Donald! Trump!

OK I know I shouldn't resort to this, but let's here from The Donald:

I know ninfan will come up up with some bizarre semantics argument but, let's be honest, to believe he isn't targeting Muslims makes you a moron, an arsehole or a Trump supporter (or possibly all three).

You like to see people upset?

Gotta feed of something
They only eat billy goats in fairytales

And when he does, here is an example of The Donald talking about his Muslim Ban in interviews after he made his original statement (and posted it on his campaign website):

Funnily enough I'm not hearing him say: [i]"Oh I was just 'calling for' a ban. It's not something I would actually enact myself. But someone else should definitely do it. Bigly."[/i]

Right i'm calling for Ninfan to be banned permanently from this entire forum. Can we take a vote on that? If the majority ask for him to be banned, then we action that ok?

Cant win argument, try to silence the opposition

Typical snowflake response really isn't it - just what they do when they cant get their on way through calling people names and trying to intimidate them.

Funnily enough I'm not hearing him say:

Funnily enough you're still unable to point to any examples of him actually saying he would put in place a muslim ban either though, aren't you?

Typical snowflake response really isn't it

Cant win argument, try to silence the opposition

Woosh, whats it like down in the sarcasm?

I thinks it's a justifiable response to obvious trolling.

lost the argument, cry troll - very Lilly Allen

So far all I've done is point out uncomfortable facts, which disproved direct allegations made on here against Trump, for example that it was untrue that "Trump said that he would put in place a muslim ban"

I didn't say you were trolling. Show me where i did.

"Eh? What has the historic origin of previous attacks got to do with the likely origin of future attacks? Or are you suggesting the US should also ban the Japanese just in case they want another crack at it."
The World Trade Centre attack as organised and carried out by Saudis was an act of Islamic terrorism, in fact the largest terrorist attack of any description carried out in America - unless you don't think so.
The "Muslim ban" is supposedly to protect America from actsd of Islamic terrorism - or not. Maybe it's just the so-called President pandering to his racist bigoted following.
Japan has no history of acts of Islamic terrorism, unless there was some Japanese involvement in the Bowling Green massacre? Maybe you can clarify the exact details of who was involved, the Internet seems remarkably short on detail there.

Everybody here knows exactly what trump wanted and exactly what he tried to do. Pettily arguing semantics and then crying victory won't change that fact.
Anyway back to Russia, so all these Russians connected with leaks dying, various top trumpers obviously with Russian involvement, Russian steel being used for the pipeline and obviously the whole Exxon debacle. Just in case anyone had forgotten or got distracted.

So far all I've done is point out uncomfortable facts, which disproved direct allegations made on here against Trump, for example that it was untrue that "Trump said that he would put in place a muslim ban"

You're not allowed to do that though. Surely you know that? If not, perhaps a few years in a workers' re-education camp would help?

some Japanese involvement in the Bowling Green massacre?

I think he was referring to Pearl Harbour.

aracer - Member

theotherjonv » Is that the level we're at now?

It's the level we're always at with ninfan - pedantic is his middle name.

Agreed. Ninfan is different to most other posters on here, he isn't in the least bit interested in convincing people that they should embrace his own personal political views, or at least give them serious consideration, he knows that would be completely futile since he's somewhere to the right of Nigel Farage.

He's only interested in "winning" arguments by scoring points, the fact that he might have failed to convince anyone is completely irrelevant to him. Scoring points and feeling smug about mocking [i]lefties[/i], as he calls anyone with a different opinion to his, is what motivates.

Is that the level we're at now?

Ninfan once tried to have a (political) argument with me over the position of a comma within a sentence. I kid you not.

Funnily enough you're still unable to point to any examples of him actually saying he would put in place a muslim ban either though, aren't you?

WTF? His initial statement was "Donald J. Trump is calling for a complete and total shutdown of Muslims entering the United States"

The video above is him explaining at great length why he wants the ban.

Here he is again on CNN. The host's introduction says [i]"Your proposition is plain: ban all muslims until we 'can figure out what's going on'."[/i]
Trump doesn't contradict him, he says "I have no doubt, that we have no choice to do exactly what I said." and goes on to explain how Paris and London are basically Afghanistan now.

How is that, in any way, NOT him saying that he wants a Muslim Ban??

Is your argument really that he wanted a ban, he prominently called for one during the campaign, he defended that call on numerous news shows and debates, but he meant that [i]someone else[/i] should enact it?

Who exactly?

many snowflakes = an avalanche

GrahamS - Member

Is your argument really that he wanted a ban, he prominently called for one during the campaign, he defended that call on numerous news shows and debates, but he meant that someone else should enact it?

Who exactly?

Hillary Clinton.

It all got a bit confusing when she didn't become US president.

[quote=ernie_lynch ] Ninfan once tried to have a (political) argument with me over the position of a comma within a sentence. I kid you not.

I bet he won though

[quote=ninfan ]Cant win argument, try to silence the opposition
Typical snowflake response really isn't it - just what they do when they cant get their on way through calling people names and trying to intimidate them.

Good point about Donny. Nobody is more of a snowflake than him, nobody.

Good point about Donny. Nobody is more of a snowflake than him, nobody.

Obviously he's the biglyest snowflake around. Couldn't be anything else could he?

Ninfan once tried to have a (political) argument with me over the position of a comma within a sentence. I kid you not.

Wasn't anywhere near half as amusing as you having a big old hissy fit because I said that "You don't think that Ernie is just a little bit intolerant of those holding different opinions?" back on page 130 something though, was it? 😀

Did you learn anything about consent during your time away?

"Donald J. Trump is calling for a complete and total shutdown of Muslims entering the United States"

Calling for it isn't promising to do it (and he hasn't done it).

Not a particularly sane thing to "call for", mind you.

It's a bit like when Politicians say 'minded'.

In other news... it's funny how things turn out some times..

[img] [/img]

😆

Calling for it isn't promising to do it

That is a ridiculous argument.

It's not "Simon Says"

He made that "call" during a presidential campaign, posted it on the campaign website and debated it extensively. People voted for him on the basis of that policy.

Claiming it doesn't count because he had his fingers crossed the whole time is just pathetic.

ninfan

Cant win argument, try to silence the opposition

Typical snowflake response really isn't it - just what they do when they cant get their on way through calling people names and trying to intimidate them.

Sorry, you'll have to understand my confusion, because for the last 3 pages you've be arguing that it's perfectly fine for a democracy to unilaterally exclude certain people because they don't fit that democracies ideals!

So,

EITHER:

1) You support the Muslim ban in the USA, and by association, are ok with our little STW democracy likewise excluding you from taking any further part in our future (for the good/safety of the people of this STW democracy of course)

OR:

2) You support un-targetted unilateral exclusion, but only if it doesn't apply to you.

Which is it?

"That is a ridiculous argument.
It's not "Simon Says"
He made that "call" during a presidential campaign, posted it on the campaign website and debated it extensively. People voted for him on the basis of that policy."

What's insane is why you'd misrepresent what he said as being something different when what he actually said was mental.

Do you really think it wasn't mad enough without you changing it a bit?

jambalaya - Member
opportunity to see how the left responds when they end up on the losing side in a democratic process, face masks, violence, vandalism.

Are you sure you're not talking about far left, which is just as bad as far right?

And are you aware it is not as cut and dry as left and right, there's also libertarianism and authoritarianism to consider?

Here is a handy diagram.

[img] [/img]

I really don't think I'm misrepresenting anything oob.

He said, very clearly, that he wanted to do X and he explained why at length.
Some people agreed X should happen and voted him into a position where he could make X happen (or try at least).

To then say "Aaah but I didn't say I would [i]actually[/i] do X. I was calling for someone else to do it" is just ridiculous.

It's very much the same tactic as saying "Let us give our NHS £350 million" and then when people do "let them" they say "Aaah but we didn't say 'promise' did we?

"Simon Says" for the news-in-soundbites generation.

Thing is I'm not sure ninfan is enjoying this

Not least coz of the debacle that led to his banning.

As much as I dislike his views I'm not sure that he's in a good place at the moment, bit worrying really

It's not right to ban him out any other of the right wing zealots on here, it's important to hear what they are saying and counter the lies they are spreading.

