What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[LaCroix]

also, I note this whole side-conversation about trump's press conference is a red herring to get away from the fact the media attacks trump over every little thing, 99.9% of which wasn't his press conference from the other day.

assuming for the sake of discussion he is lying AND the media did accurately report his press conference, that only covers .1% of the bs that's been thrown his way

here and there, some journalists have attempted to discuss this zealous anti-trump reporting that's been going on. yet, these discussions are drowned out by more and more articles lambasting trump over things like how he recognized black month

[Zanza]

No one cares what you note.

[LaCroix]

No one cares what you note.

this is not a refutation of my points

[Eddie Teach]

I question your math.

[Valmy]

I don't see from what I've said anything that comes off as me saying I don't want to have a conversation

You don't seem to address any of the points we bring up. You seem to be engaging in lots of circular logic and false comparisons that seem designed to avoid addressing points people make and instead seem designed to drag out the conversation. That and we have seen you drag on conversations in a very dishonest way before only for you to pop off with some kind 'gotcha! LOLZ' thing at the end. So it is hard for me to trust you.

[LaCroix]

You don't seem to address any of the points we bring up. You seem to be engaging in lots of circular logic and false comparisons that seem designed to avoid addressing points people make and instead seem designed to drag out the conversation. That and we have seen you drag on conversations in a very dishonest way before only for you to pop off with some kind 'gotcha! LOLZ' thing at the end. So it is hard for me to trust you.

I address points. and I see a lot of circular logic and false comparisons, too. but I don't attack people for being dishonest. I just assume they don't have arguments and that maybe they will understand if things are rephrased in a different way.

[Admiral Yi]

yes, but not in the way you're using fact checking. read both of my statements -- trump believes what he says in both of them. in the second statement in your post (my initial statement), I was saying it makes no sense for him to lie (a "lie" will always serve a purpose) when people know he's lying or his lie can be easily debunked. in the first statement in your post (my later statement), I was saying that trump probably doesn't change his view because he doesn't buy the attempts at fact-checking.

now, if one of his trusted advisors says to him, "hey, donnie, X isn't true," I don't know what happens. depending on what it is, maybe he believes it anyway or maybe he's convinced and that particular falsity isn't mentioned again.

I read both your statements.  In one you said intelligence + fact checking = not lying.  In the other you said fact checking = fake media.

[Delirium]

I admire your energy. What would you guys be talking about if Hilary had won?

[Grey Fox]

I admire your energy. What would you guys be talking about if Hilary had won?

How the National Guard had to put down yet another KKK rally that got violent.

[Grallon]

I'm beginning to wonder if he's not doing this on purpose?   Drive the mainstream media into a frothing frenzy in order to discredit them - so that whatever they report against his administration in the future is dismissed out of hand as more evidence of their bad faith.

You don't need to silence the press to make it appear irrelevant.


G.

[Agelastus]

I admire your energy. What would you guys be talking about if Hilary had won?

Trump, I would guess.

Surely he'd be as terrible as a loser as he seems to be as a winner?

[Eddie Teach]

I admire your energy. What would you guys be talking about if Hilary had won?

Trump, I would guess.

Surely he'd be as terrible as a loser as he seems to be as a winner?

He'd be sulking in his tower. Not much story there.

[Agelastus]

I admire your energy. What would you guys be talking about if Hilary had won?

Trump, I would guess.

Surely he'd be as terrible as a loser as he seems to be as a winner?

He'd be sulking in his tower. Not much story there.

He's claiming voter fraud despite his win - you don't think he'd shout this even louder in the case of his loss?

[Delirium]

I'm beginning to wonder if he's not doing this on purpose?   Drive the mainstream media into a frothing frenzy in order to discredit them - so that whatever they report against his administration in the future is dismissed out of hand as more evidence of their bad faith.

You don't need to silence the press to make it appear irrelevant.
G.

I do not disagree, but I think his supporters already believed that so in that case he is only driving home the issue.

But is it really true that mainstream media can be rendered powerless? For the sake of argument, what would a scandal look like for mainstream media to actually make it really damaging to President Trump?

[CountDeMoney]

I'm beginning to wonder if he's not doing this on purpose?   Drive the mainstream media into a frothing frenzy in order to discredit them - so that whatever they report against his administration in the future is dismissed out of hand as more evidence of their bad faith.

You don't need to silence the press to make it appear irrelevant.

He's not that complex.  20 years ago he was railing against the society pages of the New York media.
Don't give him any undue credit when he hasn't earned it, other than coincidence.

This is what he does, he's just doing it as POTUS now.