Donald Trump's cabinet picks
- Thread starter nintendofan85
- Start date
kinda scary that in 2017 people still deny the legitimacy of global warming.. it's a serious problem and if one needs to go on numerous websites to get enough proof of it, that's pretty sad. besides the other atrocious things that trump has said, one of the most stupid must be his ignorance toward global warming.
what's next? 'pollution doesn't hurt the environment'? yikes.
what's next? 'pollution doesn't hurt the environment'? yikes.
You know, it actually bothers me that people are offended by those who don't believe global warming is a myth. Shaming people for denying climate change is still political discrimination. Yes pollution does hurt the environment, but the CO2 emissions have nothing to do with global warming and stopping them won't save the earth.
i might've seemed like i was offended, but really i wasn't. i just gave my thoughts on how ignorant it is to believe that, and shared my own opinion which doesn't have to be agreed with. but your statement is very interesting, considering CO2 is the leading greenhouse gas emission which is also the primary cause of global warming.
Last edited:
Haskell
Saving for a username change KEK
And that's the thing I was talking about. I support our president-elect. From me having my own opinion and supporting him, I'm getting personally attacked. Are you getting personally attacked from me? No.
My point to umjammer brandi was that I could not read anything she wrote because a) it was not organized, b) it was in pink.
- - - Post Merge - - -
You act like I'm the old man or whomever from a Dr. Seuss book that factory polluted the land or something. I don't know, it was a children's book. What I'm saying is that I'm just against climate change. Am I against excess of pollution, yes. Pollution will always be here on Earth, it's the matter of controlling it.
You want to say Hillary is against climate change? She rides in expensive helicopters damaging the environment. She rides in expensive cars damaging the environment. She acts like the mother of nature for climate change. Atleast Trump isn't hypocritical with that. He says climate change is a hoax. Period. He doesn't say it's real and then does things that would damage the environment.
I get she "fought hard" for the election and had to travel a lot of different places to lie to the American public but if she were really against climate change, the hoax, she would try to limit her damaging of the environment.
Surprise : Politicians lie.
- - - Post Merge - - -
I can respect your opinion, Hopeless Opus but I respectfully disagree with it.
A) Trump will never say pollution isn't a problem. The day he does, I'll stop supporting him. Ok?
B) Climate change isn't a hoax.
- - - Post Merge - - -
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/election-exit-polls.html?_r=0
^ 2008
Look at this poll. NY times is not credible at all times but I believe they're credible with this.
Those that say he lost with college-educated people... lol...
The reasons he lost with minorities is because...
a) The left have had them voting for them for years.
b) The left made republicans appear to be racist m8s.
c) It's the social aspect of things. Social culture I want to say. It has been. No matter who on the republican side. It's been social culture for latinos, blacks, and Asians to not vote for republicans.
But I'd like to point out that Mr. Trump did good in his shoes as the republican nominee. For one. 29% in latino and Asians. 8% in blacks.
From all the rhetoric from the left saying how Mr. Trump is a racist, he did fairly well. Lower than McCain in the 2008 election with latinos and Asians but higher than McCain with blacks.
This was 2008. In 2012 Mitt Romney had 29%, 28%... in the high 20's for blacks and Asians and 6% for blacks.
Trump did worse than McCain (2008) for blacks and Asians.
Trump did better than Mitt Romney (2012) for blacks and Asians.
Trump did better than McCain and Mitt Romney for the black vote.
Call other republicans racist then... I dare you.
- - - Post Merge - - - -2012
http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/president/exit-polls
My point to umjammer brandi was that I could not read anything she wrote because a) it was not organized, b) it was in pink.
- - - Post Merge - - -
You act like I'm the old man or whomever from a Dr. Seuss book that factory polluted the land or something. I don't know, it was a children's book. What I'm saying is that I'm just against climate change. Am I against excess of pollution, yes. Pollution will always be here on Earth, it's the matter of controlling it.
You want to say Hillary is against climate change? She rides in expensive helicopters damaging the environment. She rides in expensive cars damaging the environment. She acts like the mother of nature for climate change. Atleast Trump isn't hypocritical with that. He says climate change is a hoax. Period. He doesn't say it's real and then does things that would damage the environment.
I get she "fought hard" for the election and had to travel a lot of different places to lie to the American public but if she were really against climate change, the hoax, she would try to limit her damaging of the environment.
Surprise : Politicians lie.
- - - Post Merge - - -
I can respect your opinion, Hopeless Opus but I respectfully disagree with it.
A) Trump will never say pollution isn't a problem. The day he does, I'll stop supporting him. Ok?
B) Climate change isn't a hoax.
- - - Post Merge - - -
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/election-exit-polls.html?_r=0
^ 2008
Look at this poll. NY times is not credible at all times but I believe they're credible with this.
Those that say he lost with college-educated people... lol...
The reasons he lost with minorities is because...
a) The left have had them voting for them for years.
b) The left made republicans appear to be racist m8s.
c) It's the social aspect of things. Social culture I want to say. It has been. No matter who on the republican side. It's been social culture for latinos, blacks, and Asians to not vote for republicans.
But I'd like to point out that Mr. Trump did good in his shoes as the republican nominee. For one. 29% in latino and Asians. 8% in blacks.
From all the rhetoric from the left saying how Mr. Trump is a racist, he did fairly well. Lower than McCain in the 2008 election with latinos and Asians but higher than McCain with blacks.
This was 2008. In 2012 Mitt Romney had 29%, 28%... in the high 20's for blacks and Asians and 6% for blacks.
Trump did worse than McCain (2008) for blacks and Asians.
Trump did better than Mitt Romney (2012) for blacks and Asians.
Trump did better than McCain and Mitt Romney for the black vote.
Call other republicans racist then... I dare you.
- - - Post Merge - - - -2012
http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/president/exit-polls
Last edited:
Red Cat
On-and-off member
Climate change isn't something people "believe" in. It's a scientific theory. You either accept the evidence that it exists or you deny it. It's like gravity. You can choose not to "believe" in gravity, but if you jump off a skyscraper, you're still going to die. The general scientific consensus is that climate change is real and that human activity is having an effect on it. Yes, not every climate scientist agrees that climate change is man-made, but just as they have challenged the evidence of man-made climate change, other climate scientists have challenged their evidence that climate change is not man-made, and most climate scientists find the evidence that climate change is man-made to be much more thoroughly tested and compelling than the evidence that it's not man-made. It's one thing for someone to say that the evidence for man-made climate change is flawed and then present a scientific argument refuting it. It's another thing to call it a "hoax", "myth", or "conspiracy" which implies that you have no actual evidence disputing it and have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to the subject.
Last edited:
I don't really understand what you are trying to say here. Most people in general that are against climate change still drive cars and take public transportation. Hillary Clinton using her "expensive vehicles" doesn't mean that she isn't representing her own views, in fact, she doesn't own any vehicles or drive any for that matter considering she was Secretary of State. She had her own plan going into office about how she planned to deal with climate change. People that are against climate change aren't going to stop using transportation or pay ridiculous amounts for a clean energy vehicle but we do support political leaders and other representatives who will work to stop climate change through a variety of methods.
Haskell
Saving for a username change KEK
Lincoln wasn't against slavery. He was only "against it" because he didn't want to receive backlash and his only motive was to not let America split. He owned slaves himself. He was one man on the outside, another on the inside.
- - - Post Merge - - -
She doesn't care about what she stands for. She could limit or do more if she actually cared. Sometimes it's doesn't need to be complex. It's simple.
(I would like your comment, Riley but there is no option.)
Last edited:
sorry but i don't really understand, are you saying that you're against the idea of climate change, or are you saying it's real? maybe i just misunderstood but i'm just a little bit confused.
anyways - i respect that you respect my opinion, so therefore i can respectfully disagree with yours as well
in response to all of what you said.. the lorax, the book/movie you were speaking of, was a great example to bring up. it teaches us that we should probably be taking care of the environment and to not be too rough with earth since it's delicate and there's only so much we'll be able to take from it til it falls apart. and if we know that something we're doing is wrong then why should we not stop it? pollution of all kinds spoils our earth - oil spills, plastic which takes years to decompose and the constant cutting down of trees and destruction of the natural environment (forests, rainforests, etc - now i sound like the lorax lmao). so if there is a problem, then obviously we need to control or stop it. it's as simple as using paper bags instead of plastic which can take up to 1000 years to decompose.
all of us use cars. so that would make all of us, especially the ones who believe in global warming, hypocrites. if what i'm understanding is correct, you think that using cars and planes damages the environment, but who else is doing that? donald trump. he might not be hypocritical since he denies the fact that global warming exists but trump has many fancy toys to ride around and fly in. so, he's just as much as an offender as hillary, or anyone who drives a car, is.
he says climate change is a hoax, but has he ever really said he truly 'cared' about the environment? here's what he said about the environmental protection agency:
meanwhile, everyday our environment is slowly being destroyed. but that's not all of it. apparently, this is also true:
vox said:
but, trump said these to statements in 2013 and 2014 on twitter:
so i think trump is truly the biggest hypocrite of all. claiming he wants clean air, but then he's against clean energy and wants to withdraw from it, which will only make air worse and global warming will continue to be on the rise from CO2 emissions.. that makes absolutely no sense to me. i mean he thinks global warming is a hoax and all, but still. that's pretty bad in my eyes.
