Reply With Quote
Not like this... you must be kidding.
Our president elect...
Holy ...
I can just say words because I have lots of them.
Not like this... you must be kidding.
the best words
Was he drunk today and just near the keyboard?
Oh yea.
Lots of the best words is very powerful...
Much more effective than just having lots of words.
Well, that and the Dems put up a flawed candidate....but your right, Trump has 4 years to prove himself or he's out too...let's just hope the Dems have learned their lesson..
i dont settle when im right
Really? Try to get to the top of the Trump Tower.
He didn't say that. He said "I don't settle very easily when I'm right". Using POTUS as a caveat qualifies as "not very easily".
From BBB
6. During the period when Trump University appeared to be active in the marketplace, BBB received multiple customer complaints about this business. These complaints affected the Trump University BBB rating, which was as low as D- in 2010. As the company appeared to be winding down, after 2013, no new complaints were reported. Complaints over three years old automatically rolled off of the Business Review, according to BBB policy. As a result, over time, Trump University’s BBB rating went to an A in July 2014 and then to an A+ in January 2015.
So the host was wrong. The do ent she had wasn't from the BBB. There's so much bull info running around and people seem to give it credibility because of who repeats it. That's why I asked you for a list of credible news outlets.
Last edited by DMC; 11-28-2016 at 02:36 AM.
he also said "again, i dont settle cases. i dont do it because that's why i dont get sued very often. because i dont settle. unlike a lot of other people. we have a situation where we will win in court"
how about this? starting at 4:40
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Trum.../03/id/717221/
anybody who has their convenient set of "reliable news sources" and gets their world view/news specifically from their hand picked set of "sources" is doing it wrong. news outlets get wrong all the time. some proceed to continue to shove a false fact down their readers throats. you only get a clear picture if you constantly survey as broad a picture as you can.
i typically avoid opinion sites like motherjones, dailykos, talkingpointsmemo, freebeacon, heatstreet because their tilt more often than not takes priority over facts. if you find a story that is only being covered by one outlet (and then having that one story reposted on blogs), and start waving that story around, you're probably doing it wrong.
Last edited by spurraider21; 11-28-2016 at 03:05 AM.
Then show that in quotes instead of removing a huge caveat like you did.
I have seen nothing to support your statement. If you are using "repeated most often" as an indicator of truth, thats likely only going to steer you past blatant lies.how about this? starting at 4:40
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/Trum.../03/id/717221/
anybody who has their convenient set of "reliable news sources" and gets their world view/news specifically from their hand picked set of "sources" is doing it wrong. news outlets get wrong all the time. some proceed to continue to shove a false fact down their readers throats. you only get a clear picture if you constantly survey as broad a picture as you can.
So no list of trustworthy sites but scoffing after the fact?i typically avoid opinion sites like motherjones, dailykos, talkingpointsmemo, freebeacon, heatstreet because their tilt more often than not takes priority over facts. if you find a story that is only being covered by one outlet (and then having that one story reposted on blogs), and start waving that story around, you're probably doing it wrong.
is your incessant demanding for a list your way of dealing with the loss of ChumpDumper? if you are looking for a handful of news sources that some random person deems "trustworthy" you're making the wrong approach. if somebody tells me "hey, did u hear the news report that hillary clinton has parkinsons, and one of her secret service agents is actually a medic that keeps some medical device him at all times, and she's used a body double for events??!!??"... i'm not going to buy that at face value. punch the story into a couple different search engines. if you see it only pop up in partisan blogs, it can probably be disregarded. if not, read articles from different sources and see if they're consistent. the MSM can be , but they have large staffs and do have a degree of credibility they like to uphold. if i see a story covered on CNN/MSNBC and the same exact story is covered on Fox News, for instance, that can be a solid indicator that the story has merit.
i dont have a handful of bookmarked sites that i frequent for news. spurminator gave a sort of blanket answer earlier for what is or isn't trustworthy. you can start there.
the idea that any website/newspaper is trustworthy as such should be offensive to any person capable of independent thinking. but maybe it's more important to belong to a recognizable political tribe than to none at all.
Hillary has Parkinsons? ;-)
I was more impressed that he pretty much really did it on his own. (campaigning wise that is, Wikileaks and Comney were daggers for Hillary) He pretty much called out the entire GOP for not supporting him, he had jokers like Rudy,Christie and Scott Baio as his really true loyalist, while Hillary had just about every main stream celebrity you can name campaigning for her, a popular outgoing President and very popular outgoing first lady stumping everywhere for her, and she still lost. She ran a very lazy campaign whereas Trump was on the ground everywhere even in Blue states. To not have signs anywhere in a blue state like MD is not a good sign of a well run campaign. I didn't even see a Hillary sign at my voting station was is un-heard of.
this clown is melting down on twitter right now
you have no evidence that there is no flying spaghetti monster
This man is going to have a Presidential Library some day.
referring to himself in the third person...he really is like a wrestling character
can fill it with bigfoot and ufo books tbh
It should really just be walls and walls of framed tweets.
as long as mexico pays for the walls
Solid gold walls.
shut the up got
You scoff at a news source as if it's untrustworthy, which then means there must be trustworthy news sources unless you think all news sources are trustworthy. When asked you should then be able to provide it rather easily instead of those non-committal responses you're giving now.
So then the pass/fail for truth is how often it's repeated and by whom?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions