Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic #228 - Orbs you glad I didn't say banana?

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10
Inviso 06/30/19 11:50:10 AM #101:	red sox 777 posted... Inviso posted... red sox 777 posted... Inviso posted... "He's good at duping gullible racists into thinking he gives a shit about them." Let's edit this. He's good at duping people into thinking he cares about them. He's good at convincing people that he cares about them. He's good at making people feel that he is on their side. He is good at understanding people so that he can say the things he needs to say to make them feel he is on their side. He is good at listening to people to understand their concerns. And there you go. The meaning necessarily hasn't changed from what you said, but it sounds far better. It's also a lie. It says absolutely nothing factual that your statement didn't say. So no, it is not a lie. Just more artfully worded. He's literally not good at listening to people to understand their concerns though. That is factually false. The man had to write on his hand how to comfort the victim of a school shooting. The reason I used the words "dupe" and "gullible" is that that's the entire M.O. of the Republican party. They don't give a shit about their voters. That's why they've insisted on trying to keep everything exactly the same, despite their voters becoming worse and worse off. But you just shift the blame onto "illegals" and "the gays", and suddenly you manufacture concerns for them to have, that have no basis in reality. --- Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier. Inviso <cite>Inviso posted [p:924052133] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote>"He's good at duping gullible racists into thinking he gives a shit about them."</quote> Let's edit this. <quote> He's good at duping people into thinking he cares about them. He's good at convincing people that he cares about them. He's good at making people feel that he is on their side. He is good at understanding people so that he can say the things he needs to say to make them feel he is on their side. He is good at listening to people to understand their concerns. </quote> And there you go. The meaning necessarily hasn't changed from what you said, but it sounds far better.</quote> It's also a lie.</quote> It says absolutely nothing factual that your statement didn't say. So no, it is not a lie. Just more artfully worded.</quote> He's literally not good at listening to people to understand their concerns though. That is factually false. The man had to write on his hand how to comfort the victim of a school shooting. The reason I used the words "dupe" and "gullible" is that that's the entire M.O. of the Republican party. They don't give a shit about their voters. That's why they've insisted on trying to keep everything exactly the same, despite their voters becoming worse and worse off. But you just shift the blame onto "illegals" and "the gays", and suddenly you manufacture concerns for them to have, that have no basis in reality.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
banananor 06/30/19 11:55:11 AM #102:	Honestly, I think when you consume and truly follow the exact same media (in this case, fox news) as someone else, it's easy to get along with them You say the same things, use the same turns of phrase, you care about the same current events If you just speak about whatever is top of mind, it's going to resonate because it'll just sound consistent with fox's world view It's like sharing a hobby or a love of a sport. Except more so, because it involves not only events in a game or microcosm, but the world in general I think when conservatives try to equate fox with, say, the daily show, they're wrong in that one is comedy and one is claiming to be real news. But if they went just a little bit further and were willing to admit fox wasn't fair, they could make the point that both are communal bonfires of sorts where people can form a baseline vocabulary for communication A place to build a shared sense of humor or outrage or values with "the news" or "the world" as a backdrop Basically, this is a long winded way to say that I don't think trump is good at reading people. I think he just swims in the same media as his fans and generally ignores secret reports, so everything he says resonates with what they're seeing on tv --- You did indeed stab me in the back. However, you are only level one, whilst I am level 50. That means I should remain uninjured. <cite>banananor posted [p:924052321] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>Honestly, I think when you consume and truly follow the exact same media (in this case, fox news) as someone else, it's easy to get along with them You say the same things, use the same turns of phrase, you care about the same current events If you just speak about whatever is top of mind, it's going to resonate because it'll just sound consistent with fox's world view It's like sharing a hobby or a love of a sport. Except more so, because it involves not only events in a game or microcosm, but the world in general I think when conservatives try to equate fox with, say, the daily show, they're wrong in that one is comedy and one is claiming to be real news. But if they went just a little bit further and were willing to admit fox wasn't fair, they could make the point that both are communal bonfires of sorts where people can form a baseline vocabulary for communication A place to build a shared sense of humor or outrage or values with "the news" or "the world" as a backdrop Basically, this is a long winded way to say that I don't think trump is good at reading people. I think he just swims in the same media as his fans and generally ignores secret reports, so everything he says resonates with what they're seeing on tv</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 11:56:17 AM #103:	Inviso posted... red sox 777 posted... Inviso posted... red sox 777 posted... Inviso posted... "He's good at duping gullible racists into thinking he gives a shit about them." Let's edit this. He's good at duping people into thinking he cares about them. He's good at convincing people that he cares about them. He's good at making people feel that he is on their side. He is good at understanding people so that he can say the things he needs to say to make them feel he is on their side. He is good at listening to people to understand their concerns. And there you go. The meaning necessarily hasn't changed from what you said, but it sounds far better. It's also a lie. It says absolutely nothing factual that your statement didn't say. So no, it is not a lie. Just more artfully worded. He's literally not good at listening to people to understand their concerns though. That is factually false. The man had to write on his hand how to comfort the victim of a school shooting. The reason I used the words "dupe" and "gullible" is that that's the entire M.O. of the Republican party. They don't give a shit about their voters. That's why they've insisted on trying to keep everything exactly the same, despite their voters becoming worse and worse off. But you just shift the blame onto "illegals" and "the gays", and suddenly you manufacture concerns for them to have, that have no basis in reality. And how does he go about duping these people if he doesn't know how to listen to them well enough to understand their concerns? --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924052351] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote>"He's good at duping gullible racists into thinking he gives a shit about them."</quote> Let's edit this. <quote> He's good at duping people into thinking he cares about them. He's good at convincing people that he cares about them. He's good at making people feel that he is on their side. He is good at understanding people so that he can say the things he needs to say to make them feel he is on their side. He is good at listening to people to understand their concerns. </quote> And there you go. The meaning necessarily hasn't changed from what you said, but it sounds far better.</quote> It's also a lie.</quote> It says absolutely nothing factual that your statement didn't say. So no, it is not a lie. Just more artfully worded.</quote> He's literally not good at listening to people to understand their concerns though. That is factually false. The man had to write on his hand how to comfort the victim of a school shooting. The reason I used the words "dupe" and "gullible" is that that's the entire M.O. of the Republican party. They don't give a shit about their voters. That's why they've insisted on trying to keep everything exactly the same, despite their voters becoming worse and worse off. But you just shift the blame onto "illegals" and "the gays", and suddenly you manufacture concerns for them to have, that have no basis in reality.</quote> And how does he go about duping these people if he doesn't know how to listen to them well enough to understand their concerns?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Inviso 06/30/19 12:01:20 PM #104:	red sox 777 posted... Inviso posted... red sox 777 posted... Inviso posted... red sox 777 posted... Inviso posted... "He's good at duping gullible racists into thinking he gives a shit about them." Let's edit this. He's good at duping people into thinking he cares about them. He's good at convincing people that he cares about them. He's good at making people feel that he is on their side. He is good at understanding people so that he can say the things he needs to say to make them feel he is on their side. He is good at listening to people to understand their concerns. And there you go. The meaning necessarily hasn't changed from what you said, but it sounds far better. It's also a lie. It says absolutely nothing factual that your statement didn't say. So no, it is not a lie. Just more artfully worded. He's literally not good at listening to people to understand their concerns though. That is factually false. The man had to write on his hand how to comfort the victim of a school shooting. The reason I used the words "dupe" and "gullible" is that that's the entire M.O. of the Republican party. They don't give a shit about their voters. That's why they've insisted on trying to keep everything exactly the same, despite their voters becoming worse and worse off. But you just shift the blame onto "illegals" and "the gays", and suddenly you manufacture concerns for them to have, that have no basis in reality. And how does he go about duping these people if he doesn't know how to listen to them well enough to understand their concerns? He invents a non-existent problem ("Mexio is sending their rapists into this country"), which inadvertently plays into the fear-based mindset inherent in conservative brains, then claims he can fix the non-existent problem that he created. That's not understanding their concerns. That's taking advantage of easily frightened people in order to create a concern, so that you don't have to ACTUALLY care about them. --- Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier. Inviso <cite>Inviso posted [p:924052524] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote>"He's good at duping gullible racists into thinking he gives a shit about them."</quote> Let's edit this. <quote> He's good at duping people into thinking he cares about them. He's good at convincing people that he cares about them. He's good at making people feel that he is on their side. He is good at understanding people so that he can say the things he needs to say to make them feel he is on their side. He is good at listening to people to understand their concerns. </quote> And there you go. The meaning necessarily hasn't changed from what you said, but it sounds far better.</quote> It's also a lie.</quote> It says absolutely nothing factual that your statement didn't say. So no, it is not a lie. Just more artfully worded.</quote> He's literally not good at listening to people to understand their concerns though. That is factually false. The man had to write on his hand how to comfort the victim of a school shooting. The reason I used the words "dupe" and "gullible" is that that's the entire M.O. of the Republican party. They don't give a shit about their voters. That's why they've insisted on trying to keep everything exactly the same, despite their voters becoming worse and worse off. But you just shift the blame onto "illegals" and "the gays", and suddenly you manufacture concerns for them to have, that have no basis in reality.</quote> And how does he go about duping these people if he doesn't know how to listen to them well enough to understand their concerns?</quote> He invents a non-existent problem ("Mexio is sending their rapists into this country"), which inadvertently plays into the fear-based mindset inherent in conservative brains, then claims he can fix the non-existent problem that he created. That's not understanding their concerns. That's taking advantage of easily frightened people in order to create a concern, so that you don't have to ACTUALLY care about them.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 12:01:54 PM #105:	I think that question was probably the most damaging to Hillary of all the debates actually (with her Abraham Lincoln taught me how to lie defense being second). It's true that she had the bad luck to be the first called on to answer, as she had much less time to think of a good answer. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924052535] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>I think that question was probably the most damaging to Hillary of all the debates actually (with her Abraham Lincoln taught me how to lie defense being second). It's true that she had the bad luck to be the first called on to answer, as she had much less time to think of a good answer.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 12:03:16 PM #106:	Inviso, that proves he understands their concerns - what they are afraid of. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924052585] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>Inviso, that proves he understands their concerns - what they are afraid of.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Inviso 06/30/19 12:05:35 PM #107:	red sox 777 posted... Inviso, that proves he understands their concerns - what they are afraid of. Those aren't THEIR concerns. You don't get to claim "Trump understands peoples' concerns" and then subsequently defend him not giving a SHIT about their concerns as he then implants false concerns in their head, that they didn't care about prior to him and the Republican Party making them up. --- Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier. Inviso <cite>Inviso posted [p:924052662] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote>Inviso, that proves he understands their concerns - what they are afraid of.</quote> Those aren't THEIR concerns. You don't get to claim "Trump understands peoples' concerns" and then subsequently defend him not giving a SHIT about their concerns as he then implants false concerns in their head, that they didn't care about prior to him and the Republican Party making them up.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 12:05:44 PM #108:	Also if you are saying he has the ability to incept concerns in people's minds and then exploit them, like in Inception, that's really high praise and more than I'm willing to give. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924052667] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>Also if you are saying he has the ability to incept concerns in people's minds and then exploit them, like in Inception, that's really high praise and more than I'm willing to give.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 12:10:55 PM #109:	And remember that as a candidate answering this question, you have a goal - to get yourself elected. Hillary wants to craft her answer in a way that makes herself look good. Saying that Trump is a genius who has the ability to incept ideas in people's minds is too high praise and goes far beyond what's beneficial to Hillary. Better to leave it at something vague. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924052854] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>And remember that as a candidate answering this question, you have a goal - to get yourself elected. Hillary wants to craft her answer in a way that makes herself look good. Saying that Trump is a genius who has the ability to incept ideas in people's minds is too high praise and goes far beyond what's beneficial to Hillary. Better to leave it at something vague.