ccunning@lemmy.world to No Stupid Questions@lemmy.world · 1 month agoIf billionaires and CEOs feel like they need to start paying for large security details, would that be an example of trickle down economics?message-squaremessage-square70fedilinkarrow-up1365arrow-down120
arrow-up1345arrow-down1message-squareIf billionaires and CEOs feel like they need to start paying for large security details, would that be an example of trickle down economics?ccunning@lemmy.world to No Stupid Questions@lemmy.world · 1 month agomessage-square70fedilink
minus-squarechillinit@lemmynsfw.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down17·1 month ago To be fair, trump was a candidate / forner president at the time, not the sitting president nor president-elect. Red herring. The USSS probably just let their guard down and didn’t expect anyone to try anything. Minimization. Ad hominem is usually next. But, you instead could choose to answer the question in good faith.
minus-squareAurenkin@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up16·1 month agoBit early in the thread for one word retorts and assumptions of bad faith isn’t it? I’m not even sure what’s supposed to be being argued right now.
minus-squarechillinit@lemmynsfw.comlinkfedilinkarrow-up1arrow-down2·1 month agoNo, it’s not. If there’s no logic in the foundation then what’s built upon it is nearly useless.
Red herring.
Minimization.
Ad hominem is usually next. But, you instead could choose to answer the question in good faith.
Bit early in the thread for one word retorts and assumptions of bad faith isn’t it? I’m not even sure what’s supposed to be being argued right now.
No, it’s not. If there’s no logic in the foundation then what’s built upon it is nearly useless.