Play Nice 45th President of the United States: Donald Trump - Part 7 - Trump takes full responsibility.

[Mike Smyth]

Lol so you’re basically just saying “I’m just a campaigner, and I’m not interested in ever considering alternative perspectives, because it’s fun to be a campaigner”?

Is that about right?

You mean considering alternative perspectives like those we saw on the weekend. Campaigners indeed.

"white man evil".........thud, thud, thud......."white men evil"

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Your own posts indicate you are nothing of the sort. They suggest you are a welfare bludger living off your old man. No different to those who refuse to work and go surfing instead and live off tax payers. Someone who lives off the hard work of others.

Was I born into privilege seeds ?

You know at my expensive private school there were some like really rich families, like in one case were talking billions. They were all families that had accumulated wealth over multiple generations because a family who builds up vast wealth over multiple generations is doing so over a longer period of time over just 1 person.

Remember when a parent gives their offspring wealth its a voluntary transaction and its god dam beautiful to see the massive amounts of wealth that multiple generations can build and something that should be celebrated.

 

[geelong_crazy26]

Sounds like you're old man has created a shit culture , you've got a few conscripts dragging the organisation downwards
What a great chance for you to put you big boy pants on and create favourable change , if you get your employees to engage and identify with the business the petty issues you outlined will disappear , morale and productivity will improve.
If you're not up to it my consultancy rates are very reasonable

If your HR consultant not for us.

Let me tell you guys something some workers are just lazy and the only thing you can do is fire them.

 

[pjcrows]

Ah look, geelong_crazy26 is here. A bit surprised to be honest - with all that hard work he'd be doing working for his dad, you'd think he wouldn't have time to post here.

 

[Balls In]

Venezuela is a sovereign nation
Meddling with it is by orders of magnitude more serious than anything Trump has even suggested to date.

And your beloved media is not condemning him for it at all. So where does that leave you?

Waiting for .... cognitive pause

I dunno. I like that the POTUS is publically shining a light on the absolute idiot in charge there. Have you seen the state of that place? Bloke is a typical leftist dictator. Fair play to Trump to recognise the bloke who believes in democracy.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Wow this thread has reached peak derangement levels the likes I haven't seen.

The mental gymnastics caused by a smirking child has made many on here show their true colours and no doubt making a few look in the mirror and questioning where it all went wrong.

Trump derangement snydrome is very real and very dangerous and alot of posters here indirectly helped contribute to the lynch mob mentality directed at these kids and for that you should be ashamed.

Shame is a waste of time emotion today.

 

[FireKrakouer]

I dunno. I like that the POTUS is publically shining a light on the absolute idiot in charge there. Have you seen the state of that place? All he's done is verbalize support for the opposition leader.

By the word of their constitution, this "opposition leader" is the legitimate interim president until a new election is held. The current guy was never eligible to begin with, particularly after ruining the last election. It's the first time I've disagreed with yebiga on something. I'm happy for the US and allies to side with the constitution and with democracy, but I'll be pissed if they intervene militarily. It'll just become Syria 2.0 in that case.

 

[Balls In]

By the word of their constitution, this "opposition leader" is the legitimate interim president until a new election is held. The current guy was never eligible to begin with, particularly after ruining the last election. It's the first time I've disagreed with yebiga on something. I'm happy for the US and allies to side with the constitution and with democracy, but I'll be pissed if they intervene militarily. It'll just become Syria 2.0 in that case.

Agree with your comments about yebiga. Same. But Trump is doing absolutely the right thing by Venezuelians. Now that the US has shown the lead even Canada has followed suit. Leftist dictators need to be rooted out and we are lucky that the US has a president prepared to do so.

 

[Balls In]

The democrats are desperate to deny Trump a state of the union address because they know damn well he's right about border control. Its remarkable what we are seeing now from them. The world has dodged a huge bullet when the smart remnant of a great nation denied them at the ballot box. Shameless.

 

[Farmer2Goggin]

If your HR consultant not for us.

Let me tell you guys something some workers are just lazy and the only thing you can do is fire them.