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Inviso 06/30/19 12:13:10 PM #110:	red sox 777 posted... Also if you are saying he has the ability to incept concerns in people's minds and then exploit them, like in Inception, that's really high praise and more than I'm willing to give. I'm saying that conservatives are more gullible and fearful than liberals. It's easier to tell them "this thing is bad and wants to get you!" and have them believe it. Hence why we can have a literal Muslim ban, yet the biggest holiday in the fucking country is the thing under attack. --- Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier. Inviso <cite>Inviso posted [p:924052933] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote>Also if you are saying he has the ability to incept concerns in people's minds and then exploit them, like in Inception, that's really high praise and more than I'm willing to give.</quote> I'm saying that conservatives are more gullible and fearful than liberals. It's easier to tell them "this thing is bad and wants to get you!" and have them believe it. Hence why we can have a literal Muslim ban, yet the biggest holiday in the fucking country is the thing under attack.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 12:16:40 PM #111:	Inviso posted... red sox 777 posted... Also if you are saying he has the ability to incept concerns in people's minds and then exploit them, like in Inception, that's really high praise and more than I'm willing to give. I'm saying that conservatives are more gullible and fearful than liberals. It's easier to tell them "this thing is bad and wants to get you!" and have them believe it. Hence why we can have a literal Muslim ban, yet the biggest holiday in the fucking country is the thing under attack. The debate question called for one nice thing. You don't have to disclose all of your background support for that thing. This is not a financial disclosure where you have to disclose everything. You can just omit the part about conservatives being gullible. It's still truthful. Because you were only asked for one nice thing. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924053071] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote>Also if you are saying he has the ability to incept concerns in people's minds and then exploit them, like in Inception, that's really high praise and more than I'm willing to give.</quote> I'm saying that conservatives are more gullible and fearful than liberals. It's easier to tell them "this thing is bad and wants to get you!" and have them believe it. Hence why we can have a literal Muslim ban, yet the biggest holiday in the fucking country is the thing under attack.</quote> The debate question called for one nice thing. You don't have to disclose all of your background support for that thing. This is not a financial disclosure where you have to disclose everything. You can just omit the part about conservatives being gullible. It's still truthful. Because you were only asked for one nice thing.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Inviso 06/30/19 12:21:18 PM #112:	red sox 777 posted... Inviso posted... red sox 777 posted... Also if you are saying he has the ability to incept concerns in people's minds and then exploit them, like in Inception, that's really high praise and more than I'm willing to give. I'm saying that conservatives are more gullible and fearful than liberals. It's easier to tell them "this thing is bad and wants to get you!" and have them believe it. Hence why we can have a literal Muslim ban, yet the biggest holiday in the fucking country is the thing under attack. The debate question called for one nice thing. You don't have to disclose all of your background support for that thing. This is not a financial disclosure where you have to disclose everything. You can just omit the part about conservatives being gullible. It's still truthful. Because you were only asked for one nice thing. I think the issue we're having is that you believe Hillary should have to lie in order to appease easily-offended conservative snowflakes, whereas I don't think she should have lowered herself to lie and claim a vile human being has any positive qualities. Like, where does the line stop for you in terms of who is, and who isn't, worthy of that kind of respect? John Wayne Gacy? Osama Bin Laden? Adolf Hitler? I know I'm being hyperbolic, but my point is...where is your line for the point where we stop coddling deplorable (sorry to trigger you) assholes by telling them they're not ALL bad? --- Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier. Inviso <cite>Inviso posted [p:924053239] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote>Also if you are saying he has the ability to incept concerns in people's minds and then exploit them, like in Inception, that's really high praise and more than I'm willing to give.</quote> I'm saying that conservatives are more gullible and fearful than liberals. It's easier to tell them "this thing is bad and wants to get you!" and have them believe it. Hence why we can have a literal Muslim ban, yet the biggest holiday in the fucking country is the thing under attack.</quote> The debate question called for one nice thing. You don't have to disclose all of your background support for that thing. This is not a financial disclosure where you have to disclose everything. You can just omit the part about conservatives being gullible. It's still truthful. Because you were only asked for one nice thing.</quote> I think the issue we're having is that you believe Hillary should have to lie in order to appease easily-offended conservative snowflakes, whereas I don't think she should have lowered herself to lie and claim a vile human being has any positive qualities. Like, where does the line stop for you in terms of who is, and who isn't, worthy of that kind of respect? John Wayne Gacy? Osama Bin Laden? Adolf Hitler? I know I'm being hyperbolic, but my point is...where is your line for the point where we stop coddling deplorable (sorry to trigger you) assholes by telling them they're not ALL bad?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 12:21:33 PM #113:	If I ever get to teach a writing class, I think I'm going to give an assignment- write an essay praising the virtues of a politician you dislike. I expect the whole class will fail. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924053247] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>If I ever get to teach a writing class, I think I'm going to give an assignment- write an essay praising the virtues of a politician you dislike. I expect the whole class will fail.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 12:23:54 PM #114:	Inviso posted... red sox 777 posted... Inviso posted... red sox 777 posted... Also if you are saying he has the ability to incept concerns in people's minds and then exploit them, like in Inception, that's really high praise and more than I'm willing to give. I'm saying that conservatives are more gullible and fearful than liberals. It's easier to tell them "this thing is bad and wants to get you!" and have them believe it. Hence why we can have a literal Muslim ban, yet the biggest holiday in the fucking country is the thing under attack. The debate question called for one nice thing. You don't have to disclose all of your background support for that thing. This is not a financial disclosure where you have to disclose everything. You can just omit the part about conservatives being gullible. It's still truthful. Because you were only asked for one nice thing. I think the issue we're having is that you believe Hillary should have to lie in order to appease easily-offended conservative snowflakes, whereas I don't think she should have lowered herself to lie and claim a vile human being has any positive qualities. Like, where does the line stop for you in terms of who is, and who isn't, worthy of that kind of respect? John Wayne Gacy? Osama Bin Laden? Adolf Hitler? I know I'm being hyperbolic, but my point is...where is your line for the point where we stop coddling deplorable (sorry to trigger you) assholes by telling them they're not ALL bad? If Hillary truly believed Trump should be in a category with those people, she should have refused to debate with him. And called out the moderator for giving bad questions, directly, the way Ron Paul used to answer most every question, with, your question is stupid. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924053345] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote>Also if you are saying he has the ability to incept concerns in people's minds and then exploit them, like in Inception, that's really high praise and more than I'm willing to give.</quote> I'm saying that conservatives are more gullible and fearful than liberals. It's easier to tell them "this thing is bad and wants to get you!" and have them believe it. Hence why we can have a literal Muslim ban, yet the biggest holiday in the fucking country is the thing under attack.</quote> The debate question called for one nice thing. You don't have to disclose all of your background support for that thing. This is not a financial disclosure where you have to disclose everything. You can just omit the part about conservatives being gullible. It's still truthful. Because you were only asked for one nice thing.</quote> I think the issue we're having is that you believe Hillary should have to lie in order to appease easily-offended conservative snowflakes, whereas I don't think she should have lowered herself to lie and claim a vile human being has any positive qualities. Like, where does the line stop for you in terms of who is, and who isn't, worthy of that kind of respect? John Wayne Gacy? Osama Bin Laden? Adolf Hitler? I know I'm being hyperbolic, but my point is...where is your line for the point where we stop coddling deplorable (sorry to trigger you) assholes by telling them they're not ALL bad?</quote> If Hillary truly believed Trump should be in a category with those people, she should have refused to debate with him. And called out the moderator for giving bad questions, directly, the way Ron Paul used to answer most every question, with, your question is stupid.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Inviso 06/30/19 12:30:01 PM #115:	red sox 777 posted... Inviso posted... red sox 777 posted... Inviso posted... red sox 777 posted... Also if you are saying he has the ability to incept concerns in people's minds and then exploit them, like in Inception, that's really high praise and more than I'm willing to give. I'm saying that conservatives are more gullible and fearful than liberals. It's easier to tell them "this thing is bad and wants to get you!" and have them believe it. Hence why we can have a literal Muslim ban, yet the biggest holiday in the fucking country is the thing under attack. The debate question called for one nice thing. You don't have to disclose all of your background support for that thing. This is not a financial disclosure where you have to disclose everything. You can just omit the part about conservatives being gullible. It's still truthful. Because you were only asked for one nice thing. I think the issue we're having is that you believe Hillary should have to lie in order to appease easily-offended conservative snowflakes, whereas I don't think she should have lowered herself to lie and claim a vile human being has any positive qualities. Like, where does the line stop for you in terms of who is, and who isn't, worthy of that kind of respect? John Wayne Gacy? Osama Bin Laden? Adolf Hitler? I know I'm being hyperbolic, but my point is...where is your line for the point where we stop coddling deplorable (sorry to trigger you) assholes by telling them they're not ALL bad? If Hillary truly believed Trump should be in a category with those people, she should have refused to debate with him. And called out the moderator for giving bad questions, directly, the way Ron Paul used to answer most every question, with, your question is stupidm Unfortunately, if she refused to debate him, that would make her come across as weak, rather than principled. The American people are fickle-minded morons who've voted for charisma over intellect ever since debates became televised, and that's why we're in the divisive mess we're in today. I can agree with the second half. Hillary SHOULD have responded that Donald Trump is a deplorable, vile human being, with no redeeming qualities whatsoever, and that his supporters need to take a good, LONG look at themselves, and why they're willing to degrade our nation by even CONSIDERING putting Donald Trump into the Oval Office. Instead, she said something about him being a decent father. That gave off the same aura of spitefulness, without the strength that the "he speaks his mind!" crowd love so goddamn much. --- Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier. Inviso <cite>Inviso posted [p:924053561] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Inviso posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote>Also if you are saying he has the ability to incept concerns in people's minds and then exploit them, like in Inception, that's really high praise and more than I'm willing to give.</quote> I'm saying that conservatives are more gullible and fearful than liberals. It's easier to tell them "this thing is bad and wants to get you!" and have them believe it. Hence why we can have a literal Muslim ban, yet the biggest holiday in the fucking country is the thing under attack.</quote> The debate question called for one nice thing. You don't have to disclose all of your background support for that thing. This is not a financial disclosure where you have to disclose everything. You can just omit the part about conservatives being gullible. It's still truthful. Because you were only asked for one nice thing.</quote> I think the issue we're having is that you believe Hillary should have to lie in order to appease easily-offended conservative snowflakes, whereas I don't think she should have lowered herself to lie and claim a vile human being has any positive qualities. Like, where does the line stop for you in terms of who is, and who isn't, worthy of that kind of respect? John Wayne Gacy? Osama Bin Laden? Adolf Hitler? I know I'm being hyperbolic, but my point is...where is your line for the point where we stop coddling deplorable (sorry to trigger you) assholes by telling them they're not ALL bad?</quote> If Hillary truly believed Trump should be in a category with those people, she should have refused to debate with him. And called out the moderator for giving bad questions, directly, the way Ron Paul used to answer most every question, with, your question is stupidm</quote> Unfortunately, if she refused to debate him, that would make her come across as weak, rather than principled. The American people are fickle-minded morons who've voted for charisma over intellect ever since debates became televised, and that's why we're in the divisive mess we're in today. I can agree with the second half. Hillary SHOULD have responded that Donald Trump is a deplorable, vile human being, with no redeeming qualities whatsoever, and that his supporters need to take a good, LONG look at themselves, and why they're willing to degrade our nation by even CONSIDERING putting Donald Trump into the Oval Office. Instead, she said something about him being a decent father. That gave off the same aura of spitefulness, without the strength that the "he speaks his mind!" crowd love so goddamn much.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 12:47:56 PM #116:	Maybe. Trump actually refused a Fox News Republican debate during the time he was feuding with them and came off no worse for it. Overall, Hillary's big mistake was targeting people like SephG (young, well educated, high earning but not filthy rich professional) who are moderate Republicans instead of the working class. She got a lot of hemming and hawing and very few votes for her efforts with moderate Republicans. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924054202] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>Maybe. Trump actually refused a Fox News Republican debate during the time he was feuding with them and came off no worse for it. Overall, Hillary's big mistake was targeting people like SephG (young, well educated, high earning but not filthy rich professional) who are moderate Republicans instead of the working class. She got a lot of hemming and hawing and very few votes for her efforts with moderate Republicans.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 1:05:37 PM #118:	xp1337 posted... Your periodic PSA that Clinton won voters making under $50k over Trump by 11 points, which is an improvement over Obama's margin against Romney (10 points) with that same group in exit polls. Better than Obama? That's really interesting. Maybe there were fewer people making under 50k in 2016 than in 2012 given 4 years of economic improvement and inflation in the interim? That's all that jumps out to me at a glance as an explanation. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924054863] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>xp1337 posted...</cite> <quote>Your periodic PSA that Clinton won voters making under $50k over Trump by 11 points, which is an improvement over Obama's margin against Romney (10 points) with that same group in exit polls.</quote> Better than Obama? That's really interesting. Maybe there were fewer people making under 50k in 2016 than in 2012 given 4 years of economic improvement and inflation in the interim? That's all that jumps out to me at a glance as an explanation.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Xeybozn 06/30/19 1:15:51 PM #119:	red sox 777 posted... xp1337 posted... Your periodic PSA that Clinton won voters making under $50k over Trump by 11 points, which is an improvement over Obama's margin against Romney (10 points) with that same group in exit polls. Better than Obama? That's really interesting. Maybe there were fewer people making under 50k in 2016 than in 2012 given 4 years of economic improvement and inflation in the interim? That's all that jumps out to me at a glance as an explanation. If I had to guess, I'd say it's probably explained by the fact that the group of voters making less than $50k is younger and less white than the group who makes more than that. Edit: To clarify a bit, I think young and/or minority voters probably hated 2016 Trump more than they liked 2012 Obama. --- Congrats to 2019 Guru champ Advokaiser! <cite>Xeybozn posted [p:924055239] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>xp1337 posted...</cite> <quote>Your periodic PSA that Clinton won voters making under $50k over Trump by 11 points, which is an improvement over Obama's margin against Romney (10 points) with that same group in exit polls.</quote> Better than Obama? That's really interesting. Maybe there were fewer people making under 50k in 2016 than in 2012 given 4 years of economic improvement and inflation in the interim? That's all that jumps out to me at a glance as an explanation.</quote> If I had to guess, I'd say it's probably explained by the fact that the group of voters making less than $50k is younger and less white than the group who makes more than that. Edit: To clarify a bit, I think young and/or minority voters probably hated 2016 Trump more than they liked 2012 Obama.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 1:19:19 PM #120:	Xeybozn posted... red sox 777 posted... xp1337 posted... Your periodic PSA that Clinton won voters making under $50k over Trump by 11 points, which is an improvement over Obama's margin against Romney (10 points) with that same group in exit polls. Better than Obama? That's really interesting. Maybe there were fewer people making under 50k in 2016 than in 2012 given 4 years of economic improvement and inflation in the interim? That's all that jumps out to me at a glance as an explanation. If I had to guess, I'd say it's probably explained by the fact that the group of voters making less than $50k is younger and less white than the group who makes more than that. The problem with this is Trump did better than Romney with every big minority group (and also with white voters). Younger....could explain it. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924055361] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>Xeybozn posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>xp1337 posted...</cite> <quote>Your periodic PSA that Clinton won voters making under $50k over Trump by 11 points, which is an improvement over Obama's margin against Romney (10 points) with that same group in exit polls.</quote> Better than Obama? That's really interesting. Maybe there were fewer people making under 50k in 2016 than in 2012 given 4 years of economic improvement and inflation in the interim? That's all that jumps out to me at a glance as an explanation.</quote> If I had to guess, I'd say it's probably explained by the fact that the group of voters making less than $50k is younger and less white than the group who makes more than that.</quote> The problem with this is Trump did better than Romney with every big minority group (and also with white voters). Younger....could explain it.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
xp1337 06/30/19 1:21:02 PM #121:	red sox 777 posted... xp1337 posted... Your periodic PSA that Clinton won voters making under $50k over Trump by 11 points, which is an improvement over Obama's margin against Romney (10 points) with that same group in exit polls. Better than Obama? That's really interesting. Maybe there were fewer people making under 50k in 2016 than in 2012 given 4 years of economic improvement and inflation in the interim? That's all that jumps out to me at a glance as an explanation. Wait, I think the article I dragged up on that misquoted the 2012 numbers (or CNN was an outlier.) Or was making some bizarre point I can't fathom since it actually states the right number right after the graphic. 2012: Obama won under $50k - 60-38 (22 points) (41% of the vote) 2016 Clinton won under $50k - 52-41 (11 points) (36% of the vote) Both Obama and Clinton lost over $50k, though Clinton narrowed the gap significantly. Obama tended to lose more as income levels rose (with the exception of a small snapback [but still lost by 5] at $200k-$250k.) Clinton hovered at losing the various brackets from 1-4 points (overall lost the whole group by 2; her worst bracket was $50k-$100k, lost by 4; Obama lost that bracket by 6) Apologies for that. --- xp1337: Don't you wish there was a spell-checker that told you when you a word out? <cite>xp1337 posted [p:924055432] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>xp1337 posted...</cite> <quote>Your periodic PSA that Clinton won voters making under $50k over Trump by 11 points, which is an improvement over Obama's margin against Romney (10 points) with that same group in exit polls.</quote> Better than Obama? That's really interesting. Maybe there were fewer people making under 50k in 2016 than in 2012 given 4 years of economic improvement and inflation in the interim? That's all that jumps out to me at a glance as an explanation.</quote> Wait, I think the article I dragged up on that misquoted the 2012 numbers (or CNN was an outlier.) Or was making some bizarre point I can't fathom since it actually states the right number right after the graphic. 2012: Obama won under $50k - 60-38 (22 points) (41% of the vote) 2016 Clinton won under $50k - 52-41 (11 points) (36% of the vote) Both Obama and Clinton lost over $50k, though Clinton narrowed the gap significantly. Obama tended to lose more as income levels rose (with the exception of a small snapback [but still lost by 5] at $200k-$250k.) Clinton hovered at losing the various brackets from 1-4 points (overall lost the whole group by 2; her worst bracket was $50k-$100k, lost by 4; Obama lost that bracket by 6) Apologies for that.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 1:26:53 PM #122:	xp1337 posted... red sox 777 posted... xp1337 posted... Your periodic PSA that Clinton won voters making under $50k over Trump by 11 points, which is an improvement over Obama's margin against Romney (10 points) with that same group in exit polls. Better than Obama? That's really interesting. Maybe there were fewer people making under 50k in 2016 than in 2012 given 4 years of economic improvement and inflation in the interim? That's all that jumps out to me at a glance as an explanation. Wait, I think the article I dragged up on that misquoted the 2012 numbers (or CNN was an outlier.) Or was making some bizarre point I can't fathom since it actually states the right number right after the graphic. 2012: Obama won under $50k - 60-38 (22 points) (41% of the vote) 2016 Clinton won under $50k - 52-41 (11 points) (36% of the vote) Both Obama and Clinton lost over $50k, though Clinton narrowed the gap significantly. Obama tended to lose more as income levels rose (with the exception of a small snapback [but still lost by 5] at $200k-$250k.) Clinton hovered at losing the various brackets from 1-4 points (overall lost the whole group by 2; her worst bracket was $50k-$100k, lost by 4; Obama lost that bracket by 6) Apologies for that. Ah that makes a lot more sense. Yeah, going from +22 to +11 with <50k is going to be devastating. I am not sure if any Democratic candidate has ever beaten a Republican one with the over 50k crowd (inflation adjusted). Maybe FDR or Johnson. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924055669] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>xp1337 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>xp1337 posted...</cite> <quote>Your periodic PSA that Clinton won voters making under $50k over Trump by 11 points, which is an improvement over Obama's margin against Romney (10 points) with that same group in exit polls.</quote> Better than Obama? That's really interesting. Maybe there were fewer people making under 50k in 2016 than in 2012 given 4 years of economic improvement and inflation in the interim? That's all that jumps out to me at a glance as an explanation.</quote> Wait, I think the article I dragged up on that misquoted the 2012 numbers (or CNN was an outlier.) Or was making some bizarre point I can't fathom since it actually states the right number right after the graphic. 2012: Obama won under $50k - 60-38 (22 points) (41% of the vote) 2016 Clinton won under $50k - 52-41 (11 points) (36% of the vote) Both Obama and Clinton lost over $50k, though Clinton narrowed the gap significantly. Obama tended to lose more as income levels rose (with the exception of a small snapback [but still lost by 5] at $200k-$250k.) Clinton hovered at losing the various brackets from 1-4 points (overall lost the whole group by 2; her worst bracket was $50k-$100k, lost by 4; Obama lost that bracket by 6) Apologies for that.</quote> Ah that makes a lot more sense. Yeah, going from +22 to +11 with <50k is going to be devastating. I am not sure if any Democratic candidate has ever beaten a Republican one with the over 50k crowd (inflation adjusted). Maybe FDR or Johnson.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
xp1337 06/30/19 1:34:05 PM #123:	red sox 777 posted... I am not sure if any Democratic candidate has ever beaten a Republican one with the over 50k crowd (inflation adjusted). Maybe FDR or Johnson. Some quick calculator math to combine the brackets has Obama 2008 at 50.05% (relative to McCain)! Not adjusted for inflation though. And of course that's so close to the edge that any rounding issues might drop it under. --- xp1337: Don't you wish there was a spell-checker that told you when you a word out? <cite>xp1337 posted [p:924055932] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote> I am not sure if any Democratic candidate has ever beaten a Republican one with the over 50k crowd (inflation adjusted). Maybe FDR or Johnson.</quote> Some quick calculator math to combine the brackets has Obama 2008 at 50.05% (relative to McCain)! Not adjusted for inflation though. And of course that's so close to the edge that any rounding issues might drop it under.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 1:46:11 PM #124:	xp1337 posted... red sox 777 posted... I am not sure if any Democratic candidate has ever beaten a Republican one with the over 50k crowd (inflation adjusted). Maybe FDR or Johnson. Some quick calculator math to combine the brackets has Obama 2008 at 50.05% (relative to McCain)! Not adjusted for inflation though. And of course that's so close to the edge that any rounding issues might drop it under. Ah right that was a pretty big blowout. I think inflation should cover it assuming Obama did well with the 40k-50k crowd (in 2008 dollars). Probably he did since this whole realignment stuff hadn't happened yet. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924056419] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>xp1337 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote> I am not sure if any Democratic candidate has ever beaten a Republican one with the over 50k crowd (inflation adjusted). Maybe FDR or Johnson.</quote> Some quick calculator math to combine the brackets has Obama 2008 at 50.05% (relative to McCain)! Not adjusted for inflation though. And of course that's so close to the edge that any rounding issues might drop it under.</quote> Ah right that was a pretty big blowout. I think inflation should cover it assuming Obama did well with the 40k-50k crowd (in 2008 dollars). Probably he did since this whole realignment stuff hadn't happened yet.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
PerfectChaosZ 06/30/19 5:12:39 PM #125:	Trump literally called his voter base stupid and still won. Red Sox, can you say a few nice things about Kim Jong-Un. What are his virtues as a leader? <cite>PerfectChaosZ posted [p:924064299] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>Trump literally called his voter base stupid and still won. Red Sox, can you say a few nice things about Kim Jong-Un. What are his virtues as a leader?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
kevwaffles 06/30/19 5:30:45 PM #126:	Hate to be that guy, but I'm pretty sure you're talking about when he said he loved the uneducated, which isn't the same thing even if it sounds awkward as hell. --- "One toot on this whistle will take you to a far away land." -Toad, SMB3 <cite>kevwaffles posted [p:924065069] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>Hate to be that guy, but I'm pretty sure you're talking about when he said he loved the uneducated, which isn't the same thing even if it sounds awkward as hell.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 06/30/19 5:40:44 PM #127:	PerfectChaosZ posted... Trump literally called his voter base stupid and still won. Red Sox, can you say a few nice things about Kim Jong-Un. What are his virtues as a leader? Um.....can I refer you to Donald Trump quotes? I feel like there must some stuff in there that's nice about KJU.... Okay, I can come up with two on my own. He is an at least competent negotiator and has refined taste in fine cuisine. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924065490] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>PerfectChaosZ posted...</cite> <quote>Trump literally called his voter base stupid and still won. Red Sox, can you say a few nice things about Kim Jong-Un. What are his virtues as a leader?</quote> Um.....can I refer you to Donald Trump quotes? I feel like there must some stuff in there that's nice about KJU.... Okay, I can come up with two on my own. He is an at least competent negotiator and has refined taste in fine cuisine.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChaosTonyV4 06/30/19 6:10:23 PM #128:	https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/451072-audience-pushes-back-when-biden-claims-homophobic-comments-were-recently-ok Our best chance, everybody. --- Phantom Dust. "I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted [p:924066839] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/451072-audience-pushes-back-when-biden-claims-homophobic-comments-were-recently-ok Our best chance, everybody.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Paratroopa1 06/30/19 6:23:39 PM #129:	ChaosTonyV4 posted... https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/451072-audience-pushes-back-when-biden-claims-homophobic-comments-were-recently-ok Our best chance, everybody. This is a dumb thing to say also because it makes it sound like life was shitty for gays under his own vice presidency and then improved during the trump years? Why do you want to make this argument? But then also yeah can confirm seattle has been gay as fuck for years <cite>Paratroopa1 posted [p:924067485] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted...</cite> <quote>https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/451072-audience-pushes-back-when-biden-claims-homophobic-comments-were-recently-ok Our best chance, everybody.</quote> This is a dumb thing to say also because it makes it sound like life was shitty for gays under his own vice presidency and then improved during the trump years? Why do you want to make this argument? But then also yeah can confirm seattle has been gay as fuck for years</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LordoftheMorons 06/30/19 6:26:07 PM #130:	He put it in a dumb way and yeah I'm sure that wasn't true in Seattle five years ago, but the general point that until fairly recently it was considered generally acceptable in much of the country to make fun of gay mannerisms is true. --- Congrats to Advokaiser for winning the CBX Guru Challenge! <cite>LordoftheMorons posted [p:924067573] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>He put it in a dumb way and yeah I'm sure that wasn't true in Seattle five years ago, but the general point that until fairly recently it was considered generally acceptable in much of the country to make fun of gay mannerisms is true.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 06/30/19 6:26:47 PM #131:	You don't have to think too hard to find the things people like about KJU. For his supporters in NK, they like that he protects the North Korean people from the US. In their view, the military dictatorship is necessary, as if they did not have a powerful military they feel the country would cease to exist (at a high cost, as you can see from the anti-american museums they offer that show the horrors inflicted on the north korean people during war) and so the Kim family is seen as vital to their well being. For why many regular people like Trump, they don't see it as being a stupid choice. They see the path that neoliberalism has taken us over the last several decades and reject it's premise entirely - Trumps fascist appeal is simple, when given a choice between the current regime that you know will not solve your problems or improve your life meaningfully, and given no alternative vision of hope, it is more satisfying to embrace this celebrity idiot, an encapsulation of the ID of America, and enjoy the fear and hatred and burn it all down. This is why Bernie, giving a socialist vision of a different way forward, polled stronger than Hillary. Many Trump voters see it as actually incredibly stupid to think that just voting for more neoliberals will do anything to reverse the decline that has occured in American Life under the administration of neoliberals! So it's pretty easy to see where the support for people like Extha, a Bernie to Trump guy, comes from, even if you don't agree with it (and I don't!) Obviously to the typical republican voter, they are either wealthy and voting for him because he represents their class interests, or white/male/christian/traditional and perceive him as representing their interests culturally. <cite>Nrrr posted [p:924067611] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>You don't have to think too hard to find the things people like about KJU. For his supporters in NK, they like that he protects the North Korean people from the US. In their view, the military dictatorship is necessary, as if they did not have a powerful military they feel the country would cease to exist (at a high cost, as you can see from the anti-american museums they offer that show the horrors inflicted on the north korean people during war) and so the Kim family is seen as vital to their well being. For why many regular people like Trump, they don't see it as being a stupid choice. They see the path that neoliberalism has taken us over the last several decades and reject it's premise entirely - Trumps fascist appeal is simple, when given a choice between the current regime that you know will not solve your problems or improve your life meaningfully, and given no alternative vision of hope, it is more satisfying to embrace this celebrity idiot, an encapsulation of the ID of America, and enjoy the fear and hatred and burn it all down. This is why Bernie, giving a socialist vision of a different way forward, polled stronger than Hillary. Many Trump voters see it as actually incredibly stupid to think that just voting for more neoliberals will do anything to reverse the decline that has occured in American Life under the administration of neoliberals! So it's pretty easy to see where the support for people like Extha, a Bernie to Trump guy, comes from, even if you don't agree with it (and I don't!) Obviously to the typical republican voter, they are either wealthy and voting for him because he represents their class interests, or white/male/christian/traditional and perceive him as representing their interests culturally.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Nrrr 06/30/19 6:42:00 PM #132:	https://twitter.com/niktaylorde/status/1145281507449286656 For anyone thinking Kamala seems like a good option after the debate! <cite>Nrrr posted [p:924068244] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>https://twitter.com/niktaylorde/status/1145281507449286656 For anyone thinking Kamala seems like a good option after the debate!</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mr Lasastryke 07/01/19 8:18:32 AM #133:	NFUN posted... Reg posted... GuessMyUserName posted... TotallyNotMI posted... Don't waste time talking to red sox. literally saying this in a topic where people are seriously engaging sephy --- Geothermal terpsichorean ejectamenta <cite>Mr Lasastryke posted [p:924089592] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>NFUN posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Reg posted...</cite> <quote><cite>GuessMyUserName posted...</cite> <quote><cite>TotallyNotMI posted...</cite> <quote>Don't waste time talking to red sox.</quote></quote></quote></quote> literally saying this in a topic where people are seriously engaging sephy</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
TotallyNotMI 07/01/19 8:31:19 AM #134:	I mean, I can think two things at the same time. Don't waste time talking to seph. --- I'm not sure who this MI guy is but he sounds sexy. <cite>TotallyNotMI posted [p:924089834] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>I mean, I can think two things at the same time. Don't waste time talking to seph.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mr Lasastryke 07/01/19 8:41:17 AM #135:	i've already gone on a huge rant in the past about how people arguing with sephy makes topic a gazillion times worse and more toxic than me arguing with red sox ever could so i won't do that again. but yeah, it's just annoying when people in this topic gang up on me for arguing with red sox while completely ignoring the people who argue with sephy. --- Geothermal terpsichorean ejectamenta <cite>Mr Lasastryke posted [p:924090012] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>i've already gone on a huge rant in the past about how people arguing with sephy makes topic a gazillion times worse and more toxic than me arguing with red sox ever could so i won't do that again. but yeah, it's just annoying when people in this topic gang up on me for arguing with red sox while completely ignoring the people who argue with sephy.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
kevwaffles 07/01/19 8:43:10 AM #136:	He at least mostly means the shit he says, even if he dials up the asshole factor. Almost everything redsox says these days is to drag out pointless debates over insane hypotheticals for reasons only he knows. --- "One toot on this whistle will take you to a far away land." -Toad, SMB3 <cite>kevwaffles posted [p:924090048] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>He at least mostly means the shit he says, even if he dials up the asshole factor. Almost everything redsox says these days is to drag out pointless debates over insane hypotheticals for reasons only he knows.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mr Lasastryke 07/01/19 8:51:32 AM #137:	kevwaffles posted... He at least mostly means the shit he says, even if he dials up the asshole factor. that just makes it worse, if anything. "he doesn't just say he's a nazi, he actually IS a nazi! totally a person we can have a fruitful argument with!" --- Geothermal terpsichorean ejectamenta <cite>Mr Lasastryke posted [p:924090244] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>kevwaffles posted...</cite> <quote>He at least mostly means the shit he says, even if he dials up the asshole factor.</quote> that just makes it worse, if anything. "he doesn't just say he's a nazi, he actually IS a nazi! totally a person we can have a fruitful argument with!"</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 07/01/19 8:53:00 AM #138:	This topic is for discussing politics. I post about topics I find interesting. Discussion is, for lack of a better word, good. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924090279] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>This topic is for discussing politics. I post about topics I find interesting. Discussion is, for lack of a better word, good.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
kevwaffles 07/01/19 8:53:04 AM #139:	Oh good lord Edit (To Lasa not redsox, in case that wasn't abundantly clear) --- "One toot on this whistle will take you to a far away land." -Toad, SMB3 <cite>kevwaffles posted [p:924090283] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>Oh good lord Edit (To Lasa not redsox, in case that wasn't abundantly clear)</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ChaosTonyV4 07/01/19 9:18:33 AM #140:	Mr Lasastryke posted... kevwaffles posted... He at least mostly means the shit he says, even if he dials up the asshole factor. that just makes it worse, if anything. "he doesn't just say he's a nazi, he actually IS a nazi! totally a person we can have a fruitful argument with!" Lasa stop doing this --- Phantom Dust. "I'll just wait for time to prove me right again." - Vlado <cite>ChaosTonyV4 posted [p:924090931] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mr Lasastryke posted...</cite> <quote><cite>kevwaffles posted...</cite> <quote>He at least mostly means the shit he says, even if he dials up the asshole factor.</quote> that just makes it worse, if anything. "he doesn't just say he's a nazi, he actually IS a nazi! totally a person we can have a fruitful argument with!"</quote> Lasa stop doing this</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 07/01/19 9:22:05 AM #141:	I think Seph is abrasive but he is really one of the most interesting posters we have here. He represents mainstream conservatism and is basically our only poster here with views that align broadly with mainstream American conservatism. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924091002] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>I think Seph is abrasive but he is really one of the most interesting posters we have here. He represents mainstream conservatism and is basically our only poster here with views that align broadly with mainstream American conservatism.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mr Lasastryke 07/01/19 9:23:04 AM #142:	i'm not going to stop complaining about you guys's blatant double standard, no. --- Geothermal terpsichorean ejectamenta <cite>Mr Lasastryke posted [p:924091028] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>i'm not going to stop complaining about you guys's blatant double standard, no.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jakyl25 07/01/19 9:24:06 AM #143:	red sox 777 posted... I think Seph is abrasive but he is really one of the most interesting posters we have here. He represents mainstream conservatism and is basically our only poster here with views that align broadly with mainstream American conservatism. Vlado --- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DRlKR5nU8AA_v_C?format=jpg&name=large <cite>Jakyl25 posted [p:924091050] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote>I think Seph is abrasive but he is really one of the most interesting posters we have here. He represents mainstream conservatism and is basically our only poster here with views that align broadly with mainstream American conservatism.</quote> Vlado</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
HashtagSEP 07/01/19 9:24:54 AM #144:	Mr Lasastryke posted... i'm not going to stop complaining about you guys's blatant double standard, no. okay bye --- #SEP #Awesome #Excellent #Greatness #SteveNash #VitaminWater #SmellingLikeTheVault #Pigeon #Sexy #ActuallyAVeryIntelligentVelociraptor #Heel #CoolSpot #EndOfSig <cite>HashtagSEP posted [p:924091074] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mr Lasastryke posted...</cite> <quote>i'm not going to stop complaining about you guys's blatant double standard, no.</quote> okay bye</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
kevwaffles 07/01/19 9:27:12 AM #145:	Mr Lasastryke posted... i'm not going to stop complaining about you guys's blatant double standard, no. It's not gonna be a double standard no matter how much you wanna cry that it is. Edit: I say this as someone who hasn't engaged much with either of them in a long time. --- "One toot on this whistle will take you to a far away land." -Toad, SMB3 <cite>kevwaffles posted [p:924091127] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>Mr Lasastryke posted...</cite> <quote> i'm not going to stop complaining about you guys's blatant double standard, no.</quote> It's not gonna be a double standard no matter how much you wanna cry that it is. Edit: I say this as someone who hasn't engaged much with either of them in a long time.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 07/01/19 9:29:44 AM #146:	Jakyl25 posted... red sox 777 posted... I think Seph is abrasive but he is really one of the most interesting posters we have here. He represents mainstream conservatism and is basically our only poster here with views that align broadly with mainstream American conservatism. Vlado Vlado is not even American. --- September 1, 2003; November 4, 2007; September 2, 2013 Congratulations to DP Oblivion in the Guru Contest! <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:924091186] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>Jakyl25 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>red sox 777 posted...</cite> <quote>I think Seph is abrasive but he is really one of the most interesting posters we have here. He represents mainstream conservatism and is basically our only poster here with views that align broadly with mainstream American conservatism.</quote> Vlado</quote> Vlado is not even American.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mr Lasastryke 07/01/19 9:30:50 AM #147:	kevwaffles posted... It's not gonna be a double standard no matter how much you wanna cry that it is. yeah, i guess you're right. arguments with red sox are way more productive and interesting than "arguments" with sephy. --- Geothermal terpsichorean ejectamenta <cite>Mr Lasastryke posted [p:924091221] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote><cite>kevwaffles posted...</cite> <quote>It's not gonna be a double standard no matter how much you wanna cry that it is.</quote> yeah, i guess you're right. arguments with red sox are way more productive and interesting than "arguments" with sephy.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
kevwaffles 07/01/19 9:37:47 AM #148:	Other people besides you respond to red sox and don't always get shit for it. There's a reason for that. --- "One toot on this whistle will take you to a far away land." -Toad, SMB3 <cite>kevwaffles posted [p:924091390] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>Other people besides you respond to red sox and don't always get shit for it. There's a reason for that.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mr Lasastryke 07/01/19 9:39:38 AM #149:	yeah, my posts being held to higher standards than other people's is something that happens pretty often on this board for some reason --- Geothermal terpsichorean ejectamenta <cite>Mr Lasastryke posted [p:924091446] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>yeah, my posts being held to higher standards than other people's is something that happens pretty often on this board for some reason</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
kevwaffles 07/01/19 9:42:49 AM #150:	Says the man who invoked Godwin's law for no reason less than an hour ago. --- "One toot on this whistle will take you to a far away land." -Toad, SMB3 <cite>kevwaffles posted [p:924091533] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>Says the man who invoked Godwin's law for no reason less than an hour ago.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mr Lasastryke 07/01/19 9:48:29 AM #151:	why not respond to the point i was making with that post instead of complaining about the tone? for someone who claims to care so much about "productive debates," the way you're arguing right now isn't productive in the least. --- Geothermal terpsichorean ejectamenta <cite>Mr Lasastryke posted [p:924091684] in Politics C... [t:77826040]...</cite> <quote>why not respond to the point i was making with that post instead of complaining about the tone? for someone who claims to care so much about "productive debates," the way you're arguing right now isn't productive in the least.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10

Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic #228 - Orbs you glad I didn't say banana? (+) Yeah! (+)

Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic #228 - Orbs you glad I didn't say banana?