|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On September 04 2016 09:26 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 09:24 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:23 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:14 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. What exactly have I given Trump a pass on when I have excoriated Hillary for doing the same thing? I didnt say it was for the same thing. Basic reading comprehension ? If it's not for the same thing, then your point is idiotic. Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt. Oh so thats the kind of argument we have devolved to now. Very well. xDaunt with the double down.
The issue is that I've already thought through your line of questioning and you haven't. The point that you want to make is that I'm being unfairly hard on Hillary while giving Trump a free pass. The problem that you're going to run into is one of apples and oranges. The things that I'm criticizing Hillary for are generally unique to Hillary (this FBI interview thing being one good example).
EDIT: And of course, the other problem that you're going to run into is that you clearly don't know what to do with my silence on various issues. Here's a hint: stay away from Mr. Strawman.
|
Hillary is a decade long high profile politician, of course a lot of her issues compared to Trump will seem unique in the sense that they don't apply to Trump, because he has literally not a single day of experience as a politician.
I don't think Hillary is unique with her problems as far as other politicians are concerned.
|
A Donald Trump surrogate who spoke at the Republican National Convention admitted he "overstated several details" of his biography after a CNN segment fact-checked claims made by the pastor.
In a pre-recorded interview with Victor Blackwell on "New Day Weekend," Pastor Mark Burns was asked about his online bio, which included claims that he graduated from North Greenville University, that he served in the Army Reserves, and was a member of Kappa Alpha Psi, a historically African-American fraternity.
In Burns' biography, it said the pastor, who has played a key role in the Republican nominee's outreach to African-Americans, earned a Bachelor of Science degree from North Greenville University. Blackwell asked if Burns attended the university, which he said he did attend, but did not graduate from.
The university told CNN Burns was enrolled for one semester at the university.
The interview also revealed that Burns served in the South Carolina National Reserves, and was not a member of Kappa Alpha Psi.
"As a young man starting my church in Greenville, South Carolina, I overstated several details of my biography because I was worried wouldn’t be taken seriously as a new pastor," Burns said in a statement Friday, pre-butting the report. "This was wrong, I wasn’t truthful then and I have to take full responsibility for my actions. Since that time I should have taken steps to correct any misrepresentations of my background. We all make mistakes, and I hope that the measure of my character and the quality of my works speak for what kind of person I am."
"I do also want to set the record straight about why this attack is happening — because I am a black man supporting Donald Trump for President," he continued. "For too long, African-American votes have been taken for granted by Democratic politicians, and enough is enough Instead, I’m going to tell people that there is another option — an option that represents a position vision that will unify our country. That’s why I have and will continue to tirelessly support Mr. Trump."
Burns recently came under fire after posting a cartoon on Twitter of Hillary Clinton in blackface.
Source
|
On September 04 2016 09:31 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 09:26 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:24 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:23 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:14 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. What exactly have I given Trump a pass on when I have excoriated Hillary for doing the same thing? I didnt say it was for the same thing. Basic reading comprehension ? If it's not for the same thing, then your point is idiotic. Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt. Oh so thats the kind of argument we have devolved to now. Very well. xDaunt with the double down. The issue is that I've already thought through your line of questioning and you haven't. The point that you want to make is that I'm being unfairly hard on Hillary while giving Trump a free pass. The problem that you're going to run into is one of apples and oranges. The things that I'm criticizing Hillary for are generally unique to Hillary (this FBI interview thing being one good example). EDIT: And of course, the other problem that you're going to run into is that you clearly don't know what to do with my silence on various issues. Here's a hint: stay away from Mr. Strawman.
I was never going to suggest that you would give Trump a free pass. Nor was that going to be line of questioning. But feel free to assume things
The bottom line of bringing up the email thing yet again is that the issue would have been either of competence of honesty. Both of which Trump is significantly worse of on in terms of the issues that both face. Im not going to list them for you, you know what they are.
Feel free to take your own advice on Mr. Strawman.
|
On September 04 2016 09:38 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 09:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:26 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:24 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:23 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:14 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. What exactly have I given Trump a pass on when I have excoriated Hillary for doing the same thing? I didnt say it was for the same thing. Basic reading comprehension ? If it's not for the same thing, then your point is idiotic. Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt. Oh so thats the kind of argument we have devolved to now. Very well. xDaunt with the double down. The issue is that I've already thought through your line of questioning and you haven't. The point that you want to make is that I'm being unfairly hard on Hillary while giving Trump a free pass. The problem that you're going to run into is one of apples and oranges. The things that I'm criticizing Hillary for are generally unique to Hillary (this FBI interview thing being one good example). EDIT: And of course, the other problem that you're going to run into is that you clearly don't know what to do with my silence on various issues. Here's a hint: stay away from Mr. Strawman. I was never going to suggest that you would give Trump a free pass. Nor was that going to be line of questioning. But feel free to assume things
Oh really? Let me remind you of what your original post was:
On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact.
