By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Donald Trump accepts invitation to Stephen Colbert's Late Night Show, can he leave the show unscathed when he faces Colbert?

 

Can Trump nail his appearance in the Colbert show?

Trump never looks good anywhere. 50 28.57%
 
Sure, the guy has a sense of humor. 46 26.29%
 
Colbert will go easy on h... 22 12.57%
 
I can't fucking care less. 18 10.29%
 
Colbert will mop the floo... 39 22.29%
 
Total:175
Kane1389 on 13 September 2015
spemanig said:
Trump is going to get obliterated. His downfall is that he's going to walk in there with a chip on his shoulder. He'll go in there knowing Colbert will try and make him look like an idiot in front of the world, think he'll easily out smart him, try to make Colbert look like the idiot, and get absolutely massecred.


yeah, because the idiots that watch Colbert and his stupid show are surley the type of audience that Trump wants to go after. He is doing it for publicity only, and the reason he is winning all the polls is because idiots like Colbert and his sheeple audience are giving him attention and publicity by thinkig they ''burned'' him or show how dumb he is and how smart they are. Trump is not going there to win over the sheep-minded progressives who watch this shit. He is going there for the same reason he keeps on winning the polls: free publicity



Around the Network
sethnintendo on 13 September 2015
Kane1389 said:
spemanig said:
Trump is going to get obliterated. His downfall is that he's going to walk in there with a chip on his shoulder. He'll go in there knowing Colbert will try and make him look like an idiot in front of the world, think he'll easily out smart him, try to make Colbert look like the idiot, and get absolutely massecred.


yeah, because the idiots that watch Colbert and his stupid show are surley the type of audience that Trump wants to go after. He is doing it for publicity only, and the reason he is winning all the polls is because idiots like Colbert and his sheeple audience are giving him attention and publicity by thinkig they ''burned'' him or show how dumb he is and how smart they are. Trump is not going there to win over the sheep-minded progressives who watch this shit. He is going there for the same reason he keeps on winning the polls: free publicity

You really played the sheep card on that post.  You know the same thing can be said about Trump followers.  They are sheep.  Your post made me feel like I just walked into a trailer park.  I didn't know they had rednecks in the U.K.



Robert_Downey_Jr. on 13 September 2015
sethnintendo said:
Robert_Downey_Jr. said:

ok...not sure how that was relevant.  I'm not a Trump supporter I'm just saying Colbert isn't quite as adept at debate as some believe.  It could also happen if he attacked Bernie Sanders on his program to be fair.

Sorry that was a bad joke and I was apparently so drunk that I didn't even bother with spell check.  I need to keep myself off the internet after I have more than 6 beers.

I didn't notice either after a little champagne and 2 mike's hards lol so we're even



I am Iron Man

Jimbo1337 on 13 September 2015
sethnintendo said:
Kane1389 said:
spemanig said:
Trump is going to get obliterated. His downfall is that he's going to walk in there with a chip on his shoulder. He'll go in there knowing Colbert will try and make him look like an idiot in front of the world, think he'll easily out smart him, try to make Colbert look like the idiot, and get absolutely massecred.


yeah, because the idiots that watch Colbert and his stupid show are surley the type of audience that Trump wants to go after. He is doing it for publicity only, and the reason he is winning all the polls is because idiots like Colbert and his sheeple audience are giving him attention and publicity by thinkig they ''burned'' him or show how dumb he is and how smart they are. Trump is not going there to win over the sheep-minded progressives who watch this shit. He is going there for the same reason he keeps on winning the polls: free publicity

You really played the sheep card on that post.  You know the same thing can be said about Trump followers.  They are sheep.  Your post made me feel like I just walked into a trailer park.  I didn't know they had rednecks in the U.K.

You should listen to your own advice:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=7520341

So because you have people who support Trump they are therefore sheep? So by your logic, those who support Bernie Sanders, Ben Carson, Hillary Clinton, etc are also sheep too.  So profound!

