199 People, Places & Things Donald Trump has insulted on Twitter

So, does saying someone "will be soundly defeated" falls under that?

Like I have said, I have no problem with someone saying Trump says things that are "scornfully, rudely or disrespectfully about someone." Good Lord....that's obvious. My problem is with the list.

And...yes...there are things on the original list that I guess I would classify as an insult. But, there are a lot that aren't.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Coach Power'T said:
Count 'Bility said:
Why do some of you appear to have such disdain towards people of strong faith? I read sh#t like this all the time on here anymore. For the love of christ, f#*k off.
Click to expand...
AGREED!!!

It's funny because they scream "bigot" at Christianity. Yet they ALL do the same thing, whether they realize it or not.

They can tell us they aren't as much as they want, and ultimately convince themselves they aren't doing what they actually are.

Fact of the matter is. EVERYONE is a bigot in some way or the other. Get over it. It's life.

I'll admit I'm pretty bigoted towards certain people. I mean a lot of us are bigot's toward the SEC.

Maybe if we didn't have opinions altogether we'd have much more fulfilling lives. Gawd.
Click to expand...
The difference being that people without strong religious beliefs don't ride around on their moral high-horse throwing shade at every political policy, or personal decision that doesn't align with their religious agenda. Not everything is a slight on Christianity.

 
Wait, what? Everyone is a bigot, so we may as well accept it?

...

If anything, Christians are some of the most compassionate and unbigoted people I know.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sounds like another thread needs to be started

default_backtotopic.gif


I was thinking last night how disappointed I've gotten in the primary process. The repubs are now faced with choosing between an egomaniac or 2 freshman senators with little experience. Both are charges that were leveled against Obama - being self centered like Trump and being of little real experience before he became President. He was denounced for only being in the Senate for a short time before he ran for president - sounds like Cruz and Rubio. I have recently been in favor of Rubio, but he is starting to look like an empty suit - short on accomplishments. Gives a good speech like Obama and sounds good in all of those sound bites.

The process has eliminated some guys that I think would have been better at the job. I'm not a Bush fan (tired of any more Bush leaders) but I would suspect he would be a better 'administrator' of the office. The same is true of Kasich and even Chris Christi (also Walker - who I was leaning towards at first - what a quick fizzle out that was). Now being a competent administrator is different than being a leader. It appears the electorate could care less about competency and more about someone who can 'drive change'.

Someone said, Obama makes some of us who did like Bill Clinton wish for Bill Clinton instead and that Trump will make us wish for Obama instead. Funny how the guy in office is extreme until the next guy takes over. The act and react pendulum keeps taking bigger and bigger swings.

 
I would take eight more years of Obama, even with the Republican obstructionism and bickering, rather than ANY of the current candidates.

Rubio seems the lesser of all evils right now, but like Obama, he's light on accomplishments right now. He'd be an OK president (like Obama would have been) if Congress would compromise & work with him, but if Rubio gets in and the Dems plot to obstruct everything he does, he'll be basically the same president we've had with Obama.

 
I didn't look at the list. Did include this?


26,000 unreported sexual assults in the military-only 238 convictions. What did these geniuses expect when they put men & women together?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 7, 2013

I would classify this as an insult against men. The implication is that men being near women is what causes rape. He's also not differentiating between assaults on men and assaults on women. There are definitely male victims as well.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/27/retired-marine-reveals-secret-suffering-of-male-military-rape-victims.html

According to this article 53% of rape victims in the military are male. Obviously the incidence is higher for women since there are way less women in the military, but it existed before women were allowed to enlist.

Pretty much anything Trump says can be broken down this way but his followers don't like to dig deeper into things.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zoogs said:
Wait, what? Everyone is a bigot, so we may as well accept it?

...

If anything, Christians are some of the most compassionate and unbigoted people I know.
Click to expand...
There ya go. Now someone is starting to get it.

Some bad, some good.

I got jumped the other day about calling out black people fitting a stereotype when it was just one guy who freaked out/disrespected my wife.

Understandable.

Yet, on this forum, it's ok to profile Christians as a whole. Even though some are ACTUALLY the opposite of the claims.

 
Moiraine said:
I didn't look at the list. Did include this?



26,000 unreported sexual assults in the military-only 238 convictions. What did these geniuses expect when they put men & women together?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) May 7, 2013

I would classify this as an insult against men. The implication is that men being near women is what causes rape. He's also not differentiating between assaults on men and assaults on women. There are definitely male victims as well.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/27/retired-marine-reveals-secret-suffering-of-male-military-rape-victims.html

According to this article 53% of rape victims in the military are male. Obviously the incidence is higher for women since there are way less women in the military, but it existed before women were allowed to enlist.

Pretty much anything Trump says can be broken down this way but his followers don't like to dig deeper into things.
Click to expand...
His followers are a load of mouth breathers. They wouldn't know substance and introspection if it whacked them over the head.

It amazes me that people can just hear the stuff he says and lap it up without a second thought. Someone described it aptly earlier today: "They don't care about substance or policies or credentials, they just want someone who will burn Washington to the ground, and they think he'll do it."

 
Moiraine said:
Sargon said:
Moiraine said:
They could pick no one. But the Republican primaries are having record turnouts. I have no idea what the Christian % of the primary voters is though. I'm also Christian, for the record, and don't understand why so many fellow Christians are staunchly in support of the Republican party except the ones who list abortion as their most important or only cause.
Click to expand...
If you understood that what you believe is actually false, then your confusion would be solved. Christians by and large definitely do not staunchly support the Republican party. Rather they somewhat staunchly anti-support Dems since Dems do more damage to them than Reps do. Christians with some wisdom, so, some but not all, staunchly support almost no one since they understand that all people are sinners, power corrupts, etc. Staunch support typically indicates "faith in man" which is a very bad idea. You should find some smarter Christians to hang out with.
Click to expand...
I said I "don't understand why so many fellow Christians are staunchly in support of the Republican party." Without data I find it unlikely that what I said was false. If 10% of voting Republican Christians were staunchly in support of the Republican party I'd think that is too many.
Click to expand...
Fine then let me teach you something else you don't understand. 10% of a population is a very LOW percentage of stupid/snookered (or anything...narcissistic, lemming, crooked). Enthusiastic support for D or R today in the US comes almost exclusively from people who cannot clearly understand the actual (bad) conduct of the actors (pun intended) and that their "analyses" and "solutions" are nearly always wrong.

Sanders...free college!

Me...how much $ per year total Bernie?

Me...stupid people also get to go? Lazy? Druggies? 10 mil Afro and womens studies degrees good? 50 mil? Should we get rid of SAT/ACT scores (haha)?

Sanders....you are a white right wing hater christian blued eyed vodoo jack boot nut job. You are a perfect example of an evil capitalist that must be expunged from Mother Earth. BTW I'm still not going to talk about Hillary's email because she's a good person but you....you are taking up oxygen that would be better used by Syrians.

Cheers roar from large crowd of white dimocrat idiots.

Trump....round em all up

Me...that would take like a 1 million person force. Why not just launch e verify and cut funding to sanctuary cities?

Trump....you are a liar and an idiot. A total nothing. A liar. Idiot. Total...loooosssseer. I built a great company.

Cheers roar from 'uge mixed crowd who hates the government (but crowd likes everything I said but they LOVE the Donald!)

 
Sargon said:
Moiraine said:
Sargon said:
Moiraine said:
They could pick no one. But the Republican primaries are having record turnouts. I have no idea what the Christian % of the primary voters is though. I'm also Christian, for the record, and don't understand why so many fellow Christians are staunchly in support of the Republican party except the ones who list abortion as their most important or only cause.
Click to expand...
If you understood that what you believe is actually false, then your confusion would be solved. Christians by and large definitely do not staunchly support the Republican party. Rather they somewhat staunchly anti-support Dems since Dems do more damage to them than Reps do. Christians with some wisdom, so, some but not all, staunchly support almost no one since they understand that all people are sinners, power corrupts, etc. Staunch support typically indicates "faith in man" which is a very bad idea. You should find some smarter Christians to hang out with.
Click to expand...
I said I "don't understand why so many fellow Christians are staunchly in support of the Republican party." Without data I find it unlikely that what I said was false. If 10% of voting Republican Christians were staunchly in support of the Republican party I'd think that is too many.
Click to expand...
Fine then let me teach you something else you don't understand. 10% of a population is a very LOW percentage of stupid/snookered (or anything...narcissistic, lemming, crooked). Enthusiastic support for D or R today in the US comes almost exclusively from people who cannot clearly understand the actual (bad) conduct of the actors (pun intended) and that their "analyses" and "solutions" are nearly always wrong.

