Trump MAGAthread VII

[Cannot think of a name]

Doesn't help me that I find "the bantz" and a slew of other dank memes to be the lowest possible form of comedy, and generally really fucking annoying.

You sound like a lot of fun at parties.

At one point in my life I found peek-a-boo fucking hilarious. Giggled for hours until I literally pooped my pants.

These days? Not so much. I didn't become humorless, joy did not depart from my life. I still laugh hysterically, find joy daily. But as I've grown I do not find mundane things hilarious. If you repeat something over and over again it no longer merits the same response each time. I no longer think it's high comedy to immediately recite the same joke an adult just said and giggle like an idiot. My tastes have evolved. The have matured to a point where we no longer let children attend our parties because pretending that they said the word "fart" is comedy gold drags the party down.

So if I had to choose between the two of you, I'd party with him because he might make a joke I haven't heard and I won't have to smile and nod at the person at the little table saying "poopy" too loud.

[Great Nepal]

I'm waiting for his lawyers to take control of his twitter. Especially since the court ruled that his tweets are admissible as evidence

If President Obama had tweeted a gif of himself putting the figure 4 leglock on Fox News, I'd have laughed and grudgingly admired him for his willingness to bring the bantz.

I can't comprehend how humorless one must be to think this is some uniquely horrific degradation of the office of POTUS. Thomas Jefferson called John Adams a blind, bald, crippled, toothless man. John Adams called Hamilton the bastard brat of a Scotch peddler, etc.

When you've to retort to "just a joke bruh", you've told a bad and humorless 'joke' and should feel bad.

[Thermodolia]

To be honest, CNN kind of deserves the criticism when they keep bringing idiot Jeffrey Lord on.

I don't get their fascination with that simpleton.

They want Fox News old slogan, fair and balanced

[Salandriagado]

Anything

Call me a skeptic, but I suspect the fallout from this shitposting to be equivalent to the time he posted the can't stump the trump video

Unless at any point in the future he has to defend some decision regarding freedom of the press in court.

[Vassenor]

If President Obama had tweeted a gif of himself putting the figure 4 leglock on Fox News, I'd have laughed and grudgingly admired him for his willingness to bring the bantz.

I can't comprehend how humorless one must be to think this is some uniquely horrific degradation of the office of POTUS. Thomas Jefferson called John Adams a blind, bald, crippled, toothless man. John Adams called Hamilton the bastard brat of a Scotch peddler, etc.

When you've to retort to "just a joke bruh", you've told a bad and humorless 'joke' and should feel bad.

If you have to explain the joke there is no joke.

[AiliailiA]

Presidents have done dumber, gimmickier things than this. Look hard enough and you'll find some examples.

"This" being the Trump/CNN wrestling clip.

Since you're arguing that perhaps you can provide some.

I can't right now, on mobile.

How about now? Still on mobile?

[FelrikTheDeleted]

If you have to explain the joke there is no joke.

A persons inability to understand a joke does not make said joke, not a joke.

[AiliailiA]

No not at all.

No, I'm quite sure liberals were the young punks and the conservatives were the old angry men. It's in their name, FFS.

Conservative doesn't mean humourless or bigoted or stick-up-the-ass. We have other terms to use when we want to say that.
Conservative is the respectful term, it's a name chosen by conservatives themselves, serious-minded ones like Goldwater.

And liberal. Some liberals apply the term to themselves (I do) but it's very much about social policy. Permissive, tolerant (yeah, there are contradictions, we're generally not tolerant of guns or discrimination), but it's NOT actually the opposite of conservative. There isn't an exact opposite, but "progressive" is closer than "liberal".

In what possible way does "liberal" mean fun-loving young punks? You say this is so obvious all one has to do is look at the names (names you picked btw), but I don't think even that is true. Such drivel from you today.

[AiliailiA]

If you have to explain the joke there is no joke.

A persons inability to understand a joke does not make said joke, not a joke.

If person A says something insulting that might be a joke, person B takes offense and says it's not, and person A then refuses to prove that it's a joke, then all person B needs to do is show how the statement was offensive. If person A wants to leave it there, they're leaving their statement as offensive but not a joke.

Proving something is a joke might sound impossible, but it's really not. Just tell the same joke again in slightly different words.
Proving something is offensive is also quite easy.
In this, whether a joke is funny enought to be called a joke, both sides have to give the other some slack. The best joke on Earth you couldn't strictly prove to be funny, and the worst insult I couldn't strictly prove to be offensive, both are subjective judgements so what's required here isn't a formal proof or an academic treatise on meaning. It's simply this: A tells joke, B says its not a joke, A tells joke again in different words. If B still insists it's not a joke, they're being unreasonable.

It's hard for me to understand why anyone who really did think their joke was funny, would refuse to tell the same joke again slightly differently. Did they not enjoy telling the joke the first time? Or ... well the obvious really ... they'd rather the other person be offended than to be amused.

[Genivaria]

We tend to expect better than stupid ad hominem attacks from the most powerful man on earth. Trump's not attacking aome institution he has no actual power to affect, he's a powerful head of state who it would not be unimaginable for him to use his massive poitical power to actually degrade or even destroy CNN or harm its employees. Even his "harmless bantz" have a real effect

Indeed. People forget Reagan's joke about bombing the USSR actually put the Soviet Eastern forces on alert.

In fairness he didn't know they were still rolling.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

[REDACTED]

[Cannot think of a name]

A persons inability to understand a joke does not make said joke, not a joke.

If person A says something insulting that might be a joke, person B takes offense and says it's not, and person A then refuses to prove that it's a joke, then all person B needs to do is show how the statement was offensive. If person A wants to leave it there, they're leaving their statement as offensive but not a joke.

Proving something is a joke might sound impossible, but it's really not. Just tell the same joke again in slightly different words.
Proving something is offensive is also quite easy.
In this, whether a joke is funny enought to be called a joke, both sides have to give the other some slack. The best joke on Earth you couldn't strictly prove to be funny, and the worst insult I couldn't strictly prove to be offensive, both are subjective judgements so what's required here isn't a formal proof or an academic treatise on meaning. It's simply this: A tells joke, B says its not a joke, A tells joke again in different words. If B still insists it's not a joke, they're being unreasonable.

It's hard for me to understand why anyone who really did think their joke was funny, would refuse to tell the same joke again slightly differently. Did they not enjoy telling the joke the first time? Or ... well the obvious really ... they'd rather the other person be offended than to be amused.

I'm going to submit that whether or not it was a joke is immaterial to whether it's offensive or not.

Certainly humor is subjective, as we've seen people still think the sounds of their own farts are funny. A racist thinks racist jokes are hilarious. They are joking AND being offensive. Sometimes the point of the joke is to be offensive. "To is a preposition cum is a verb" is funny in its time because Lenny Bruce was trying to offend the sensibilities of people who had sex but refused to talk about it.

Trumps tweet is both a joke and it is offensive. It is a joke about Trump "putting down" CNN. "Haha, CNN is my bitch just like this guy." But it is also offensive by design . It is meant to offend media and CNN specifically.

Trump has recently defended tweeting as modern presidential and followed that up with a joke about hitting the media. Modern Presidential is to attack a free and independent press. Something that has been a cornerstone to a free society for centuries. Beyond complaining about coverage, whining about biases, even further than calling them the nattering neighbobs of negativity, this is childish and by his own account 'modern presidential.' It is a joke. And it is offensive. Because it's an attack on a cornerstone of democracy, AND because it presumes I have the mentality of a nine year old to find it funny.

[Proctopeo]

If person A says something insulting that might be a joke, person B takes offense and says it's not, and person A then refuses to prove that it's a joke, then all person B needs to do is show how the statement was offensive. If person A wants to leave it there, they're leaving their statement as offensive but not a joke.

Proving something is a joke might sound impossible, but it's really not. Just tell the same joke again in slightly different words.
Proving something is offensive is also quite easy.
In this, whether a joke is funny enought to be called a joke, both sides have to give the other some slack. The best joke on Earth you couldn't strictly prove to be funny, and the worst insult I couldn't strictly prove to be offensive, both are subjective judgements so what's required here isn't a formal proof or an academic treatise on meaning. It's simply this: A tells joke, B says its not a joke, A tells joke again in different words. If B still insists it's not a joke, they're being unreasonable.

It's hard for me to understand why anyone who really did think their joke was funny, would refuse to tell the same joke again slightly differently. Did they not enjoy telling the joke the first time? Or ... well the obvious really ... they'd rather the other person be offended than to be amused.

I'm going to submit that whether or not it was a joke is immaterial to whether it's offensive or not.

Certainly humor is subjective, as we've seen people still think the sounds of their own farts are funny. A racist thinks racist jokes are hilarious. They are joking AND being offensive. Sometimes the point of the joke is to be offensive. "To is a preposition cum is a verb" is funny in its time because Lenny Bruce was trying to offend the sensibilities of people who had sex but refused to talk about it.

Trumps tweet is both a joke and it is offensive. It is a joke about Trump "putting down" CNN. "Haha, CNN is my bitch just like this guy." But it is also offensive by design . It is meant to offend media and CNN specifically.

Trump has recently defended tweeting as modern presidential and followed that up with a joke about hitting the media. Modern Presidential is to attack a free and independent press. Something that has been a cornerstone to a free society for centuries. Beyond complaining about coverage, whining about biases, even further than calling them the nattering neighbobs of negativity, this is childish and by his own account 'modern presidential.' It is a joke. And it is offensive. Because it's an attack on a cornerstone of democracy, AND because it presumes I have the mentality of a nine year old to find it funny.

Non-racists can find racist jokes funny, too, you know.

[MERIZoC]

Sir I'm going to have to ask you to stop trying to move the goalposts, I don't hate yellow or brown people. I really do not hate anyone. Unfortunately at times loss of life is just an unfortunate event. It's a risk we have to take.

Any military leader or expert can tell you this simple truism.
When war is declared innocent civilians will die, that is and has always been the case throughout recorded human history.

If someone actually thinks that civilians dying AT ALL during wartime is a legitimate thing to criticize someone about then please put forward the doctrine or technology that would reduce all collateral damage to 0.00%.

Until someone does this then it's not valid criticism.

And this is directed at Merizoc btw.

Not fucking going to war

[Cannot think of a name]

I'm going to submit that whether or not it was a joke is immaterial to whether it's offensive or not.

Certainly humor is subjective, as we've seen people still think the sounds of their own farts are funny. A racist thinks racist jokes are hilarious. They are joking AND being offensive. Sometimes the point of the joke is to be offensive. "To is a preposition cum is a verb" is funny in its time because Lenny Bruce was trying to offend the sensibilities of people who had sex but refused to talk about it.

Trumps tweet is both a joke and it is offensive. It is a joke about Trump "putting down" CNN. "Haha, CNN is my bitch just like this guy." But it is also offensive by design . It is meant to offend media and CNN specifically.

Trump has recently defended tweeting as modern presidential and followed that up with a joke about hitting the media. Modern Presidential is to attack a free and independent press. Something that has been a cornerstone to a free society for centuries. Beyond complaining about coverage, whining about biases, even further than calling them the nattering neighbobs of negativity, this is childish and by his own account 'modern presidential.' It is a joke. And it is offensive. Because it's an attack on a cornerstone of democracy, AND because it presumes I have the mentality of a nine year old to find it funny.

Non-racists can find racist jokes funny, too, you know.

Look, if you need to convince yourself of something I don't think you need to drag me into it.

[Proctopeo]

Non-racists can find racist jokes funny, too, you know.

Look, if you need to convince yourself of something I don't think you need to drag me into it.

I don't understand this response to a factual comment

[Cannot think of a name]

Look, if you need to convince yourself of something I don't think you need to drag me into it.

I don't understand this response to a factual comment

We're even then.

[Proctopeo]

I don't understand this response to a factual comment

We're even then.

To my credit, I used commas and my sentence was coherent.

[Cannot think of a name]

We're even then.

To my credit, I used commas and my sentence was coherent.

And we're all super proud of you and look forward to seeing that use of common punctuation and coherent sentences to be brought to bear on the topic at hand.

[Proctopeo]

To my credit, I used commas and my sentence was coherent.

And we're all super proud of you and look forward to seeing that use of common punctuation and coherent sentences to be brought to bear on the topic at hand.

Both are highly important, which is what made your sentence jarring and confusing.

[Genivaria]

Another point that shows Bush was a better President than Trump.

[Hittanryan]

So where were Iraq's weapons of mass destruction?

Getting false information and outright lying are two very different things.

I am pretty sure the people giving the false information to Bush knew that it was false. They doctored the summaries of the intel to make it look more credible than it really was. Bush may not have been in the loop and thus didn't realize he was lying. I'm pretty sure Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz knowingly lied or at least manipulated information to give a false pretext for invasion. The Bush Administration as a whole lied.

[Cannot think of a name]

Another point that shows Bush was a better President than Trump.

(Image)

It's actually depressing that W is no longer the low watermark.

[Proctopeo]

Another point that shows Bush was a better President than Trump.

(Image)

It's actually depressing that W is no longer the low watermark.

I thought the low watermarks have been Buchanan and Johnson, not W. Bush.

[Washington Resistance Army]

It's actually depressing that W is no longer the low watermark.

I thought the low watermarks have been Buchanan and Johnson, not W. Bush.

Buchanan did nothing wrong