that would cost the country a trillion dollars a year.

He wants to distribute that at rates of a couple hundred dollars a year to lower classes and tens of thousands to the top bracket.

 

And his trade policy is summed up as "I'm gonna get a better deal" which, I mean, sure? That'd be great. But until he actually says how it's meaningless. And given that he's a clueless, spineless imbecile with the respect of absolutely no one internationally, it seems unlikely.

 

He hasn't really put forth an economic platform and the stuff he has said is asinine at best. I still have yet to find a good reason as to why people legitimately support him.

[Rozalia]

Trump wants to implement a tax cut that would cost the country a trillion dollars a year.

He wants to distribute that at rates of a couple hundred dollars a year to lower classes and tens of thousands to the top bracket.

 

And his trade policy is summed up as "I'm gonna get a better deal" which, I mean, sure? That'd be great. But until he actually says how it's meaningless. And given that he's a clueless, spineless imbecile with the respect of absolutely no one internationally, it seems unlikely.

 

He hasn't really put forth an economic platform and the stuff he has said is asinine at best. I still have yet to find a good reason as to why people legitimately support him.

 

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/us-china-trade-reform

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/03/would_trumps_trade_policy_really_cause_a_recession.html

 

"Trump hasn't explained how he'll do things" is pretty basic fodder. A lot of things like his healthcare plan for example he released information on before any other candidate but yet I see a lot of this "He has no plans" stuff. Research the matter before saying such things in future please mate.

[The Governor]

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/us-china-trade-reform

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/03/would_trumps_trade_policy_really_cause_a_recession.html

 

"Trump hasn't explained how he'll do things" is pretty basic fodder. A lot of things like his healthcare plan for example he released information on before any other candidate but yet I see a lot of this "He has no plans" stuff. Research the matter before saying such things in future please mate.

I have researched the matter. I clearly said that the things he HAS explained are asinine.