Trump clarifies his platform

[Renauda]

@taiwan_girl said in Trump clarifies his platform:

I think it is pretty obvious that he did not answer the question. The question was pretty simple: "What are your top priority items for a second term?" (But, he is talking like a politician. I would have been surprise if he (or any major candidate) would have answered differently.)

Re: hiring of people. At some point, it become probable that the problem is not with the people he hired, but with the person that is doing the hiring.

John Kelly
Rex Tillerson
John Bolton
HR McMaster
Gen. Mattis
Jerome Powell
etc

Pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter.

[Larry]

[Doctor Phibes]

Sometimes, re-reading a discussion such as this in the cold light of day teaches me a valuable lesson.

In this particular case, the valuable lesson to be learned is not to post after attempting to make dry martini's for the first time.

Sorry, everyone

[Mik]

Drunk posting is a time honored tradition at TNCR. Next day regrets, not so much.

[Larry]

@taiwan_girl said in Trump clarifies his platform:

I think it is pretty obvious that he did not answer the question. The question was pretty simple: "What are your top priority items for a second term?" (But, he is talking like a politician. I would have been surprise if he (or any major candidate) would have answered differently.)

Re: hiring of people. At some point, it become probable that the problem is not with the people he hired, but with the person that is doing the hiring.

John Kelly
Rex Tillerson
John Bolton
HR McMaster
Gen. Mattis
Jerome Powell
etc

Have you ever applied that same thing to Obama?

I didn't think so.

[Catseye3]

@Doctor-Phibes said in Trump clarifies his platform:

Sorry, everyone

De nada. I had to go back and review to even know what you were referring to.

[Mik]

It did seem awfully normal for Phibes, now that you mention it.

[Horace]

Deeply troubling.

[bachophile]

@Doctor-Phibes said in Trump clarifies his platform:

Frame it how you will, however your understandable shame and embarrassment at being so late for the first two World Wars in no way excuses your attempts to be quite so early for Number 3.

Actually thought that this was quite a brilliant retort.

Certainly after reading larsons take on Churchill.

[Doctor Phibes]

Maybe I should drink martinis more often.

Then again, maybe not.

[Jolly]

Shucks, I thought I had you at Dickie Valentine.

[Klaus]

@jon-nyc said in Trump clarifies his platform:

the only way Trump would ever get pushback from Hannity is if he were fucking him from behind.

I've got to remember that nice phrase.

[Horace]

If you think the phrase is nice, just wait till you try it.

[Doctor Phibes]

@Jolly said in Trump clarifies his platform:

Shucks, I thought I had you at Dickie Valentine.

[taiwan_girl]

@Larry I would be happy too. I am not "marry" to one side. However, when someone bases their "reputation" on the fact that they only hire good people, and "trumpet" (no pun intended 5555) the fact that they are such a good judge of people, etc., they SHOULD be called out on it, whether or not it is Democrat, Republic, Communist, Fascist, etc etc

I do stand by my point that a number of high level respected people very close to teh President (does not matter if I agree with them or not - for example, i previously did not like Mr. Bolton and I still dont. I did not like Mr. Tillerson, and I still dont) who left/fired from the administration have had quite a bit of negative things to say about President Trump. At some point, as the English saying goes - if it walk like a duck, sound like a duck, etc etc

I do not remember the same number of high level people questioning the competency of President Obama. AGAIN, I WOULD SAY THE SAME THING IF THAT WERE THE CASE.

[Horace]

Trump is a much higher level person than Obama. It makes sense that fewer people are capable of meeting his expectations.

[Mik]

@Horace said in Trump clarifies his platform:

If you think the phrase is nice, just wait till you try it.

We really need that projectile laughter emoji back.

[Renauda]

@Horace said in Trump clarifies his platform:

Trump is a much higher level person than Obama. It makes sense that fewer people are capable of meeting his expectations.

Indeed, it was euphemistically stated now and then in a previous incarnation of this den of iniquity, that Obama was a mere "two bit thug". Trump, it seems, is something quite other.

[Loki]

@Horace said in Trump clarifies his platform:

If you think the phrase is nice, just wait till you try it.

https://giphy.com/gifs/3oEjI4cNJe5JZEuNLG/html5

[Jolly]

@taiwan_girl said in Trump clarifies his platform:

@Larry I would be happy too. I am not "marry" to one side. However, when someone bases their "reputation" on the fact that they only hire good people, and "trumpet" (no pun intended 5555) the fact that they are such a good judge of people, etc., they SHOULD be called out on it, whether or not it is Democrat, Republic, Communist, Fascist, etc etc

I do stand by my point that a number of high level respected people very close to teh President (does not matter if I agree with them or not - for example, i previously did not like Mr. Bolton and I still dont. I did not like Mr. Tillerson, and I still dont) who left/fired from the administration have had quite a bit of negative things to say about President Trump. At some point, as the English saying goes - if it walk like a duck, sound like a duck, etc etc

I do not remember the same number of high level people questioning the competency of President Obama. AGAIN, I WOULD SAY THE SAME THING IF THAT WERE THE CASE.

200 judges.

And you can bet your sweet ass ain't nobody hired that many in 40 years.