Donald trump. what is your take on him?

GroupDIY Audio Forum

Help Support GroupDIY Audio Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.

"Fear, uncertainty and doubt (often shortened to FUD) is a disinformation strategy used in sales, marketing, public relations, talk radio, politics, religion, and propaganda. FUD is generally a strategy to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information and a manifestation of the appeal to fear."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7EehglazbjQ

"On September 6, 2006, Senate Amendment No. 4882, an amendment to a Pentagon appropriations bill that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas–presented Senator Clinton with a timely opportunity to protect the lives of children throughout the world.

The cluster bomb is one of the most hated and heinous weapons in modern war, and its primary victims are children. Cluster bombs are designed to kill people, not to damage buildings or roads. Like land mines, they continue to kill people long after the battle in which they were used. It is typical for a large number of these smaller bombs to remain un-detonated, waiting to explode, after their initial deployment.

The problem with cluster bombs is threefold:

    When used, they are distributed in large numbers across terrain;
    They have a high failure rate, leaving many un-exploded bombs;
    They are small and typically shiny, disproportionately attracting the hands of curious children.

Cluster bombs and landmines are particularly terrifying weapons that wreak havoc on communities trying to recover from war. They are fatal impediments to reconstruction and rehabilitation of agricultural land; they destroy valuable livestock; they disable otherwise productive members of society; they maim or kill children trying to salvage them for scrap metal.

I want the Iranians to know that if I’m president, we will attack Iran. In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them,“ Clinton said. She endorses using cluster bombs, toxic agents and nuclear weapons in US war theaters. She calls them deterrents that “keep the peace.” She was one of only six Democrat senators opposed to blocking deployment of untested missile defense systems – first-strike weapons entirely for offense."

http://thegreenmeanmachine.tumblr.com/post/141805548267/since-tumblr-yahoo-is-censoring-the-post-about

 
79 percent of the total (not individual) 'current level' will remain and continue, if nothing at all is done. SS won't be 'gone', or 'insolvent', only the trust fund they came up with 'to prepare for the large number of baby boomers retiring'.

Insolvent means: "unable to pay debts owed"

Projections for 2034 are probably about as accurate as the fortune teller down the street.  But the trend is that money is going to run out sooner or later (probably sooner). As the job market tanks, disability applicants increase - we saw that in 2008. As SS becomes INSOLVENT, benefits will decline. No way Republicans increase revenue to support it, I expect. They will be happy to let it flounder and fail, and then repeal, which has been on their agenda for decades.

As much fun as it is to say both Republicans and Democrats are terrible and there is no difference no matter who you vote for, there is a difference. The man behind the curtain is working really hard to get you to feel that they are all terrible so you will just stay home and not vote at all.

And I don't know about everyone else, but I don't need to see long quotes posted in this thread from other webpages.  Especially when they are of questionable veracity.
 
dmp said:
And I don't know about everyone else, but I don't need to see long quotes posted in this thread from other webpages.  Especially when they are of questionable veracity.
Stop press, we agree again.... ;D  and videos, and... blah blah blah.

I value what forum members think and write in their own words to express their own opinions, long cut and paste diatribes (or videos) is just noise and anybody paying attention is already seeing too much noise. For us to use the bandwidth here constructively less words but more content is desireable (IMO).

I expect opinions to vary... When I was a kid, cut and paste involved both scissors and glue.

JR
 
dmp said:
And I don't know about everyone else, but I don't need to see long quotes posted in this thread from other webpages.

JohnRoberts said:
Stop press, we agree again.... ;D  and videos, and... blah blah blah.

I value what forum members think and write in their own words to express their own opinions, long cut and paste diatribes (or videos) is just noise and anybody paying attention is already seeing too much noise.

I agree with you both.

JohnRoberts said:
For us to use the bandwidth here constructively less words but more content is desireable (IMO).

"less words"?

I know two people who are bound to fail...  ;D
 
The brewery says bar stool philosophy Or opinion.  Have a beer and let flow.  No need for footnotes.  Just keep emotions In check .  Hard to do sometimes.
 
Not that a short quote shouldn't be posted in support of certain viewpoint. For instance, anyone read the Intelligence report on Russian hacking?

From page 1:
“We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S. presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.”

