Do you think we need a Megathread on Donald Trump given that the polls are all indicating he'll be back in the White House early next year?

His recent waffling on about choosing between to get electrocuted or eaten if you were on a sinking electric boat while a shark circled was particularly amusing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lVsbm_OFd8

There's already a thread running for this fuckhead. No doubt you think he's doing God's work.

Trump is showing a similar characteristic to that great President Abraham Lincoln, who was famous for his yarns.

https://www.google.com/search?q=abraham+lincoln+famous+yarns

Hoping he does get in. Some would say that having a serial adulterer/sexual deviate, and scammer/grifter who pretends to read the bible would not wash with the the looney US religious types. But really that's just them in a nutshell. Perfect match. 

Can we fuck this thread off when we've got another perfectly good one gong already. 

Piss off Js.

God I hope this guy gets elected... I really, really, really, really do.... 

Silicon Valley billionaire and long time Democratic voter, Chamath Palihapitiya, said: "The first is that I think there is a huge gap between how the media tries to portray Donald Trump and what he’s like when you meet him in person. And that gap is really wide."

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/06/silicon-valley-billionaire-democrat-voter-chamath-palihapitiya-exposes/

This applies to the Australian Media, not just "as well", but in particular. This is because, unlike the U.S., there is no conservative media in Australia that widely influences the people. All the conservative main Media are behind pay-walls. e.g. Herald-Sun, The Australian, Sky News etc. So the only things constantly bombarding the people are Left agenda (now regarded as Far Left).

And you have a baked-in culture where the average bloke, firstly says the Media lies - but then acts and believes 100% what that Media tells him - it follows that so many Australians just reflect the Media's view on Trump ... without the fair-mindedness to consider evidence from the other side. Evidence, evidence, evidence. The average bloke does not respond to evidence. Instead, the average bloke operates on following those whom he/she trusts. So when you provide the average bloke with evidence on anything, they will laugh in your face if the evidence conflicts with those whom they trust.

+ 2 after MSC lol.....

A lot of people are fake when you meet them, to be honest

Seriously can we use this thread instead? 

https://forum.insidesport.com.au/2889675/Chronicles-of-a-stable-genius?PageIndex=34

There's plenty of history in there. It would be a shame to lose it.

Yes, some are. Some are genuine. HENCE, WHAT are you going to do here? Insult and ignore. Or are you going to be open to evidence, and give people the benefit of the doubt? For instance, if the Entire Mainstream Media said something positive about a certain thing e.g. vaccines - would you still be open to raw evidence to the contrary? Majority of people are not. Similarly here ...

This interview of President Trump by Dr. Phil, he said it surprised him by letting him see a different side to Donald Trump.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkBkgqt_mT0

Change the title to include the word "President Trump" in it, otherwise many people won't realise what the thread is about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zicGxU5MfwE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYqKx1GuZGg

Dont need "Entire Mainstream Media" just have to listen to the Orange Turd himself and make up your own mind - if you are allowed to by your cult leaders?. 

Anyone who jerks their gherkin over any politician for internet points needs to have a good long look at themselves.   

well coming back in ET seeing this after what happened the other day seems this thread will grow no ?

anyone seen Joe Biden lately?

All you whack jobs think because he didn’t personally check in with you, that Alex jones is right and he’s dead. 

huh?

I'm not saying Trump didn't get shot at the other day because clearly that happened. BUT did he actually get hit with a bullet or did he get hit by flying debris?

Saw a video of some blokes shooting an ear on a ballistics gel head model and even when they just nicked it it just about shredded the ear.

The doctor said he didn't even need stitches, didn't release a report on the injury, the FBI only said he was 'shot at' so what's going on?

 

He was hit by the bullet.  That left wing conspiracy theory about him being hit by glass has been thoroughly debunked.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nearly two weeks after Donald Trump’s near assassination, the FBI confirmed Friday that it was indeed a bullet that struck the former president’s ear, moving to clear up conflicting accounts about what caused the former president’s injuries after a gunman opened fire at a Pennsylvania rally.

“What struck former President Trump in the ear was a bullet, whether whole or fragmented into smaller pieces, fired from the deceased subject’s rifle,” the agency said in a statement.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-bullet-shrapnel-ronny-jackson-christopher-wray-cb780b9d1a078f0be4191682e75101cf

Seeing as though the grifting bufoon & the Kamala idiot both have the exact same foreign policy outlook what is actually the difference between them both?  

Can we just keep the other thread going mate? It's been running for years. I know it went on a little tangent the last page or 2.