Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: I knew that Trump would be a clown show who had no idea how to run a country, when I didn't vote for him. I knew that McMuffin wouldn't win when I voted for him.
I was right on both counts. Next.
Fascinating. But, you thought Egg McMuffin the CIA agent was qualified? Can you even tell me his running mate off the top of your head?

Also, since you voted for someone you knew wouldn't win (Egg McMuffin) against someone you didn't want to win (Trump), isn't that really a defacto endorsement of Hillary?

What do you stand for? Men who stand for nothing (a man who stands for nothing, stands for everything) or make pussy protest votes are the worst type of men. I hope that's not your philosophy.
We've been through this before. None of them were qualified.
Trump is a rich, classless, douchebag, and a poor leader. He has some good economic ideas, but that's it.
Hillary...too many things to list that show her lack of qualities.
Not voting for Hillary or Trump, isn't an endorsement of Hillary, just like it isn't an endorsement of Trump. That argument is just plain stupid.
What I stand for is voting for someone who is a decent human being, who shares my values and morals. Neither of the candidates that was going to win, is even close to being worth my vote. McMullin was at least in the ballpark. I also strongly think we need more than 2 parties, and that if enough people actually voted their conscience, not party line sheep, we would have a chance of getting rid of our 2 party system.

The worst type of ppl are the ones that always find a way to convince themselves (against their own beliefs and values) that voting the party line is the right thing to do. It's not.
LOL. Some observations:

1. You think being rich makes someone not qualified to be President. :idea:

2. Voting for candidate C who takes votes away from candidate A is a defacto endorsement/support for candidate B. If we assume you are of average intelligence (I think you are), then we can assume you understand this.

3. If everyone voted for someone who shares their personal values, we wouldn't have any consensus on leadership. It's really an absurd standard.

I don't care if the guy engineering my deck shares my values, I care that he's a good engineer. Besides being impossible to reach a consensus, it's also irrelevant to the qualities needed to be president.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by awesome guy »

HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: I knew that Trump would be a clown show who had no idea how to run a country, when I didn't vote for him. I knew that McMuffin wouldn't win when I voted for him.
I was right on both counts. Next.
Fascinating. But, you thought Egg McMuffin the CIA agent was qualified? Can you even tell me his running mate off the top of your head?

Also, since you voted for someone you knew wouldn't win (Egg McMuffin) against someone you didn't want to win (Trump), isn't that really a defacto endorsement of Hillary?

What do you stand for? Men who stand for nothing (a man who stands for nothing, stands for everything) or make pussy protest votes are the worst type of men. I hope that's not your philosophy.
We've been through this before. None of them were qualified.
Trump is a rich, classless, douchebag, and a poor leader. He has some good economic ideas, but that's it.
Hillary...too many things to list that show her lack of qualities.
Not voting for Hillary or Trump, isn't an endorsement of Hillary, just like it isn't an endorsement of Trump. That argument is just plain stupid.
What I stand for is voting for someone who is a decent human being, who shares my values and morals. Neither of the candidates that was going to win, is even close to being worth my vote. McMullin was at least in the ballpark. I also strongly think we need more than 2 parties, and that if enough people actually voted their conscience, not party line sheep, we would have a chance of getting rid of our 2 party system.

The worst type of ppl are the ones that always find a way to convince themselves (against their own beliefs and values) that voting the party line is the right thing to do. It's not.
When did rich become an insult? And how is he a poor leader? He's getting his agenda done without following the "expert" advice of lesser people. I think that's why you can't recognize what he's doing, as you have an idea of what a leader is and that's gotten you not far on the career track. Trump has a different idea and that's made him a billionaire and the President of the United States. What I'm saying is your idea of a leader is way off if you don't think Trump is doing it right. He plays a rough game and that may be what you're seeing, his game is for effectiveness, not being tender hearted to non-performers. You're thinking someone like Norv Turner is the model of a leader, someone that loses. Trump is Bill Belichick, a winner that's not liked ... outside his organization. Loved within. It's time you give him the respect he's due.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by awesome guy »

HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: I knew that Trump would be a clown show who had no idea how to run a country, when I didn't vote for him. I knew that McMuffin wouldn't win when I voted for him.
I was right on both counts. Next.
You're insane. Trump is doing a great job. You're dead wrong on predicting competence, clueless on the matter. Trump has been the opposite of what you predicted and what you now proclaim him to be. A smarter man would know it's time to reevaluate his position.
You're welcome to your opinion. It's true that he's doing a great job on several items, not so great on many others. His main failure is his inability to keep his mouth shut, or allow people to have dissenting opinions from his.

My opinion is based on measurable facts, like the economy doing well, NK coming to the negotiating table, giant tax cuts, and ISIS being destroyed. Yours is based on emotions and feelings, thusly it not being worth much. You're not even right about him tolerating dissenting opinions. He's way more tolerant than any of the ass clowns calling him a fool or clown. What he doesn't suffer is fools. That's different that not tolerating dissenting opinions, it's not tolerating emotional and feelings based silliness. He doesn't keep his mouth shut in response to fools and that's proving to be the right move too as he's winning while those people are losing. The bottom line is the emotional feelers want to take shots at him without him responding. And not only does he respond, he belittles them in the process.
You're talking nonsense.

I agree that he's doing a good job on the economy, and like the general tone he's set with NK. I think tax cuts were needed, but don't think he made the right cuts. But, still better than nothing. ISIS...nothing to do with him. You've listed the few things he is doing well on, then you move on to Trump's emotional failing. His leadership style isn't that he doesn't suffer fools. The people he has gotten rid of aren't fools, they are people that don't agree with him, and aren't afraid to voice their opinions. Trump is ruled by emotions and feelings, it's laughable that you call being ruled by emotion and feelings silly, it's what he lives on.
How can claim I'm talking nonsense after dropping that turd? "Few things?" That's 90% of the job and he's knocking out of the park. The "few thing" is pissing off pussies on twitter. Which that's a matter of perspective, I think it's great that he has you purse swingers in a tissy. It keeps you from engaging in actual policy, another win by Trump. He's gotten rid of plenty of fools, but mostly more disloyalty. The fools I'm referring to are the purse swingers. The tweets that you apparently think are the lions share of the job of the president. He comes at you guys with both barrels, it's hilarious.

Back to "few things", if not taking care of the economy, national security, and domestic policy then what do you think the president actually does? Seriously, Twitter is the only logical conclusion given what you said above.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by HokieFanDC »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: I knew that Trump would be a clown show who had no idea how to run a country, when I didn't vote for him. I knew that McMuffin wouldn't win when I voted for him.
I was right on both counts. Next.
Fascinating. But, you thought Egg McMuffin the CIA agent was qualified? Can you even tell me his running mate off the top of your head?

Also, since you voted for someone you knew wouldn't win (Egg McMuffin) against someone you didn't want to win (Trump), isn't that really a defacto endorsement of Hillary?

What do you stand for? Men who stand for nothing (a man who stands for nothing, stands for everything) or make pussy protest votes are the worst type of men. I hope that's not your philosophy.
We've been through this before. None of them were qualified.
Trump is a rich, classless, douchebag, and a poor leader. He has some good economic ideas, but that's it.
Hillary...too many things to list that show her lack of qualities.
Not voting for Hillary or Trump, isn't an endorsement of Hillary, just like it isn't an endorsement of Trump. That argument is just plain stupid.
What I stand for is voting for someone who is a decent human being, who shares my values and morals. Neither of the candidates that was going to win, is even close to being worth my vote. McMullin was at least in the ballpark. I also strongly think we need more than 2 parties, and that if enough people actually voted their conscience, not party line sheep, we would have a chance of getting rid of our 2 party system.

The worst type of ppl are the ones that always find a way to convince themselves (against their own beliefs and values) that voting the party line is the right thing to do. It's not.
LOL. Some observations:

1. You think being rich makes someone not qualified to be President. :idea:

2. Voting for candidate C who takes votes away from candidate A is a defacto endorsement/support for candidate B. If we assume you are of average intelligence (I think you are), then we can assume you understand this.

3. If everyone voted for someone who shares their personal values, we wouldn't have any consensus on leadership. It's really an absurd standard.

I don't care if the guy engineering my deck shares my values, I care that he's a good engineer. Besides being impossible to reach a consensus, it's also irrelevant to the qualities needed to be president.
1. No, I was describing him. You and several others, constantly use his wealth as a defense against people who think he's foolish. Being rich, doesn't have any bearing on one's qualification as POTUS.

2. You should try that again. The only way that works is if absent Candidate C, everyone would actually vote for A or B. That's not the case.

3. Read what I wrote again. I said that neither Trump nor Hillary is even close. IMO, you should vote for someone who is at least somewhat in line with your social and economic values. Neither of them is close to my personal values, they are both dishonest and not trustworthy.
As for your deck building concept, if your engineer is a good engineer, that means that he understands how to engineer a deck, and that he will not cut corners, overcharge you, or be lazy in his calculations, when designing the deck. Part of the engineer being a good engineer, is related to his personal values.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by awesome guy »

HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: I knew that Trump would be a clown show who had no idea how to run a country, when I didn't vote for him. I knew that McMuffin wouldn't win when I voted for him.
I was right on both counts. Next.
Fascinating. But, you thought Egg McMuffin the CIA agent was qualified? Can you even tell me his running mate off the top of your head?

Also, since you voted for someone you knew wouldn't win (Egg McMuffin) against someone you didn't want to win (Trump), isn't that really a defacto endorsement of Hillary?

What do you stand for? Men who stand for nothing (a man who stands for nothing, stands for everything) or make pussy protest votes are the worst type of men. I hope that's not your philosophy.
We've been through this before. None of them were qualified.
Trump is a rich, classless, douchebag, and a poor leader. He has some good economic ideas, but that's it.
Hillary...too many things to list that show her lack of qualities.
Not voting for Hillary or Trump, isn't an endorsement of Hillary, just like it isn't an endorsement of Trump. That argument is just plain stupid.
What I stand for is voting for someone who is a decent human being, who shares my values and morals. Neither of the candidates that was going to win, is even close to being worth my vote. McMullin was at least in the ballpark. I also strongly think we need more than 2 parties, and that if enough people actually voted their conscience, not party line sheep, we would have a chance of getting rid of our 2 party system.

The worst type of ppl are the ones that always find a way to convince themselves (against their own beliefs and values) that voting the party line is the right thing to do. It's not.
LOL. Some observations:

1. You think being rich makes someone not qualified to be President. :idea:

2. Voting for candidate C who takes votes away from candidate A is a defacto endorsement/support for candidate B. If we assume you are of average intelligence (I think you are), then we can assume you understand this.

3. If everyone voted for someone who shares their personal values, we wouldn't have any consensus on leadership. It's really an absurd standard.

I don't care if the guy engineering my deck shares my values, I care that he's a good engineer. Besides being impossible to reach a consensus, it's also irrelevant to the qualities needed to be president.
1. No, I was describing him. You and several others, constantly use his wealth as a defense against people who think he's foolish. Being rich, doesn't have any bearing on one's qualification as POTUS.

2. You should try that again. The only way that works is if absent Candidate C, everyone would actually vote for A or B. That's not the case.

3. Read what I wrote again. I said that neither Trump nor Hillary is even close. IMO, you should vote for someone who is at least somewhat in line with your social and economic values. Neither of them is close to my personal values, they are both dishonest and not trustworthy.
As for your deck building concept, if your engineer is a good engineer, that means that he understands how to engineer a deck, and that he will not cut corners, overcharge you, or be lazy in his calculations, when designing the deck. Part of the engineer being a good engineer, is related to his personal values.
Are you afraid Trump will grab you by the pussy? I don't get how anyone could call him a poor leader after all the success he lead last year. He's been better than Reagan and that was the greatest president of my lifetime.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
cwtcr hokie
Posts: 13399
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by cwtcr hokie »

FYI, the story coming out of DC is that Tillerson was not following the prez wishes on the Iran deal and was actually trying to do it in a complete opposite manner than what Trump wanted. Yea sorry, Tillerson still has a boss. Again he was the boss at Exxon and answered to nobody, that can be an issue when the situation changes

And no, wealth has zero to do with being prez except there will never be a non-wealthy prez.... it takes too much cash to get elected for middle class joe public to be prez
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by ip_law-hokie »

awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: I knew that Trump would be a clown show who had no idea how to run a country, when I didn't vote for him. I knew that McMuffin wouldn't win when I voted for him.
I was right on both counts. Next.
Fascinating. But, you thought Egg McMuffin the CIA agent was qualified? Can you even tell me his running mate off the top of your head?

Also, since you voted for someone you knew wouldn't win (Egg McMuffin) against someone you didn't want to win (Trump), isn't that really a defacto endorsement of Hillary?

What do you stand for? Men who stand for nothing (a man who stands for nothing, stands for everything) or make pussy protest votes are the worst type of men. I hope that's not your philosophy.
We've been through this before. None of them were qualified.
Trump is a rich, classless, douchebag, and a poor leader. He has some good economic ideas, but that's it.
Hillary...too many things to list that show her lack of qualities.
Not voting for Hillary or Trump, isn't an endorsement of Hillary, just like it isn't an endorsement of Trump. That argument is just plain stupid.
What I stand for is voting for someone who is a decent human being, who shares my values and morals. Neither of the candidates that was going to win, is even close to being worth my vote. McMullin was at least in the ballpark. I also strongly think we need more than 2 parties, and that if enough people actually voted their conscience, not party line sheep, we would have a chance of getting rid of our 2 party system.

The worst type of ppl are the ones that always find a way to convince themselves (against their own beliefs and values) that voting the party line is the right thing to do. It's not.
When did rich become an insult? And how is he a poor leader? He's getting his agenda done without following the "expert" advice of lesser people. I think that's why you can't recognize what he's doing, as you have an idea of what a leader is and that's gotten you not far on the career track. Trump has a different idea and that's made him a billionaire and the President of the United States. What I'm saying is your idea of a leader is way off if you don't think Trump is doing it right. He plays a rough game and that may be what you're seeing, his game is for effectiveness, not being tender hearted to non-performers. You're thinking someone like Norv Turner is the model of a leader, someone that loses. Trump is Bill Belichick, a winner that's not liked ... outside his organization. Loved within. It's time you give him the respect he's due.
[emoji106][emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by HokieFanDC »

awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: I knew that Trump would be a clown show who had no idea how to run a country, when I didn't vote for him. I knew that McMuffin wouldn't win when I voted for him.
I was right on both counts. Next.
You're insane. Trump is doing a great job. You're dead wrong on predicting competence, clueless on the matter. Trump has been the opposite of what you predicted and what you now proclaim him to be. A smarter man would know it's time to reevaluate his position.
You're welcome to your opinion. It's true that he's doing a great job on several items, not so great on many others. His main failure is his inability to keep his mouth shut, or allow people to have dissenting opinions from his.


My opinion is based on measurable facts, like the economy doing well, NK coming to the negotiating table, giant tax cuts, and ISIS being destroyed. Yours is based on emotions and feelings, thusly it not being worth much. You're not even right about him tolerating dissenting opinions. He's way more tolerant than any of the ass clowns calling him a fool or clown. What he doesn't suffer is fools. That's different that not tolerating dissenting opinions, it's not tolerating emotional and feelings based silliness. He doesn't keep his mouth shut in response to fools and that's proving to be the right move too as he's winning while those people are losing. The bottom line is the emotional feelers want to take shots at him without him responding. And not only does he respond, he belittles them in the process.
You're talking nonsense.

I agree that he's doing a good job on the economy, and like the general tone he's set with NK. I think tax cuts were needed, but don't think he made the right cuts. But, still better than nothing. ISIS...nothing to do with him. You've listed the few things he is doing well on, then you move on to Trump's emotional failing. His leadership style isn't that he doesn't suffer fools. The people he has gotten rid of aren't fools, they are people that don't agree with him, and aren't afraid to voice their opinions. Trump is ruled by emotions and feelings, it's laughable that you call being ruled by emotion and feelings silly, it's what he lives on.
How can claim I'm talking nonsense after dropping that turd? "Few things?" That's 90% of the job and he's knocking out of the park. The "few thing" is pissing off pussies on twitter. Which that's a matter of perspective, I think it's great that he has you purse swingers in a tissy. It keeps you from engaging in actual policy, another win by Trump. He's gotten rid of plenty of fools, but mostly more disloyalty. The fools I'm referring to are the purse swingers. The tweets that you apparently think are the lions share of the job of the president. He comes at you guys with both barrels, it's hilarious.

Back to "few things", if not taking care of the economy, national security, and domestic policy then what do you think the president actually does? Seriously, Twitter is the only logical conclusion given what you said above.
The only people in this thread that are in a "tissy", are the Trump defenders.

Even when I lay out the things I think he's doing well, you purse clutchers get all red faced and angry.
User avatar
HokieHam
Posts: 26370
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:50 pm
Location: Kicking over crayons in a safe space for libruls....

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by HokieHam »

cwtcr hokie wrote:FYI, the story coming out of DC is that Tillerson was not following the prez wishes on the Iran deal and was actually trying to do it in a complete opposite manner than what Trump wanted. Yea sorry, Tillerson still has a boss. Again he was the boss at Exxon and answered to nobody, that can be an issue when the situation changes

And no, wealth has zero to do with being prez except there will never be a non-wealthy prez.... it takes too much cash to get elected for middle class joe public to be prez
WSJ reporting he was undermining Trumps wishes on that clown show of a deal by the clown Obeezy.

If so, I’d have fired him too.
Image
"if you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-forever."

ip believes you can dial in a 78 year old man who suffers from deminishing mental function
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by awesome guy »

cwtcr hokie wrote:FYI, the story coming out of DC is that Tillerson was not following the prez wishes on the Iran deal and was actually trying to do it in a complete opposite manner than what Trump wanted. Yea sorry, Tillerson still has a boss. Again he was the boss at Exxon and answered to nobody, that can be an issue when the situation changes

And no, wealth has zero to do with being prez except there will never be a non-wealthy prez.... it takes too much cash to get elected for middle class joe public to be prez
Obama was a non-wealthy president and look how incompetent he was.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by awesome guy »

HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote: You're insane. Trump is doing a great job. You're dead wrong on predicting competence, clueless on the matter. Trump has been the opposite of what you predicted and what you now proclaim him to be. A smarter man would know it's time to reevaluate his position.
You're welcome to your opinion. It's true that he's doing a great job on several items, not so great on many others. His main failure is his inability to keep his mouth shut, or allow people to have dissenting opinions from his.


My opinion is based on measurable facts, like the economy doing well, NK coming to the negotiating table, giant tax cuts, and ISIS being destroyed. Yours is based on emotions and feelings, thusly it not being worth much. You're not even right about him tolerating dissenting opinions. He's way more tolerant than any of the ass clowns calling him a fool or clown. What he doesn't suffer is fools. That's different that not tolerating dissenting opinions, it's not tolerating emotional and feelings based silliness. He doesn't keep his mouth shut in response to fools and that's proving to be the right move too as he's winning while those people are losing. The bottom line is the emotional feelers want to take shots at him without him responding. And not only does he respond, he belittles them in the process.
You're talking nonsense.

I agree that he's doing a good job on the economy, and like the general tone he's set with NK. I think tax cuts were needed, but don't think he made the right cuts. But, still better than nothing. ISIS...nothing to do with him. You've listed the few things he is doing well on, then you move on to Trump's emotional failing. His leadership style isn't that he doesn't suffer fools. The people he has gotten rid of aren't fools, they are people that don't agree with him, and aren't afraid to voice their opinions. Trump is ruled by emotions and feelings, it's laughable that you call being ruled by emotion and feelings silly, it's what he lives on.
How can claim I'm talking nonsense after dropping that turd? "Few things?" That's 90% of the job and he's knocking out of the park. The "few thing" is pissing off pussies on twitter. Which that's a matter of perspective, I think it's great that he has you purse swingers in a tissy. It keeps you from engaging in actual policy, another win by Trump. He's gotten rid of plenty of fools, but mostly more disloyalty. The fools I'm referring to are the purse swingers. The tweets that you apparently think are the lions share of the job of the president. He comes at you guys with both barrels, it's hilarious.

Back to "few things", if not taking care of the economy, national security, and domestic policy then what do you think the president actually does? Seriously, Twitter is the only logical conclusion given what you said above.
The only people in this thread that are in a "tissy", are the Trump defenders.

Even when I lay out the things I think he's doing well, you purse clutchers get all red faced and angry.
Nope
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by HokieFanDC »

awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: I knew that Trump would be a clown show who had no idea how to run a country, when I didn't vote for him. I knew that McMuffin wouldn't win when I voted for him.
I was right on both counts. Next.
Fascinating. But, you thought Egg McMuffin the CIA agent was qualified? Can you even tell me his running mate off the top of your head?

Also, since you voted for someone you knew wouldn't win (Egg McMuffin) against someone you didn't want to win (Trump), isn't that really a defacto endorsement of Hillary?

What do you stand for? Men who stand for nothing (a man who stands for nothing, stands for everything) or make pussy protest votes are the worst type of men. I hope that's not your philosophy.
We've been through this before. None of them were qualified.
Trump is a rich, classless, douchebag, and a poor leader. He has some good economic ideas, but that's it.
Hillary...too many things to list that show her lack of qualities.
Not voting for Hillary or Trump, isn't an endorsement of Hillary, just like it isn't an endorsement of Trump. That argument is just plain stupid.
What I stand for is voting for someone who is a decent human being, who shares my values and morals. Neither of the candidates that was going to win, is even close to being worth my vote. McMullin was at least in the ballpark. I also strongly think we need more than 2 parties, and that if enough people actually voted their conscience, not party line sheep, we would have a chance of getting rid of our 2 party system.

The worst type of ppl are the ones that always find a way to convince themselves (against their own beliefs and values) that voting the party line is the right thing to do. It's not.
LOL. Some observations:

1. You think being rich makes someone not qualified to be President. :idea:

2. Voting for candidate C who takes votes away from candidate A is a defacto endorsement/support for candidate B. If we assume you are of average intelligence (I think you are), then we can assume you understand this.

3. If everyone voted for someone who shares their personal values, we wouldn't have any consensus on leadership. It's really an absurd standard.

I don't care if the guy engineering my deck shares my values, I care that he's a good engineer. Besides being impossible to reach a consensus, it's also irrelevant to the qualities needed to be president.
1. No, I was describing him. You and several others, constantly use his wealth as a defense against people who think he's foolish. Being rich, doesn't have any bearing on one's qualification as POTUS.

2. You should try that again. The only way that works is if absent Candidate C, everyone would actually vote for A or B. That's not the case.

3. Read what I wrote again. I said that neither Trump nor Hillary is even close. IMO, you should vote for someone who is at least somewhat in line with your social and economic values. Neither of them is close to my personal values, they are both dishonest and not trustworthy.
As for your deck building concept, if your engineer is a good engineer, that means that he understands how to engineer a deck, and that he will not cut corners, overcharge you, or be lazy in his calculations, when designing the deck. Part of the engineer being a good engineer, is related to his personal values.
Are you afraid Trump will grab you by the pussy? I don't get how anyone could call him a poor leader after all the success he lead last year. He's been better than Reagan and that was the greatest president of my lifetime.
It's way too early to call him better than Reagan, that's just ridiculous. Trump stepped into an economy, and a stock market, that was headed in the right direction. He's kept it on track. The crap Reagan had to deal with is exponentially more difficult than what Trump was handed.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
You're insane. Trump is doing a great job. You're dead wrong on predicting competence, clueless on the matter. Trump has been the opposite of what you predicted and what you now proclaim him to be. A smarter man would know it's time to reevaluate his position.
You're welcome to your opinion. It's true that he's doing a great job on several items, not so great on many others. His main failure is his inability to keep his mouth shut, or allow people to have dissenting opinions from his.
You're just describing the status quo politician who glues "made in USA" labels on his Italian suits (look it up) or makes sure she's seen in public wearing Mets and Yankees hats equally (look it up)....you know, the people who've been **** us over for decades.

You're just saying you want to be manipulated.
That's funny. You voted for the guy who crows about "Made in the USA", and bashes China and overseas manufacturing, while having his products made in China and other Asian countries.
:roll: :roll:
Holy logical fallacy, batman.

That's no different than bashing the libertarian for driving on public roads.
I disagree. There are plenty of companies that purposefully manufacture in the US, on principle.
And if you're going to mock Chinese manufacturing b/c it puts out crappy products, you should probably not have your signature products being made in China. He is free to manufacture wherever he wants, but he should not make it such a talking point, while being part of the problem.
Companies who manufacture in the US market to that. If you're making military grade rucksacks, it can work. If you're making silk neck ties, good luck (I think BB has that niche pinned down).

Regardless, my analogy of the libertarian being criticized for driving on public roads still stands. A smart business man uses his environment to his advantage - or he loses. That doesn't mean he shouldn't fight for values which everyone can compete equally under, or make him a hypocrite for doing so.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Fascinating. But, you thought Egg McMuffin the CIA agent was qualified? Can you even tell me his running mate off the top of your head?

Also, since you voted for someone you knew wouldn't win (Egg McMuffin) against someone you didn't want to win (Trump), isn't that really a defacto endorsement of Hillary?

What do you stand for? Men who stand for nothing (a man who stands for nothing, stands for everything) or make pussy protest votes are the worst type of men. I hope that's not your philosophy.
We've been through this before. None of them were qualified.
Trump is a rich, classless, douchebag, and a poor leader. He has some good economic ideas, but that's it.
Hillary...too many things to list that show her lack of qualities.
Not voting for Hillary or Trump, isn't an endorsement of Hillary, just like it isn't an endorsement of Trump. That argument is just plain stupid.
What I stand for is voting for someone who is a decent human being, who shares my values and morals. Neither of the candidates that was going to win, is even close to being worth my vote. McMullin was at least in the ballpark. I also strongly think we need more than 2 parties, and that if enough people actually voted their conscience, not party line sheep, we would have a chance of getting rid of our 2 party system.

The worst type of ppl are the ones that always find a way to convince themselves (against their own beliefs and values) that voting the party line is the right thing to do. It's not.
LOL. Some observations:

1. You think being rich makes someone not qualified to be President. :idea:

2. Voting for candidate C who takes votes away from candidate A is a defacto endorsement/support for candidate B. If we assume you are of average intelligence (I think you are), then we can assume you understand this.

3. If everyone voted for someone who shares their personal values, we wouldn't have any consensus on leadership. It's really an absurd standard.

I don't care if the guy engineering my deck shares my values, I care that he's a good engineer. Besides being impossible to reach a consensus, it's also irrelevant to the qualities needed to be president.
1. No, I was describing him. You and several others, constantly use his wealth as a defense against people who think he's foolish. Being rich, doesn't have any bearing on one's qualification as POTUS.

2. You should try that again. The only way that works is if absent Candidate C, everyone would actually vote for A or B. That's not the case.

3. Read what I wrote again. I said that neither Trump nor Hillary is even close. IMO, you should vote for someone who is at least somewhat in line with your social and economic values. Neither of them is close to my personal values, they are both dishonest and not trustworthy.
As for your deck building concept, if your engineer is a good engineer, that means that he understands how to engineer a deck, and that he will not cut corners, overcharge you, or be lazy in his calculations, when designing the deck. Part of the engineer being a good engineer, is related to his personal values.
1. You should have just stuck with everyone assuming you thought being rich was a bad quality for a leader. Reducing it to an epithet is even worse. That's how poor rent seekers think.