While you are at it, why don't you include more condescending remarks towards Kane's insightful post.



SamuelRSmith on 14 September 2015
Madword said:

I dont think that is true, otherwise the term "The rich get richer, and the poorer get poorer" would never be said. Yes of course if you give someone 1m they will be a new house, car, holiday, they'll spend it to make their life better. You give someone $40-200m who is already living a good life, it's very easy to make more money with that. yes one or two might blow it (Nicolas cage is a good example), but on the whole, once you get a few million it's easy to make lots more money.


Lots of stuff gets said that has no bearing on reality, including that phrase.

Truth is, those who come into "easy money" more likely than not end up bankrupt.

http://www.goldengirlfinance.com/inspiration/?post_id=1385

"According to a 2010 study by researchers at Vanderbilt University, the University of Kentucky and the University of Pittsburgh, the more money you win in the lottery, the more likely you are to end up bankrupt.

The authors divided past lottery winners into two separate groups: Those who had won cash prizes between $50,000 and $150,000, and those who had won $10,000 or less. What they found is that those who had won the more sizable sums were more likely to have filed for bankruptcy five years later. Similar research from the National Endowment for Financial Education estimates that 70 percent of people who had unexpectedly come into large sums of money ended up broke within seven years."



Around the Network
SamuelRSmith on 14 September 2015
pokoko said:

I think you quoted the wrong person.  I didn't say he was an idiot.


I didn't misquote, I misinterepreted. Apologies.



DonFerrari on 14 September 2015
generic-user-1 said:
DonFerrari said:
generic-user-1 said:

hes not stupid, hes just not a selfmade billionair, or a good business person.  but he is a brilliant conman.


That could be an opinion that if said in person could get you in jail... but certainly a conman have a place in politics, and I would bet some have sitted on the presidential chair not only on the white house but several other countries.

what? thats an insult in the worst case, and an insult doesnt get you into jail, he could sue me, but i doubt that will happen


Isn't conman an allegation of him being a criminal? In Brazil I'm positive it could be understand as that... well different cultures I guess.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari on 14 September 2015
Madword said:
DonFerrari said:

Have I denied he had a better start? Or have I said I wouldn't value more the achievements of Silvio Santos in Brazil or Bill Gates in USA? Nope, I just said he is not the idiot you may think he is, or even the fool he may be pretending to be.

Woah calm down, I'm not even american, so I dont care that much about it....lol.

But yes I still believe/think he is an idiot and a fool. Just because someone is rich, doesnt exclude them from that possibility. How he acts in public is how I perceive him, if he pretends to be a fool in public, I'm afraid that's how I'll get my opinion of him.


A lot of people pretend to be fool just to get benefits of people understimating them... and I don't think anyone could get bilionaire by being a fool and idiot... but as explained by another user, his opinion is that even an idiot could become bilionaire with his starting point without much hassle, and due to lack of statistics I won't pursue it.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

generic-user-1 on 14 September 2015
DonFerrari said:
generic-user-1 said:
DonFerrari said:
generic-user-1 said:

hes not stupid, hes just not a selfmade billionair, or a good business person.  but he is a brilliant conman.


That could be an opinion that if said in person could get you in jail... but certainly a conman have a place in politics, and I would bet some have sitted on the presidential chair not only on the white house but several other countries.

what? thats an insult in the worst case, and an insult doesnt get you into jail, he could sue me, but i doubt that will happen


Isn't conman an allegation of him being a criminal? In Brazil I'm positive it could be understand as that... well different cultures I guess.

the world is full of con artist, priests, scientologie, people who promote BS diets and food suppliments, all of those things are legal cons.



sethnintendo on 14 September 2015
Jimbo1337 said:

 So by your logic, those who support Bernie Sanders, Ben Carson, Hillary Clinton, etc are also sheep too.  So profound!

Yea, I believe that is what I am saying.  Candidates promise the world but they usually don't keep them.  I'm also tired of the two party sytem and winner takes all.  I would vote again if we had proportional representation.