The Time Trump Thought ‘Western Liberalism’ Meant California

It's a joke son, it's a joke.

 

No sht?

This post is dumber than the joke.

 

I think it was his attempt at showing his wit. He should stick to his day job.

 

I know. He tries.

 

No sense of humor but then the only sense humor I've ever noted on the part if leftist involves torturing conservatives verbally it other wise so not unexpected...

 

Quit while you're behind. You've gone from dumb posts to a nonsensical one. You seem triggered by "leftist." If I see him, I'll tell him to give conservatives a break. Cool with you?

Now, show me that sense of humor garyd. I know it's in there somewhere.

(Trump is the moron here. If you want to be clever, say something about him. The possibilities are endless. There just isn't much, if anything, clever to say about Joe Biden. The few things that have been peddled by Trump, in this case, dementia, just aren't true. Chinese millions, quid pro quo Joe, maybe a couple more. Not a lick of truth to any of them. They're just petty, easily dismissed lies. Trying to bring levity to a falsehood just reminds your audience of the lie. The lie was dumb. Any attempted joke built on the lie will necessarily be dumb as well. A real eye roller.)

Hey, did you hear? Sleepy Joe Biden's dementia is so far advanced that he will refuse to debate. And Hillary is going to replace him at the convention, anyway. And ya gotta love that birth certificate... Not funny. Ignorant.

Guess what? Flynn is calling for Martial Law and a do-over election. I don't see any humor in that. Do you?

‘When the Bombs Go Off, the Blood Is on Mike Flynn’s Hands’: Retired Officers Blast His Calls for Martial Law

 

Disagree, I've talked to many people from China, (half the student body at UCSD are from China ) who told me, if someone in China criticized Chinese leadership in a public forum as Americans do everyday regarding Trump, they would be incarcerated.

I'd say the difference is as vast as night is to day.

 

I'm just saying you decide who in your opinion is fit for office and vote for him; if he loses then your view on his fitness has been overruled by the people and the states.

Not that you can't still hold that opinion, but it has no relevance to the functioning of government or the legitimacy of the President.

 

If someone can't be trusted to uphold his oath of office, then he is unfit. It's a matter of opinion, but Trump has been blatant.

Trump's own employees say he's unfit. It's pretty clear to most of us.

 

Not the issue. Try critiquing any if the left's favorite form over substance solutions to various problems in this country or global warming on a college campus and see how much freedom you have.

 

Trump was qualified to be president according to the Constitution. He was elected to this office in accordance with the Constitution. Whether you think he is or is not fit is not relevant.

 

Plenty of Republican clubs on campus.

As far as global warming goes, allowing an anti-science agenda onto a college campus would be like allowing a pro-fornication agenda into church. We just don't do such things.

 

Sorry one can be very much pro-science and not buy into global warming hysteria.

By the way funny you should mention church, given that the approach of the apostles of agw far more resembles a cult than it does actual science.

 

Sure, if one's politics is that strong. Contradiction in belief is pretty common. That's a personal choice, not a curriculum.

 

In 2016, the electorate didn't know him well enough to understand that he is unfit. After having been exposed to his madness, the electorate, now equipped with the knowledge of his unfitness, have given him the boot.

And so, 80,000,000 have declared him unfit, according to the prescription of a how the vote is achieved, as written in the constitution, and he will be removed on january 20 at noon, and I happen to agree with them, and not you, so, apparently, your viewpoint is not relevant and mine is.

 

I am just responding to what you wrote:

If your standard for a free press is freer than China you have almost no standard at all.

You made it the issue with that statement. my answer rebutts the premise, and now you are deflecting onto another issue.

No one is suggesting 'freedom of speech' is absolute or exists in utopia perfection in the US, and you are representing that fact as 'hardly a shade better than that of China', which is absurd.

 

Fitness has a bearing on any job one does. If you were about to hire someone, you'd make an assessment as to the person's fitness and hire or not hire accordingly.

 

Science should have something a little stronger than belief attached to it.

 

Because that's what he said, "Freer than China", Freer than China is pretty much meaningless as a Standard. There's a hundred and something countries in the world darn near all of them would rank as freer than China.

 

Silly Trump! Will you be starting threads about Biden's gaffes?

 

It wasn't expressed as a 'standard', that is where you are confused.

 

Dude he said "Freer than China". The point is that's like saying wetter than the Atacama Desert or drier than the ocean.

 

The OP is not about a gaffe -- it's about Trump's lack of basic knowledge of history as it relates the advent of liberal democracies as a reaction to monarchial rule in Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries, knowledge which all presidents, except this one, are mindful of and of which we would expect of any president. In other words, this president, by virtue of the fact that his answer to Putin's question regarding 'liberal democracies', proved that he didn't know what a liberal democracy is, therefore, also proves he is, by presidential standards, an ignoramus.

Accordingly, your failure to grasp the premise of the OP and your conflating the premise on par with a trivial gaffe, suggests that you, too, are lacking knowledge on this and it's significance.

 

"He said"?

Dude, it was I, as in moi, me, myself, who said it, and I assure you, it was not presented in the context of a 'standard', ......

dude.....