|
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 06 2017 04:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 04:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:56 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:34 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:22 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 02:04 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 01:57 xDaunt wrote:
I don't understand all of the handwringing going on here over the questions that I posed about illegal immigration. I gave y'all a very clear opportunity to acknowledge that it's a bad thing. I put it right on the tee, and y'all still wouldn't take it. Even I had the good sense to denounce Nazism while acknowledging that they have a right to protest. So what exactly is a reasonable person supposed to take from this refusal to acknowledge that illegal immigration is bad? And how about putting this refusal in the context of Democrats obstructing immigration enforcement if not outright encouraging it?
There's nothing inherently wrong with advocating for an open, legal immigration policy. However, where the Left has jumped the shark is in their dogged refusal to acknowledge that illegal immigration is a problem and a bad thing. Almost every poster agreed with you that it was illegal and bad for everyone. I didn't see anyone here saying it was great. What are you trying to do here? Is this gaslighting for stupid people? Who agreed with me? Just take a look at the shit from here going on forward. I went out of my way to create some common ground, and I get shit like this in response. You should consider these types of responses a reflection on your abject failure to build common ground. Look within my son. No, and to borrow language from zlefin, this very clearly is a function of the lack of soundness in the leftist position on immigration. Y'all are just as vulnerable on immigration as the right is on healthcare. Once again, look within. Extend people the good faith that you demand we keep extending you. I responded to your post with “I will also agree that crime is bad and all education should be the best.” What part of that was not agreeing with you? I showed the good faith by asking the fucking question in the simplest form possible rather than presuming the answer. That y'all still refused to make their simplest and easiest of admissions isn't my fault. If y'all want to play dumb or lie, I can't stop you. I stand by my original assessment, this is gaslighting for stupid people. You can’t trick us into redefining good faith to allow you to call “the left” stupid all the time. Feel free to show otherwise. I'm giving y'all plenty of opportunity to show your colors. Needless to say, I've found them wanting so far. And here's the rub: there is an intellectual and sound argument for y'all to make. So when you're ready to stop shitting up the thread and make it, I'll be here.
Why am I not surprised that xDaunt's logic leads to everyone else in the thread being anti-intellectual shit-posters.
|
On September 06 2017 04:53 WolfintheSheep wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 04:40 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 04:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:56 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:34 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:22 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 02:04 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 01:57 xDaunt wrote:
I don't understand all of the handwringing going on here over the questions that I posed about illegal immigration. I gave y'all a very clear opportunity to acknowledge that it's a bad thing. I put it right on the tee, and y'all still wouldn't take it. Even I had the good sense to denounce Nazism while acknowledging that they have a right to protest. So what exactly is a reasonable person supposed to take from this refusal to acknowledge that illegal immigration is bad? And how about putting this refusal in the context of Democrats obstructing immigration enforcement if not outright encouraging it?
There's nothing inherently wrong with advocating for an open, legal immigration policy. However, where the Left has jumped the shark is in their dogged refusal to acknowledge that illegal immigration is a problem and a bad thing. Almost every poster agreed with you that it was illegal and bad for everyone. I didn't see anyone here saying it was great. What are you trying to do here? Is this gaslighting for stupid people? Who agreed with me? Just take a look at the shit from here going on forward. I went out of my way to create some common ground, and I get shit like this in response. You should consider these types of responses a reflection on your abject failure to build common ground. Look within my son. No, and to borrow language from zlefin, this very clearly is a function of the lack of soundness in the leftist position on immigration. Y'all are just as vulnerable on immigration as the right is on healthcare. Once again, look within. Extend people the good faith that you demand we keep extending you. I responded to your post with “I will also agree that crime is bad and all education should be the best.” What part of that was not agreeing with you? I showed the good faith by asking the fucking question in the simplest form possible rather than presuming the answer. That y'all still refused to make their simplest and easiest of admissions isn't my fault. If y'all want to play dumb or lie, I can't stop you. I stand by my original assessment, this is gaslighting for stupid people. You can’t trick us into redefining good faith to allow you to call “the left” stupid all the time. Feel free to show otherwise. I'm giving y'all plenty of opportunity to show your colors. Needless to say, I've found them wanting so far. And here's the rub: there is an intellectual and sound argument for y'all to make. So when you're ready to stop shitting up the thread and make it, I'll be here. Why am I not surprised that xDaunt's logic leads to everyone else in the thread being anti-intellectual shit-posters.
Take a look at your posts, ChristianS's, or Kollins' (among others, but not all). The proof is in the pudding.
|
On September 06 2017 04:57 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 04:53 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 06 2017 04:40 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 04:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:56 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:34 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:22 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 02:04 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Almost every poster agreed with you that it was illegal and bad for everyone. I didn't see anyone here saying it was great. What are you trying to do here? Is this gaslighting for stupid people? Who agreed with me? Just take a look at the shit from here going on forward. I went out of my way to create some common ground, and I get shit like this in response. You should consider these types of responses a reflection on your abject failure to build common ground. Look within my son. No, and to borrow language from zlefin, this very clearly is a function of the lack of soundness in the leftist position on immigration. Y'all are just as vulnerable on immigration as the right is on healthcare. Once again, look within. Extend people the good faith that you demand we keep extending you. I responded to your post with “I will also agree that crime is bad and all education should be the best.” What part of that was not agreeing with you? I showed the good faith by asking the fucking question in the simplest form possible rather than presuming the answer. That y'all still refused to make their simplest and easiest of admissions isn't my fault. If y'all want to play dumb or lie, I can't stop you. I stand by my original assessment, this is gaslighting for stupid people. You can’t trick us into redefining good faith to allow you to call “the left” stupid all the time. Feel free to show otherwise. I'm giving y'all plenty of opportunity to show your colors. Needless to say, I've found them wanting so far. And here's the rub: there is an intellectual and sound argument for y'all to make. So when you're ready to stop shitting up the thread and make it, I'll be here. Why am I not surprised that xDaunt's logic leads to everyone else in the thread being anti-intellectual shit-posters. Take a look at your posts, ChristianS's, or Kollins' (among others, but not all). The proof is in the pudding.
You literally do not engage with anyone that injects the nuance required into the issue, because to do so would be to admit that your original interjection into the discussion was ridiculous.
|
On September 06 2017 04:43 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 04:40 Danglars wrote:On September 06 2017 04:18 Nebuchad wrote:
I know that's not the first time I harp on this but it's not really surprising that your rightwing doesn't have a bunch of coherent arguments after you have decided as a country to redefine the right so absurdly that someone like KwarK is now leftwing. And win elections with it! In most of the country! Absolutely absurd. I follow these arguments incessantly, and I constantly wonder, "If all this is true, how could the Democrats be such losers to mess it all up to such a large degree." And the responses are ... telling. Like arguments that could get you to bad shit happening in the House, but not explain the supposedly out-of-step and ideologically bankrupt right can control so many governorships/state houses that you have to rewind to the civil war to beat the dominance. We're winning so we can't be wrong! If I'm not misremembering it's you that harps on about the failures of a two party system to give viable voting options, could that not be the case here?
Seriously, re-read. The poster described the right as not "having a bunch of coherent arguments" and the country has decided to "redefine the right so absurdly." How could the Democrats mess it up? Why does the party of the right enjoy such great majorities in governorships and state houses? It matters that people still see their interests represented in this supposed bankrupt position that huge majorities go this way. If it were just low amounts of viable voting options, the Dems ought to win that easily. Lesser of two evils with such a bad opposition how could you lose? Still waiting, kollin.
|
On September 06 2017 04:57 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 04:53 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 06 2017 04:40 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 04:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:56 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:34 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:22 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 02:04 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Almost every poster agreed with you that it was illegal and bad for everyone. I didn't see anyone here saying it was great. What are you trying to do here? Is this gaslighting for stupid people? Who agreed with me? Just take a look at the shit from here going on forward. I went out of my way to create some common ground, and I get shit like this in response. You should consider these types of responses a reflection on your abject failure to build common ground. Look within my son. No, and to borrow language from zlefin, this very clearly is a function of the lack of soundness in the leftist position on immigration. Y'all are just as vulnerable on immigration as the right is on healthcare. Once again, look within. Extend people the good faith that you demand we keep extending you. I responded to your post with “I will also agree that crime is bad and all education should be the best.” What part of that was not agreeing with you? I showed the good faith by asking the fucking question in the simplest form possible rather than presuming the answer. That y'all still refused to make their simplest and easiest of admissions isn't my fault. If y'all want to play dumb or lie, I can't stop you. I stand by my original assessment, this is gaslighting for stupid people. You can’t trick us into redefining good faith to allow you to call “the left” stupid all the time. Feel free to show otherwise. I'm giving y'all plenty of opportunity to show your colors. Needless to say, I've found them wanting so far. And here's the rub: there is an intellectual and sound argument for y'all to make. So when you're ready to stop shitting up the thread and make it, I'll be here. Why am I not surprised that xDaunt's logic leads to everyone else in the thread being anti-intellectual shit-posters. Take a look at your posts, ChristianS's, or Kollins' (among others, but not all). The proof is in the pudding.
I acknowledge that I am a frequent shit-poster.
I think I'm more than blatant enough when I am shit-posting, though. And don't feel the need to judge people by their responses (or lack thereof) to my shit-posts. Unless they're Romanian.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On September 06 2017 04:49 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Well on the bright side at least like ~90% of people can finally agree that Hillary should shut the fuck up because ain't no one buying it anymore. As bad as DWS' "I did nothing wrong and just took one for the team" from however long ago that BS was.
|
United States42609 Posts
On September 06 2017 04:52 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 04:49 ChristianS wrote:On September 06 2017 04:37 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:09 ChristianS wrote:On September 06 2017 04:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:56 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:34 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:22 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 02:04 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Almost every poster agreed with you that it was illegal and bad for everyone. I didn't see anyone here saying it was great. What are you trying to do here? Is this gaslighting for stupid people? Who agreed with me? Just take a look at the shit from here going on forward. I went out of my way to create some common ground, and I get shit like this in response. You should consider these types of responses a reflection on your abject failure to build common ground. Look within my son. No, and to borrow language from zlefin, this very clearly is a function of the lack of soundness in the leftist position on immigration. Y'all are just as vulnerable on immigration as the right is on healthcare. Once again, look within. Extend people the good faith that you demand we keep extending you. I responded to your post with “I will also agree that crime is bad and all education should be the best.” What part of that was not agreeing with you? I showed the good faith by asking the fucking question in the simplest form possible rather than presuming the answer. That y'all still refused to make their simplest and easiest of admissions isn't my fault. If y'all want to play dumb or lie, I can't stop you. Put it this way: Is Trump bad? Bear in mind if you don't answer, or give anything more than yes or no, I can apparently assume you're either playing dumb or lying. Watch and learn, everybody: Yes, Trump has been bad so far. The problem with most of the people around here is that y'all aren't smart enough to know to make the easy concessions when they need to be made. I don't have that problem, which is why my posting is remarkably consistent. "So far?" Arguing in bad faith, clearly either playing dumb or lying (/s). So now can we accuse you of inconsistency for ever defending him on anything? You probably should have the logic of this post checked before you go down this road. You're very far from terra firma.
He's very clearly using your own argument against you to demonstrate the absurdity of it.
|
On September 06 2017 05:00 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 04:57 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:53 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 06 2017 04:40 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 04:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:56 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:34 Plansix wrote:You should consider these types of responses a reflection on your abject failure to build common ground. Look within my son. No, and to borrow language from zlefin, this very clearly is a function of the lack of soundness in the leftist position on immigration. Y'all are just as vulnerable on immigration as the right is on healthcare. Once again, look within. Extend people the good faith that you demand we keep extending you. I responded to your post with “I will also agree that crime is bad and all education should be the best.” What part of that was not agreeing with you? I showed the good faith by asking the fucking question in the simplest form possible rather than presuming the answer. That y'all still refused to make their simplest and easiest of admissions isn't my fault. If y'all want to play dumb or lie, I can't stop you. I stand by my original assessment, this is gaslighting for stupid people. You can’t trick us into redefining good faith to allow you to call “the left” stupid all the time. Feel free to show otherwise. I'm giving y'all plenty of opportunity to show your colors. Needless to say, I've found them wanting so far. And here's the rub: there is an intellectual and sound argument for y'all to make. So when you're ready to stop shitting up the thread and make it, I'll be here. Why am I not surprised that xDaunt's logic leads to everyone else in the thread being anti-intellectual shit-posters. Take a look at your posts, ChristianS's, or Kollins' (among others, but not all). The proof is in the pudding. You literally do not engage with anyone that injects the nuance required into the issue, because to do so would be to admit that your original interjection into the discussion was pants on head retarded.
Oh I am perfectly willing to engage on nuance. What you don't understand, however, is that nuance requires context to be understood. I asked a very simple question to set the table for the more nuanced discussion to follow, which was met with .... whatever the fuck you would call this "discussion." Now, if y'all had the balls and the integrity to just make the admissions and concessions that you need to make, we'd be well on our way to a more productive discussion. But most of you are badly missing this point despite my repeatedly bludgeoning you over the head with it.