As Trump and Brexit drag us further to the right, it's too important not to keep challenging them.- scapegoating or whipping up fear of the EU, immigrants, muslims, terrorism- whatever they are using it should be challenged

I'm not sure that he's in a good place at the moment, bit worrying really

🙄

In other news

CIA hacking methods revealed to leave the fingerprints of Russian involvement

😳

https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/index.html

I really don't think I'm misrepresenting anything oob.

Oh ok, perhaps your English comprehension is just poor.

Outofbreath is calling for you to improve your English comprehension.

Outofbreath is calling for you to improve your English comprehension.

Im here for you man!

CIA hacking methods revealed to leave the fingerprints of Russian involvement

you mean they used russian hackers code and tried to frame foreign powers, like russia,hardly surprising, unless of course the CIA hacked the dems and made it look like Russia, either way hacking helped Trump into power?

also MI5 helped develop the Samsung TV hack!

question is how will trump handle it?

Will he launch another attack on his own intelligence services ad drive that wedge deeper?

Either way the Russians and ther spy agencies must be very pleased indeed!

Shall I improve it for him then?

This could run and run! 🙂

Why did they choose Samsung?

meanwhile...

http://www.iflscience.com/environment/white-house-caught-copying-exxonmobil-press-release/

kimbers - Member
... either way hacking helped Trump into power?

😆 No amount of hacking can bring someone into power let alone the President of USA.

The simple fact is that the people got so fed up with the previous administration they just want them out regardless.

The previous administration was so disliked even with the help from "saintly" ex-President acting as a cheerleader brought no joy to them. Yeap, the people fired them. 😛

slowoldman - Member
Why did they choose Samsung?

I'd hazard a guess that it's a mainstream device with good market saturation, and crucially, Internet connectivity. so lots of users who want to buy a smart TV will buy a Samsung as they are probably the most respected brand in TV sets at the moment.

That's not a dig at Samsung, smart TVs in general are inherently less secure than a well configured PC, so are a target for hackers, and they are wide spread, so they are an obvious target.

Oh ok, perhaps your English comprehension is just poor.

I do wonder if there is some kind of specific "American English" meaning to "calling for" that only the colonials get.

But to be honest I think the specific legal definition of the wording is a massive red-herring - he stated he [i]wanted[/i] something to happen. The clear implication is that if you vote for him he will try to make that thing happen.

question is how will trump handle it?

Will he launch another attack on his own intelligence services ad drive that wedge deeper?

Either way the Russians and ther spy agencies must be very pleased indeed!

No tweets yet...

Donald J. Trump? @realDonaldTrump
Don't let the FAKE NEWS tell you that there is big infighting in the Trump Admin. We are getting along great, and getting major things done!

17,264

75,963

7h
Donald J. Trump? @realDonaldTrump
I am working on a new system where there will be competition in the Drug Industry. Pricing for the American people will come way down!

What I really want is the cia/nsa/FBI to have the surveillance of the day bannon has to finally convince him that he shouldn't rely on [s]breitbat[/s] hatefilledbile.com for news as it's mostly made up.

But to be honest I think the specific legal definition of the wording is a massive red-herring -

That's what I'm saying! You're ignoring an open goal.

does that mean the CIA were able to hack trumps phone? 😆

GrahamS - Member
Oh ok, perhaps your English comprehension is just poor.
I do wonder if there is some kind of specific "American English" meaning to "calling for" that only the colonials get.

It's basic English, 'calling for' something is no more committal than saying 'let's give the NHS £xxxxx'

It's not a promise, it's a suggestion and nothing more.

The fact the electorate fall for such 'guarantees' is deeply worrying and why we are now in this mess.

If 'they' said 'we will do x, y, z' that's entirely different and they'd be nailed to the wall for being liars.

It's not a promise, it's a suggestion and nothing more

While you all cling to semantics, he is actively trying to drive wedges between people. Trying to divide and split groups. Wake up and smell the bull shit.

