Donald Trump says “only stupid people put old” in Supreme Court positions - seemingly forgetting he’s a 78-year-old man running for the top position in the executive branch.
I hate defending Trump, but this is the difference between LIFETIME appointments vs maybe 4 years, 8 tops for president… He’s absolutely correct, you’re an idiot if you choose an old person to be a judge for SCOTUS since you open up the possibility of them being replaced sooner…
In a world that isn’t completely corrupted by partisan hacks we shouldn’t care who ends up on the court, but because of billionaires we don’t get to have that world…
I disagree with his sentiment. Higher turn over on the Supreme Court is part of the proposed Supreme Court reform.
Defending him because “nuance” is stupid, he doesn’t have any, why project it on him? What has he done to earn it? This is how narcissists maneuver – people’s eagerness to see their good side; it doesn’t exist for the narcissists.
Really they are just defending honest assessments of facts. Unfortunately, because the title of the article is so disgustingly disingenuous and blatantly misleading, it led a lot of people to believe his statement is blatantly hypocritical. . .so by pointing out reality you are actually “defending Trump.”
You are all but admitting that reality doesn’t matter. Sounds exactly like Trump supporters. Please don’t be like them.
Just because he’s an asshole doesn’t make what he said wrong. I’m more angry at “the media” for trying to make something out of nothing for clicks. Their comparison is stupid.
But it’s not even that. He said what he meant and then the chucklefucks looking for clicks went on with the “BuT HeS oLd ToO! HuR dUr, HoW dUmB!” when it’s not the same comparison at all.
I guess I’m just sick of all large media outlets lately.
I’m just happy to see users calling out these bullshit articles taking shit outta context. I don’t have a ton of time to read the news. So I prefer my brief overviews of titles to be factual and contextual to what the authors implying. Which it’s the independent so already knew it was probs bs.
I’m just happy to see users calling out these bullshit articles taking shit outta context.
But what bothers me is that even when the blatant deception is pointed out, you still have a large percentage of people here actually defending such bullshit.
“His point” makes it sound like he’s thought about it. I guarantee you he has not. This is a talking point he was reminded of five minutes before the planted question was asked and he almost blew that.
Seriously, he’s demented. His only thoughts revolve around him and his money - that’s it.
What an absolutely fucking ridiculous comparison…
I hate defending Trump, but this is the difference between LIFETIME appointments vs maybe 4 years, 8 tops for president… He’s absolutely correct, you’re an idiot if you choose an old person to be a judge for SCOTUS since you open up the possibility of them being replaced sooner…
In a world that isn’t completely corrupted by partisan hacks we shouldn’t care who ends up on the court, but because of billionaires we don’t get to have that world…
BE BETTER MEDIA ASSHATS.
:/
Then don’t. You aren’t obligated to defend him.
I disagree with his sentiment. Higher turn over on the Supreme Court is part of the proposed Supreme Court reform.
Defending him because “nuance” is stupid, he doesn’t have any, why project it on him? What has he done to earn it? This is how narcissists maneuver – people’s eagerness to see their good side; it doesn’t exist for the narcissists.
Really they are just defending honest assessments of facts. Unfortunately, because the title of the article is so disgustingly disingenuous and blatantly misleading, it led a lot of people to believe his statement is blatantly hypocritical. . .so by pointing out reality you are actually “defending Trump.”
You are all but admitting that reality doesn’t matter. Sounds exactly like Trump supporters. Please don’t be like them.
Just because he’s an asshole doesn’t make what he said wrong. I’m more angry at “the media” for trying to make something out of nothing for clicks. Their comparison is stupid.
This is like that “sanewashing” thing. “What he means is this…” no. No need to do him any favors.
But it’s not even that. He said what he meant and then the chucklefucks looking for clicks went on with the “BuT HeS oLd ToO! HuR dUr, HoW dUmB!” when it’s not the same comparison at all.
I guess I’m just sick of all large media outlets lately.
I’m just happy to see users calling out these bullshit articles taking shit outta context. I don’t have a ton of time to read the news. So I prefer my brief overviews of titles to be factual and contextual to what the authors implying. Which it’s the independent so already knew it was probs bs.
But what bothers me is that even when the blatant deception is pointed out, you still have a large percentage of people here actually defending such bullshit.
Then what you want is term limits.
I don’t like Trump, but I get his point. It’s the same argument he makes about taxing the rich. Guess who has the power to fix that, too?
People in power rarely make laws to limit themselves.
“His point” makes it sound like he’s thought about it. I guarantee you he has not. This is a talking point he was reminded of five minutes before the planted question was asked and he almost blew that.
Seriously, he’s demented. His only thoughts revolve around him and his money - that’s it.
Nothing ever good starts with