Trump

I assume that post is directed at me. Perhaps if you want an answer from a specific person, you should use “reply”.

To be honest, I have no idea what you are talking about. Nothing in my fox news feed, so I assume it’s fake news.
I heard it on the radio while driving.
The 'no comment yet' was in part directed at you. The original point was more at anyone who is a committed MAGA fan. The Kimmel one was at you and you didn't answer it very convincingly - plus ignored the autism point, fair enough if you hadn't heard about it.

Trump says women using paracetamol during pregnancy can cause autism

 
Can't wait for our loyal MAGA friends to praise the stunning announcement that paracetamol during pregnancy causes autism.
And one serious contributor to this thread even obediently parrotted the laugable MAGA line that Kimmel was taken off due to bad ratings, no talent.
To be fair re Dinesh they do not have an issue with criminals so why would they Jake an issue with him
 
I heard it on the radio while driving.
The 'no comment yet' was in part directed at you. The original point was more at anyone who is a committed MAGA fan. The Kimmel one was at you and you didn't answer it very convincingly - plus ignored the autism point, fair enough if you hadn't heard about it.

Trump says women using paracetamol during pregnancy can cause autism


Sorry I am not clicking on that pinko commie crap
 
I heard it on the radio while driving.
The 'no comment yet' was in part directed at you. The original point was more at anyone who is a committed MAGA fan. The Kimmel one was at you and you didn't answer it very convincingly - plus ignored the autism point, fair enough if you hadn't heard about it.

Trump says women using paracetamol during pregnancy can cause autism

I’m sorry my Kimmel answer was a little unconvincing, but at least I answered your question. You seem determined to not answer my question to you on Kimmel, but that’s ok, I know how much you prefer asking to answering. I’ll let this one slide as well.

From what I can gather on paracetamol, I understand the link to autism has been long debated/considered, with nothing proven either way. I’m no expert, so I have no view on whatever new research has been undertaken.

 
Mate I know / have more at stake in that area of the world than you could ever know.
Sure sure. So tell me about hamas and why they exist? Why do the arabs hate the Jews so much? Why do they teach their kids to hate them? I know the history very well that land doesn't belong to any arab 🤣
 
You may not have noticed who is killing who for the last couple of years. On average 28 children per day killed, every day since the latest war began. You can guess, Palestinian or Israeli?
28 per day whooaaa!

Like this one?

Hillel Fuld - And the Oscar goes to…. The Gazan mourning... | Facebook Log in to Facebook

The health ministry in gaza IS HAMAS. The only war their winning is the propaganda war. Too many videos like the one above to count, check them out. There is no genocide there is no famine. Real famines and genocides are happening in Nigeria and Syria and also Yemen but no Jews no news.

The terrorists can end the war but they won't give the hostages back and hence the people of gaza suffer. They didn't even build them bomb shelters, just a network of rat tunnles to hide in. Cowards and satanic rats 🐀 🧀
 
Slating paracetamol use by pregnant women as causing autism & promoting an alternative drug that just happens to be made by the company owned by someone in his cabinet 😂

You can’t make this sh1t up.
 
Sure sure. So tell me about hamas and why they exist? Why do the arabs hate the Jews so much? Why do they teach their kids to hate them? I know the history very well that land doesn't belong to any arab 🤣
I know this is futile but I will say this (as a Jewish person, grand child of holocaust survivors with direct family living there)

There is no justification for the Hamas attack much like there is no justification for the ongoing Israel attack

It is a complicated issue which requires tact and far smarter people than me. All I know as this is truly a “both sides “ discussion
 
I know this is futile but I will say this (as a Jewish person, grand child of holocaust survivors with direct family living there)

There is no justification for the Hamas attack much like there is no justification for the ongoing Israel attack

It is a complicated issue which requires tact and far smarter people than me. All I know as this is truly a “both sides “ discussion
Out of interest I will be interested in your views about how the mainstream media ( excluding FOX) in Australia is reporting this conflict ( both apparent facts and opinion based) do you think it’s balanced and objective? Especially the ABC’s coverage?
 
Last edited:
Wow I’ve seen some rubbish on here but this takes the cake. The reason democrats lost the election is because they were terrified to even answer a simple questions like what is a woman or should trans people be allowed to compete against women in sport. Too worried about what the woke left would say instead of the majority. Look at Gavin Newsom who clearly has aspirations of becoming president views change in the last 12 months.

One of the most effective campaign ads of all time was the Kamala is for ‘they them’ Trump is for ‘you’ shown in all swing states. The ad directly moved 2-3% of undecided voters in battleground states to vote Trump winning him the election. The democrats were seen as out of touch with reality not centrist
I think you should think about this a whole lot longer. Kamala was a poor candidate. She was poor because she tried to be neutral and polite about everything in general. The fact you managed to only listen to the words “trans” and “they, them” is telling (it means you watched the bits Fox News reported to you)

Obviously wasn’t talking about US perspectives on the democrats here either. Because first of all, Americans are naive and live in a bubble. Why is their opinion on what constitutes left and right relevant when a majority haven’t even left the states. A majority also got brought up being taught that everything publically owned is socialist, leading to them being the richest country in the world despite having no access to basic healthcare.

It’s unsurprising some 35% of the US have been led to believe the Democrats are some radical entity because dear leader said so. Most can’t explain why they think so without falling on the schoolyard woke argument or referencing some broader conspiracy theory

Besides - Newsflash - transgender/ gay people are not a US-based phenomenon. The reason people who refuse to tolerate them get called bigots nowadays is because the world has moved on without them - and will continue to do so. Fact of the matter is that it’s nicer to tolerate minority groups than ostracise them out of fear anyways so get over it

The Democrats were out of touch - but not for the trivial reason you mentioned. It’s because they didn’t reflect the political ideas of their voters and it’s because they were already in power (people on the fence didn’t care about trump’s disastrous economic ideas because they believe any change is a good change).

Bernie sanders is a great example of being “too far left” for the Democrats and he’s the most humanistic politician in all the US landscape. Kicked aside for Hilary Clinton despite Sanders developing a strong level of support amongst the working class of the democrats and some republicans at the time (he was also demonised in right wing media).

Same sort of thing happened with Kamala, Biden dropped out and the Democrats didn’t make her fight it out against other candidates. People felt unheard from the start.

Anyways back on topic; a true left wing party would immediately commit to fixing the broken private healthcare system of the US. The Democrats barely discussed it. They talked about how Trump had no political policy and warned them of the damage he would do to the United States. At the end of the day the voters at the time didn’t care. Now farmers, latinos/immigants and small business owners say they regret their decision; well, tough titties they get what they voted for unfortunately

Relative to the broader left-wing parties, I was not joking around when I implied the US left-wing can hardly be classified as such.

As an aside you need to get over “woke”. It’s just a catch all term popularised by a president who continually exposed himself as a snowflake. I assume you’re no different than “woke” people in that respect too

The Democrats had a policy book spanning some 40-50 pages I believe. Republicans 0. Why? Because at the end of the day, reducing the Democrats to a “woke, radical” party that “is ruining the country”and protecting immigrants that “only rape, murder and steal” is so, so much easier for Trump than trying to convince people that he has political policies worth voting for

to circle back again, the Democrats still don’t care to do anything about their guns, were more than happy to keep helping Israel in the Middle East. The majority were fine to keep allowing corporate sponsorships. I bet most own numerous properties and invest in stocks too. The young ones have some backbone and will become more prominent

Without referring to the woke nonsense, tell me exactly why you think they are so unbelievably left wing. It’s ok if you have since reconsidered that stance

Some of the most notable Republican / right-wing figures today; Trump, RFK, Musk and Tulsi Gabbard were all former Democrats. The fact RFK and Gabbard managed to blend in to the Democratic Party tells you everything you need to know about whether the Democratic party is as radical as you have been told it is
 
I think you should think about this a whole lot longer. Kamala was a poor candidate. She was poor because she tried to be neutral and polite about everything in general. The fact you managed to only listen to the words “trans” and “they, them” is telling (it means you watched the bits Fox News reported to you)

Obviously wasn’t talking about US perspectives on the democrats here either. Because first of all, Americans are naive and live in a bubble. Why is their opinion on what constitutes left and right relevant when a majority haven’t even left the states. A majority also got brought up being taught that everything publically owned is socialist, leading to them being the richest country in the world despite having no access to basic healthcare.

It’s unsurprising some 35% of the US have been led to believe the Democrats are some radical entity because dear leader said so. Most can’t explain why they think so without falling on the schoolyard woke argument or referencing some broader conspiracy theory

Besides - Newsflash - transgender/ gay people are not a US-based phenomenon. The reason people who refuse to tolerate them get called bigots nowadays is because the world has moved on without them - and will continue to do so. Fact of the matter is that it’s nicer to tolerate minority groups than ostracise them out of fear anyways so get over it

The Democrats were out of touch - but not for the trivial reason you mentioned. It’s because they didn’t reflect the political ideas of their voters and it’s because they were already in power (people on the fence didn’t care about trump’s disastrous economic ideas because they believe any change is a good change).

Bernie sanders is a great example of being “too far left” for the Democrats and he’s the most humanistic politician in all the US landscape. Kicked aside for Hilary Clinton despite Sanders developing a strong level of support amongst the working class of the democrats and some republicans at the time (he was also demonised in right wing media).

Same sort of thing happened with Kamala, Biden dropped out and the Democrats didn’t make her fight it out against other candidates. People felt unheard from the start.

Anyways back on topic; a true left wing party would immediately commit to fixing the broken private healthcare system of the US. The Democrats barely discussed it. They talked about how Trump had no political policy and warned them of the damage he would do to the United States. At the end of the day the voters at the time didn’t care. Now farmers, latinos/immigants and small business owners say they regret their decision; well, tough titties they get what they voted for unfortunately

Relative to the broader left-wing parties, I was not joking around when I implied the US left-wing can hardly be classified as such.

As an aside you need to get over “woke”. It’s just a catch all term popularised by a president who continually exposed himself as a snowflake. I assume you’re no different than “woke” people in that respect too

The Democrats had a policy book spanning some 40-50 pages I believe. Republicans 0. Why? Because at the end of the day, reducing the Democrats to a “woke, radical” party that “is ruining the country”and protecting immigrants that “only rape, murder and steal” is so, so much easier for Trump than trying to convince people that he has political policies worth voting for

to circle back again, the Democrats still don’t care to do anything about their guns, were more than happy to keep helping Israel in the Middle East. The majority were fine to keep allowing corporate sponsorships. I bet most own numerous properties and invest in stocks too. The young ones have some backbone and will become more prominent

Without referring to the woke nonsense, tell me exactly why you think they are so unbelievably left wing. It’s ok if you have since reconsidered that stance

Some of the most notable Republican / right-wing figures today; Trump, RFK, Musk and Tulsi Gabbard were all former Democrats. The fact RFK and Gabbard managed to blend in to the Democratic Party tells you everything you need to know about whether the Democratic party is as radical as you have been told it is
No disrespect, but for someone who seems to prefer focussing on facts and hard evidence, there are enough sweeping statements, bias, hyperbole, generalisations and assumptions in that post to drive a truck through.
 
No disrespect, but for someone who seems to prefer focussing on facts and hard evidence, there are enough sweeping statements, bias, hyperbole, generalisations and assumptions in that post to drive a truck through.
I was really just reflecting back the same kind of energy I got from the person I replied to.

I’m sure you can appreciate that not every one of my posts will involve me taking the time to compile the stats / case studies for the sake of the conversation. I agree that in an ideal world they would, but look back 4 or so posts ago and you’ll see I spent some time looking into the data on violence by trans versus violence by males and got diddly squat engagement

I really do not mind if you wanted to sum up a short (or long) list of the sweeping statements, hyperbole, bias, generalisations/assumptions. Even if you think an idea of mine was bat **** stupid I’d prefer hear what that idea was (and perhaps also some reasoning for why you think so). I’ll happily take the time to consider them and answer them in proper detail (because that way I’d at least know it’s worthwhile)

I also left that reply of yours unanswered from last week or so, so I’ll try get back to that when I have some time too
 
Last edited:
Such as…
Not sure I have the time or inclination to list them all, but here’s an example from your first paragraph;

- “you only managed to listen to the words “ trans” and “they/them”. How do you know that is all he listened too. He was using those as an example.

I like your analytical approach, but as an obviously analytical person, do you ever consider that you are approaching topics from an already entrenched perspective, and therefore your analysis is flawed by confirmation bias?
 
Not sure I have the time or inclination to list them all, but here’s an example from your first paragraph;

- “you only managed to listen to the words “ trans” and “they/them”. How do you know that is all he listened too. He was using those as an example.

I like your analytical approach, but as an obviously analytical person, do you ever consider that you are approaching topics from an already entrenched perspective, and therefore your analysis is flawed by confirmation bias?
Oh my bad I edited my comment (the “such as…” one) after you got to it

But sure,

Off the bat, yes I do think that confirmation bias is a valid concern (particularly when searching for data, there’s always a risk of being selective).

That said, I think the recent post I made on trans versus male mass shootings shows I can change my stance (particularly when the data is there to support it). For example, I came into that post thinking that ‘trans people being 5 times less likely to be violent than males’ was still far too low. Looking at just two datasets I actually got 8.6 times myself, so in retrospect the value of 5 actually appeared fairly reasonable / a safe estimate.

Anyways to answer your question; this is the first US election cycle I’ve had interest in, so I watched a fair bit of Kamala speeches. While I know for a fact that she spoke of trans people, there were only so many times the topic was actually discussed. If you look through the footage on YouTube you’ll also find that more often than not the topic was raised by an audience member in a town hall, or an interviewer/reporter. It really was a small focus that got a lot of media attention.

Why did it get so much attention? Why is it still a commonly held viewpoint amongst Republican fans today?

I think the following may be a factor. From CNN (also available elsewhere):
Over the first half of October, former President Donald Trump and his allies poured more than $21 million into television ads attacking Vice President Kamala Harris over her past support of certain rights for transgender people – a message they have spread during nationally televised NFL games, college football broadcasts and in battleground states.
It’s a staggering sum to spend on a topic that most voters say isn’t a top priority for them this election. But Trump’s campaign is betting any voters still choosing between the two candidates can be swayed to take sides in a cultural fight that has torn apart state houses and school boards in recent years – one that has put tremendous focus on an incredibly small, marginalized group that already faces discrimination-based violence. Republicans in key Senate races have mirrored that messaging as part of a playbook painting Democrats as out of touch with most voters.

This really tied in with my earlier idea (previous post) that the Democrats were effectively reduced to being a “woke, radical party” despite having a sizeable policy handbook with fairly standard ideas in it.

On Kamala, I wasn’t particularly inspired by her. Thought she would’ve been an OK candidate in the past but she probably wasn’t confrontational enough for what she was contending with and did not convince voters that she would meaningfully change things.
 
Without referring to the woke nonsense, tell me exactly why you think they are so unbelievably left wing. It’s ok if you have since reconsidered that stance

Some of the most notable Republican / right-wing figures today; Trump, RFK, Musk and Tulsi Gabbard were all former Democrats. The fact RFK and Gabbard managed to blend in to the Democratic Party tells you everything you need to know about whether the Democratic party is as radical as you have been told it is
You can name call & label it ‘woke nonsense’ all you like. Fact is they lost to Trump whose political career was dead in the water after January 6th. People would rather vote for a felon over someone who is too woke to answer what a woman is or say trans people competing in women’s sport is unfair🤣.

Trumps anti-woke ad campaign won him the election & you need to find a way to cope with that, I understand that upsets you but facts don’t care about your feelings. Run another far left democrat like AOC & they’ll get trampled again in 3 years time.

(Source New York Times)

So [the Trump campaign] poured still more money into the ads, running them during football games, which prompted Charlamagne Tha God, the host of the Breakfast Club, a popular show among Black listeners, to express exasperation — and his on-air complaints gave the Trump team fodder for yet another commercial. The Charlamagne ad ranked as one of the Trump team’s most effective 30-second spots, according to an analysis by Future Forward, Ms. Harris’s leading super PAC. It shifted the race 2.7 percentage points in Mr. Trump’s favor after viewers watched it.

The anti-trans ads cut to the core of the Trump argument: that Ms. Harris was “dangerously liberal” — the exact vulnerability her team was most worried about. The ads were effective with Black and Latino men, according to the Trump team, but also with moderate suburban white women who might be concerned about transgender athletes in girls’ sports.

Those were the same suburban women Ms. Harris was trying to mobilize with ads about abortion.

Democrats struggled to respond. At one point, former President Bill Clinton told an associate, “We have to answer it and say we won’t do it.” He even raised the issue in a conversation with the campaign and was told the Trump ads were not necessarily having an impact, according to two people familiar with his conversations. He never broached the topic publicly.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

2025 Ladder

Team P W D L PD Pts
1 Raiders 24 19 0 5 148 44
2 Storm 24 17 0 7 212 40
3 Bulldogs 24 16 0 8 120 38
4 Broncos 24 15 0 9 172 36
5 Sharks 24 15 0 9 109 36
6 Warriors 24 14 0 10 21 34
7 Panthers 24 13 1 10 107 33
8 Roosters 24 13 0 11 132 32
9 Dolphins 24 12 0 12 125 30
10 Sea Eagles 24 12 0 12 21 30
11 Eels 24 10 0 14 -76 26
12 Cowboys 24 9 1 14 -146 25
13 Tigers 24 9 0 15 -135 24
14 Rabbitohs 24 9 0 15 -181 24
15 Dragons 24 8 0 16 -130 22
16 Titans 24 6 0 18 -199 18
17 Knights 24 6 0 18 -300 18
Back
Top Bottom