Looks pretty clear to me what you were after.
The bottom line of bringing up the email thing yet again is that the issue would have been either of competence of honesty. Both of which Trump is significantly worse of on in terms of the issues that both face. Im not going to list them for you, you know what they are.
Feel free to take your own advice on Mr. Strawman.
And here it is yet again.
Looks like I hit the nail squarely on the head.
|
This all being as it may, one does have to ask the question of how important it is that the Secretary of State (or President) has a detailed understanding of the classification process, as opposed to relying on other people to provide that information when required.
Everyone's criticism of Clinton's replies in that transcript have been very vague ("just look at it! it's so bad!") or silly ("she doesn't remember a training course from X years ago") but that's the only point which I can see holding any water at all.
|
This is a pretty spot-on piece on the coverage Clinton and Trump get in the media, on false equivalences and on the focus on politics instead of policy:
How the Media Undermine American Democracy
Twenty years ago I published a book called Breaking the News: How the Media Undermine American Democracy. The Atlantic ran an excerpt as a cover story, called “Why Americans Hate the Media.”
The main argument was that habits of mind within the media were making citizens and voters even more fatalistic and jaded about public affairs than they would otherwise be—even more willing to assume that all public figures were fools and crooks, even less willing to be involved in public affairs, and unfortunately for the media even less interested in following news at all. These mental habits of the media included an over-emphasis on strife and conflict, a fascination with the mechanics or “game” of politics rather than the real-world consequences, and a self-protective instinct to conceal limited knowledge of a particular subject (a new budget proposal, an international spat) by talking about the politics of these questions, and by presenting disagreements in a he-said/she-said, “plenty of blame on all sides” fashion now known as “false equivalence.”
Through the rise of Donald Trump, I’ve been watching to see how these patterns of mind might reassert themselves, particularly in the form of normalizing Trump.
Source
|
On September 04 2016 06:07 puerk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 00:53 Thieving Magpie wrote:On September 03 2016 23:57 puerk wrote:On September 03 2016 23:33 Yoav wrote:On September 03 2016 15:23 FiWiFaKi wrote:On September 03 2016 15:15 Toadesstern wrote:
try selling that to your people as a mexican politician without people going crazy with how much they hate the man Tariffs have always existed, they have always been the norm. Well, yes, but every major step forward in the eradication of the things was a step forward for the economy of the region doing so, starting with getting trolls out from under bridges and moving through keeping every petty feudal lord from exercising his ability to shake down traders for money and into the gradual demolition of mercantilist schemes. Tariffs are utterly foolish, especially in a world where increasing them ultimately puts your entire economy at a competitive disadvantage. But I know, we all have to talk about stagnating wages and not realize that in the last 40 years our quality of life for equivalent purchasing power has gone way up, thanks to cheap imports. Yeah, it would be great if wages were going up, and yes, we should probably raise income taxes at the higher end to smooth the curve, but you guys have been alive recently. Imagine if all the crap we get for super cheap from China was still produced in unionized US factories. We'd be poor as shit, even imagining we still made as much money (which we wouldn't, because cheap goods and services are a direct economic benefit to US companies and workers). it is not that simple. not partaking in the race to the bottom is not necessarily going to hurt all of the population. especially the stability and existence of a broad middle class of people with high and rising living standard and a feeling of economic participation, were not happening because of free trade but because unionized labor prohibited the race to the bottom. If you treat your workers like shit to compete with china, your workers can only buy cheap shit from china and your company runs out of work. German car makership is ridiculous at face value: the price for a new car that i would find desireable is so high compared to anything that happens in sectors with full devotion to the free trade race to the bottom (like smartphones), and yet it works out, because it strengthens communities, because it gives people a purpose, workers at the auto makers are proud of them and their work, not only because they believe in the product, but also because they get long term job security and good pay, which actually makes them able to buy them aswell. The real issue why this model will stop working, is not that countries have to give up competitive disadvantages like unionization to please the gods of free market™ but because labor demand is quickly collapsing under the pressure of automation replacing every last bastion of human endevour. Quicker or more determined pacing to the bottom will not aliviate the comming problem: people are useless to the economy as suppliers, and only useful as demand. Free trade even though a good idea in principle also will not adress that there will be no more place at the table for the people who are not owners of the means of production. The only way to solve this issue (if you consider fellow humans worth of living, thich not all of you do ofc. but i as a tiny cog in a machine working to replace other people with automation (document generation for banks) with software, i hold no illusions that i am fully replaceable as well, and i somehow cling to living) is massive redistribution of the gains of this comming new economy. "Massive redistribution of gains" => economics. How does stuff from one place, get transferred to another place, with both sides being happy. Free markets are what happens when one person has stuff, and other people want stuff, so they redistribute among themselves. This "race to the bottom" crap never makes sense to me--because "demand" only happens so long as there is a customer base able to buy. As more people lose wages, less stuff gets bought, less stuff gets sold, we move back to a more agrarian lifestyle. Automation becomes less valuable, and companies dissolve with lack of demand. Once things re-stabilize again, then we start back from scratch. Companies reform, automation takes precedence, people become sources of demand once again, etc... There is no "race to the bottom" where things stagnate down there--that's not how resource exchanges work. At some point, communities will find it easier to just make goods for themselves than afford goods from outside. You be okay that you don't have smart phones and go back to the old ways of life. Things eventually stabilize. The only "race to the bottom" is if the end goal is for everyone to have an upper class lifestyle instead of there being no end goal, and that the economy is just something that happens. If i have nothing of value i can not trade. There is no fundamental reason that everyone should alwas have some tradeable value. Your claim that "both sides" are "happy" with deals in our current economy is not only laughable but also insulting: people are forced to do terrible shit to survive. Nobody is selling their kidneys in india because it makes them "happy". The choice between survival and death is a faux one due to our inherent survival instinct. The second issue i take with your post is that you switch from individual views to societal to community level as it suits your argument, when a conistent scheme would fall apart: maybe societies can adjust to the shock if described on a community level, but those communities do not exist, people live in really really big cities, that are unable to dissolve themselfs into peaceful coexisting sustainance farmers in the wilderness. Current people, who do wage labor, who will be no longer in demand, who have nothing to "trade" to someone able to sell them food, provide them with housing and energy (cooking/heating), will suffer. Current people who are deemed by the owners of means of productions to hold no value (who are unemployable), actually already face those issues. Homeless people for instance suffer and die all the time. You saying adding millions and millions of people to the ranks who have no marketable value, will be fine, when current events already tell you the opposite is naive at best and dangerous at worst. I know it is on some level selfish of me to consider it a problem that i and all the people like me will inevetibly become obsolete. I like living, i like to have a warm dry flat, plenty of food, friends, social events and entertainment. When i become obsolete in form of labor, i can not become a sustainance farmer as you propose as i do not own land. I also am not prone to violence to obtain land and defend land against other people with the same urge for survival. In a time when everyone needs his own plot of land to sustainance farm in little communities as you propose, the demand for land will outstrip the supply thousandfold. That will inevetible cause violence, disruption and a lot of suffering. What you portrait as smooth downsizing is nothing less than social darwinism: some will survive and maybe eventually strife, but it will be payed and paved with millions of "losers" falling by the wayside.
Creatures adapt to the environment or die out. That is how all things work. Pretending that there is value in maintaining your lifestyle just because you don't see the person you currently are or the society you're currently in being willing to adapt to the world around them is naive.
The truth is that its shitty. The world is shitty. And people on the first world will not always be living in the first world. Countries can be the top of the food chain one century and be starving beggars the next. You just have to look at Africa and the Middle East to see how far down the shit-hole a multi-continent world power can get.
How "smooth" the downsizing is a matter of scale. But yes, people will adapt to the realities of the time no matter what that reality is. Failure to adapt means you're shit out of luck. The world was not made so you can guarantee what the future will be. Change happens all the time--even if the change is something you find shitty.
Here is the truth--no company will sell something that no one is buying. If enough people become poor by automation--companies stop existing. Period. End of discussion. And unless you think that means the human race becomes extinct--it simply means humanity will start over again.
|
On September 04 2016 09:49 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 09:38 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:26 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:24 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:23 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:14 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. What exactly have I given Trump a pass on when I have excoriated Hillary for doing the same thing? I didnt say it was for the same thing. Basic reading comprehension ? If it's not for the same thing, then your point is idiotic. Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt. Oh so thats the kind of argument we have devolved to now. Very well. xDaunt with the double down. The issue is that I've already thought through your line of questioning and you haven't. The point that you want to make is that I'm being unfairly hard on Hillary while giving Trump a free pass. The problem that you're going to run into is one of apples and oranges. The things that I'm criticizing Hillary for are generally unique to Hillary (this FBI interview thing being one good example). EDIT: And of course, the other problem that you're going to run into is that you clearly don't know what to do with my silence on various issues. Here's a hint: stay away from Mr. Strawman. I was never going to suggest that you would give Trump a free pass. Nor was that going to be line of questioning. But feel free to assume things Oh really? Let me remind you of what your original post was: Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. Looks pretty clear to me what you were after. Show nested quote +The bottom line of bringing up the email thing yet again is that the issue would have been either of competence of honesty. Both of which Trump is significantly worse of on in terms of the issues that both face. Im not going to list them for you, you know what they are.
Feel free to take your own advice on Mr. Strawman. And here it is yet again. Looks like I hit the nail squarely on the head.
I dont know what you are on about tbh. The context of the post is Hillary's emails and the FBI release. Which is you suggesting that it is evidence of incompetence or dishonesty.
Its not an apples to oranges comparison because the conclusion that both sides draw from the issues are roughly the same. Yet you will willfully ignore clear evidence on the Trump side and latch onto vague shit on the other.
You are being deliberately obtuse for god knows what reason.
But I guess patting yourself on the back for nothing is another thing Trump seems to have started influencing his supporters into. You really have lost the plot pretty bad this past few months. Im out.
|
On September 04 2016 11:33 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 09:49 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:38 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:26 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:24 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:23 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:14 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. What exactly have I given Trump a pass on when I have excoriated Hillary for doing the same thing? I didnt say it was for the same thing. Basic reading comprehension ? If it's not for the same thing, then your point is idiotic. Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt. Oh so thats the kind of argument we have devolved to now. Very well. xDaunt with the double down. The issue is that I've already thought through your line of questioning and you haven't. The point that you want to make is that I'm being unfairly hard on Hillary while giving Trump a free pass. The problem that you're going to run into is one of apples and oranges. The things that I'm criticizing Hillary for are generally unique to Hillary (this FBI interview thing being one good example). EDIT: And of course, the other problem that you're going to run into is that you clearly don't know what to do with my silence on various issues. Here's a hint: stay away from Mr. Strawman. I was never going to suggest that you would give Trump a free pass. Nor was that going to be line of questioning. But feel free to assume things Oh really? Let me remind you of what your original post was: On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. Looks pretty clear to me what you were after. The bottom line of bringing up the email thing yet again is that the issue would have been either of competence of honesty. Both of which Trump is significantly worse of on in terms of the issues that both face. Im not going to list them for you, you know what they are.
Feel free to take your own advice on Mr. Strawman. And here it is yet again. Looks like I hit the nail squarely on the head. I dont know what you are on about tbh. The context of the post is Hillary's emails and the FBI release. Which is you suggesting that it is evidence of incompetence or dishonesty. Its not an apples to oranges comparison because the conclusion that both sides draw from the issues are roughly the same. Yet you will willfully ignore clear evidence on the Trump side and latch onto vague shit on the other. You are being deliberately obtuse for god knows what reason. But I guess patting yourself on the back for nothing is another thing Trump seems to have started influencing his supporters into. You really have lost the plot pretty bad this past few months. Im out.
Yes, I have no doubt that you don't know what's going on. Your desperate flailing to get me to throw Trump under the bus over the past couple of pages makes that obvious enough. However, I'm feeling charitable right now, so I'm going to tell you what you should have asked me two pages ago:
"xDaunt, don't you think that Trump is also incompetent and a liar?"
Hopefully a few more posters will be stricken by the surgical genius of this very basic question.
Anyway, give it a try, Rebs. Watch what happens when you ask it.
|
On September 04 2016 11:33 Rebs wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 09:49 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:38 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:26 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:24 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:23 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:14 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. What exactly have I given Trump a pass on when I have excoriated Hillary for doing the same thing? I didnt say it was for the same thing. Basic reading comprehension ? If it's not for the same thing, then your point is idiotic. Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt. Oh so thats the kind of argument we have devolved to now. Very well. xDaunt with the double down. The issue is that I've already thought through your line of questioning and you haven't. The point that you want to make is that I'm being unfairly hard on Hillary while giving Trump a free pass. The problem that you're going to run into is one of apples and oranges. The things that I'm criticizing Hillary for are generally unique to Hillary (this FBI interview thing being one good example). EDIT: And of course, the other problem that you're going to run into is that you clearly don't know what to do with my silence on various issues. Here's a hint: stay away from Mr. Strawman. I was never going to suggest that you would give Trump a free pass. Nor was that going to be line of questioning. But feel free to assume things Oh really? Let me remind you of what your original post was: On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. Looks pretty clear to me what you were after. The bottom line of bringing up the email thing yet again is that the issue would have been either of competence of honesty. Both of which Trump is significantly worse of on in terms of the issues that both face. Im not going to list them for you, you know what they are.
Feel free to take your own advice on Mr. Strawman. And here it is yet again. Looks like I hit the nail squarely on the head. I dont know what you are on about tbh. The context of the post is Hillary's emails and the FBI release. Which is you suggesting that it is evidence of incompetence or dishonesty. Its not an apples to oranges comparison because the conclusion that both sides draw from the issues are roughly the same. Yet you will willfully ignore clear evidence on the Trump side and latch onto vague shit on the other. You are being deliberately obtuse for god knows what reason. But I guess patting yourself on the back for nothing is another thing Trump seems to have started influencing his supporters into. You really have lost the plot pretty bad this past few months. Im out.
I am struck by how much you and others invest into this double standard attack. This isn't even harsh criticism of Hillary she hasn't already invited by behavior. No reason to assert without evidence that the rest of us must be twisting ourselves into pretzels for the sake of Trump because here comes bad news for Hillary. Sometimes she just has to take one on the chin.
Any dinosaurs in the thread remembering mid 1990s Clinton saying she couldn't recall ...
+ Show Spoiler [just a parody from nineties] +
|
On September 04 2016 12:14 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 11:33 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:49 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:38 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:26 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:24 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:23 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:14 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:
[quote]
OK.
you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. What exactly have I given Trump a pass on when I have excoriated Hillary for doing the same thing? I didnt say it was for the same thing. Basic reading comprehension ? If it's not for the same thing, then your point is idiotic. Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt. Oh so thats the kind of argument we have devolved to now. Very well. xDaunt with the double down. The issue is that I've already thought through your line of questioning and you haven't. The point that you want to make is that I'm being unfairly hard on Hillary while giving Trump a free pass. The problem that you're going to run into is one of apples and oranges. The things that I'm criticizing Hillary for are generally unique to Hillary (this FBI interview thing being one good example). EDIT: And of course, the other problem that you're going to run into is that you clearly don't know what to do with my silence on various issues. Here's a hint: stay away from Mr. Strawman. I was never going to suggest that you would give Trump a free pass. Nor was that going to be line of questioning. But feel free to assume things Oh really? Let me remind you of what your original post was: On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. Looks pretty clear to me what you were after. The bottom line of bringing up the email thing yet again is that the issue would have been either of competence of honesty. Both of which Trump is significantly worse of on in terms of the issues that both face. Im not going to list them for you, you know what they are.
Feel free to take your own advice on Mr. Strawman. And here it is yet again. Looks like I hit the nail squarely on the head. I dont know what you are on about tbh. The context of the post is Hillary's emails and the FBI release. Which is you suggesting that it is evidence of incompetence or dishonesty. Its not an apples to oranges comparison because the conclusion that both sides draw from the issues are roughly the same. Yet you will willfully ignore clear evidence on the Trump side and latch onto vague shit on the other. You are being deliberately obtuse for god knows what reason. But I guess patting yourself on the back for nothing is another thing Trump seems to have started influencing his supporters into. You really have lost the plot pretty bad this past few months. Im out. Yes, I have no doubt that you don't know what's going on. Your desperate flailing to get me to throw Trump under the bus over the past couple of pages makes that obvious enough. However, I'm feeling charitable right now, so I'm going to tell you what you should have asked me two pages ago: "xDaunt, don't you think that Trump is also incompetent and a liar?" Hopefully a few more posters will be stricken by the surgical genius of this very basic question. Anyway, give it a try, Rebs. Watch what happens when you ask it.
Does the fact that nobody has asked you that question say something about the posters in this thread or about you I wonder.
|
The secretary of state is the nations lead diplomat and fifth in line for the throne Ofc she she know how to handle the nations security and be able to do it as a basic aspect of her job.
|
On September 04 2016 15:11 nothingmuch wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 12:14 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 11:33 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:49 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:38 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:26 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:24 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:23 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:14 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
What exactly have I given Trump a pass on when I have excoriated Hillary for doing the same thing? I didnt say it was for the same thing. Basic reading comprehension ? If it's not for the same thing, then your point is idiotic. Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt. Oh so thats the kind of argument we have devolved to now. Very well. xDaunt with the double down. The issue is that I've already thought through your line of questioning and you haven't. The point that you want to make is that I'm being unfairly hard on Hillary while giving Trump a free pass. The problem that you're going to run into is one of apples and oranges. The things that I'm criticizing Hillary for are generally unique to Hillary (this FBI interview thing being one good example). EDIT: And of course, the other problem that you're going to run into is that you clearly don't know what to do with my silence on various issues. Here's a hint: stay away from Mr. Strawman. I was never going to suggest that you would give Trump a free pass. Nor was that going to be line of questioning. But feel free to assume things Oh really? Let me remind you of what your original post was: On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. Looks pretty clear to me what you were after. The bottom line of bringing up the email thing yet again is that the issue would have been either of competence of honesty. Both of which Trump is significantly worse of on in terms of the issues that both face. Im not going to list them for you, you know what they are.
Feel free to take your own advice on Mr. Strawman. And here it is yet again. Looks like I hit the nail squarely on the head. I dont know what you are on about tbh. The context of the post is Hillary's emails and the FBI release. Which is you suggesting that it is evidence of incompetence or dishonesty. Its not an apples to oranges comparison because the conclusion that both sides draw from the issues are roughly the same. Yet you will willfully ignore clear evidence on the Trump side and latch onto vague shit on the other. You are being deliberately obtuse for god knows what reason. But I guess patting yourself on the back for nothing is another thing Trump seems to have started influencing his supporters into. You really have lost the plot pretty bad this past few months. Im out. Yes, I have no doubt that you don't know what's going on. Your desperate flailing to get me to throw Trump under the bus over the past couple of pages makes that obvious enough. However, I'm feeling charitable right now, so I'm going to tell you what you should have asked me two pages ago: "xDaunt, don't you think that Trump is also incompetent and a liar?" Hopefully a few more posters will be stricken by the surgical genius of this very basic question. Anyway, give it a try, Rebs. Watch what happens when you ask it. Does the fact that nobody has asked you that question say something about the posters in this thread or about you I wonder.
Oh for crying out loud. Just ask xDaunt and you will get your answer. You don't have to go through magical conspiracy thinking, psychoanalyzing his previous posts to determine what his "obvious" stance is on Trump, or why people did or did not ask him certain questions.
There could be all sorts of reasons why people didn't ask, foremost among them that they simply don't care that much about xDaunt's personal beliefs on Trump. This is the US politics megathread, not "the thread where we interrogate xDaunt on his political views, and if we aren't asking that definitely implies that his views are well known and therefore we won't follow up on them"
|
On September 04 2016 15:11 nothingmuch wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 12:14 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 11:33 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:49 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:38 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:26 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:24 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:23 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:14 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
What exactly have I given Trump a pass on when I have excoriated Hillary for doing the same thing? I didnt say it was for the same thing. Basic reading comprehension ? If it's not for the same thing, then your point is idiotic. Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt. Oh so thats the kind of argument we have devolved to now. Very well. xDaunt with the double down. The issue is that I've already thought through your line of questioning and you haven't. The point that you want to make is that I'm being unfairly hard on Hillary while giving Trump a free pass. The problem that you're going to run into is one of apples and oranges. The things that I'm criticizing Hillary for are generally unique to Hillary (this FBI interview thing being one good example). EDIT: And of course, the other problem that you're going to run into is that you clearly don't know what to do with my silence on various issues. Here's a hint: stay away from Mr. Strawman. I was never going to suggest that you would give Trump a free pass. Nor was that going to be line of questioning. But feel free to assume things Oh really? Let me remind you of what your original post was: On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. Looks pretty clear to me what you were after. The bottom line of bringing up the email thing yet again is that the issue would have been either of competence of honesty. Both of which Trump is significantly worse of on in terms of the issues that both face. Im not going to list them for you, you know what they are.
Feel free to take your own advice on Mr. Strawman. And here it is yet again. Looks like I hit the nail squarely on the head. I dont know what you are on about tbh. The context of the post is Hillary's emails and the FBI release. Which is you suggesting that it is evidence of incompetence or dishonesty. Its not an apples to oranges comparison because the conclusion that both sides draw from the issues are roughly the same. Yet you will willfully ignore clear evidence on the Trump side and latch onto vague shit on the other. You are being deliberately obtuse for god knows what reason. But I guess patting yourself on the back for nothing is another thing Trump seems to have started influencing his supporters into. You really have lost the plot pretty bad this past few months. Im out. Yes, I have no doubt that you don't know what's going on. Your desperate flailing to get me to throw Trump under the bus over the past couple of pages makes that obvious enough. However, I'm feeling charitable right now, so I'm going to tell you what you should have asked me two pages ago: "xDaunt, don't you think that Trump is also incompetent and a liar?" Hopefully a few more posters will be stricken by the surgical genius of this very basic question. Anyway, give it a try, Rebs. Watch what happens when you ask it. Does the fact that nobody has asked you that question say something about the posters in this thread or about you I wonder.
That should be obvious; it says something about them. People are so eager to pick a fight with me that it never occurs to them that they should just ask me what's really on their mind instead of clumsily trying pin some false perception of what I think on me. This is why this thread devolves into a dance of the retards from time to time. Now, it certainly doesn't help that I enjoy screwing with these folks, but they're the ones who invite it.
|
On September 04 2016 15:33 radscorpion9 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 15:11 nothingmuch wrote:On September 04 2016 12:14 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 11:33 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:49 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:38 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:26 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:24 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:23 Rebs wrote:
[quote]
I didnt say it was for the same thing. Basic reading comprehension ? If it's not for the same thing, then your point is idiotic. Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt. Oh so thats the kind of argument we have devolved to now. Very well. xDaunt with the double down. The issue is that I've already thought through your line of questioning and you haven't. The point that you want to make is that I'm being unfairly hard on Hillary while giving Trump a free pass. The problem that you're going to run into is one of apples and oranges. The things that I'm criticizing Hillary for are generally unique to Hillary (this FBI interview thing being one good example). EDIT: And of course, the other problem that you're going to run into is that you clearly don't know what to do with my silence on various issues. Here's a hint: stay away from Mr. Strawman. I was never going to suggest that you would give Trump a free pass. Nor was that going to be line of questioning. But feel free to assume things Oh really? Let me remind you of what your original post was: On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. Looks pretty clear to me what you were after. The bottom line of bringing up the email thing yet again is that the issue would have been either of competence of honesty. Both of which Trump is significantly worse of on in terms of the issues that both face. Im not going to list them for you, you know what they are.
Feel free to take your own advice on Mr. Strawman. And here it is yet again. Looks like I hit the nail squarely on the head. I dont know what you are on about tbh. The context of the post is Hillary's emails and the FBI release. Which is you suggesting that it is evidence of incompetence or dishonesty. Its not an apples to oranges comparison because the conclusion that both sides draw from the issues are roughly the same. Yet you will willfully ignore clear evidence on the Trump side and latch onto vague shit on the other. You are being deliberately obtuse for god knows what reason. But I guess patting yourself on the back for nothing is another thing Trump seems to have started influencing his supporters into. You really have lost the plot pretty bad this past few months. Im out. Yes, I have no doubt that you don't know what's going on. Your desperate flailing to get me to throw Trump under the bus over the past couple of pages makes that obvious enough. However, I'm feeling charitable right now, so I'm going to tell you what you should have asked me two pages ago: "xDaunt, don't you think that Trump is also incompetent and a liar?" Hopefully a few more posters will be stricken by the surgical genius of this very basic question. Anyway, give it a try, Rebs. Watch what happens when you ask it. Does the fact that nobody has asked you that question say something about the posters in this thread or about you I wonder. Oh for crying out loud. Just ask xDaunt and you will get your answer. You don't have to go through magical conspiracy thinking, psychoanalyzing his previous posts to determine what his "obvious" stance is on Trump, or why people did or did not ask him certain questions. There could be all sorts of reasons why people didn't ask, foremost among them that they simply don't care that much about xDaunt's personal beliefs on Trump. This is the US politics megathread, not "the thread where we interrogate xDaunt on his political views, and if we aren't asking that definitely implies that his views are well known and therefore we won't follow up on them"
I think you're missing the point here- at least in my case the actual answer (what he thinks about Trump) is way less interesting than how he got to his opinion. I'm afraid that whenever you're talking about a person, or a persons opinion the way that persons mind works will be of great significance.
