Trump

[47MVEagle]

Man, @Brookie1973 is just a troll, he obviously doesn't know WTF is actually going on in the US but swallows everything he reads on his pro-Trump news sites hook, line & sinker!

 

[Brookie1973]

I like polls. Seeing as though we now like them as well

How popular is Donald Trump?

Silver Bulletin approval ratings for President Trump — and all presidents since Truman.

www.natesilver.net

"Yesterday, Donald Trump’s net approval rating hit -10.3 after a flurry of poll releases. That’s not quite a new low because Trump’s approval rating also dropped to -10.3 on July 22nd, but still, it’s about as unpopular as Trump 2.0 has been thus far. "

Presidential Approval Ratings -- Donald Trump

Do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as president?

news.gallup.com

Where Trump is at 40% lower than anything Biden had (although to be fair not as low as his first term)

Or this one?

Donald Trump’s approval rating

Follow our presidential approval rating poll tracker to see how favourably Americans view Mr Trump

www.economist.com

I like how this one shows how on all the major issues (inflation, Jobs / economy, health care, immigration and even crime) he has gone from positive to negative approval since the start of the year

MSN

 

[Brookie1973]

Hate to break it to you but the GOP controls all three branches of the US government...

This might help you to understand how things work.

MSN

 

[47MVEagle]

 

[lsz]

Man, @Brookie1973 is just a troll, he obviously doesn't know WTF is actually going on in the US but swallows everything he reads on his pro-Trump news sites hook, line & sinker!

There is no point in engaging with him as is evidenced over this thread.

Post a clip from a new source...it is fake news. Post a number of sources...I am not going to click on those links.

Post clip from fox...ignore that.

 

[47MVEagle]

There is no point in engaging with him as is evidenced over this thread.

Post a clip from a new source...it is fake news. Post a number of sources...I am not going to click on those links.

Post clip from fox...ignore that.

Not to mention his very convenient catchphrase "Orange man bad" he uses to discredit any source of criticism of Trump, meanwhile he operates under the "Democrats bad" function.

Absolute troll or, even worse, a genuine Trump supporter.

 

[Brookie1973]

There is no point in engaging with him as is evidenced over this thread.

Post a clip from a new source...it is fake news. Post a number of sources...I am not going to click on those links.

Post clip from fox...ignore that.

Perhaps instead of personally attacking other posters, you should reflect on whether your frustration stems from the fact you are so anti Trump that you cannot abide anyone having a contrary view.

If you are so interested in thoughtful engagement, why haven’t you answered the question I posed to you in post #1,264, which was a direct response to your post #1,251? Instead of engaging on that topic, you proceeded to post various unrelated anti-Trump clips and two more posts criticising me for not engaging.

Presumably the back and forth between myself and h27272727 over the past several pages is not engagement to you, given I was putting forth views you disagreed with.

 

[Eagle 1]

You need to stop bringing facts to a bias fight…..nothing ever changes as people who say we should be “open minded” are only open minded when it suits their view
(I do like reading your posts though)

Would you agree to this.
Before another dollar is spent, there should be a royal commission into Australia's Climate agenda so that every document is made public for general scrutiny, particularly the cost to taxpayers which even now, Labor has refused to release.
If the doomsters arguments stack up, what could they possibly have to fear from the truth.

 

[47MVEagle]

Would you agree to this.
Before another dollar is spent, there should be a royal commission into Australia's Climate agenda so that every document is made public for general scrutiny, particularly the cost to taxpayers which even now, Labor has refused to release.
If the doomsters arguments stack up, what could they possibly have to fear from the truth.

So basically, every time someone who hasn't bothered to do their own research into climate change hints at it being a big conspiracy, a royal commission should be held?

What a massive waste of tax payers dollars.

How about the people who claim it's bullsh1t fund their own studies to disprove it?

 

[47MVEagle]

@Eagle 1 here's some links for your information on climate change specific to Australia:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212094723000750?utm_source=chatgpt.com

https://meridian.allenpress.com/jcr/article/36/5/915/441297/Updated-Mean-Sea-Level-Analysis-Australia?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Journal Papers

 

[Eagle 1]

So basically, every time someone who hasn't bothered to do their own research into climate change hints at it being a big conspiracy, a royal commission should be held?

What a massive waste of tax payers dollars.

How about the people who claim it's bullsh1t fund their own studies to disprove it?

So I gather it's a "no" from you then.

 

[lsz]

Would you agree to this.
Before another dollar is spent, there should be a royal commission into Australia's Climate agenda so that every document is made public for general scrutiny, particularly the cost to taxpayers which even now, Labor has refused to release.
If the doomsters arguments stack up, what could they possibly have to fear from the truth.

Sorry what would the Royal Commission be into?

The science? Is that what we are arguing about?

I think there is a valid conversation on how you balance taking action in Australia to address a global problem when there are potential (and I say potential) short falls, especially when some of the larger polluters are not taking action.

Much like most things that have potential for generational impact I would love to see a local bipartisan approach rather than cheap point scoring (from both sides)...I know I am dreaming over this one

 

[lsz]

Perhaps instead of personally attacking other posters, you should reflect on whether your frustration stems from the fact you are so anti Trump that you cannot abide anyone having a contrary view.

If you are so interested in thoughtful engagement, why haven’t you answered the question I posed to you in post #1,264, which was a direct response to your post #1,251? Instead of engaging on that topic, you proceeded to post various unrelated anti-Trump clips and two more posts criticising me for not engaging.

Presumably the back and forth between myself and h27272727 over the past several pages is not engagement to you, given I was putting forth views you disagreed with.

Engaging with you is pointless.

Quote whatever you like

 

[h27272727]

This response starts with a falsehood in the very first sentence. I never said the scientific community was close-minded, just the climate science community. What’s different about the climate science community? Politics and money.

The rest is just more pushback about someone daring to suggest climate science should be more receptive to open debate and discussion. Clearly you don’t appreciate the irony.

No, you are being delusional here.