• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Trump's alternative facts.

Yes, unprovable falsehoods would be better. That way, it's not so obvious that they're just a group of idiots.
 
barbos said:
Tom Sawyer said:
Yes, unprovable falsehoods would be better. That way, it's not so obvious that they're just a group of idiots.
Click to expand...
But result is the same or even worse. With Trump you at least know that you can simply ignore him.
Click to expand...

But you can't ignore him. He is the most powerful man in the planet and his words and actions matter, regardless of how much people don't want them to.

Deliberately lying at least indicates a minimal level of intelligence and competence. I'd prefer that.
 
Tom Sawyer said:
barbos said:
But result is the same or even worse. With Trump you at least know that you can simply ignore him.
Click to expand...

But you can't ignore him. He is the most powerful man in the planet and his words and actions matter, regardless of how much people don't want them to.

Deliberately lying at least indicates a minimal level of intelligence and competence. I'd prefer that.
Click to expand...
So you would prefer Hitler over Trump?
 
barbos said:
Tom Sawyer said:
But you can't ignore him. He is the most powerful man in the planet and his words and actions matter, regardless of how much people don't want them to.

Deliberately lying at least indicates a minimal level of intelligence and competence. I'd prefer that.
Click to expand...
So you would prefer Hitler over Trump?
Click to expand...

Don't be a fucking moron. You have displayed the ability to have a conversation above a fifth grade level, so use it.

The ... never even mind.
 
Alternative fact is just humorous. Why should it even matter how large a crowd actually is? Is this different misdirection than that of the past which I called enhanced truth? I think I heard the robot voice on P0rtal say that once. Please tell me why the crowd should matter
 
barbos said:
No, I am just surprised that you would prefer politicians who are good liars. I think good liars are more dangerous.
Click to expand...
I think people who feel brazen enough to just outright lie when the truth is plain to see are people who are very dangerous to ignore. Nobody would prefer a skilled liar, they’d prefer a skilled politician rather than a despicable and incapable asshole who lies, and has liars representing and interpreting him, just outright telling people “These plain falsehoods are what we expect all you dummies out there to believe”. What goes along with such brazen disregard for truth is a big "Fuck you all, we're the ones with the power and will do as we please with it".

another1 said:
Alternative fact is just humorous. Why should it even matter how large a crowd actually is? Is this different misdirection than that of the past which I called enhanced truth? I think I heard the robot voice on P0rtal say that once. Please tell me why the crowd should matter
Click to expand...
So now there are two, you and fast, that have mistaken the topic as being about numbers at the inauguration.
 
So now there's two, you and fast, that have mistaken the topic as being about numbers at the inauguration.
Click to expand...

What, is two not a lucky number? I read the stuff as best I could. .

Something didn't seem clear. Maybe just me. May be out of context for reasons beyond me. Chaos and stuff like that.
 
abaddon said:
I think people who feel brazen enough to just outright lie when the truth is plain to see are people who are very dangerous to ignore. Nobody would prefer a skilled liar, they’d prefer a skilled politician rather than a despicable and incapable asshole who lies, and has liars representing and interpreting him, just outright telling people “These plain falsehoods are what we expect all you dummies out there to believe”. What goes along with such brazen disregard for truth is a big "Fuck you all, we're the ones with the power and will do as we please with it".

another1 said:
Alternative fact is just humorous. Why should it even matter how large a crowd actually is? Is this different misdirection than that of the past which I called enhanced truth? I think I heard the robot voice on P0rtal say that once. Please tell me why the crowd should matter
Click to expand...
So now there are two, you and fast, that have mistaken the topic as being about numbers at the inauguration.
Click to expand...
I've made no mistake. The thread title clearly reads, "Trump's inauguration numbers."

