Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 182: Vesuvius of Mendacities

(+) Yeah! (+)

pyresword posted...

Also while I'm on the subject, actively advertising that you don't think certain people are worth engaging with is also pretty poor discussion etiquette. If you truly think a comment isn't worth your time to read/discuss then just ignore it. Don't go out of your way to say that something isn't worth your time or act like other people are obligated to feel the same way.

The users in question have repeatedly proven that they are deserving of such treatment.
---

In the same spirit as my comment to Corrik, all that's going to do is unnecessarily piss people off, and comments in that vein from all parties are (I believe) a significant part of why our political climate is the way it is today.
---

red sox 777 posted...

I thought you meant attacking in general, as in it doesn't matter who is being attacked, the act of attacking is the goal

no, that's not what i meant. i meant "democrats attack certain people because they think those people should be attacked."
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I dunno why you'd want to repeat one of the worsts post I've ever read in the history of the politics topic series.

pointing out how utterly unreasonable/hypocritical some people in this topic are = one of the worst posts in the history of this topic series. ok.
---

Inviso posted...

The reason I'm pissed at Corrik's post is less "hurr durr, transgender people suck and you guys are idiots for supporting them" and more the implication that it was Democrats that made transgender bathroom rights an issue, rather than the Republicans playing identity politics (and never catching flak for identity politics the way Democrats do.)

I don't think transgender people "suck". Hell, the only person I have talked to that was transgender online privately was on NeoGAF and we even followed each other on ResetERA after talking to each other.

I am just saying it was an issue that I felt swung just enough votes to flip the outcome of the election.

I don't think the transgender issue itself is a sound platform even within the Democratic party itself.
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

I dunno why you'd want to repeat one of the worsts post I've ever read in the history of the politics topic series.

pointing out how utterly unreasonable/hypocritical some people in this topic are = one of the worst pots in the history of this topic series. ok.

So your persecution complex has you pretty disconnected from reality on this one. Good to know.
---

Reg posted...

So your persecution complex has you pretty disconnected from reality on this one. Good to know.

what the fuck are you talking about?
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

Reg posted...

So your persecution complex has you pretty disconnected from reality on this one. Good to know.

what the fuck are you talking about?

You're full of shit, whether you know it or not.
---

Reg posted...

You're full of shit, whether you know it or not.

https://giphy.com/gifs/sesame-street-k-kermit-QWaSVX9FizaxO
---

Corrik posted...

I am just saying it was an issue that I felt swung just enough votes to flip the outcome of the election.

R....really?

You really think this?
---

Well, like I said earlier, I try to evaluate things on a post-by-post basis. If I don't think see any point in responding to something, I don't. Who posted it is irrelevant. I get that some people here disagree with that, and I'm sure some people disagree that some of the stuff I discuss has any worth. I just try to tune all that out.

Certainly I think there's a habit for dumb arguments to take over the topic at time, but I'm self-aware enough to know that from other people's point of view I take part in some dumb arguments. I try not to get involved in the policing of all that but I do think some posts feel way too much like bait and aren't going to go anywhere good.

i dunno maybe i shouldn't have said anything.
---

The margin in the election was close enough that you can point out any number of things that "swung" the election.

Individual issues, the Comey letter, the interference, voter suppression, etc.
---

Lasa, some people are not worth engaging because they never post anything substantive.
---

LapisLazuli posted...

Corrik posted...

I am just saying it was an issue that I felt swung just enough votes to flip the outcome of the election.

R....really?

You really think this?

Yes. I think the situation being so close to elections swung a lot of independents and fringe democrats to either voting R or voting Third Party.
---

Corrik posted...

Inviso posted...

The reason I'm pissed at Corrik's post is less "hurr durr, transgender people suck and you guys are idiots for supporting them" and more the implication that it was Democrats that made transgender bathroom rights an issue, rather than the Republicans playing identity politics (and never catching flak for identity politics the way Democrats do.)

I don't think transgender people "suck". Hell, the only person I have talked to that was transgender online privately was on NeoGAF and we even followed each other on ResetERA after talking to each other.

I am just saying it was an issue that I felt swung just enough votes to flip the outcome of the election.

I don't think the transgender issue itself is a sound platform even within the Democratic party itself.

Again, my point was that:

The Republicans made the transgender bathroom issue a thing, not the Democrats.

And yet you're making the argument that it's the Democrats own fault for their response to an issue the Republicans conjured up out of nowhere.
---

Inviso posted...

Corrik posted...

Inviso posted...

The reason I'm pissed at Corrik's post is less "hurr durr, transgender people suck and you guys are idiots for supporting them" and more the implication that it was Democrats that made transgender bathroom rights an issue, rather than the Republicans playing identity politics (and never catching flak for identity politics the way Democrats do.)

I don't think transgender people "suck". Hell, the only person I have talked to that was transgender online privately was on NeoGAF and we even followed each other on ResetERA after talking to each other.

I am just saying it was an issue that I felt swung just enough votes to flip the outcome of the election.

I don't think the transgender issue itself is a sound platform even within the Democratic party itself.

Again, my point was that:

The Republicans made the transgender bathroom issue a thing, not the Democrats.

And yet you're making the argument that it's the Democrats own fault for their response to an issue the Republicans conjured up out of nowhere.

I mean, they seized on it. I don't think Republicans were cancelling events in North Carolina and such in response to it though.
---

Corrik posted...

I don't think Republicans were cancelling events in North Carolina and such in response to it though.

Are the Democrats responsible for actions of private corporations though? Like if the ACC decides to move events out of there in response to laws passed by Republicans, how is that the Democrats' fault?

Because that was mostly what was going on IIRC.
---

Democrats didn't handle that issue very well, because it was pretty obvious that they wouldn't have called for boycotts of North Carolina if they lived there or cared about the state's residents, or even if it was important economically as NY and CA. But if that was why they lost, there are a hundred bigger reasons. With such a close margin, almost anything can pull you over the line but you should still focus on the big ones.

And I don't agree that this issue necessarily hurt them at all - Republicans looked plain mean for creating the issue.
---

xp1337 posted...

Corrik posted...

I don't think Republicans were cancelling events in North Carolina and such in response to it though.

Are the Democrats responsible for actions of private corporations though? Like if the ACC decides to move events out of there in response to laws passed by Republicans, how is that the Democrats' fault?

Because that was mostly what was going on IIRC.

I know it pushed some R on the Carolina message boards due to outrage over it. (Trust me, I am the biggest tar heel fan in the world and do go to them).

I mean, singers cancelling events and organizations still has its implications to the everyday person.
---

pyresword posted...

In the same spirit as my comment to Corrik, all that's going to do is unnecessarily piss people off, and comments in that vein from all parties are (I believe) a significant part of why our political climate is the way it is today.

see, the beauty of it is that if everybody ignores Corrik et al we won't be able to hear them bitch about it
---

pyresword posted...

In the same spirit as my comment to Corrik, all that's going to do is unnecessarily piss people off, and comments in that vein from all parties are (I believe) a significant part of why our political climate is the way it is today.

We have given Corrik PLENTY of rope. Again, its not that his comment warrants ignoring him, its his history that proves that he cant handle basic conversational debate from an empathetic standpoint. He cares about laws more than human rights, so you know EXACTLY where he stands on any given issue, and there is no point to engaging him because his opinions arent worthy of respect.
---

Corrik posted...

xp1337 posted...

Corrik posted...

I don't think Republicans were cancelling events in North Carolina and such in response to it though.

Are the Democrats responsible for actions of private corporations though? Like if the ACC decides to move events out of there in response to laws passed by Republicans, how is that the Democrats' fault?

Because that was mostly what was going on IIRC.

I know it pushed some R on the Carolina message boards due to outrage over it. (Trust me, I am the biggest tar heel fan in the world and do go to them).

I mean, singers cancelling events and organizations still has its implications to the everyday person.

Doesn't seem rational to blame the Democrats though. It was the Republicans who passed the law that caused that to happen. If the blame lied with either party surely it lie with them.
---

xp1337 posted...

Corrik posted...

xp1337 posted...

Corrik posted...

I don't think Republicans were cancelling events in North Carolina and such in response to it though.

Are the Democrats responsible for actions of private corporations though? Like if the ACC decides to move events out of there in response to laws passed by Republicans, how is that the Democrats' fault?

Because that was mostly what was going on IIRC.

I know it pushed some R on the Carolina message boards due to outrage over it. (Trust me, I am the biggest tar heel fan in the world and do go to them).

I mean, singers cancelling events and organizations still has its implications to the everyday person.

Doesn't seem rational to blame the Democrats though. It was the Republicans who passed the law that caused that to happen. If the blame lied with either party surely it lie with them.

I dunno. I think there is an argument to make the other way.
---

https://twitter.com/Curtis_Cook/status/1012070956494274560
---

Ill denounce that. Thats an awful thing for that person to say.

Also it wouldnt change anything Court-wise so WTF
---

NFUN posted...

pyresword posted...

In the same spirit as my comment to Corrik, all that's going to do is unnecessarily piss people off, and comments in that vein from all parties are (I believe) a significant part of why our political climate is the way it is today.

see, the beauty of it is that if everybody ignores Corrik et al we won't be able to hear them bitch about it

hail
---

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-25/as-trade-war-looms-china-wonders-whether-it-s-up-for-the-fight
---

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1012142325169098752?s=21

Trump says he'll let rich guys do their own rocket stuff and space exploration, but then, if they make accomplishments, he will seize the glory and "give them no credit."

He probably SAYS this jokingly, but its true
---

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1012137249713131521?s=21

President Donald Trump on how he felt after his VA reform: "I am the smartest person. My uncle was a great professor at MIT for 40 years...but I'm smarter than him, I'm smarter than anybody."

Heres an all-timer
---

For fuck's sake.

First off, I have lurked this topic (and made a few posts) for somewhere around a year now, and I do believe Corrik to be someone who is worth engaging with.

But the point I'm trying to make has very little to do with whether or not he is actually worth engaging with. What I'm saying is that even in some hypothetical world where it is an absolute philosophical truth that someone is not worth engaging with, you still should not tell that person either directly or indirectly that they are not worth engaging with.
---

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1012138781472968704?s=21

Trump says he used to be considered "an interloper" but now a poll "came out" that said, he says, "He's the most powerful, most popular Republican in the history of the party."

This rally is a gold mine
---

This topic is an interesting microcosm of the 5 stages of grief
---

pyresword posted...

What I'm saying is that even in some hypothetical world where it is an absolute philosophical truth that someone is not worth engaging with, you still should not tell that person either directly or indirectly that they are not worth engaging with.

Why?
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

This topic is an interesting microcosm of the 5 stages of grief

If you think this thread is bad... thank god you don't go to reset or have twitter.
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

This topic is an interesting microcosm of the 5 stages of grief

Im in the bargaining stage!

I would GLADLY give my life for a magic guarantee that conservatives/Republicans never again held a majority in either house of Congress after this year, or the Presidency after 2020.
---

gamefaqs needs to implement a reverse-ignorelist to block certain people from seeing your posts/topics
---

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hey-democrats-pack-the-court_us_5b33f7a8e4b0b5e692f3f3d4?ko
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Nelson_Mandela posted...

This topic is an interesting microcosm of the 5 stages of grief

Im in the bargaining stage!

I would GLADLY give my life for a magic guarantee that conservatives/Republicans never again held a majority in either house of Congress after this year, or the Presidency after 2020.

Would you be willing to publicly denounce Hillary Clinton for it?
---

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1012141201678577665?s=21

The president on people criticizing him on trade: "It's like rushing the turkey out of the stove. The women can tell me. And some of the men...have to be politically correct...in the old days...but it's true, some of the men can tell me."

This is either incredibly feminist or incredibly misogynistic, but its too senile to understand
---

red sox 777 posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Nelson_Mandela posted...

This topic is an interesting microcosm of the 5 stages of grief

Im in the bargaining stage!

I would GLADLY give my life for a magic guarantee that conservatives/Republicans never again held a majority in either house of Congress after this year, or the Presidency after 2020.

Would you be willing to publicly denounce Hillary Clinton for it?

I didnt vote for Hillary so sure. I dont want her in office. Ill take her 100/100 times over Trump though!

Hillary Clinton is hereby DENOUNCED by me! Will never vote for her!
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Nelson_Mandela posted...

This topic is an interesting microcosm of the 5 stages of grief

Im in the bargaining stage!

I would GLADLY give my life for a magic guarantee that conservatives/Republicans never again held a majority in either house of Congress after this year, or the Presidency after 2020.

Give him liberals or give him death!
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

Nelson_Mandela posted...

This topic is an interesting microcosm of the 5 stages of grief

Im in the bargaining stage!

I would GLADLY give my life for a magic guarantee that conservatives/Republicans never again held a majority in either house of Congress after this year, or the Presidency after 2020.

Give him liberals or give him death!

Im asking for both, silly
---

Jakyl25 posted...

I didnt vote for Hillary

...So all of this is your fault, then?
---

Xeybozn posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

I didnt vote for Hillary

...So all of this is your fault, then?

Well the Michigan part is, yes
---

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1012142765948526592?s=21

Trump scoffs at the "elite," calling them "stone-cold losers." This time he boasts about his base as "the super-elite" instead of just himself: "We got more money, we got more brains, we got better houses, apartments, we got nicer boats...we're the elite."

We got nicer boats here in...*checks card*...North Dakota!
---

Also if they have more money and better houses, there goes any economic anxiety argument
---

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1012146325855592448?s=21

The smartest person in the world, everyone.

I would bet that everyone in here could figure out what that means just on context
---

North Dakota has the lowest unemployment rate in the country! They struck oil, they did.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1012146325855592448?s=21

The smartest person in the world, everyone.

I would bet that everyone in here could figure out what that means just on context

Before 2016 this is literally how a President might have been portrayed in a silly comedy.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

pyresword posted...

What I'm saying is that even in some hypothetical world where it is an absolute philosophical truth that someone is not worth engaging with, you still should not tell that person either directly or indirectly that they are not worth engaging with.

Why?

Because it is demeaning to that person and potentially demeaning to others who either have similar beliefs or to people who mistakenly (in this hypothetical construct) identify this person as someone who is worth engaging with. I take it to be a moral axiom that this fact is in-and-of-itself a bad thing. (Also it is worth pausing for a moment to point out that this becomes much much worse as soon you remove my "absolute truth" conditional statement)

Furthermore I do not perceive any potential benefit that could come from such an action which could not be achieved through methods which do not suffer from the above problem. If you're trying to avoid wasting time reading someone's nonsense, you could instead just not read it (made particularly easy here via the ignore button). If you're trying to communicate to other people that someone is not worth engaging with, you could instead for example communicate with that person privately, or engage with the original person's ideas anyways on the basis that by continually exposing flaws in that person's rationale/beliefs, others will naturally come to the conclusion that the person is not worth engaging with.
---