2. Nope, not all...you just have to *think* it's enough - or that it damages the other candidate (it does).

3. Good job of describing a salesman and not an engineer.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote: It's way too early to call him better than Reagan,
Is he a rich, classless, poor leader....or possibly better than Reagan? Or, both (afraid to ask what you think of the gipper)?

Confusing either way.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by TheH2 »

HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: I knew that Trump would be a clown show who had no idea how to run a country, when I didn't vote for him. I knew that McMuffin wouldn't win when I voted for him.
I was right on both counts. Next.
You're insane. Trump is doing a great job. You're dead wrong on predicting competence, clueless on the matter. Trump has been the opposite of what you predicted and what you now proclaim him to be. A smarter man would know it's time to reevaluate his position.
You're welcome to your opinion. It's true that he's doing a great job on several items, not so great on many others. His main failure is his inability to keep his mouth shut, or allow people to have dissenting opinions from his.

My opinion is based on measurable facts, like the economy doing well, NK coming to the negotiating table, giant tax cuts, and ISIS being destroyed. Yours is based on emotions and feelings, thusly it not being worth much. You're not even right about him tolerating dissenting opinions. He's way more tolerant than any of the ass clowns calling him a fool or clown. What he doesn't suffer is fools. That's different that not tolerating dissenting opinions, it's not tolerating emotional and feelings based silliness. He doesn't keep his mouth shut in response to fools and that's proving to be the right move too as he's winning while those people are losing. The bottom line is the emotional feelers want to take shots at him without him responding. And not only does he respond, he belittles them in the process.
You're talking nonsense.

I agree that he's doing a good job on the economy?
How? I'd say the economy is doing good, but not because of him, just because the economy was fine before. Please note, this isn't an insult to him. Add to that the rest of the developed world finally growing again, and things are looking pretty good.

I do find like the signalling from posters that think the economy is so great under Trump and thought it sucked under Obama. I'm not putting you in this group.
People who know, know.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by TheH2 »

HokieFanDC wrote: It's way too early to call him better than Reagan, that's just ridiculous. Trump stepped into an economy, and a stock market, that was headed in the right direction. He's kept it on track. The crap Reagan had to deal with is exponentially more difficult than what Trump was handed.
And I think that answered my question.
People who know, know.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by awesome guy »

TheH2 wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote: I knew that Trump would be a clown show who had no idea how to run a country, when I didn't vote for him. I knew that McMuffin wouldn't win when I voted for him.
I was right on both counts. Next.
You're insane. Trump is doing a great job. You're dead wrong on predicting competence, clueless on the matter. Trump has been the opposite of what you predicted and what you now proclaim him to be. A smarter man would know it's time to reevaluate his position.
You're welcome to your opinion. It's true that he's doing a great job on several items, not so great on many others. His main failure is his inability to keep his mouth shut, or allow people to have dissenting opinions from his.

My opinion is based on measurable facts, like the economy doing well, NK coming to the negotiating table, giant tax cuts, and ISIS being destroyed. Yours is based on emotions and feelings, thusly it not being worth much. You're not even right about him tolerating dissenting opinions. He's way more tolerant than any of the ass clowns calling him a fool or clown. What he doesn't suffer is fools. That's different that not tolerating dissenting opinions, it's not tolerating emotional and feelings based silliness. He doesn't keep his mouth shut in response to fools and that's proving to be the right move too as he's winning while those people are losing. The bottom line is the emotional feelers want to take shots at him without him responding. And not only does he respond, he belittles them in the process.
You're talking nonsense.

I agree that he's doing a good job on the economy?
How? I'd say the economy is doing good, but not because of him, just because the economy was fine before. Please note, this isn't an insult to him. Add to that the rest of the developed world finally growing again, and things are looking pretty good.

I do find like the signalling from posters that think the economy is so great under Trump and thought it sucked under Obama. I'm not putting you in this group.
That's a canard. Obama never produced 3% annual GDP growth. That's not fine and what y'all waved off as the new normal. Trump is getting us the old normal.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by TheH2 »

awesome guy wrote:That's a canard. Obama never produced 3% annual GDP growth. That's not fine and what y'all waved off as the new normal. Trump is getting us the old normal.
You're right, Obama didn't, but the US economy did. Great signalling.

Image

Image
People who know, know.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by awesome guy »

TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:That's a canard. Obama never produced 3% annual GDP growth. That's not fine and what y'all waved off as the new normal. Trump is getting us the old normal.
You're right, Obama didn't, but the US economy did. Great signalling.

Image

Image
"Annual" wasn't included to add space. Learn to read.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by TheH2 »

awesome guy wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:That's a canard. Obama never produced 3% annual GDP growth. That's not fine and what y'all waved off as the new normal. Trump is getting us the old normal.
You're right, Obama didn't, but the US economy did. Great signalling.