|
On September 06 2017 05:05 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 04:43 kollin wrote:On September 06 2017 04:40 Danglars wrote:On September 06 2017 04:18 Nebuchad wrote:
I know that's not the first time I harp on this but it's not really surprising that your rightwing doesn't have a bunch of coherent arguments after you have decided as a country to redefine the right so absurdly that someone like KwarK is now leftwing. And win elections with it! In most of the country! Absolutely absurd. I follow these arguments incessantly, and I constantly wonder, "If all this is true, how could the Democrats be such losers to mess it all up to such a large degree." And the responses are ... telling. Like arguments that could get you to bad shit happening in the House, but not explain the supposedly out-of-step and ideologically bankrupt right can control so many governorships/state houses that you have to rewind to the civil war to beat the dominance. We're winning so we can't be wrong! If I'm not misremembering it's you that harps on about the failures of a two party system to give viable voting options, could that not be the case here? Seriously, re-read. The poster described the right as not "having a bunch of coherent arguments" and the country has decided to "redefine the right so absurdly." How could the Democrats mess it up? Why does the party of the right enjoy such great majorities in governorships and state houses? It matters that people still see their interests represented in this supposed bankrupt position that huge majorities go this way. If it were just low amounts of viable voting options, the Dems ought to win that easily. Lesser of two evils with such a bad opposition how could you lose? Still waiting, kollin.
I think majority of the US is absurdly right wing.
|
On September 06 2017 04:57 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 04:53 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 06 2017 04:40 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 04:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:56 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:34 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:22 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 02:04 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Almost every poster agreed with you that it was illegal and bad for everyone. I didn't see anyone here saying it was great. What are you trying to do here? Is this gaslighting for stupid people? Who agreed with me? Just take a look at the shit from here going on forward. I went out of my way to create some common ground, and I get shit like this in response. You should consider these types of responses a reflection on your abject failure to build common ground. Look within my son. No, and to borrow language from zlefin, this very clearly is a function of the lack of soundness in the leftist position on immigration. Y'all are just as vulnerable on immigration as the right is on healthcare. Once again, look within. Extend people the good faith that you demand we keep extending you. I responded to your post with “I will also agree that crime is bad and all education should be the best.” What part of that was not agreeing with you? I showed the good faith by asking the fucking question in the simplest form possible rather than presuming the answer. That y'all still refused to make their simplest and easiest of admissions isn't my fault. If y'all want to play dumb or lie, I can't stop you. I stand by my original assessment, this is gaslighting for stupid people. You can’t trick us into redefining good faith to allow you to call “the left” stupid all the time. Feel free to show otherwise. I'm giving y'all plenty of opportunity to show your colors. Needless to say, I've found them wanting so far. And here's the rub: there is an intellectual and sound argument for y'all to make. So when you're ready to stop shitting up the thread and make it, I'll be here. Why am I not surprised that xDaunt's logic leads to everyone else in the thread being anti-intellectual shit-posters. Take a look at your posts, ChristianS's, or Kollins' (among others, but not all). The proof is in the pudding.
There was the time when you were arguing that 0.17C air temperature increase wasn't a big deal. I put out math showing that it could be measured in nukes per square km of energy release and you didn't even bother to check the numbers for yourself. Who's the anti-intellectual here?
|
On September 06 2017 05:05 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 04:43 kollin wrote:On September 06 2017 04:40 Danglars wrote:On September 06 2017 04:18 Nebuchad wrote:
I know that's not the first time I harp on this but it's not really surprising that your rightwing doesn't have a bunch of coherent arguments after you have decided as a country to redefine the right so absurdly that someone like KwarK is now leftwing. And win elections with it! In most of the country! Absolutely absurd. I follow these arguments incessantly, and I constantly wonder, "If all this is true, how could the Democrats be such losers to mess it all up to such a large degree." And the responses are ... telling. Like arguments that could get you to bad shit happening in the House, but not explain the supposedly out-of-step and ideologically bankrupt right can control so many governorships/state houses that you have to rewind to the civil war to beat the dominance. We're winning so we can't be wrong! If I'm not misremembering it's you that harps on about the failures of a two party system to give viable voting options, could that not be the case here? Seriously, re-read. The poster described the right as not "having a bunch of coherent arguments" and the country has decided to "redefine the right so absurdly." How could the Democrats mess it up? Why does the party of the right enjoy such great majorities in governorships and state houses? It matters that people still see their interests represented in this supposed bankrupt position that huge majorities go this way. If it were just low amounts of viable voting options, the Dems ought to win that easily. Lesser of two evils with such a bad opposition how could you lose? Still waiting, kollin.
You posit your questions as evidence that my opinion is wrong when there are actual answers to your questions that make logical sense and when a cursory glance at the world demonstrates that my opinion is factually substantiated.
|
She just wishes "my opponents are sexist" worked as well for her as "my opponents are racist" for Obama. You can't rewind the clock.
|
On September 06 2017 04:47 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 04:40 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 04:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:56 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:34 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:22 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 02:04 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 01:57 xDaunt wrote:
I don't understand all of the handwringing going on here over the questions that I posed about illegal immigration. I gave y'all a very clear opportunity to acknowledge that it's a bad thing. I put it right on the tee, and y'all still wouldn't take it. Even I had the good sense to denounce Nazism while acknowledging that they have a right to protest. So what exactly is a reasonable person supposed to take from this refusal to acknowledge that illegal immigration is bad? And how about putting this refusal in the context of Democrats obstructing immigration enforcement if not outright encouraging it?
There's nothing inherently wrong with advocating for an open, legal immigration policy. However, where the Left has jumped the shark is in their dogged refusal to acknowledge that illegal immigration is a problem and a bad thing. Almost every poster agreed with you that it was illegal and bad for everyone. I didn't see anyone here saying it was great. What are you trying to do here? Is this gaslighting for stupid people? Who agreed with me? Just take a look at the shit from here going on forward. I went out of my way to create some common ground, and I get shit like this in response. You should consider these types of responses a reflection on your abject failure to build common ground. Look within my son. No, and to borrow language from zlefin, this very clearly is a function of the lack of soundness in the leftist position on immigration. Y'all are just as vulnerable on immigration as the right is on healthcare. Once again, look within. Extend people the good faith that you demand we keep extending you. I responded to your post with “I will also agree that crime is bad and all education should be the best.” What part of that was not agreeing with you? I showed the good faith by asking the fucking question in the simplest form possible rather than presuming the answer. That y'all still refused to make their simplest and easiest of admissions isn't my fault. If y'all want to play dumb or lie, I can't stop you. I stand by my original assessment, this is gaslighting for stupid people. You can’t trick us into redefining good faith to allow you to call “the left” stupid all the time. Feel free to show otherwise. I'm giving y'all plenty of opportunity to show your colors. Needless to say, I've found them wanting so far. And here's the rub: there is an intellectual and sound argument for y'all to make. So when you're ready to stop shitting up the thread and make it, I'll be here. And again, the discussion all started with a request to specific conservative poster define “securing the border” would entail. Because his argument was that it was the critical issue holding back immigration reform. And somehow you came storming in there saying zero illegal immigration was the goal and that asking if we thought illegal immigration was bad. We started with asking for some specifics to discuss and you decided it would be better to a vague and nonspecific as possible. And people responded exactly as expected.
I was as conciliatory as possible and it didn't matter. Given the responses and requests for "nuanced" views on illegal immigration it is now clear the one-sided requests for specifics were exactly ad they seemed: tthey were dodges.
One side in government is bending over backwards to accomsdate on the issue and the other is digging in its heels. in that sense I guess that this is all very consistent.
|
United States42609 Posts
On September 06 2017 05:07 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 05:00 kollin wrote:On September 06 2017 04:57 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:53 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 06 2017 04:40 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 04:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:56 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:34 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
You should consider these types of responses a reflection on your abject failure to build common ground. Look within my son. No, and to borrow language from zlefin, this very clearly is a function of the lack of soundness in the leftist position on immigration. Y'all are just as vulnerable on immigration as the right is on healthcare. Once again, look within. Extend people the good faith that you demand we keep extending you. I responded to your post with “I will also agree that crime is bad and all education should be the best.” What part of that was not agreeing with you? I showed the good faith by asking the fucking question in the simplest form possible rather than presuming the answer. That y'all still refused to make their simplest and easiest of admissions isn't my fault. If y'all want to play dumb or lie, I can't stop you. I stand by my original assessment, this is gaslighting for stupid people. You can’t trick us into redefining good faith to allow you to call “the left” stupid all the time. Feel free to show otherwise. I'm giving y'all plenty of opportunity to show your colors. Needless to say, I've found them wanting so far. And here's the rub: there is an intellectual and sound argument for y'all to make. So when you're ready to stop shitting up the thread and make it, I'll be here. Why am I not surprised that xDaunt's logic leads to everyone else in the thread being anti-intellectual shit-posters. Take a look at your posts, ChristianS's, or Kollins' (among others, but not all). The proof is in the pudding. You literally do not engage with anyone that injects the nuance required into the issue, because to do so would be to admit that your original interjection into the discussion was pants on head retarded. Oh I am perfectly willing to engage on nuance. What you don't understand, however, is that nuance requires context to be understood. I asked a very simple question to set the table for the more nuanced discussion to follow, which was met with .... whatever the fuck you would call this "discussion." Now, if y'all had the balls and the integrity to just make the admissions and concessions that you need to make, we'd be well on our way to a more productive discussion. But most of you are badly missing this point despite my repeatedly bludgeoning you over the head with it.
xDaunt
Just because someone would rather the agricultural sector of the economy not collapse than that there be zero illegal immigration does not mean they are in favour of illegal immigration.