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3254237/Russia-Hack-Report.pdf

It's amazing how politics has become so dominated by airing the other side's dirty laundry.  Is the take away lesson here that outside entities can do the dirty business of 'acquiring' the info and America will accept it?
Wikileaks started publishing Podesta's emails an hour after the "grab them by the pussy" access Hollywood outtake came out.  (I hope the forum allows a direct quote of the President elect without censoring it).
If any good comes out of this, maybe Americans will  wake up to how manipulated they have been by people in power or seeking power - with fake news, propaganda, disinformation, and outright lies.
 
dmp said:
If any good comes out of this, maybe Americans will  wake up to how manipulated they have been by people in power or seeking power - with fake news, propaganda, disinformation, and outright lies.

If it wasn't a problem on election day why would it be more of a problem now?
 
If it wasn't a problem on election day why would it be more of a problem now?

Because everybody has a different perspective. Over time, I think the truth will push out the fake news and propoganda.
 
Personally, I don't need another convoluted, speculation ridden public justification of someone's biases. If I can help clarify the obfuscation with  facts, I count myself pretty lucky.

Like Adolf Hitler.

/s
 
dmp said:
Insolvent means: "unable to pay debts owed"

Projections for 2034 are probably about as accurate as the fortune teller down the street.  But the trend is that money is going to run out sooner or later (probably sooner). As the job market tanks, disability applicants increase - we saw that in 2008. As SS becomes INSOLVENT, benefits will decline. No way Republicans increase revenue to support it, I expect. They will be happy to let it flounder and fail, and then repeal, which has been on their agenda for decades.

As much fun as it is to say both Republicans and Democrats are terrible and there is no difference no matter who you vote for, there is a difference. The man behind the curtain is working really hard to get you to feel that they are all terrible so you will just stay home and not vote at all.

And I don't know about everyone else, but I don't need to see long quotes posted in this thread from other webpages.  Especially when they are of questionable veracity.

You want to imply I'm lying to you while you do nothing but argue semantics over what insolvent means, and then give me a rah rah 'you better vote' sales job?

F**k the man behind the curtain.

The reason I had to use all those quotes that Script likes so much, is because what actually happened was that Reagan and Greenspan came up with the 'Trust fund' scam to get their hands on a giant slush fund so they could prance around saying they cut taxes without affecting the deficit. Now, the government [dems and reps] doesn't want pay for those tax cuts, and f**k us over.

Insolvent my ass.

Here is the rest of what I said, in which I specified exactly what I mean.

"The Trust Fund represents a legal obligation of the federal government to program beneficiaries. The government has borrowed nearly $2.8 trillion as of 2014 from the Trust Fund and used the money for other purposes. [Tax cuts for the rich, wars, banker bailouts, you know what they're up to] Under current law, when the program goes into an annual cash deficit, the government has to seek alternate funding beyond the payroll taxes dedicated to the program to cover the shortfall. This reduces the trust fund balance to the extent this occurs. The program deficits are expected to exhaust the fund by 2034. Thereafter, since Social Security is only authorized to pay beneficiaries what it collects in payroll taxes dedicated to the program, program payouts will fall by an estimated 21%."

79 percent of the total (not individual) 'current level' will remain and continue, if nothing at all is done. SS won't be 'gone', or 'insolvent', only the trust fund they came up with 'to prepare for the large number of baby boomers retiring'. The trust fund was started as an addition to SS 'for' that, that was 'the plan'.  Also, these are projections based on the low growth of the past few years.  You can rest assured the government is fudging the projections to manipulate the rest of us, like we're to blame for something. "

This is why you lost, keep it up.

;)






 
No one's going to get smarter--take it to the bank.  And things are going to get seriously ugly shortly.  Steve Bannon learned a lot from Dick Cheney, and now it's time for him to outshine his teacher.  Beyond the repeal of any and all executive orders from Obama (and remember, much of what he did for the last 6 years had to be done without Congress,  because the GOP-stated mission was to obstruct Obama), but they're also positioning themselves to root out any entrenched "bureaucrats" who might be working on climate issues, or whatever other dreaded "liberal" business they might be working on.  The immediate resignation of all ambassadors (I wonder whether part of the idea here is to make such a mess of things that nobody pays much attention to all the shady cabinet appointments, since there will be so many other things that need immediate attention.) 

It's going to be very, very bad.  And I'm not trying to stir things up--I'm just saying this is how it looks to me. 
 
You want to imply I'm lying to you...This is why you lost, keep it up.

tands,

People will sometimes disagree with you. That doesn't mean I was saying you were lying. You said the program wasn't going to be insolvent, which I disagreed with.  You don't need to get all bent out of shape telling me "why I lost".  And no, a winky smiley face at the end of a post doesn't give you carte blanche with the words before it.

Most people here are interested in electronics - coming in to post in the brewery is a side activity - but we still expect people to be respectful and in general be above the arguments / insults back and forth you find elsewhere on the web (although we're not  perfect...).

You have 3 posts about electronics and 37 about politics, which is not what this forum is going for. 
 
Three posts trying to help. I don't know a lot about electronics, but I try to help when I can. You imply there's something wrong with my veracity, now you want to set yourself up as arbiter of what I can and cannot say. And apparently if, if I can say anything. I see you're in WI, it's kind of unfortunate Obama couldn't be bothered to get his 'comfortable shoes' on and help you guys out, don't you think?

Like I say, keep it up.

;)

 
. You imply there's something wrong with my veracity
You or the quotes you were posting? I said some of the quotes were of questionable veracity. 

I'm not interested in a personal argument or discussing politics as if it were a sporting event. 
 
Uh huh. Then let's stick to the facts. Do you want to specify which quotes that I posted you find lacking in veracity?
 
Well I clicked on this link you quoted from and immediately regretted it:
http://thegreenmeanmachine.tumblr.com/post/141805548267/since-tumblr-yahoo-is-censoring-the-post-about
It's not my responsibility to read through the long quotes you post and parse the truth from the misinformation.
"Lacking veracity" (your words) is not the same as questionable veracity (my words). 
Like I said, I'm not interested in an argument so I'm done. Last post responding.
 
dmp said:
Not that a short quote shouldn't be posted in support of certain viewpoint. For instance, anyone read the Intelligence report on Russian hacking?

From page 1:
“We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S. presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump.”

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3254237/Russia-Hack-Report.pdf

It's amazing how politics has become so dominated by airing the other side's dirty laundry.  Is the take away lesson here that outside entities can do the dirty business of 'acquiring' the info and America will accept it?
Wikileaks started publishing Podesta's emails an hour after the "grab them by the pussy" access Hollywood outtake came out.  (I hope the forum allows a direct quote of the President elect without censoring it).
If any good comes out of this, maybe Americans will  wake up to how manipulated they have been by people in power or seeking power - with fake news, propaganda, disinformation, and outright lies.
One of the more amusing things to come from this is that the Russian intelligence thought Hillary would win too (like me). They may have been holding back some really juicy stuff to use as blackmail or to further discredit her administration after she was in office (too late to play it now).

[Facetious] I'm shocked that Russia would interfere with other country's electoral integrity [/facetious], and media seems complicit in  helping them diminish confidence in our system. Putin is the winner this news cycle.  :-[

Cyber security needs some more teeth to bite back with, this is not the only or last incident. Maybe we need to drop the team politics for a moment (unlikely to happen in the current environment).

JR


 
 
dmp said:
"Lacking veracity" (your words) is not the same as questionable veracity (my words). 

Well, I'm not going to link you to the definition of veracity. I assume you have access to the internet to look it up.

"Definition of veracity

    1:  devotion to the truth :  truthfulness

    2:  power of conveying or perceiving truth

    3 :  conformity with truth or fact :  accuracy

    4:  something true

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/veracity

 
JohnRoberts said:
That said the hypocrisy from the democrats is palpable. Almost like seeing SNL skits on the news. They need to do what they need to do to regroup their base that is in disarray (and denial) right now, so this is just political kabuki.

You are right, it is palpable:

In 2008, McConnell demanded full review of Obama's cabinet picks, stating he would filibuster any cabinet recommendations from a floor vote unless "all ethics, background checks, and longstanding Senate practices were observed."  Now, his tune is "we'll just move forward before ethics and background checks are complete."

He also blocked any hearings on Garland:  "We've already made it very clear that a nomination for the Supreme Court by this president will not be filled this year".  Now, it's "The American people will not tolerate any delays in confirmations sent forth by Donald Trump, and we expect Democrats to approve candidates quickly".

But I get it:  it's always obstructionism when the "other team" is doing it, and good political sense when your side benefits.  You can hardly blame the Democrats for subscribing to a winning play.  The Republicans have already shown there is absolutely no political downside to just saying no to everything, so why not?
 
Matador said:
But I get it:  it's always obstructionism when the "other team" is doing it, and good political sense when your side benefits.  You can hardly blame the Democrats for subscribing to a winning play.  The Republicans have already shown there is absolutely no political downside to just saying no to everything, so why not?

You're absolutely right, and I wish there was a like-button to save some space. I think there was one at one point, or a "thanks" button or something.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top