Image

Image
"Annual" wasn't included to add space. Learn to read.
The second graph provided annual numbers. Both 2014 and 2015 posted higher GDP growth than 2017. Directly from the source: click section 1, table 1.1.1, modify to annual.
https://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?r ... 6=a&1911=0

Like I said, signalling.
People who know, know.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by awesome guy »

TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:That's a canard. Obama never produced 3% annual GDP growth. That's not fine and what y'all waved off as the new normal. Trump is getting us the old normal.
You're right, Obama didn't, but the US economy did. Great signalling.

Image

Image
"Annual" wasn't included to add space. Learn to read.
The second graph provided annual numbers. Both 2014 and 2015 posted higher GDP growth than 2017. Directly from the source: click section 1, table 1.1.1, modify to annual.
https://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?r ... 6=a&1911=0

Like I said, signalling.
Like I said and you erroneously contracted, not over 3%.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by TheH2 »

awesome guy wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:That's a canard. Obama never produced 3% annual GDP growth. That's not fine and what y'all waved off as the new normal. Trump is getting us the old normal.
You're right, Obama didn't, but the US economy did. Great signalling.

Image

Image
"Annual" wasn't included to add space. Learn to read.
The second graph provided annual numbers. Both 2014 and 2015 posted higher GDP growth than 2017. Directly from the source: click section 1, table 1.1.1, modify to annual.
https://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?r ... 6=a&1911=0

Like I said, signalling.
Like I said and you erroneously contracted, not over 3%.
Ok, sorry, this economy is great with lower job creation and GDP growth consistent with the Obama years which was terrible.
People who know, know.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by HokieFanDC »

USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Fascinating. But, you thought Egg McMuffin the CIA agent was qualified? Can you even tell me his running mate off the top of your head?

Also, since you voted for someone you knew wouldn't win (Egg McMuffin) against someone you didn't want to win (Trump), isn't that really a defacto endorsement of Hillary?

What do you stand for? Men who stand for nothing (a man who stands for nothing, stands for everything) or make pussy protest votes are the worst type of men. I hope that's not your philosophy.
We've been through this before. None of them were qualified.
Trump is a rich, classless, douchebag, and a poor leader. He has some good economic ideas, but that's it.
Hillary...too many things to list that show her lack of qualities.
Not voting for Hillary or Trump, isn't an endorsement of Hillary, just like it isn't an endorsement of Trump. That argument is just plain stupid.
What I stand for is voting for someone who is a decent human being, who shares my values and morals. Neither of the candidates that was going to win, is even close to being worth my vote. McMullin was at least in the ballpark. I also strongly think we need more than 2 parties, and that if enough people actually voted their conscience, not party line sheep, we would have a chance of getting rid of our 2 party system.

The worst type of ppl are the ones that always find a way to convince themselves (against their own beliefs and values) that voting the party line is the right thing to do. It's not.
LOL. Some observations:

1. You think being rich makes someone not qualified to be President. :idea:

2. Voting for candidate C who takes votes away from candidate A is a defacto endorsement/support for candidate B. If we assume you are of average intelligence (I think you are), then we can assume you understand this.

3. If everyone voted for someone who shares their personal values, we wouldn't have any consensus on leadership. It's really an absurd standard.

I don't care if the guy engineering my deck shares my values, I care that he's a good engineer. Besides being impossible to reach a consensus, it's also irrelevant to the qualities needed to be president.
1. No, I was describing him. You and several others, constantly use his wealth as a defense against people who think he's foolish. Being rich, doesn't have any bearing on one's qualification as POTUS.

2. You should try that again. The only way that works is if absent Candidate C, everyone would actually vote for A or B. That's not the case.

3. Read what I wrote again. I said that neither Trump nor Hillary is even close. IMO, you should vote for someone who is at least somewhat in line with your social and economic values. Neither of them is close to my personal values, they are both dishonest and not trustworthy.
As for your deck building concept, if your engineer is a good engineer, that means that he understands how to engineer a deck, and that he will not cut corners, overcharge you, or be lazy in his calculations, when designing the deck. Part of the engineer being a good engineer, is related to his personal values.
1. You should have just stuck with everyone assuming you thought being rich was a bad quality for a leader. Reducing it to an epithet is even worse. That's how poor rent seekers think.

2. Nope, not all...you just have to *think* it's enough - or that it damages the other candidate (it does).

3. Good job of describing a salesman and not an engineer.
1-3. Correcting your misguided assumptions and illogical leaps, multiple times, is SOP on UWS.
User avatar
USN_Hokie
Posts: 30831
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:58 pm
Party: Draintheswamp

Re: Anybody concerned Tillerson is on the way out.

Post by USN_Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
1-3. Correcting your misguided assumptions and illogical leaps, multiple times, is SOP on UWS.
Not an argument.
Post Reply