Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Trump makes 103 false claims in a week

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Trump makes 103 false claims in a week

    Ratcheting up the rhetoric and sowing chaos because he's beset by scandals on all sides.

    https://www.thestar.com/news/world/a...ty-record.html

  • #2
    Still less than you

    Comment


    • #3
      From the article:

      To put it in perspective: he uttered fewer than 100 false claims in eight of his first ten months in office. His previous average had been 101 per month.

      People really should ask themselves, why all the blatant lies and manufactured crises. This is far beyond the normal convenient exaggerations of any other politician. It's like he gets off on the madness - or is covering for bigger scandals.

      He's sure ratcheting up the crazy

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by budgie
        This is far beyond the normal convenient exaggerations of any other politician.
        You're complaining about a politician distorting facts all the while presenting your subjective perception as a factual truth. I for one don't think he's "far beyond"; which of one us is right? Trump's more cavalier about his lies, so much seems to be true; he doesn't seem to appreciate why he should stick to the facts, but so far I've not been given any reason to suspect he's bullshitting us any worse than any other US President before him.

        Besides, who gets to decide what constitutes a false claim? Falsity as a category usually falls short of measuring political discourse; downright lying is rather uncommon a deed in politics, usually it's about using facts which are but facettes of a complex issue and ignoring the remainder that happens to be inconvenient to one's narrative. Western societies wouldn't be as politically divided as they are if it wasn't for both sides being able to claim they're somewhat right, and you had best recognize that at bloody last.

        For example: Last week, Trump drew fire for suggesting on Twitter crime had went up 10% in Germany due to immigration.

        He was wrong, say Germany's government and the mass media, quick to pointing out nation-wide crime had just dropped to a 25-year low.

        He was right, says Germany's opposition, citing a governmental study which proved a 10% surge in street violence and sexual assaults that indeed coincides with the refugee crisis.

        When it comes to semantics, Trump's statement was incorrect. When it comes to factuality, he was arguably correct. Everybody with half a brain understood his use of "crime" to be shorthand for the offenses relevant in this context, as no one's ever suggested illegal immigration leads to an uptick in copyright infringements.

        Originally posted by Mike1976
        Still less than you
        Ouch.

        Comment


        • #5
          The problem with Trump is that as a candidate he was so promising, and called it like it is . From the Iraq war, the real economy, stock market, curruption of the Clintons, the poor choice of other republican candidates.

          As president, the record has not been consistent. Of course all leaders have to bend the truth to a degree, but many voted for him for his abassive openness.

          Comment


          • #6
            https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018...dation-lawsuit

            And his charity is exposed as a scam to pay his debts

            https://www.propublica.org/article/p...million#146050

            And political campaigns and taxpayers have spent 16 million at his for-profit resorts. He's shovelling public and donor money into his own coffers.

            He's running a scam on everyone, wake up.

            Comment


            • #7
              and? what politician doesn't? reminds me of the whole "bullet button" tirade that somehow it makes reloading "faster" according to one california polichicken...

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by sgt_g View Post
                and? what politician doesn't? reminds me of the whole "bullet button" tirade that somehow it makes reloading "faster" according to one california polichicken...
                Everything politician does that, when it comes to Trump it doesn't makes a difference anymore if he lies 20 or 25 times a day. He surely does quite some good things, but he is a unreliable liar telling what the crowd wants te hear. In many other countries lies on those scale would't be accepted. And he is smart, what is a scandal or an unacceptable lie in his case? He can f#ck around and it's all fine!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Jumper View Post
                  In many other countries lies on those scale would't be accepted. And he is smart, what is a scandal or an unacceptable lie in his case? He can f#ck around and it's all fine!
                  Funny to see a fellow Dutchman make this remark when we've got Lying Mark Rutte for prime minister

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    This is hilarious.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by budgie View Post
                      He's running a scam on everyone, wake up.
                      Most politicians are, and do we not usually come to compromise in a democracy? I don't see why it'd be particularly immoral to suffer someone's lies and attitudes if it gets you the policies you have asked for.

