The Student Room Group

"If Obama did it why can't Trump do it"?

Is there some consensus that if obama can do something and get away with it Trump should be afforded the same treatment?

It doesn't even have to be a like-for-like policy. If any of trump bonehead policy even vaguely resembles that of Obama's then there you go - you are just hating on trump.

Wtf...?

Anyways I just read about the Yemen raid authorized by trump



As many as 23 civilians were killed in the raid on a village in Yakla district on Saturday, including 10 children, rights group Reprieve says.

Yemeni reports say the victims included the daughter of Anwar al-Awlaki, a militant killed by a US strike in 2011.

The raid was the first such operation authorised by President Donald Trump.

The US military had previously said a Navy Seal died and three others were injured. But the US Central Command (Centcom) later said that those killed could include children.

Several Apache helicopters were reported to have taken part in the operation, which killed 14 militants, including three al-Qaeda leaders, according to the US military.

White House spokesman Sean Spicer told journalists: "It's hard to ever call something a complete success when you have a loss of life or people injured."

"But I think when you look at the totality of what was gained to prevent the future loss of life... I think it's a successful operation in all standards."



http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38848297

If there ever was a terrorist empowerment program, this commander in chief will have an effective one.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Because Obama was black and a left-wing. Therefore he's right even when he's wrong, unlike a rich white man.
If you did pay attention to the news, a lot of Obama's failed military attacks were largely broadcasted. But right wingers were too busy concerned with other stuff.
Original post by STEMisSuperior.
If you did pay attention to the news, a lot of Obama's failed military attacks were largely broadcasted. But right wingers were too busy concerned with other stuff.


Such as having jobs, unlike lefties.
Original post by MildredMalone
Such as having jobs, unlike lefties.


Lefties are far more educated than the right.
Original post by STEMisSuperior.
Lefties are far more educated than the right.


Those Gender Studies, so useful man!
Reply 6
Original post by TaintedLight
Is there some consensus that if obama can do something and get away with it Trump should be afforded the same treatment?

It doesn't even have to be a like-for-like policy. If any of trump bonehead policy even vaguely resembles that of Obama's then there you go - you are just hating on trump.

Wtf...?

Anyways I just read about the Yemen raid authorized by trump



http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38848297

If there ever was a terrorist empowerment program, this commander in chief will have an effective one.


Thats because trump is doing something different to what Obama did. Obama banned Iraqi refugees and Trump is now banning almost every single citizen of the seven countries.

There is a large difference.
Original post by MildredMalone
Those Gender Studies, so useful man!


Is that all you've got?
Same old. Trump's executive orders on immigration were based on lists created by Obama, ie, he identified the countries which were sending homegrown terrorists. Then again, he also banned Iraqis for 6 months back in 2011. You'll note the lack of moral outrage at that action - there wasn't even a peep.

Even all the hysteria around the wall: 'It's xenophobic! It will never work.' The rank idiocy of these people is something to behold. Take The UN, for example - they've manned a wall along the Cypriot border for 52 years. The Macedonians have a huge barrier which even Frontex has proclaimed helped reduce illegal crossings by 90%. The Israelis have a wall, as do the Turks, the Saudis, the Hungarians, the Indians and Hillary Clinton - the latter has a big one, all the way round her house.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by STEMisSuperior.
Lefties are far more educated than the right.


[video="youtube;oKosd0xJadE"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKosd0xJadE[/video]
In answer to the thread title.

Simple, the left do not actually care about the issues they use to attack Trump.

This is how we end up with the situation in which the left condemn Trump for doing the exact same thing Obama did without protest from them.

So outraged are they that their anointed candidate Hillary failed to reach the oval office, they fail to see how blatant their hypocrisy is.
Original post by LiberalOutcast
http://www.independent.co.uk/student/news/eu-referendum-majority-of-uk-students-do-not-know-when-voting-day-is-reveals-poll-a7038371.html

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/20/40-of-millennials-ok-with-limiting-speech-offensive-to-minorities/

I can play this game all day. That's the beauty of social scientific research, it's downright nonsense. Of course, that's also the problem with progressivism in a nutshell (which invented much of the social science you inevitably cite) - it prioritises the imagined collective and its perception of it ahead of liberalism (individualism).


None of your links are relevant since they're not directly to do with intelligence which was the original point I made and the one you're so desperate to refute. Try again.

Left wingers are smarter than right wingers.
Original post by STEMisSuperior.
None of your links are relevant since they're not directly to do with intelligence which was the original point I made and the one you're so desperate to refute. Try again.

Left wingers are smarter than right wingers.


Can you start by defining left-wing and right-wing please?

Further to this, can you detail how you know the entire collection of those you deem 'right-wingers' in the UK are less intelligent than the entire collection of what you deem to be 'left-wingers' in the UK?

Can you provide me with census data on those who proclaim to be right-wing, and those who proclaim to be left-wing, as well as information on the measure you've employed to gauge their intelligence?

Next, can you define what you mean by 'intelligence' please?
Original post by LiberalOutcast
Can you start by defining left-wing and right-wing please?

Further to this, can you detail how you know the entire collection of those you deem 'right-wingers' in the UK are less intelligent than the entire collection of what you deem to be 'left-wingers' in the UK?

Can you provide me with census data on those who proclaim to be right-wing, and those who proclaim to be left-wing, as well as information on the measure you've employed to gauge their intelligence?

Next, can you define what you mean by 'intelligence' please?


Read the links I provided then refute those articles instead of asking stupid questions :smile:
Original post by STEMisSuperior.
Read the links I provided then refute those articles instead of asking stupid questions :smile:


If a question is stupid it should be easy for someone who isn't stupid to answer.

Who are these right-wingers and left-wingers you refer to? How many are there? What is your classification of intelligence? How do you measure intelligence?
Original post by LiberalOutcast
If a question is stupid it should be easy for someone who isn't stupid to answer.

Who are these right-wingers and left-wingers you refer to? How many are there? What is your classification of intelligence? How do you measure intelligence?


Again, I did not do the studies. But if you've got an issue with the article and the studies done, it's up to you to refute it.

I rest my case.
Original post by STEMisSuperior.
Again, I did not do the studies. But if you've got an issue with the article and the studies done, it's up to you to refute it.

I rest my case.


Citing a study isn't refuting a point; are your essays composed purely of bibliographies? When you make a point it's up to you to defend it; you raised the study, then you put up walls the moment it was questioned.

What you're looking for is the word 'representative sample', which is to suggest you have some level of confidence in polling (which, based on recent electoral results, is quite astounding; it's also woefully misplaced, considering the limitations of representative samples and wider social science).
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by LiberalOutcast
Citing a study isn't refuting a point; are your essays composed purely of bibliographies? When you make a point it's up to you to defend it; you raised the study, then you scuppered the moment it was questioned.

What you're looking for is the word 'representative sample', which is to suggest you have some level of confidence in polling (which, based on recent electoral results, is quite astounding; it's also woefully misplaced, considering the limitations of representative samples and wider social science).


I don't think you understand how an argument works. I did make a point and cited a source for it. I'm not going to explain the source since it's all in the article. So you can analyse the articles and tell me what's wrong with it or you can apologise for wasting my time.

Saying it's "representative sample" is a generic knee jerk reaction to oppose anything you don't agree with it. Try again.

Quick Reply

Latest