Nah , not into HR - just a plain old business manager like yourself geelong_crazy26
One thing I am into is high performing teams and a positive culture - like our mighty Catters
If you want loyal , hard working employees establish clear goals , articulate expected behaviours and outcomes - preach it and give regular feedback on personal and business performance.
Do it right and you'll achieve what you want from your employees , time for you to take the reigns and put it into practice old boy

 

[Father Jack]

Remember, as stated by the great SJW and Democrat, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, "it's not important to be factually correct its just important to be morally correct" even when you are factually incorrect.

where did she say this?

 

[NSWCROW]

Does that mean we can do the same with donny ??

Sauce for the goose.......

 

[FireKrakouer]

where did she say this?

She literally said exactly that. I love the gal, but she's doing a terrible job of proving that young people should be in politics.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...asio-cortezs-very-bad-defense-her-falsehoods/

 

[Satan]

She literally said exactly that. I love the gal, but she's doing a terrible job of proving that young people should be in politics.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...asio-cortezs-very-bad-defense-her-falsehoods/

There a few freshpersons showing their nieivity

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Agree with your comments about yebiga. Same. But Trump is doing absolutely the right thing by Venezuelians. Now that the US has shown the lead even Canada has followed suit. Leftist dictators need to be rooted out and we are lucky that the US has a president prepared to do so.

Canada announced their recognition at the same. And about a dozen American countries have done so. Which makes me strongly suspect Trump isn't really interested but someone who works for him told him, correctly, that his base would love him hanging shit on a hispanic foreigner socialist.

You lot were so cynical when Obama did stuff like this, and are cynical when Labor Prime Ministers try to better our neighbours.

 

[Father Jack]

She literally said exactly that. I love the gal, but she's doing a terrible job of proving that young people should be in politics.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...asio-cortezs-very-bad-defense-her-falsehoods/

Okay, I had a look and it turns out that the claim that she literally said exactly that "it's not important to be factually correct its just important to be morally correct" is not true. She agrees that it is very important to be factually correct. She made a mistake and was attempting to make the point that it does not invalidate her overall argument. Do you think one error invalidates an entire argument?

The actual exchange:

COOPER: One of the criticisms of you is that-- that your math is fuzzy. The Washington Post recently awarded you four Pinocchios --

OCASIO-CORTEZ: Oh my goodness --

COOPER: -- for misstating some statistics about Pentagon spending?

OCASIO-CORTEZ: If people want to really blow up one figure here or one word there, I would argue that they’re missing the forest for the trees. I think that there’s a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.

COOPER: But being factually correct is important--

OCASIO-CORTEZ: It’s absolutely important. And whenever I make a mistake. I say, “Okay, this was clumsy,” and then I restate what my point was. But it’s -- it’s not the same thing as -- as the president lying about immigrants. It’s not the same thing at all.


At least she was owning the mistake, unlike Trump does. I mean, has he ever admitted a lie? If we're going to be holding one person to account with regard to accuracy of claims, you have to hold everyone to account, and not give them a free pass like certain people do with Trump.

And she must scare conservatives shitless the way they go over everything she says or does. I think she's doing a terrific job of proving that young people should be in politics.

 

[happy_eagle]

Okay, I had a look and it turns out that the claim that she literally said exactly that "it's not important to be factually correct its just important to be morally correct" is not true. She agrees that it is very important to be factually correct. She made a mistake and was attempting to make the point that it does not invalidate her overall argument. Do you think one error invalidates an entire argument?

The actual exchange:

COOPER: One of the criticisms of you is that-- that your math is fuzzy. The Washington Post recently awarded you four Pinocchios --

OCASIO-CORTEZ: Oh my goodness --

COOPER: -- for misstating some statistics about Pentagon spending?

OCASIO-CORTEZ: If people want to really blow up one figure here or one word there, I would argue that they’re missing the forest for the trees. I think that there’s a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.

COOPER: But being factually correct is important--

OCASIO-CORTEZ: It’s absolutely important. And whenever I make a mistake. I say, “Okay, this was clumsy,” and then I restate what my point was. But it’s -- it’s not the same thing as -- as the president lying about immigrants. It’s not the same thing at all.


At least she was owning the mistake, unlike Trump does. I mean, has he ever admitted a lie? If we're going to be holding one person to account with regard to accuracy of claims, you have to hold everyone to account, and not give them a free pass like certain people do with Trump.

And she must scare conservatives shitless the way they go over everything she says or does. I think she's doing a terrific job of proving that young people should be in politics.

How dare you provide context behind comments in this era of soundbites and catchphrases

 

[pjcrows]

Okay, I had a look and it turns out that the claim that she literally said exactly that "it's not important to be factually correct its just important to be morally correct" is not true. She agrees that it is very important to be factually correct. She made a mistake and was attempting to make the point that it does not invalidate her overall argument. Do you think one error invalidates an entire argument?

The actual exchange:

COOPER: One of the criticisms of you is that-- that your math is fuzzy. The Washington Post recently awarded you four Pinocchios --

OCASIO-CORTEZ: Oh my goodness --

COOPER: -- for misstating some statistics about Pentagon spending?

OCASIO-CORTEZ: If people want to really blow up one figure here or one word there, I would argue that they’re missing the forest for the trees. I think that there’s a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.

COOPER: But being factually correct is important--

OCASIO-CORTEZ: It’s absolutely important. And whenever I make a mistake. I say, “Okay, this was clumsy,” and then I restate what my point was. But it’s -- it’s not the same thing as -- as the president lying about immigrants. It’s not the same thing at all.


At least she was owning the mistake, unlike Trump does. I mean, has he ever admitted a lie? If we're going to be holding one person to account with regard to accuracy of claims, you have to hold everyone to account, and not give them a free pass like certain people do with Trump.

And she must scare conservatives shitless the way they go over everything she says or does. I think she's doing a terrific job of proving that young people should be in politics.

This makes way too much sense for this thread. Be gone!

 

[FireKrakouer]

Okay, I had a look and it turns out that the claim that she literally said exactly that "it's not important to be factually correct its just important to be morally correct" is not true. She agrees that it is very important to be factually correct. She made a mistake and was attempting to make the point that it does not invalidate her overall argument. Do you think one error invalidates an entire argument?

The actual exchange:

COOPER: One of the criticisms of you is that-- that your math is fuzzy. The Washington Post recently awarded you four Pinocchios --

OCASIO-CORTEZ: Oh my goodness --

COOPER: -- for misstating some statistics about Pentagon spending?

OCASIO-CORTEZ: If people want to really blow up one figure here or one word there, I would argue that they’re missing the forest for the trees. I think that there’s a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.

COOPER: But being factually correct is important--

OCASIO-CORTEZ: It’s absolutely important. And whenever I make a mistake. I say, “Okay, this was clumsy,” and then I restate what my point was. But it’s -- it’s not the same thing as -- as the president lying about immigrants. It’s not the same thing at all.


At least she was owning the mistake, unlike Trump does. I mean, has he ever admitted a lie? If we're going to be holding one person to account with regard to accuracy of claims, you have to hold everyone to account, and not give them a free pass like certain people do with Trump.

And she must scare conservatives shitless the way they go over everything she says or does. I think she's doing a terrific job of proving that young people should be in politics.

She says people are more concerned about her being factually correct than morally correct. How can one form a moral judgement on any political issue without being privy to all the facts? It was a ludicrous comment, and you are defending the indefensible.

As for her scaring conservatives, I agree with that part. She likely has a bright future. That doesn't mean that we can't call out bs sentiment. And the biggest smears emerging against her are from democrat party lap dog WaPo. So watch for her getting the Bernie treatment.

 

[pjcrows]

As for her scaring conservatives, I agree with that part. She likely has a bright future. That doesn't mean that we can't call out bs sentiment. And the biggest smears emerging against her are from democrat party lap dog WaPo. So watch for her getting the Bernie treatment.

Spot on.