Lincoln did not own slaves. He lived and grew up in Illinois which had banned slavery in 1787 (before he was born) and his parents attended an anti-slavery Baptist church. Lincoln is sometimes confused with other presidents that did own slaves like George Washington. Please cite your credible sources if you would like to say historically incorrect things like that, blatantly saying falsehoods will not provide any substance to a discussion.
Here are a few links to some credible published books and articles on the matter. There are tons more, go to your local or school library to check out books about it.
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/148705
https://books.google.com/books?id=w1mL2E0QMsUC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
https://books.google.com/books?isbn=0307377148
Haskell
Saving for a username change KEK
Q: Would you cut departments?
TRUMP: Environmental Protection, what they do is a disgrace. Every week they come out with new regulations.
Q: Who's going to protect the environment?
TRUMP: We'll be fine with the environment. We can leave a little bit, but you can't destroy businesses.
When he is talking about cutting departments. He won't actually cut the EPA. He's saying that there regulations are interfering with the welfare of good, solid businesses.
I'm fine with "donating to environmental causes" but global warming is a scam. How do we know that the money that's being donated is going to the hoax? Too much $$$ is also being given by the federal government to "fight" global warming. Bull**** on that. We're 19 trillion dollars in debt. Our border isn't secure. Our schools are unfunded. Our teachers are underpaid. Our military is downsizing, thanks Obama!
- - - Post Merge - - -
Oml. I can't even respond to this. smh
Where'd you get this information from? winnersmakehistory.scam?
You know the winning side makes history, right? You have to dig a little deeper. I have a friend who's a historian that specializes in presidents and government. xoxo
TRUMP: Environmental Protection, what they do is a disgrace. Every week they come out with new regulations.
Q: Who's going to protect the environment?
TRUMP: We'll be fine with the environment. We can leave a little bit, but you can't destroy businesses.
When he is talking about cutting departments. He won't actually cut the EPA. He's saying that there regulations are interfering with the welfare of good, solid businesses.
I'm fine with "donating to environmental causes" but global warming is a scam. How do we know that the money that's being donated is going to the hoax? Too much $$$ is also being given by the federal government to "fight" global warming. Bull**** on that. We're 19 trillion dollars in debt. Our border isn't secure. Our schools are unfunded. Our teachers are underpaid. Our military is downsizing, thanks Obama!
- - - Post Merge - - -
Oml. I can't even respond to this. smh
Where'd you get this information from? winnersmakehistory.scam?
You know the winning side makes history, right? You have to dig a little deeper. I have a friend who's a historian that specializes in presidents and government. xoxo
but what's more important? a stupid business? or the environment which is slowly deteriorating because of pollution?
Haskell
Saving for a username change KEK
The thing is... the second one is speculation.
Business Environment
I think what Mr. Trump is trying to do is to lower the amount of funding and effort we put into environmental causes and put some into businesses. Middle ground.
Business Environment
I think what Mr. Trump is trying to do is to lower the amount of funding and effort we put into environmental causes and put some into businesses. Middle ground.
I cited a few different credible sources. Can you name even 1? I know you have your opinions but stating falsehoods with no evidence or credibility will not take this discussion anywhere.
that's the problem. we need more funding for our environment. we only get one healthy environment just like we only get one chance at life. we have to try and make up for all the wrong we've done to it now while we still have a chance.
Red Cat
On-and-off member
Guys, why are you posting pages of information about climate change trying to debate with an obviously irrational person? You could write an entire book about climate change and irhaskell8 would come back with "Polar Bears". Hillary Clinton was right when she called people "irredeemable" and this thread is a perfect example of that. Some people are so cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs that it's not worth your time trying to reason with them.
Haskell
Saving for a username change KEK
Red Cat. So half of America are deplorable and irredeemable? Nice!