I'm genuinely curious what Xdaunt thinks how he is perceived in this discussion.
|
On September 04 2016 15:54 nothingmuch wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 15:33 radscorpion9 wrote:On September 04 2016 15:11 nothingmuch wrote:On September 04 2016 12:14 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 11:33 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:49 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:38 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:31 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 09:26 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 09:24 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
If it's not for the same thing, then your point is idiotic. Excuse me for giving you the benefit of the doubt. Oh so thats the kind of argument we have devolved to now. Very well. xDaunt with the double down. The issue is that I've already thought through your line of questioning and you haven't. The point that you want to make is that I'm being unfairly hard on Hillary while giving Trump a free pass. The problem that you're going to run into is one of apples and oranges. The things that I'm criticizing Hillary for are generally unique to Hillary (this FBI interview thing being one good example). EDIT: And of course, the other problem that you're going to run into is that you clearly don't know what to do with my silence on various issues. Here's a hint: stay away from Mr. Strawman. I was never going to suggest that you would give Trump a free pass. Nor was that going to be line of questioning. But feel free to assume things Oh really? Let me remind you of what your original post was: On September 04 2016 09:04 Rebs wrote:On September 04 2016 08:59 xDaunt wrote:On September 04 2016 08:56 IgnE wrote:
you cant defend trump for exercising his legal rights while excoriating hillary for exercising hers I'm not criticizing her exercise of a right. I'm just pointing out the obvious problems with the answers that she gave. OK. you cant ignore the obvious problems with Trumps refusal to do certain things and excoriate Hillary for hers. Especially when the nature of the action is worlds apart in terms of the impact. Looks pretty clear to me what you were after. The bottom line of bringing up the email thing yet again is that the issue would have been either of competence of honesty. Both of which Trump is significantly worse of on in terms of the issues that both face. Im not going to list them for you, you know what they are.
Feel free to take your own advice on Mr. Strawman. And here it is yet again. Looks like I hit the nail squarely on the head. I dont know what you are on about tbh. The context of the post is Hillary's emails and the FBI release. Which is you suggesting that it is evidence of incompetence or dishonesty. Its not an apples to oranges comparison because the conclusion that both sides draw from the issues are roughly the same. Yet you will willfully ignore clear evidence on the Trump side and latch onto vague shit on the other. You are being deliberately obtuse for god knows what reason. But I guess patting yourself on the back for nothing is another thing Trump seems to have started influencing his supporters into. You really have lost the plot pretty bad this past few months. Im out. Yes, I have no doubt that you don't know what's going on. Your desperate flailing to get me to throw Trump under the bus over the past couple of pages makes that obvious enough. However, I'm feeling charitable right now, so I'm going to tell you what you should have asked me two pages ago: "xDaunt, don't you think that Trump is also incompetent and a liar?" Hopefully a few more posters will be stricken by the surgical genius of this very basic question. Anyway, give it a try, Rebs. Watch what happens when you ask it. Does the fact that nobody has asked you that question say something about the posters in this thread or about you I wonder. Oh for crying out loud. Just ask xDaunt and you will get your answer. You don't have to go through magical conspiracy thinking, psychoanalyzing his previous posts to determine what his "obvious" stance is on Trump, or why people did or did not ask him certain questions. There could be all sorts of reasons why people didn't ask, foremost among them that they simply don't care that much about xDaunt's personal beliefs on Trump. This is the US politics megathread, not "the thread where we interrogate xDaunt on his political views, and if we aren't asking that definitely implies that his views are well known and therefore we won't follow up on them" I think you're missing the point here- at least in my case the actual answer (what he thinks about Trump) is way less interesting than how he got to his opinion. I'm afraid that whenever you're talking about a person, or a persons opinion the way that persons mind works will be of great significance. I'm genuinely curious what Xdaunt thinks how he is perceived in this discussion.
The proper question to ask is how I think I'm perceived by whom.
EDIT: I'll send you a PM.
|
Canada11398 Posts
Well I'll bite.
xDaunt, do you think that Trump is also incompetent and a liar?
|
On September 04 2016 07:36 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2016 07:30 GreenHorizons wrote:
This is what I'm talking about when I say Clinton is using rank ignorance/incompetence as a legal shield.
It's gonna be fun when the attack ads start rolling out.
I feel disappointed that people here on TL pay any attention to attack ads, and not only that, seem to revel in the concept of them. No matter who is being attacked.
|
There is some dishonesty in asking the question to be framed in terms of 'do you think that Trump is also incompetent and a liar' when Rebs has clearly been arguing that he's worse on both counts. It artificially creates an equivalency in a place where Clinton supporters (or hell, even me) think there is none.
You could answer unequivocally 'Yes' to the question you want us to ask you and still completely disagree with Rebs on the initial point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
