Skip to main content

Cause and effect according to Donald Trump

As I pointed out in a blog yesterday, multiple parties deserve at least some of the blame for the escalated tension and violence at Donald Trump rallies, including: The media (5% of the blame), the protesters (10% of the blame), and Trump supporters (10% of the blame). However, no matter what the current GOP frontrunner wants to believe, a large majority of the blame is with him and his rhetoric (75% of the blame).

Based on Trump's commentary following recent protests at his rallies, which have resulted in one cancellation and potential multiple criminal charges (on both Trump supporters and protesters), he appears to be quite confused on the concept of cause and effect. He has yet to bear any responsibility for the escalated tension, anger, and violence at his rallies, instead fully blaming the protesters. Just from a chronological standpoint, how does that work exactly?

According to Donald Trump
Cause: Protesters respond to his angry rhetoric

Effect: His angry rhetoric which preceded the protests

I'm sorry, Donald, but that can't make any logical sense whatsoever. That'd be like suggesting the following:

Cause and effect according to Donald Trump

Cause: A woman gets pregnant

Effect: A man and a woman have unprotected sex


Cause: A man dies from a gunshot wound

Effect: A man gets shot by a gun


Cause: Barack Obama gets elected President of the United States

Effect: Barack Obama receives more votes John McCain


Cause: Part of Evander Holyfield's ear goes missing

Effect: Mike Tyson bites off part of Evander Holyfield's ear


Cause: Ben Carson endorses Donald Trump

Effect: Donald Trump compares Ben Carson to a child molester

Okay, so that last one doesn't make any sense regardless of how we slice it...
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun
2 comments
Read more

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i
Post a Comment
Read more

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"
Post a Comment
Read more