You are the definition of what's wrong with liberals. Thinking that republicans are wrong for every single controversial "issue".
If you're that triggered by this thread to be a complete *****, then leave.
irrational : not logical or reasonable
logical : characterized by or capable of clear, sound reasoning.
reasoning : the action of thinking about something in a logical, sensible way.
Half of America is neither logical, reasonable, or irrational? That statement that you just made is ignorant itself.
If you're going to throw in personal insults, get off this thread.
- - - Post Merge - - -
This is what Apple2012 was mentioning a few posts ago. Liberals are more intolerant.
- - - Post Merge - - -
Here's your "fact proofing", Red Cat. I do my research. Don't demonize me... that's what's wrong with you. If you don't like how someone is debating, supporting, or exampling then you throw out personal insults. You've thrown out the most personal insults on this thread. If you're going to continue on this thread, actually engage in the conversation instead of trying to get it closed.
You are the definition of what's wrong with liberals. Thinking that republicans are wrong for every single controversial "issue".
If you're that triggered by this thread to be a complete *****, then leave.
irrational : not logical or reasonable
logical : characterized by or capable of clear, sound reasoning.
reasoning : the action of thinking about something in a logical, sensible way.
Half of America is neither logical, reasonable, or irrational? That statement that you just made is ignorant itself.
If you're going to throw in personal insults, get off this thread.
- - - Post Merge - - -
This is what Apple2012 was mentioning a few posts ago. Liberals are more intolerant.
- - - Post Merge - - -
And that's the thing I was talking about. I support our president-elect. From me having my own opinion and supporting him, I'm getting personally attacked. Are you getting personally attacked from me? No.
My point to umjammer brandi was that I could not read anything she wrote because a) it was not organized, b) it was in pink.
- - - Post Merge - - -
You act like I'm the old man or whomever from a Dr. Seuss book that factory polluted the land or something. I don't know, it was a children's book. What I'm saying is that I'm just against climate change. Am I against excess of pollution, yes. Pollution will always be here on Earth, it's the matter of controlling it.
You want to say Hillary is against climate change? She rides in expensive helicopters damaging the environment. She rides in expensive cars damaging the environment. She acts like the mother of nature for climate change. Atleast Trump isn't hypocritical with that. He says climate change is a hoax. Period. He doesn't say it's real and then does things that would damage the environment.
I get she "fought hard" for the election and had to travel a lot of different places to lie to the American public but if she were really against climate change, the hoax, she would try to limit her damaging of the environment.
Surprise : Politicians lie.
- - - Post Merge - - -
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/election-exit-polls.html?_r=0
^ 2008
Look at this poll. NY times is not credible at all times but I believe they're credible with this.
Those that say he lost with college-educated people... lol...
The reasons he lost with minorities is because...
a) The left have had them voting for them for years.
b) The left made republicans appear to be racist m8s.
c) It's the social aspect of things. Social culture I want to say. It has been. No matter who on the republican side. It's been social culture for latinos, blacks, and Asians to not vote for republicans.
But I'd like to point out that Mr. Trump did good in his shoes as the republican nominee. For one. 29% in latino and Asians. 8% in blacks.
From all the rhetoric from the left saying how Mr. Trump is a racist, he did fairly well. Lower than McCain in the 2008 election with latinos and Asians but higher than McCain with blacks.
This was 2008. In 2012 Mitt Romney had 29%, 28%... in the high 20's for blacks and Asians and 6% for blacks.
Trump did worse than McCain (2008) for blacks and Asians.
Trump did better than Mitt Romney (2012) for blacks and Asians.
Trump did better than McCain and Mitt Romney for the black vote.
Call other republicans racist then... I dare you.
- - - Post Merge - - - -2012
http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/president/exit-polls
Here's your "fact proofing", Red Cat. I do my research. Don't demonize me... that's what's wrong with you. If you don't like how someone is debating, supporting, or exampling then you throw out personal insults. You've thrown out the most personal insults on this thread. If you're going to continue on this thread, actually engage in the conversation instead of trying to get it closed.
Last edited:
if we're going to stop with personal insults, maybe we should start by not calling others 'complete *****'. or irrational, as this does go both ways, before you accuse me of being the definition of what's wrong with liberals. it does suck that you feel you're being personally attacked, and i'm sorry if i have contributed to that in any way, but maybe we should be careful of what we're saying to others to warrant that reaction.
Last edited: