Trump Derangement Syndrome

[Walker]

Trump is the most investigated president in the history of the USA.
Biden is the least investigated president in the history of the USA.

Thus, Trump has been vetted of wrong doing, more than any other president.
Biden has not even been investigated of obvious, blatant, wrong doing.

TDS is like a virus. It affects the mind, like rabies affects the mind. It makes normal folks see things all cockeyed.

[Immanuel Can]

Both Trump and Biden have been accused of sexual assault.

Really? I had not heard that Trump had actually done it. What I understood was that he'd merely made some rough talk. And I heard that even that pertained only to consenting women, not unconsenting ones...but I'd be very interested in the facts you've discovered.

Now, I know for certain that Biden's accuser, Tara Reade, has gone on record and on national TV to detail his conduct, but is not being prosecuted or sued by anyone. And I know the facts about Clinton are well documented, including his misdeeds with Lewisky and Flowers, and including his at least 17 known trips to Epstein Island.

But is it your claim that that, or that Reade's allegation is not credible?

I'd like to know where to find the evidence for all of that: Trump's actual sexual assault, Clinton's innocence, and Ms. Reade's unreliability. Can you provide those? They will change the equation considerably...assuming you have them.

[Sculptor]

What? When you pillory one man for making frat-boy talk, and say nothing about his competitor who's an actual rapist? I think practically everbody would say that's an imbalance of values, at the very least.

And it still needs explaining.

Start another thread if you want to talk about another person.

We're talking about TDS, and have not left the subject. And we are not talking about "another person," but about the same person's comparative reactions to different incidents.

When a speaker...any speaker...has a strong reaction to one thing, and no comparable outrage at other things that are manifestly, and by all general consensus, much more morally egregious,(like "bad talk" versus "serial rape") we need a reasonable accounting for the disparity. If there is no reasonable explanation, then plausibly, we have something like TDS in hand. The person has manifestly become irrational and unbalanced in some way. And that is what we are looking to evaluate.

IN other words you think that SIr Donald is not different from any other person.

[Sculptor]

The Guy Who Believed Biden’s Speech
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6yXf4zXO1g


The gullibility that is satirically presented is an element of TDS, and that's being generous.

(The last 2 minutes is a capitalist/hippie sales pitch.)

This is about your derangement syndrome. If you want to talk about Biden - start a new thread.

The gullibility that is satirically presented in the link is an element of TDS, thus relevant, as painful as that must be for you to face.

Are you still going to vote for Sir Donald if he runs for Pres?

[Immanuel Can]

Start another thread if you want to talk about another person.

We're talking about TDS, and have not left the subject. And we are not talking about "another person," but about the same person's comparative reactions to different incidents.

When a speaker...any speaker...has a strong reaction to one thing, and no comparable outrage at other things that are manifestly, and by all general consensus, much more morally egregious,(like "bad talk" versus "serial rape") we need a reasonable accounting for the disparity. If there is no reasonable explanation, then plausibly, we have something like TDS in hand. The person has manifestly become irrational and unbalanced in some way. And that is what we are looking to evaluate.

IN other words you think that SIr Donald is not different from any other person.

I'm not talking about "Sir Donald's" reaction. I'm speaking of the reaction of posters and critics here, who beat their breasts and cry because of what they identify as only an instance of rude talking, and yet evince no proportionate concern about known serial rape.

You can attach any names to those facts, at it would equally be a serious matter of concern.

[tillingborn]

Trump is the most investigated president in the history of the USA.
Biden is the least investigated president in the history of the USA.

I can believe that the former is true, but do you have any statistics to show that every other president was investigated more than Biden?

Thus, Trump has been vetted of wrong doing, more than any other president. Biden has not even been investigated of obvious, blatant, wrong doing.

There are events that it's fair to examine: the 2020 election for example and the chaos at the Capitol on January 6 2021. Donald Trump, as president, was a major figure. Bearing in mind that he has not been charged with any wrongdoing, do you think it unreasonable to examine his influence?

TDS is like a virus. It affects the mind, like rabies affects the mind. It makes normal folks see things all cockeyed.

That is the nature of derangement.

[tillingborn]

Both Trump and Biden have been accused of sexual assault.

Really? I had not heard that Trump had actually done it.

Nor had I. All I have heard is that both have been accused of sexual assault. Yet you call Biden "an actual rapist", even though he hasn't been convicted.

What I understood was that he'd merely made some rough talk. And I heard that even that pertained only to consenting women, not unconsenting ones...but I'd be very interested in the facts you've discovered.

I don't pretend to know any facts about Biden's or Trump's sexual history beyond these:

Now, I know for certain that Biden's accuser, Tara Reade, has gone on record and on national TV to detail his conduct, but is not being prosecuted or sued by anyone. And I know the facts about Clinton are well documented, including his misdeeds with Lewisky and Flowers, and including his at least 17 known trips to Epstein Island.

It seems to me that we are both party to the same facts. What is puzzling is that you can declare one man guilty independently of any court of law. On what grounds?

But is it your claim that that, or that Reade's allegation is not credible?

Not at all. Is it yours that the allegation is true?

I'd like to know where to find the evidence for all of that: Trump's actual sexual assault, Clinton's innocence, and Ms. Reade's unreliability. Can you provide those? They will change the equation considerably...assuming you have them.