Like CNN at the moment. They have HARRIS, BIDEN AND O'ROURKE as the three "clear frontrunners" for the nomination. Based on nothing. A bit like in January 2015 when it was Jeb Bush, Rand Paul and Marco Rubio as the obvious favourites despite Trump way ahead in polling.

 

[happy_eagle]

She says people are more concerned about her being factually correct than morally correct. How can one form a moral judgement on any political issue without being privy to all the facts?

Thats not what she was saying at all.

Her point was that people will pick apart everything she says with the same weight of importance, and if one of her statistics or words is incorrect then they use that to discredit the entire argument. Thats where the quote "precisely, factually and semantically correct" comes from. Of course you just eliminated two of those words because the full context wasn't headline worthy enough for you.

Lets say I'm trying to argue the point that we need to spend more money on programs to assist veterans returning from war, and within my lengthy argument I state that last year 94 Australian veterans committed suicide, when in reality the figure is 84 (https://www.theage.com.au/national/...toll-is-84-say-activists-20171231-h0bs1p.html ). Is my mistake in stating this figure enough to discredit the entire argument ?

Thats what AOC was trying to say, and deep down I think you know it.

 

[FireKrakouer]

Thats not what she was saying at all.

Her point was that people will pick apart everything she says with the same weight of importance, and if one of her statistics or words is incorrect then they use that to discredit the entire argument. Thats where the quote "precisely, factually and semantically correct" comes from. Of course you just eliminated two of those words because the full context wasn't headline worthy enough for you.

Lets say I'm trying to argue the point that we need to spend more money on programs to assist veterans returning from war, and within my lengthy argument I state that last year 94 Australian veterans committed suicide, when in reality the figure is 84 (https://www.theage.com.au/national/...toll-is-84-say-activists-20171231-h0bs1p.html ). Is my mistake in stating this figure enough to discredit the entire argument ?

Thats what AOC was trying to say, and deep down I think you know it.

I'm ok with figures being incorrect to an insignificant degree. But she has stated things like "the US military budget was increased by over $700b this year". When she is incorrect by a factor of ten fold, doesn't that give pause to consider if she has nfi and if her opinion on the subject is credible?

 

[happy_eagle]

I'm ok with figures being incorrect to an insignificant degree. But she has stated things like "the US military budget was increased by over $700b this year". When she is incorrect by a factor of ten fold, doesn't that give pause to consider if she has nfi and if her opinion on the subject is credible?

Her quote
"Just last year we gave the military a $700 billion dollar budget increase, which they didn’t even ask for."
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...rtez/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-defense-budget/

I'd put this more down to misspeaking than misleading (she wouldn't have quoted the exact budget total if she was trying to mislead or exaggerate). Without the word increase in that quote, it's an accurate statement. Unfortunately the word increase in that statement changes the context a whole bunch so I'd probably agree with you that this kind of error goes beyond just "precision and semantic errors"

But do we discredit the entire argument that the U.S spends too much on Defence (compared to areas like Healthcare, Education etc..) because she misspoke on this fact ?

 

[Satan]

I'm ok with figures being incorrect to an insignificant degree. But she has stated things like "the US military budget was increased by over $700b this year". When she is incorrect by a factor of ten fold, doesn't that give pause to consider if she has nfi and if her opinion on the subject is credible?

Almost like 500,000 new jobs said by Trump to be created by arm sales
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...w-u-s-jobs-from-saudi-mega-deal-idUSKCN1N40DM

 

[pjcrows]

I'm ok with figures being incorrect to an insignificant degree. But she has stated things like "the US military budget was increased by over $700b this year". When she is incorrect by a factor of ten fold, doesn't that give pause to consider if she has nfi and if her opinion on the subject is credible?

You're dismissing her as a viable politician because she misquoted something once, but you have no problem in supporting Trump and co. who talk sh*t daily?

You can support Trump. You can prefer conservative ideas, no worries. People have different opinions. But don't say "she has NFI" and then tell us Trump is fine.

AOC is on the right side of history,and there's a reason that the establishment on both sides are bending over backwards to dismiss her. They're tit scared.