@maty I am not sure "far left" exists in the US. As my French / US SIL (now a US citizen) says in French terms she is right wing (UMP) and in the US she is left of the Democrats.i have made similar comparisons between the Tories and Democrats.

Trump's repeal of Obamacare doesn't go far enough for some Republicans it seems

opportunity to see how the left responds when they end up on the losing side in a democratic process, face masks, violence, vandalism.

[img] [/img]

Let me see, left wing European dictators - Stalin, Lenin and a few other USSR/GDR nutbags.

Right wing European dictators - Zog, Engelbert Dollfuss, Kurt Schuschnigg, Heydar Aliyev, Ilham Aliyev, Aleksandar Tsankov, Kimon Georgiev, Boris III, Kiril, Ante Paveli?, Nikos Sampson, Konstantin Päts, Philippe Pétain, Eduard Shevardnadze, Theodoros Pangalos, Ioannis Metaxas, Georgios Tsolakoglou, Konstantinos Logothetopoulos, Ioannis Rallis, Georgios Papadopoulos, Miklós Horthy, Ferenc Szálasi, Benito Mussolini, K?rlis Ulmanis, Antanas Smetona, Anton Mussert, Vidkun Quisling, Józef Pi?sudski, Joaquim Pimenta de Castro, Sidónio Pais, Óscar Carmona, António de Oliveira Salazar, Marcelo Caetano, Carol II, Ion Antonescu with Horia Sima, Milan Nedi?, Jozef Tiso, Miguel Primo de Rivera, Francisco Franco, Alexander I of Yugoslavia, Prince Paul of Yugoslavia, Milan Stojadinovi? and the one and only Adolf Hitler!!!!

So before you argue that the left is undemocratic, I think that history shows that it is actually the right that is undemocratic. This is because although military officers—and therefore coups—can occasionally favour the Left, the circumstances when they do so are comparatively rare, and not by any means universal even in the underdeveloped world. The general bias of both officers and coups is towards “Bonapartism”, a political move to the conservative side, or at best a corporative self-assertion of the armed forces as a special economic and professional pressure group within the status quo.

It's not a promise, it's a suggestion and nothing more.

See, to my mind, changing the statement to be:

"Donald J. Trump is [i]suggesting[/i] a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.."

Doesn't make any difference. It still sounds like something he thinks would be a good idea to do if he were president. No?

no more committal than saying 'let's give the NHS £xxxxx'

See that's a nice one because they literally said LET US give the NHS £350 million. As if it was something they really wanted to do if only we'd just [i]let[/i] them.

Well that's the whole problem with health care, and what I really don't understand why Americans are opposed to affordable health care.

I believe there can be a balance, especially in this context, between crazy private health insurance prices or general taxation like the NHS.

It's in no nations interest to have it's productive workforce ill or dying.

It's just another case of lying your tits off than blaming the electorate for falling for it.
What's it like being a winner, you losers?

Time for a little bit of history, peasants.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonapartism

The term was used more generally for a political movement that advocated a dictatorship or authoritarian centralized state, with a strongman charismatic leader based on anti-elitist rhetoric, army support, and conservatism.

I wonder who this describes?

[img] [/img]

Je Suis.... Trump?

It's just another case of lying your tits off than blaming the electorate for falling for it.
What's it like being a winner, you losers?

It's a very sad state of affairs, it's like the human race at least in the UK and the USA has devolved.

Personally, I intend to move to Nepal, where I intend to live as a goat.

It's basic English, 'calling for' something is no more committal than saying 'let's give the NHS £xxxxx'

It's not a promise, it's a suggestion and nothing more.

If 'they' said 'we will do x, y, z' that's entirely different and they'd be nailed to the wall for being liars.

This.

ninfan - Member

Wasn't anywhere near half as amusing as you having a big old hissy fit because I said .......

"hissy fit" ? 😆

Do you honestly think I give monkeys what your opinion is? 😆

I think your contribution to making right-wingers appear ridiculous is outstanding!

It's a very sad state of affairs, it's like the human race has devolved.

Yup, pretty much how I feel.

Do you honestly think I give monkeys what your opinion is?

The time you spend writing about Ninfan suggests he's personally very important to you in some weird way.

You've just written a whole post about him.

Looks like Trumpcare is going to be opposed by everyone, including possibly trump ?!?

the reps and Trump have spent years whining about ACA, but havent actually thought of anything better, remarkable

booting millions of americans healthcare cover was always going to be a tough sell

who really did know healthcare was so complicated? 😆

who really did know healthcare was so complicated?

It's actually really simple, it's a cartel, the drug companies tell the government how to run the health service via bribes. And the government does as it's told.

The time you spend writing about Ninfan suggests he's personally very important to you in some weird way.

You've just written a whole post about him.

outofbreath - Member

Do you honestly think I give monkeys what your opinion is?

The time you spend writing about Ninfan suggests he's personally very important to you in some weird way.

You've just written a whole post about him.

There's some very strange logic going on there outofbreath.

Can you explain how because I point out that ninfan is only interested in scoring points and mocking people it means that I give a monkeys about his opinions? Can you do that?

I very rarely respond to ninfan's contributions but I take great delight in witnessing his ability to make right-wingers appear ridiculous 🙂

It's actually really simple, it's a cartel, the drug companies tell the government how to run the health service via bribes. And the government does as it's told.

You'd be surprised, I worked for a massive American pharma company and got to meet some of the top people. They were mostly actually pretty left wing and they repeatedly told me how jealous they were of our "sane healthcare and education systems". Then again, one of them started crying when he met one of the patients that a drug of ours had helped - so maybe they weren't your typical yank pharmaceutical. Remember, these are people who live in California and look upto or play golf with other pretty liberal tech billionaires.

Also, the regulatory blowback for bribing is pretty high - we couldn't give so much as an external technician a pencil without being shot at dawn.

My experience with non-american pharmaceutical companies has been decidedly worse, Americans seem to take rules much more seriously - and thus anti-corruption laws and laws designed to protect patients - much more seriously.

If only the US had a single unified health service that could be powerful enough to get what it needs... perhaps it could be run fedrally.

This is fascinating.

https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2017/march/trump-clinton-debates-gender-reversal.html?platform=hootsuite

The difference is, if I may use an analogy, Volvo could have patented the seat belt, but chose not to, Ford patented the heated windscreen which is arguably a very effective safety device.

Think about that.

Remember " ... no boom & burst ..." from one of our ex-PM ... he must be telling the "truth". 😆

mikewsmith - Member
If only the US had a single unified health service that could be powerful enough to get what it needs... perhaps it could be run fedrally.

That would be great.
If the people who run said health services wouldn't make really bad deals with pharmaceutical companies.

That would be great.
If the people who run said health services wouldn't make really bad deals with pharmaceutical companies.

Would you consider 66 thousand dollars per patient, for a drug that is a first of its kind (genetically modified virus, designed to infect and kill cancer cells) a bad deal? Considering it took the best part of 25 years to develop?

Pharmaceutical companies have to make profits and have enough cash left over to invest in new drugs that keep them ahead of the generics manufacturers, if you want cheap drugs - go to generics.

Your drugs cost so much because of the amount of time and insane amount of regulatory and safety hoops that they go through.

Or good ones that is the point of it all.

But in Summary if somebody says they are Calling for something to happen you should assume they oppose that as a policy.
If somebody enacts a policy that looks like the first steps to something the Called for again you should certainly be aware that they have no intention of doing what they said.
The President is screwed if he can't understand how congress and the senate works. He can't exec order things like heathcare. The Republicans are 2 parties desperatly trying to get rid of the other one.
There is a limit to how many distractionary hand grenades you can throw before you start hitting your own side.

and almost perfectly timed... read into it what you like
[img] [/img]

B.S.

that keep them ahead of the generics manufacturers, if you want cheap drugs - go to generics.

Your drugs cost so much because of the amount of time and insane amount of regulatory and safety hoops that they go through.

Ibuprofen is cheap because there is no patent on it.
Asprin is cheap because there is no patent on it.

Seat belts are free on every car because there is no patent on it.

See a pattern developing here?

Ibuprofen is cheap because there is no patent on it.
Asprin is cheap because there is no patent on it.

Seat belts are free on every car because there is no patent on it.

See a pattern developing here?

https://www.baldwins.com/news/maintaining-market-share-after-your-patent-expires

. Boots Healthcare’s international patents for ibuprofen expired in the late 1980’s and yet in 2004 its ibuprofen product Nurofen™ made up 96% of all ibuprofen sales in pharmacies in New Zealand.

How much does an NHS prescription of ibuprofen cost?

I bet it's a lot more than 30p a packet that you pay at tesco.

Why is this? I ask.

Do you get Ibuprofen on prescription?
Do you know the cost they pay? Or are we back to make an accusation and then declare it fact until somebody goes and disproves you.
We alredy established that all drugs have patents just some are expired.
If you insist that drugs are sold at manufacturing cost from day 1 how do you fund the research and development costs?

Neurofen, lol, it's just generic ibuprofen with a seventy billion percentage mark up.

If people want to pay for a fancy box then fine, but the active ingredient is no better than the 30p per box stuff.

want to read my posts, have a think and try again?
Ibuprofen was patented. The Patent has expired hence generics are available.
If it was not patented then anyone could make it from day one.
How does the research get funded?

Again do you know what the NHS pays? Do you have that figure to hand? Are you making up "thoughts"to support your view point.

Do you get Ibuprofen on prescription?
Do you know the cost they pay? Or are we back to make an accusation and then declare it fact until somebody goes and disproves you.

Well I pay 30p at tesco, compared to about £7 so the extra costs of the prescription are going somewhere, maybe ask your local GP how he can afford to work part-time.

So that is a no then. Good to know that is all cleared up then.

Want to try and guess how Pharma companies fund the research into this sort of stuff?

yeah, Mattyfez... unfortunately you don't know what you are talking about. no disrespect meant, but you just don't.

New drugs are patented at the point of discovery, but the patent only lasts for 15 years. During that 15 years, the drug needs to go through pre-clinical (ie: lab and animal) and then clinical (ie: in human) testing. That whole process can take around 10 years - increasing by the day as the demand for further testing prior to market approval increases (ie: to ensure pt safety).

This leaves the pharma company with 5 years to sell their product before they lose the patent (goes generic).

In that 5 years, not only do they need to earn back the cost of the development of THAT drug (average is 2.6 billion dollars btw, some of which goes to me), but they also have to earn back the development cost of every drug that doesn't make it to market. At the moment only 10% of drugs that enter clinical trials get marketing approval.

THAT is why new drugs cost so much - it's not the cost per tablet - it's the costs associated with their discovery, development and licencing.

At the point that a drug goes generic, there are lorry loads of stock literally lined-up at the warehouses of generics manufacturers ready to go..... the pharma companies lose 99.8% of their sales on that product overnight (not an exaggeration).

Everyone in the industry knows why drugs are so expensive in the US:
1. Direct to consumer advertising
2. Private healthcare providers
3. Private Health insurance

The reason we pay less for drugs in the UK is NICE

7h
Donald J. Trump? @realDonaldTrump
I am working on a new system where there will be competition in the Drug Industry. Pricing for the American people will come way down!

Oh god, this fills me with dread. As somebody who has only just found out that the healthcare industry is complicated - the mind boggles at what sort of moronic suggestion he's about to make.

the mind boggles at what sort of moronic suggestion he's about to make.

yeah - my worry is that this will become the dialogue around his failure to reform the American Healthcare system - It's the nasty pharma companies.

As has been ably demonstrated - people are already conditioned to believe that, and so it seems like an easy sell to the deplorables.

I take solace in the fact that the US pharma giants probably have some clout with the republican party.

For the record - I think Americans are being heinously overcharged for their healthcare. But that's to do with the lack of a strong public healthcare alternative to force the insurance companies to compete based on price.

Yep for a pattern...
Invent (or occasionally identify an actual problem)
Tell everyone you are WORKING on it REALLY HARD and you have INSTRUCTED PEOPLE to DO STUFF
In case people remind you of this have ready a list of people to blame
Democrats
Main Stream Media
Republicans
Everyone ELSE

If fails TWEET SOMETHING EggsTRAvIGaNT and call Spicer