You are demanding evidence for claims I haven't made. I have only said that Donald Trump has been accused of sexual assault. That Bill Clinton is guilty of sexual misconduct is a matter of public record. Tara Reade's credibility doesn't alter the facts, and I don't think either of us know what those are.

[Immanuel Can]

Both Trump and Biden have been accused of sexual assault.

Really? I had not heard that Trump had actually done it.

Nor had I. All I have heard is that both have been accused of sexual assault.

Could I have your source, please? I would like to know the truth about that, if true it is.

Yet you call Biden "an actual rapist", even though he hasn't been convicted.

I was referring to Clinton, but Biden is credibly accused, I would say. Give the he said-she-said of it, you can judge for yourself why he hasn't been convicted. Any woman understands that. But we might well suspect he probably should be. Why his complete lack of interest in pressing the matter? It seems Joe doesn't want the matter to end up in court...and I think we can guess why.

But Clinton, we know for sure. And nothing excuses his conduct or makes it the equal of anything I have yet heard alleged regarding Trump...though I will await your sources before deciding that.

What I understood was that he'd merely made some rough talk. And I heard that even that pertained only to consenting women, not unconsenting ones...but I'd be very interested in the facts you've discovered.

I don't pretend to know any facts about Biden's or Trump's sexual history beyond these:

Now, I know for certain that Biden's accuser, Tara Reade, has gone on record and on national TV to detail his conduct, but is not being prosecuted or sued by anyone. And I know the facts about Clinton are well documented, including his misdeeds with Lewisky and Flowers, and including his at least 17 known trips to Epstein Island.

It seems to me that we are both party to the same facts. What is puzzling is that you can declare one man guilty independently of any court of law. On what grounds?

Well, Clinton's abuse of office and manipulation of power concerning Lewinsky is confessed and confirmed. So that, we have. So are his 17 Epstein trips, and his payoffs to other complainants like Paula Jones. So there's no doubt about Clinton, whatever one says about Biden.

So why commenters so enraged at Trump's language, and so unconcerned about Clinton's predations? And that question deserves to be asked, whether or not you let Biden off the hook.

But is it your claim that that, or that Reade's allegation is not credible?

Not at all. Is it yours that the allegation is true?

I'm perplexed that Biden has not sued her, nor has she been prosecuted for slander. Surely that's what a public figure would ordinarily do, if only to keep his "good name" clear. But Biden's done neither. And that's got to make you wonder...Biden's plenty creepy with women, as we know...we see it on TV all the time. He's inappropriate with children, as well. So it's not hard to connect the dots.

Why are people less concerned about Clinton's predations or Biden's evident sniffing and groping than they are about Trump's words? It's a mystery.

[mickthinks]

All I have heard is that both have been accused of sexual assault.

Could I have your source, please? I would like to know the truth about that, if true it is.

Manny!

Are you really unaware of the accusations of sexual assault made against Trump?

Or are you just pretending to stop your debating position from sinking further?

[Sculptor]

We're talking about TDS, and have not left the subject. And we are not talking about "another person," but about the same person's comparative reactions to different incidents.

When a speaker...any speaker...has a strong reaction to one thing, and no comparable outrage at other things that are manifestly, and by all general consensus, much more morally egregious,(like "bad talk" versus "serial rape") we need a reasonable accounting for the disparity. If there is no reasonable explanation, then plausibly, we have something like TDS in hand. The person has manifestly become irrational and unbalanced in some way. And that is what we are looking to evaluate.

IN other words you think that SIr Donald is not different from any other person.

I'm not talking about "Sir Donald's" reaction. I'm speaking of the reaction of posters and critics here, who beat their breasts and cry because of what they identify as only an instance of rude talking, and yet evince no proportionate concern about known serial rape.

You can attach any names to those facts, at it would equally be a serious matter of concern.

As usual you have nothing to say of relevance.
You are suffering from SIr Donald Derangement for sure.

[Immanuel Can]

All I have heard is that both have been accused of sexual assault.

Could I have your source, please? I would like to know the truth about that, if true it is.

Manny!

Are you really unaware of the accusations of sexual assault made against Trump?

Or are you just pretending to stop your position for sinking?

No, I'm unaware of them. Please, enlighten me. Give me the sources.

[mickthinks]

No, I'm unaware of them. Please, enlighten me. Give me the sources.
Let me Google that for you

[tillingborn]

Really? I had not heard that Trump had actually done it.

Nor had I. All I have heard is that both have been accused of sexual assault.

Could I have your source, please? I would like to know the truth about that, if true it is.

It is demonstrably true that Donald Trump has been accused of sexual assault. I don't remember where I first became aware of any of them, but malicious or otherwise, Donald Trump has faced accusations "by at least 25 women since the 1970s". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Tr ... llegations I am neither judge nor jury and find the accused innocent until proven guilty, but the allegations have been made, you are clearly unaware of them and furthermore, you will condemn a man on the basis of hearsay.

Yet you call Biden "an actual rapist", even though he hasn't been convicted.

I was referring to Clinton

Who named Clinton do you know of that has been convicted of rape?

[commonsense]

No one can say that Clinton raped Monica Lewinsky. She stated that she was in love with him. That suggests that she had oral sex with him consensually.

[commonsense]

burning cities is mostly peaceful

-Imp

I need a hint