Sanders...free college!

Me...how much $ per year total Bernie?

Me...stupid people also get to go? Lazy? Druggies? 10 mil Afro and womens studies degrees good? 50 mil? Should we get rid of SAT/ACT scores (haha)?

Sanders....you are a white right wing hater christian blued eyed vodoo jack boot nut job. You are a perfect example of an evil capitalist that must be expunged from Mother Earth. BTW I'm still not going to talk about Hillary's email because she's a good person but you....you are taking up oxygen that would be better used by Syrians.

Cheers roar from large crowd of white dimocrat idiots.

Trump....round em all up

Me...that would take like a 1 million person force. Why not just launch e verify and cut funding to sanctuary cities?

Trump....you are a liar and an idiot. A total nothing. A liar. Idiot. Total...loooosssseer. I built a great company.

Cheers roar from 'uge mixed crowd who hates the government (but crowd likes everything I said but they LOVE the Donald!)
Click to expand...
Not sure how this reply is in any way relevant to my post.

 
dudeguyy said:
It amazes me that people can just hear the stuff he says and lap it up without a second thought. Someone described it aptly earlier today: "They don't care about substance or policies or credentials, they just want someone who will burn Washington to the ground, and they think he'll do it."
Click to expand...
All wrong. Substance is hope and change? Black lives matter? Dude D's run on no substance always R's run on substance then confuse people and never deliver and always grow government anyway. Trump is running on pragmatic clear END STATES and not on some bullsh#t programs that will cost infinite money forever.

Build the wall, mexico pays. This is a good black and white result and it's frankly simple to do including the Mexico pays part.

Qualifications huh? A 44 year old senator? A 73 year old cook who's never managed a thing? An old white lady who only managed something for 4 years and got historically terrible results and lost top secrets because she's above the law?

Most others in the race have actually proven they are NOT qualified. Obama? His qualifications were a complete joke. Least qualified in a century (probably for all time).

Dude...we SHOULD be a government of the PEOPLE by the PEOPLE not a political ruling class. Our Presidents should usually NOT be Senators they should be CEO's and Generals and Governors (if you actually care about executive leadership experience which along with intelligence and integrity are the only things I care about).

 
Sargon said:
dudeguyy said:
It amazes me that people can just hear the stuff he says and lap it up without a second thought. Someone described it aptly earlier today: "They don't care about substance or policies or credentials, they just want someone who will burn Washington to the ground, and they think he'll do it."
Click to expand...
All wrong. Substance is hope and change? Black lives matter? Dude D's run on no substance always R's run on substance then confuse people and never deliver and always grow government anyway. Trump is running on pragmatic clear END STATES and not on some bullsh#t programs that will cost infinite money forever.

Build the wall, mexico pays. This is a good black and white result and it's frankly simple to do including the Mexico pays part.

Qualifications huh? A 44 year old senator? A 73 year old cook who's never managed a thing? An old white lady who only managed something for 4 years and got historically terrible results and lost top secrets because she's above the law?

Most others in the race have actually proven they are NOT qualified. Obama? His qualifications were a complete joke. Least qualified in a century (probably for all time).

Dude...we SHOULD be a government of the PEOPLE by the PEOPLE not a political ruling class. Our Presidents should usually NOT be Senators they should be CEO's and Generals and Governors (if you actually care about executive leadership experience which along with intelligence and integrity are the only things I care about).
Click to expand...
I'm going to ignore the middle of the that because of the obvious bias.

Logically, how the hell does Trump legitimately make Mexico pay for a wall? Before you say leverage Mexico via the "billions" that we lose to them, there have already been MULTIPLE MEXICAN PRESIDENTS who have straight up told Trump to f*ck off and they're not going to pay a cent. For a negotiator, that's a hell of a starting point.

I'd like to also point out that essentially slapping an embargo on Mexico would hurt our economy a good chunk as well.

Tell me, logically, how he gets it done. Piece by piece.

I very much agree about government being by the people for the people. But do you sense the irony dripping when you say you care about a president with intelligence and integrity, while defending Trump?

 
Back
Top