You have finally reached the climax of your attempt to trap the left with the question "is illegal immigration bad?" and the conclusion simply doesn't follow. The universal answer to "is illegal immigration bad?" is always "it depends". And yet you are insisting that "it depends" is dishonest.
You're painting this absurd false choice and then crying about intellectual dishonesty whenever anyone gives you anything but a yes or no.
You're deliberately misrepresenting very clear answers.
You're insisting that because you were able to give a clear answer on whether or not Nazis are bad other people should be able to give an equally clear answer on illegal immigrants.
You're insisting that any answers other than "yes, you got me, I'm in favour of illegal immigration" indicate a lack of integrity on behalf of the answerer.
This is not what arguing in good faith looks like. You're making the kind of arguments that only an incredibly stupid or incredibly dishonest person would make. Stop.
|
On September 06 2017 05:09 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 05:05 Danglars wrote:On September 06 2017 04:43 kollin wrote:On September 06 2017 04:40 Danglars wrote:On September 06 2017 04:18 Nebuchad wrote:
I know that's not the first time I harp on this but it's not really surprising that your rightwing doesn't have a bunch of coherent arguments after you have decided as a country to redefine the right so absurdly that someone like KwarK is now leftwing. And win elections with it! In most of the country! Absolutely absurd. I follow these arguments incessantly, and I constantly wonder, "If all this is true, how could the Democrats be such losers to mess it all up to such a large degree." And the responses are ... telling. Like arguments that could get you to bad shit happening in the House, but not explain the supposedly out-of-step and ideologically bankrupt right can control so many governorships/state houses that you have to rewind to the civil war to beat the dominance. We're winning so we can't be wrong! If I'm not misremembering it's you that harps on about the failures of a two party system to give viable voting options, could that not be the case here? Seriously, re-read. The poster described the right as not "having a bunch of coherent arguments" and the country has decided to "redefine the right so absurdly." How could the Democrats mess it up? Why does the party of the right enjoy such great majorities in governorships and state houses? It matters that people still see their interests represented in this supposed bankrupt position that huge majorities go this way. If it were just low amounts of viable voting options, the Dems ought to win that easily. Lesser of two evils with such a bad opposition how could you lose? Still waiting, kollin. You posit your questions as evidence that my opinion is wrong when there are actual answers to your questions that make logical sense and when a cursory glance at the world demonstrates that my opinion is factually substantiated.
If only you could communicate the actual answers to your questions that make logical sense.
Wait a second ... let's see if I have it down: If you actually told them, you'd then realize that the real answers totally contradict your points and make them all fundamentally unsound, to the extent to which even a short read would make you realize how stupid it would be to hold them.
|
United States42609 Posts
On September 06 2017 05:12 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 04:47 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 04:40 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 04:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:56 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:34 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:22 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 02:04 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Almost every poster agreed with you that it was illegal and bad for everyone. I didn't see anyone here saying it was great. What are you trying to do here? Is this gaslighting for stupid people? Who agreed with me? Just take a look at the shit from here going on forward. I went out of my way to create some common ground, and I get shit like this in response. You should consider these types of responses a reflection on your abject failure to build common ground. Look within my son. No, and to borrow language from zlefin, this very clearly is a function of the lack of soundness in the leftist position on immigration. Y'all are just as vulnerable on immigration as the right is on healthcare. Once again, look within. Extend people the good faith that you demand we keep extending you. I responded to your post with “I will also agree that crime is bad and all education should be the best.” What part of that was not agreeing with you? I showed the good faith by asking the fucking question in the simplest form possible rather than presuming the answer. That y'all still refused to make their simplest and easiest of admissions isn't my fault. If y'all want to play dumb or lie, I can't stop you. I stand by my original assessment, this is gaslighting for stupid people. You can’t trick us into redefining good faith to allow you to call “the left” stupid all the time. Feel free to show otherwise. I'm giving y'all plenty of opportunity to show your colors. Needless to say, I've found them wanting so far. And here's the rub: there is an intellectual and sound argument for y'all to make. So when you're ready to stop shitting up the thread and make it, I'll be here. And again, the discussion all started with a request to specific conservative poster define “securing the border” would entail. Because his argument was that it was the critical issue holding back immigration reform. And somehow you came storming in there saying zero illegal immigration was the goal and that asking if we thought illegal immigration was bad. We started with asking for some specifics to discuss and you decided it would be better to a vague and nonspecific as possible. And people responded exactly as expected. I was as conciliatory as possible and it didn't matter. Given the responses and requests for "nuanced" views on illegal immigration it is now clear the one-sided requests for specifics were exactly ad they seemed: tthey were dodges. One side in government is bending over backwards to accomsdate on the issue and the other is digging in its heels. in that sense I guess that this is all very consistent.
?
What are you talking about?
xDaunt still hasn't given any specifics, meanwhile everyone but him has spoken about their opinions at length.
Hell, I went as far as to give two answers to his question so that he could fill in the specifics later and know my response.On September 05 2017 22:39 KwarK wrote:
Danglars, you're refusing to understand the very simple issue with xDaunt's problem, that it is unclear whether the problems that illegally immigration currently solves would be solved in his 0% illegal immigration hypothetical.
That's what we need cleared up from him. People can't give a clear yes/no on that because they don't know what they're saying yes/no to. If he's offering us a world without seasonal agricultural labourers then that's a no. If he's saying there should be a legal framework for those guys then yes. But it's not clear from the question at all.
Not only did I not dodge the question, I gave two answers.
|
On September 06 2017 05:13 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 05:09 Nebuchad wrote:On September 06 2017 05:05 Danglars wrote:On September 06 2017 04:43 kollin wrote:On September 06 2017 04:40 Danglars wrote:On September 06 2017 04:18 Nebuchad wrote:
I know that's not the first time I harp on this but it's not really surprising that your rightwing doesn't have a bunch of coherent arguments after you have decided as a country to redefine the right so absurdly that someone like KwarK is now leftwing. And win elections with it! In most of the country! Absolutely absurd. I follow these arguments incessantly, and I constantly wonder, "If all this is true, how could the Democrats be such losers to mess it all up to such a large degree." And the responses are ... telling. Like arguments that could get you to bad shit happening in the House, but not explain the supposedly out-of-step and ideologically bankrupt right can control so many governorships/state houses that you have to rewind to the civil war to beat the dominance. We're winning so we can't be wrong! If I'm not misremembering it's you that harps on about the failures of a two party system to give viable voting options, could that not be the case here? Seriously, re-read. The poster described the right as not "having a bunch of coherent arguments" and the country has decided to "redefine the right so absurdly." How could the Democrats mess it up? Why does the party of the right enjoy such great majorities in governorships and state houses? It matters that people still see their interests represented in this supposed bankrupt position that huge majorities go this way. If it were just low amounts of viable voting options, the Dems ought to win that easily. Lesser of two evils with such a bad opposition how could you lose? Still waiting, kollin. You posit your questions as evidence that my opinion is wrong when there are actual answers to your questions that make logical sense and when a cursory glance at the world demonstrates that my opinion is factually substantiated. If only you could communicate the actual answers to your questions that make logical sense. Wait a second ... let's see if I have it down: If you actually told them, you'd then realize that the real answers totally contradict your points and make them all fundamentally unsound, to the extent to which even a short read would make you realize how stupid it would be to hold them.
You clearly don't have it down. Haven't you learned from the last few times we had an interaction and you immediately disengaged when the threat of an actual conversation emerged?
|
On September 06 2017 05:12 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 05:07 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 05:00 kollin wrote:On September 06 2017 04:57 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:53 WolfintheSheep wrote:On September 06 2017 04:40 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 04:11 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 04:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 06 2017 03:59 Plansix wrote:On September 06 2017 03:56 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
No, and to borrow language from zlefin, this very clearly is a function of the lack of soundness in the leftist position on immigration. Y'all are just as vulnerable on immigration as the right is on healthcare. Once again, look within. Extend people the good faith that you demand we keep extending you. I responded to your post with “I will also agree that crime is bad and all education should be the best.” What part of that was not agreeing with you? I showed the good faith by asking the fucking question in the simplest form possible rather than presuming the answer. That y'all still refused to make their simplest and easiest of admissions isn't my fault. If y'all want to play dumb or lie, I can't stop you. I stand by my original assessment, this is gaslighting for stupid people. You can’t trick us into redefining good faith to allow you to call “the left” stupid all the time. Feel free to show otherwise. I'm giving y'all plenty of opportunity to show your colors. Needless to say, I've found them wanting so far. And here's the rub: there is an intellectual and sound argument for y'all to make. So when you're ready to stop shitting up the thread and make it, I'll be here. Why am I not surprised that xDaunt's logic leads to everyone else in the thread being anti-intellectual shit-posters. Take a look at your posts, ChristianS's, or Kollins' (among others, but not all). The proof is in the pudding. You literally do not engage with anyone that injects the nuance required into the issue, because to do so would be to admit that your original interjection into the discussion was pants on head retarded. Oh I am perfectly willing to engage on nuance. What you don't understand, however, is that nuance requires context to be understood. I asked a very simple question to set the table for the more nuanced discussion to follow, which was met with .... whatever the fuck you would call this "discussion." Now, if y'all had the balls and the integrity to just make the admissions and concessions that you need to make, we'd be well on our way to a more productive discussion. But most of you are badly missing this point despite my repeatedly bludgeoning you over the head with it. xDaunt Just because someone would rather the agricultural sector of the economy not collapse than that there be zero illegal immigration does not mean they are in favour of illegal immigration. You have finally reached the climax of your attempt to trap the left with the question "is illegal immigration bad?" and the conclusion simply doesn't follow. The universal answer to "is illegal immigration bad?" is always "it depends". And yet you are insisting that "it depends" is dishonest. You're painting this absurd false choice and then crying about intellectual dishonesty whenever anyone gives you anything but a yes or no. You're deliberately misrepresenting very clear answers. You're insisting that because you were able to give a clear answer on whether or not Nazis are bad other people should be able to give an equally clear answer on illegal immigrants. You're insisting that any answers other than "yes, you got me, I'm in favour of illegal immigration" indicate a lack of integrity on behalf of the answerer. This is not what arguing in good faith looks like. You're making the kind of arguments that only an incredibly stupid or incredibly dishonest person would make. Stop.