[/Trump]
 
I have very little idea what you are talking about anyway. What I gave was an opinion, and I'm not mistaken about that part. That it was an opinion. Should I dance like a robot and do twirls now, or what? I do understand that you're trying to keep things simple and unconfusing, so carry on.
 
abaddon said:
I think people who feel brazen enough to just outright lie when the truth is plain to see are people who are very dangerous to ignore. Nobody would prefer a skilled liar, they’d prefer a skilled politician rather than a despicable and incapable asshole who lies, and has liars representing and interpreting him, just outright telling people “These plain falsehoods are what we expect all you dummies out there to believe”. What goes along with such brazen disregard for truth is a big "Fuck you all, we're the ones with the power and will do as we please with it".
Click to expand...
Yes, Trump lies and he himself are very annoying, stupid and upsetting. But in a long run lies which you eventually start believing are more dangerous. That's why I consider neocons like Hillary more dangerous.
 
This is brilliant. Now it wasn't any longer a lie that Saddam had WMDs. Now it's an alternative fact. Just think of the possibilities.

Trump will never be wrong about anything any longer. The moon is made out of cheese... sure!
 
Sorry I don't have time to read through the responses until later, but here are some more alternative facts for y'all to mull over.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/22/us/politics/president-trump-inauguration-crowd-white-house.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0


In leveling this attack, the president and Mr. Spicer made a series of false statements.

Here are the facts.

In a speech at the C.I.A. on Saturday, Mr. Trump said the news media had constructed a feud between him and the intelligence community. “They sort of made it sound like I had a ‘feud’ with the intelligence community,” he said. “It is exactly the opposite, and they understand that, too.”

In fact, Mr. Trump repeatedly criticized the intelligence agencies during his transition to office and has questioned their conclusion that Russia meddled in the election to aid his candidacy. He called their assessment “ridiculous” and suggested that it had been politically motivated.

After the disclosure of a dossier with unsubstantiated claims about him, Mr. Trump alleged that the intelligence agencies had allowed a leak of the material. “Are we living in Nazi Germany?” he asked in a post on Twitter.
Click to expand...

You really need to read the articles that go with this thread to understand the full extent of these lies.
 
jonatha said:
fast said:
He is often dishonest, but not in the form of lying but rather in offering deflective truths.
Click to expand...

Are those like alternative facts?
Click to expand...
I was told not to eat lunch because we were having an early supper, so I had breakfast, but because I was still hungry I had lunch anyway. When asked if I had lunch, I spoke a truth, the truth that I had breakfast. It corresponds with fact and is therefore a spoken truth, but speaking a truth is not the same thing as being truthful, as I was dishonest and avoided the truth by deflecting not with a lie but a misleading truth. Some call it a lie of omission, but it's not a lie, and the reason it's called a lie is captured in the confusion between a lie and dishonesty. A terms name is not necessarily indicative of its meaning or etymology. Positing something as a fact when it's not a fact is an alternative fact, which in fact is not a kind of fact at all.
 
Do you all remember how many times Trump promised he would release his tax returns after the election or after the so called audit? Well it's not going to happen because nobody cares about his tax returns. Alternative facts again.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/22/us/politics/donald-trump-tax-returns.html?mabReward=CTM&recp=2&moduleDetail=recommendations-2&action=click&contentCollection=Politics&region=Footer&module=WhatsNext&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&src=recg&pgtype=article

In a Pew Research Center poll this month, 60 percent of respondents said Mr. Trump should release his returns, although just 38 percent of Republican respondents said he should.

Ms. Conway said those calling for the release of the information — which includes the director of the nonpartisan Office of Government Ethics — “want to keep litigating what happened in the campaign.”

In the interview, Ms. Conway was asked about a petition on the White House website demanding that Mr. Trump release the returns. It had garnered more than 220,000 signatures by Sunday; petitions that get 100,000 signatures require a response from the White House. But Ms. Conway issued a flat refusal.
Click to expand...
 
DrZoidberg said:
This is brilliant. Now it wasn't any longer a lie that Saddam had WMDs. Now it's an alternative fact. Just think of the possibilities.

Trump will never be wrong about anything any longer. The moon is made out of cheese... sure!
Click to expand...

Well a big part of the Bush administration's strategies was redefining words. 'Torture is illegal of course, which is why we don't torture, we just use "enhanced interrogation'''.
Now it is not lies, it is 'alt-facts'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom