Uncle Joe is at it again!!

You're WRONG if you think what biased fact checkers say means shit. It's trivially obvious to an intelligent observer that your notion that "Trump lies more" because fact checkers tell you "he lies more" is bullshit considering those same fucking fact checkers will not call Odumbo and hildebeest liars even when Odumbo and hildebeest blatantly lie. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I read/hear statements made by Trump. First day he took office he said more people attended his inauguration than attended Obama's inauguration. Started his presidency with a lie/misrepresentation of the truth and it continues day-to-day. I'll ask you to do the same thing I've asked of others -- look through the 3 links I cited and tell me which statements about Trump are untrue.

Some people really do live in their own reality.

I've already stated that politicians lie and lie often so it's easy to cherry pick statements to list as their lies.

You have also acknowledged liberal bias in the media and that the "fact checkers" may be following suit.

So putting two and two together, you pretty much just validated that the Lichtner study probably has merit in overly calling out the right or Republicans as victims of the media and fact checkers. So post all the individual fact checking items you want, the lists that attack Trump comparatively as was your earlier premise are inherently biased statistics.

Other posters have fairly credibly debunked your comparisons to Obama as well in that they have easily shown the bias of the media and fact checkers to give Obama passes in instances of far more overt lying than they accuse Trump of directly.

And I most certainly remember Bush towards the mid to end of his two terms being vilified by "fact checkers" and the media.

We get it, you hate Trump and I agree he is certainly outside the norm of the last 50+ years of Presidents. But its what we needed and that he succeeds in spite of all of the above bias just drives lefties ape shit is also an added bonus.

Uncle Joe is not going to be much competition at this point as he continue to get knocked down by his past, be it the plagiarism, the groping, the recent Hyde flip flop, the lack of attending early campaigning against his rivals, etc. etc.

He isn't looking good right now and I don't see anyone on the left stepping up for a major push. Originally Posted by eccielover

You "remember" Bush being vilified towards the end of his term. So the press/media was fair to him for 7 years and it wasn't until the economy's downward explosion that he was treated unfairly. As I keep saying, Trump brings the negativity on himself.

The one thing you've been correct about is that I don't like Trump. Part due to his character and part due to his policies. You say he "succeeds in spite of all the above bias" yet his approval ratings both within the U.S. and outside are the worst of any POTUS since approval ratings have been done. Obviously the majority of the people in this country disagree with you.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...-election-odds

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...t-in-9-charts/

Who knows what the next 17 months will bring. I will honestly say one thing -- everyone go out on November 3, 2020 and vote for the candidate(s) of your choice. I support anyone's decision to vote for Trump and I support anyone's decision to vote for whoever the Democratic candidate turns out to be. Whoever wins the electoral vote in 2020 will be our duly elected POTUS for 4 years.

Who posted #22 of this thread, was that you SPEED...someone in that post..."Assuming the media is Anti-republican"....SPEED please think before you post...I have shown your concrete studies in regards to the left wing bias... Originally Posted by bb1961

Do you think there is no right wing bias?

So half the country listens to left wing bias and the other half listens to right wing bias. WTF is your point?

I read/hear statements made by Trump. First day he took office he said more people attended his inauguration than attended Obama's inauguration. Started his presidency with a lie/misrepresentation of the truth and it continues day-to-day. I'll ask you to do the same thing I've asked of others -- look through the 3 links I cited and tell me which statements about Trump are untrue. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Your fallacious argument is that Trump lies more than hildebeest, Odumbo, etc., and the basis of your argument is lists created by so-called ~fact checkers~ who are in fact biased players -- biased players who are too willing to compile a list of Trump's short comings and who are also too willing to ignore the short comings of their favorites.

Your notion that comparing those lists made by these biased players afford in any way a fair way to make a comparison with the likes of Odumbo and hildebeest is absurdly faulty; thus, meaningless.

You cannot make your case without pointing to their lists, as you just did, and we know damn good and well that the lists these jackasses have created are prima facie rotten and represent their bias and DO NOT represent truth and fact.

DO NOT represent truth and fact.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Pray do tell who/what represents the truth?

Pray do tell who/what represents the truth?

Originally Posted by WTF

Suffice it to say that it ain't those self-appointed, lib-retarded mutha fuckers.

You "remember" Bush being vilified towards the end of his term. So the press/media was fair to him for 7 years and it wasn't until the economy's downward explosion that he was treated unfairly. As I keep saying, Trump brings the negativity on himself. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

What part of Mid to end of his two terms did you have trouble understanding? I, in no way, alluded to just his 8th year, but basically his whole second term. Re-read what I wrote. 9/11 had Bush in a unique place for much of the first term. After that, the vilification and biased "fact checking" resumed against him and other republicans full force for his second term.

Your fallacious argument is that Trump lies more than hildebeest, Odumbo, etc., and the basis of your argument is lists created by so-called ~fact checkers~ who are in fact biased players -- biased players who are too willing to compile a list of Trump's short comings and who are also too willing to ignore the short comings of their favorites.

Your notion that comparing those lists made by these biased players afford in any way a fair way to make a comparison with the likes of Odumbo and hildebeest is absurdly faulty; thus, meaningless.

You cannot make your case without pointing to their lists, as you just did, and we know damn good and well that the lists these jackasses have created are prima facie rotten and represent their bias and DO NOT represent truth and fact.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

+1

He is being deliberately evasive in the refutation of his own statements. It's getting comical.

-

Apparently, Creepy Joe had 85 people at his Trump bashing rally in Iowa today!!!

AE - Great pic of Biden and Maduro!
DPST's will strip the military budget to spread Socialism and emigration to the US in South America.
Buttigieg approves the photo!

So, I’m watching the news. Biden was talking to his second group of the day. They had Biden on first. He seemed completely spent. It was sad. They switched to Trump speaking. His energy was evident. A stark contrast. Biden doesn’t have it. I think he knows it.

Do you think there is no right wing bias?

So half the country listens to left wing bias and the other half listens to right wing bias. WTF is your point?





Originally Posted by WTF

to get you to say something stupid and it worked

to get you to say something stupid and it worked Originally Posted by Hotrod511

biden = Jeb Bush = low energy