                      Originally posted by Kilgor View Post
                      The problem with Trump is that as a candidate he was so promising, and called it like it is . From the Iraq war, the real economy, stock market, curruption of the Clintons, the poor choice of other republican candidates. As president, the record has not been consistent. Of course all leaders have to bend the truth to a degree, but many voted for him for his abassive openness.
                      The same could be said about Obama. Oh, what good a laugh I used to have over those delusional European liberals and their eventual anger with The One about subjects like drone warfare or his failure to shut down Guantanamo… the point being, there are no messiahs in politics. Don't expect me to offer my sympathies to those who'd believed there were. "The Swamp" isn't a place nor a certain group of people; it's a necessity. Trump's as much a part of the Swamp as was Obama and every other guy to ever sit in that chair.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by muck View Post
                        Most politicians are, and do we not usually come to compromise in a democracy? I don't see why it'd be particularly immoral to suffer someone's lies and attitudes if it gets you the policies you have asked for.
                        Indeed but the problem is that you can get Trump to make any compromises. The majority of the US voters actually didn't asked for such policies. It's just because of an antiquated system called the electoral college that Trump won. In our country Clinton would have been the winner.

                        The same could be said about Obama. Oh, what good a laugh I used to have over those delusional European liberals and their eventual anger with The One about subjects like drone warfare or his failure to shut down Guantanamo… the point being, there are no messiahs in politics. Don't expect me to offer my sympathies to those who'd believed there were. "The Swamp" isn't a place nor a certain group of people; it's a necessity. Trump's as much a part of the Swamp as was Obama and every other guy to ever sit in that chair.
                        Obama and presumably no other former president comes even close to that number(s). Obama surely wasn't the "messiah" and as you said there actually presumably never will be one in politics but he at least was able to make compromises. I vehemently disagree with your statement that "the swamp is a necessity". It's of course illusion to think you can completely weed out lobbyism and such things but what we see with Trump is actually worse than anything before. Alone the people he appointed to certain positions make that clear. All that why promising to drain that exact swamp mind you. In comparison to Obama Trump is actually a swamp monster.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Marsch View Post

                          Indeed but the problem is that you can get Trump to make any compromises. The majority of the US voters actually didn't asked for such policies. It's just because of an antiquated system called the electoral college that Trump won. In our country Clinton would have been the winner.
                          Your country (and mine for that matter) have a completely different voting system that results in a completely different party structure. There's no more guarantee that a MMP type system would produce a Clinton victory than any other outcome.


                          Originally posted by Marsch View Post
                          ...Obama surely wasn't the "messiah" and as you said there actually presumably never will be one in politics but he at least was able to make compromises....
                          No he wasn't. Which was why for the last term of his presidency he ran things on Executive Orders because he couldn't/wouldn't compromise to get laws passed by Congress/The Senate. And the thing about government by Executive Order is that the next guy can (and probably will) overturn them. Which Trump has found a great deal of amusement in doing so.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by TheKiwi View Post

                            Your country (and mine for that matter) have a completely different voting system that results in a completely different party structure. There's no more guarantee that a MMP type system would produce a Clinton victory than any other outcome.

                            In fact in some ways it favours a Trump-style victory as a populist with less than a plurality can win on districts or with a coalition. This is how the last NZ election was more or less won.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by TheKiwi View Post
                              Your country (and mine for that matter) have a completely different voting system that results in a completely different party structure. There's no more guarantee that a MMP type system would produce a Clinton victory than any other outcome.
                              Indeed but it's not so much about the party system but a system that can make the majority lose being antiquated.

                              No he wasn't. Which was why for the last term of his presidency he ran things on Executive Orders because he couldn't/wouldn't compromise to get laws passed by Congress/The Senate. And the thing about government by Executive Order is that the next guy can (and probably will) overturn them. Which Trump has found a great deal of amusement in doing so.
                              A quote and two links about Obama not being able to compromise.

                              Barack Obama - Throughout his presidency, President Obama has showed his ability to not only compromise with the Republican party but also with his own party, the Democratic party. President Obama has worked tirelessly to come to agreements with the Republican party, who is constantly making his life harder by not wanting to pass any of his legislation. Even the Democratic party forces him to reach compromises with it because the members of the party see President Obama's willingness to compromise as a weakness. President Obama is basically in between the two parties constantly trying to reach compromises with both sides in an attempt to get legislation passed. President Obama is hailed as one of the greatest presidents ever when it comes to his ability to compromise.

                              Source: https://greatpresidentsdelgado.weebl...ompromise.html
                              Obama in comparison to Trump so far:

                              http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...gs/compromise/ vs. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...gs/compromise/

                              About the executive orders:

                              Trump: 77 (so far)
                              Obama: 275 (2 terms)
                              Bush Jr.: 290 (2 terms)
                              Clinton: 363 (1 term)
                              Bush Sr.: 165 (1 term)
                              Reagan: 380 (2 terms)

                              Doesn't seems extraordinary to me compared to the others.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X