I'm not misrepresenting anything. Illegal immigration is unequivocally a bad thing. It enslaves people, degrades their dignity, and reduces them to a sub-class within larger society. And that's before we start talking about stuff like human trafficking. None of these arguments that I'm seeing from people like Gorsameth about how illegal immigration props up the agricultural industry changes the fact that illegal immigration is bad. Do you know what also was used to prop up the agricultural economy? Slavery. I could go down the list of any number of "necessary evils" that are obviously bad things, but needed to accomplish desirable ends. Illegal immigration is no different than any of them. I just find it endlessly amusing that y'all on the Left refuse to admit this basic fact. And it's painfully obvious why you won't admit it: illegal immigration is a sacred cow on the Left cuz y'all gotta have that hispanic vote.
|
On September 06 2017 05:06 LegalLord wrote:Well on the bright side at least like ~90% of people can finally agree that Hillary should shut the fuck up because ain't no one buying it anymore. As bad as DWS' "I did nothing wrong and just took one for the team" from however long ago that BS was.
1. It's typical for presidents or lifetime politicians to have a biography written about them, so I'm not surprised by that. Asking her to shut the fuck up seems pretty harsh; she hasn't really been spending the last 6 months on talk shows whining about losing or whatever.
2. I want to resist passing too much new judgment on sentences from one specific page before reading the whole book (i.e., possibly quote mining).
3. I don't think Hillary is particularly justified in blaming Bernie for attacks that caused lasting damage. I think that Bernie did more good than harm in trying to rally his supporters around Hillary (he reminded everyone that their ideologies are relatively similar in the big picture). I also think that Hillary did more harm than good when she didn't really throw Bernie supporters a bone. She didn't really try to win them over, and thus they felt disenfranchised and angry with the Democratic establishment.
4. Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders both would have been competent presidents, unlike Donald Trump.
|
On September 06 2017 05:07 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 06 2017 05:05 Danglars wrote:On September 06 2017 04:43 kollin wrote:On September 06 2017 04:40 Danglars wrote:On September 06 2017 04:18 Nebuchad wrote:
I know that's not the first time I harp on this but it's not really surprising that your rightwing doesn't have a bunch of coherent arguments after you have decided as a country to redefine the right so absurdly that someone like KwarK is now leftwing. And win elections with it! In most of the country! Absolutely absurd. I follow these arguments incessantly, and I constantly wonder, "If all this is true, how could the Democrats be such losers to mess it all up to such a large degree." And the responses are ... telling. Like arguments that could get you to bad shit happening in the House, but not explain the supposedly out-of-step and ideologically bankrupt right can control so many governorships/state houses that you have to rewind to the civil war to beat the dominance. We're winning so we can't be wrong! If I'm not misremembering it's you that harps on about the failures of a two party system to give viable voting options, could that not be the case here? Seriously, re-read. The poster described the right as not "having a bunch of coherent arguments" and the country has decided to "redefine the right so absurdly." How could the Democrats mess it up? Why does the party of the right enjoy such great majorities in governorships and state houses? It matters that people still see their interests represented in this supposed bankrupt position that huge majorities go this way. If it were just low amounts of viable voting options, the Dems ought to win that easily. Lesser of two evils with such a bad opposition how could you lose? Still waiting, kollin. I think majority of the US is absurdly right wing.
I congratulate you in holding a consistent position with reality. I do not take that for granted in this thread. If we define the left/right divide in a European context, I might actually agree with you. The people have failed the state, and should be dissolved to be replaced by another.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
