Jump to content

Historically Speaking, Who Does Trump Remind You Of & Why


The_Dude

Recommended Posts

It’s a simple game if you want to play. Who is the historical figure that Trump most resembles and why. You can base your answer off whatever criteria you want (obviously). But who does Trump remind you of and why? What traits of his are similar to the historical figure you’re comparing him to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

Chagadai Khan.

Is that a compliment or not? I only know about his father and on that mostly just his way of war. 

12 minutes ago, snafu said:

Honorius I

 

Ok. On the board with a pope. I don’t get it but cool. Maybe due to conflicts with Islam?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

Is that a compliment or not? I only know about his father and on that mostly just his way of war. 

 

Ok. On the board with a pope. I don’t get it but cool. Maybe due to conflicts with Islam?

 

No, I meant the Emperor Honorius I.  He was an Emperor of Rome in the late 4th - early 5th C.  Became Emperor when he was 10 years old.  Dealt with "barbarian" invasions chipping away at the outskirts of the empire and also with some attempted usurpations.  Ultimately those things led to the first sack of Rome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

It's an observation that you don't know ****.

 

No, old man, it’s an observation I’m not full of ****. Do you see? I could have easily gone to Wikipedia and scanned his entire life and pretended that was previously obtained knowledge but I don’t do that. If I’m not an expert I say so. If I’m not knowledgeable on a topic I state so and I ask questions. I ask questions because I believe learning is continuous. 

 

Am I supposed to be expected to have knowledge on every historical figure? ?

 

 

24 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

No, I meant the Emperor Honorius I.  He was an Emperor of Rome in the late 4th - early 5th C.  Became Emperor when he was 10 years old.  Dealt with "barbarian" invasions chipping away at the outskirts of the empire and also with some attempted usurpations.  Ultimately those things led to the first sack of Rome.

 

That one. Gotcha. But Rome was sacked during the republic too! Don’t forget. F’ing, pants-wearing savages!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

No, old man, it’s an observation I’m not full of ****. Do you see? I could have easily gone to Wikipedia and scanned his entire life and pretended that was previously obtained knowledge but I don’t do that. If I’m not an expert I say so. If I’m not knowledgeable on a topic I state so and I ask questions. I ask questions because I believe learning is continuous. 

 

It's an observation you don't know ****, because "Khan" is a title, not a name.  His name was simply Chagadai.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

It's an observation you don't know ****, because "Khan" is a title, not a name.  His name was simply Chagadai.  

 

I never addressed him as “Khan,” you did. ?

 

I came out and said I’m not familiar with him. So why would I know if he became Khan or not? That doesn’t even prove that i didnt know Khan was a title and that’s about all I know about the Mongols from that time — that and their way of war. So if I don’t know their political practices or means of succession, and you addressed the guy as “Khan” why would I argue that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

I never addressed him as “Khan,” you did. ?

 

I came out and said I’m not familiar with him. So why would I know if he became Khan or not? That doesn’t even prove that i didnt know Khan was a title and that’s about all I know about the Mongols from that time — that and their way of war. So if I don’t know their political practices or means of succession, and you addressed the guy as “Khan” why would I argue that? 

 

Well, you argue with every fact I post.  But you accept the falsehoods blindly?  And you're "familiar with" Genghis Khan...but didn't know his name wasn't "Genghis Khan?"

 

Friggin' stoner dipshits.  :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

Well, you argue with every fact I post.  But you accept the falsehoods blindly?  And you're "familiar with" Genghis Khan...but didn't know his name wasn't "Genghis Khan?"

 

Friggin' stoner dipshits.  :lol:

 

No I didn’t because I studied them from the western perspective. Most of what I read on them stems from Byzantine sources. Most of what I read was just detailing their methods of fighting. 

 

But yeah — you know more about Genghis Khan than I. ?????

 

And you’re pulling out a fact I don’t even care about and is completely insgnificant...did you know Germanicus’ real name wasn’t Germanicus? In fact, you’re an idiot if you don’t know what Germanicus’ real name was. G’head — tell me his name. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

 

No I didn’t because I studied them from the western perspective. Most of what I read on them stems from Byzantine sources. Most of what I read was just detailing their methods of fighting. 

 

But yeah — you know more about Genghis Khan than I. ?????

 

And you’re pulling out a fact I don’t even care about and is completely insgnificant...did you know Germanicus’ real name wasn’t Germanicus? In fact, you’re an idiot if you don’t know what Germanicus’ real name was. G’head — tell me his name. 

 

:lol:  You're an idiot.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...