Trump Dump / War Train vol 2

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 429137
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So the author proudly makes an emotional appeal to intelligence by extolling Hawking's conclusion that -wait for it- Trump's popularity is based on emotional appeals? Demagogue much?
 
dontsnitch said:
So the author proudly makes an emotional appeal to intelligence by extolling Hawking's conclusion that -wait for it- Trump's popularity is based on emotional appeals? Demagogue much?
Click to expand...

Words have meaning. Demagogue ain't it.
 
dontsnitch said:
Why, because I used the word playfully as a verb?

He is distorting with emotionalism. There is great irony in the article.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure demagogues are explicitly political leaders. So...no.
 
Falsedawn said:
Pretty sure demagogues are explicitly political leaders. So...no.
Click to expand...

My point was that there is irony here. You can strike demagogue from the record if it helps, although I believe it does not only apply to political leaders.
 
Should I listen to the man whose field is almost entirely speculative, whose "truths" are derived mostly through esoteric formulae and impossible to falsify (thus unscientific), or should I listen to the man whose field deals with the most complex and fascinating organ in the human body, a field whose life and death triumphs and failures can be seen right in front of us? A man with his head in the clouds or a real life superhero? Tough choice.

Not really. When it comes to the political endorsements or admonitions from celebrity scientists:

Ben Carson > Hawking
 
His real last name is Drumpf...
 
It's called a pitch.

Trump team calculated Kasich to be a mentally-ill power-addict and they figured that promising him power would get him to accept the nomination.

Kasich would be great for Donald's electability.

From a swing state. check.

Establishment moderate. check.
 
Rex Kwon Do said:
Should I listen to the man whose field is almost entirely speculative, whose "truths" are derived mostly through esoteric formulae and impossible to falsify (thus unscientific), or should I listen to the man whose field deals with the most complex and fascinating organ in the human body, a field whose life and death triumphs and failures can be seen right in front of us? A man with his head in the clouds or a real life superhero? Tough choice.

Not really. When it comes to the political endorsements or admonitions from celebrity scientists:

Ben Carson > Hawking
Click to expand...

Hahaha, you're funny.
 
oleDirtyBast4rd said:
Lol at the idiots frothing over nothing
Click to expand...

You gotta be two tons of fuckwit to think it's a nothing story. Of course, I'm not calling you a fuckwit because that would be flaming and against the forum rules. I only mean to say a person that has the thought you yourself just thought must be a giant bumbling moron too dumb to wipe his own ass.
 
Clippy, please stop making threads. Both here and the Heavies.
 
Rex Kwon Do said:
Not really. When it comes to the political endorsements or admonitions from celebrity scientists:

Ben Carson > Hawking
Click to expand...

Ben-Carson-Baby-Ghosts.jpg
 
I don't see anything wrong with this statement. I'm sure that even Trump would admit that he's not aiming for the "intellectuals" with his speeches. They are something that the average guy can relate to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,283,130
Messages
58,483,549
Members
176,050
Latest member
Rick Quid

Share this page

Back
Top