|
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 26 2017 00:42 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 00:25 zlefin wrote:On September 26 2017 00:19 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 00:14 zlefin wrote:On September 26 2017 00:11 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 00:10 zlefin wrote:On September 26 2017 00:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 00:02 NewSunshine wrote:On September 25 2017 23:58 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 25 2017 23:52 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
[quote]
You're clearly trolling at this point. Bring national pride back? When did it ever leave? When we elected a black president? Did it leave then? I must have been asleep when national pride was lost. And each president has stood up to NK. They just never threatened them with unilateral war because...reasons? Dude you are putting words into people's mouth and that's not cool. It temporarily left during the election (or even prior to that as dems was carefully setting up for a Hillary win, but failed) when dems played identity politics by pitting LGBT/PoC/women against white heterosexual males. It was basically identity politics vs economical nationalism in 2016 and we all know what decision people came to. So I know you and others like to say "identity politics" like it's some kind of filthy word, but what would you have discriminated peoples do? All the systemic racism PoC face, the rights continuously being contested/denied for LGBT folk, and even the sexism that women put up with, you just want them to keep quiet and not rock the boat? Identity politics is real politics. Because when you're constantly treated like shit because of how you look or how you live, your existence has been made political by the people doing it. Plain and simple. You can clearly protest without painting one subset of the nation into horrible monsters. And using violent manners in shutting down dissenting thoughts in various platforms is DEFINITELY NOT helping. Instead it would be much more efficient to be to nice to dissenting voices and present them with provable facts (none of that wage gap/rape epidemic bs) first instead of going at it w/ "You are racists/sexists/(insert your favorite buzzword here) if you are not with us!". Plain and simple. you're not presenting us with provable facts to support your arguments. I'm presenting you with logic and reason. no, you hvaen't been. you mostly present claims that are without foundation (and absurdly false, but that's another story); you don't establish that foundation with citations or evidence, you simply assert it to be so. you may think that you're being logical and reasonable, that doesn't mean that you are. if oyu truly want to be logical, I recommend putting everything in full formal logic to make it clearer. See you are all about insulting other people even though it is 100% logical that calling people names does NOT get them to come to your side. If you want to talk about presenting citations and references, go look at your attitude w/ Danglars's article. You've responded w/ NOTHING substantial, just simple dismissal to all those points and being snark. Go look at yourself in the mirror. This is why Trump won. trump didn't run against me; so my attitude has nothing to do with why trump won. When others post utter nonsense, there's little reason or need to counter it. If people don't know the obvious nonsense that occurred in parts of danglars article, and they ask, i'll provide it. Generally speaking though, people are quite able to see it for themselves. It's already established that facts and reason will not convince you to come ot my side. The only things I can do are facts/reason, and insults. I'm hopelessly bad at everything else. I looked in the mirror, and dang I'm looking good! He didn't run against you. But he ran against your emotional ideas of outburts. He ran against many people in this thread that utilizes insults first and then go "Hey if you didn't want me to be all insulting and want me to provide facts, you just have to ask!" and then proceed to not offer none of that afterward. If you truly care about changing people's opinion, you got to cut out all those talk by saying "Hey this article is trash and it would be better if they cut off the trash." and then proceed to not even giving explanation with "people are quite able to see it for themselves." At least in my points, I provide arguments in that BLM/Antifa people use violent means and how feminists utilizes the wage gap myth to justify their hatreds for man. There should be, at no point, in a civilized society, display any form of violent when attempting to change policy, just look at South Korea for their exemplary methods in making their president resign. But no you chose to ignore them and then say "Hey this guy doesn't provide any facts!" when the facts are right there starring in your face. If this is kind of attitude you have, then I will NEVER bother wasting my time w/ you (and this goes to others who have the same attitude as you here) ever again.
no, he did'nt run against my kind of outbursts either. He ran on a policy of identity politics; the white male christian identity. and trump was also full of emotional outbursts, and not at all concerned about facts or reality. He was the least truthful of any politician by far in a long time. So your claim to care about facts seems kind of hollow.
This isn't our first rodeo, you've been in the thread many times before, the first several times, I tried facts, when you ignore those, I'm left with no alternatives.
You didn't provide facts in this go-round, the facts you're claiming were from prior go-rounds, and also still not that relevant. And you didn't ask me for an explanation of why the article had a bnuch of trash in it, had you asked, i'd have answered (and noone else in the thread asked for one either). You're already wasting your time with us; you have nothing useful or insightful to say, you're not adding anything ot the discussion. and the few claims you do make, like that trump is uniting the country, are still without ofundation, and of course, absurdly false on their face, so it's odd you'd even claim such nonsense.
|
@reality
If you would start your statements with a reason or even a little argument, posters probably would react diffrently to you.
There have been plenty of people as far out there, compared to most people here, as you that managed to get into actual discussions.
Most not long term but well, atleast there were actual exchanges.
|
On September 26 2017 00:53 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 00:11 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 00:10 zlefin wrote:On September 26 2017 00:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 00:02 NewSunshine wrote:On September 25 2017 23:58 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 25 2017 23:52 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 25 2017 23:44 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 25 2017 23:28 Sadist wrote:On September 25 2017 23:25 RealityIsKing wrote:
[quote]
Also brought more divisiveness into the country, which is bad. Its devisive because people are idiots and arent asking why they are kneeling even though its been said over and over. People dont stand in their homes when watching on tv. Is that disrespectful? Our president is a divisive scumbag. If you want to talk about divisive look at the orange bag of hot air. Our president is at least trying to unite the country into one unified nation by bringing national pride back and at least have the courage to fully stand up to NK's dictatorship. You're clearly trolling at this point. Bring national pride back? When did it ever leave? When we elected a black president? Did it leave then? I must have been asleep when national pride was lost. And each president has stood up to NK. They just never threatened them with unilateral war because...reasons? Dude you are putting words into people's mouth and that's not cool. It temporarily left during the election (or even prior to that as dems was carefully setting up for a Hillary win, but failed) when dems played identity politics by pitting LGBT/PoC/women against white heterosexual males. It was basically identity politics vs economical nationalism in 2016 and we all know what decision people came to. So I know you and others like to say "identity politics" like it's some kind of filthy word, but what would you have discriminated peoples do? All the systemic racism PoC face, the rights continuously being contested/denied for LGBT folk, and even the sexism that women put up with, you just want them to keep quiet and not rock the boat? Identity politics is real politics. Because when you're constantly treated like shit because of how you look or how you live, your existence has been made political by the people doing it. Plain and simple. You can clearly protest without painting one subset of the nation into horrible monsters. And using violent manners in shutting down dissenting thoughts in various platforms is DEFINITELY NOT helping. Instead it would be much more efficient to be to nice to dissenting voices and present them with provable facts (none of that wage gap/rape epidemic bs) first instead of going at it w/ "You are racists/sexists/(insert your favorite buzzword here) if you are not with us!". Plain and simple. you're not presenting us with provable facts to support your arguments. I'm presenting you with logic and reason. This is the problem. You are not. How is it logical to say the president is trying to unite the country? Almost none of his actions ever have had that effect. His number one way to respond to questions is blaming someone else or saying 'but what about this other person he/she is worse than me'. He holds grudges against those who don't agree with him and constantly flames them instead of trying to understand their reasoning. He is rude and calls people names. There is no way to logically conclude from this that he is trying to unite a nation. Just none.
I like this response because there are at least some reasoning involved.
He is specifically saying that one shouldn't be disrespectful of the flag and respect the national anthem.
If you are smart and want to unite the nation while using NFL as a political platforms. You could totally simultaneously use the stadium's sound system to express your thoughts while saluting the flag/standing for the national anthem.
|
On September 26 2017 00:55 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 00:45 farvacola wrote:
quick zlefin, hurt his feelings again!
PC culture gone wild! I'm not hurt by this. As matter of fact, from reading multiple people on this thread. I can predict who is going to use "social justice" as an excuse to be unreasonably violent as possible and not willing to have a calm discussion and just want to flamebait.
I believe in social justice. I don't believe in violence of any kind. But you wouldn't know, because you barged in spouting typical Trump supporter nonsense, and had no interest in having a discussion with anyone on "the left". If you want to just pop in and regurgitate what you heard on Fox News and bash the left, expect to be treated like this.
|
On September 26 2017 00:59 Velr wrote:
@reality
If you would start your statements with a reason or even a little argument, posters probably would react diffrently to you.
There have been plenty of people as far out there, compared to most people here, as you that managed to get into actual discussions.
Most not long term but well, atleast there were actual exchanges.
About half of the people responding to him are shitposting. Singling RiK out for the shittiness in the thread is badly misplaced.
|
you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest..
|
So your issue is that they kneel in silence and you would rather have them blasting out their issues/agenda over the stadiums sound system?
Please explain
|
On September 26 2017 01:03 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 00:59 Velr wrote:
@reality
If you would start your statements with a reason or even a little argument, posters probably would react diffrently to you.
There have been plenty of people as far out there, compared to most people here, as you that managed to get into actual discussions.
Most not long term but well, atleast there were actual exchanges. About half of the people responding to him are shitposting. Singling RiK out for the shittiness in the thread is badly misplaced.
on average; shitty posts tend to result in shitty replies. There's a clear single source of the problem in this instance. There is indeed some other shittiness; but unless you deal with the problem at the source you're not going to fix it.
|
On September 26 2017 01:04 brian wrote:
you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest..
If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest.
Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool.
|
On September 26 2017 01:07 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:04 brian wrote:
you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest.. If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest. Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool.
except we were talking about the NFL, you laid out your thoughts on the nfl protest with your flame, and you made the violence/antifa straw man to attach to the conversation. how is it relevant? who are you talking to?
|
Nobody was even talking about BLM or Antifa. Talk about putting words in peoples' mouths.
|
On September 26 2017 01:03 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 00:59 Velr wrote:
@reality
If you would start your statements with a reason or even a little argument, posters probably would react diffrently to you.
There have been plenty of people as far out there, compared to most people here, as you that managed to get into actual discussions.
Most not long term but well, atleast there were actual exchanges. About half of the people responding to him are shitposting. Singling RiK out for the shittiness in the thread is badly misplaced.
I personally partially agree with him - I just don't want to wade into this BS. That is neither entertaining nor does it end well.
|
On September 26 2017 01:03 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 00:59 Velr wrote:
@reality
If you would start your statements with a reason or even a little argument, posters probably would react diffrently to you.
There have been plenty of people as far out there, compared to most people here, as you that managed to get into actual discussions.
Most not long term but well, atleast there were actual exchanges. About half of the people responding to him are shitposting. Singling RiK out for the shittiness in the thread is badly misplaced.
He barged into the thread with a garbage post that showed no education on actual issues, and doubled down when people called him on it. Garbage in, garbage out. You and Danglars know this very well.
|
On September 26 2017 01:10 brian wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:04 brian wrote:
you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest.. If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest. Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool. except we were talking about the NFL, you laid out your thoughts on the nfl protest with your flame, and you made the violence/antifa straw man to attach to the conversation. how is it relevant? who are you talking to?
At that point, it was mainly Trump talk. This thread is about US politics in general, not NFL Politic talk. Thank you.
|
On September 26 2017 01:03 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 00:59 Velr wrote:
@reality
If you would start your statements with a reason or even a little argument, posters probably would react diffrently to you.
There have been plenty of people as far out there, compared to most people here, as you that managed to get into actual discussions.
Most not long term but well, atleast there were actual exchanges. About half of the people responding to him are shitposting. Singling RiK out for the shittiness in the thread is badly misplaced.
no, it isn’t. he’s come here just to shit on his perception of the alt regressive left without any context and has just shoehorned BLM and Antifa into a conversation about a peaceful protest. the lack of subtlety in this attempt to bait should be dismissed with as much subtlety.
|
On September 26 2017 01:14 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:10 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:04 brian wrote:
you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest.. If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest. Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool. except we were talking about the NFL, you laid out your thoughts on the nfl protest with your flame, and you made the violence/antifa straw man to attach to the conversation. how is it relevant? who are you talking to? At that point, it was mainly Trump talk. This thread is about US politics in general, not NFL Politic talk. Thank you.
It's a general thread because it encompasses many issues, but it's still a discussion thread, which has a flow. People are talking about the NFL protests. Not BLM or Antifa. Your post about their violence is a non sequitir.
|
On September 26 2017 01:14 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:10 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:04 brian wrote:
you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest.. If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest. Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool. except we were talking about the NFL, you laid out your thoughts on the nfl protest with your flame, and you made the violence/antifa straw man to attach to the conversation. how is it relevant? who are you talking to? At that point, it was mainly Trump talk. This thread is about US politics in general, not NFL Politic talk. Thank you.
So your argument was: "BUT BLM AND ANTIFA!"?
|
On September 26 2017 00:53 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 00:11 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 00:10 zlefin wrote:On September 26 2017 00:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 00:02 NewSunshine wrote:On September 25 2017 23:58 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 25 2017 23:52 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 25 2017 23:44 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 25 2017 23:28 Sadist wrote:On September 25 2017 23:25 RealityIsKing wrote:
[quote]
Also brought more divisiveness into the country, which is bad. Its devisive because people are idiots and arent asking why they are kneeling even though its been said over and over. People dont stand in their homes when watching on tv. Is that disrespectful? Our president is a divisive scumbag. If you want to talk about divisive look at the orange bag of hot air. Our president is at least trying to unite the country into one unified nation by bringing national pride back and at least have the courage to fully stand up to NK's dictatorship. You're clearly trolling at this point. Bring national pride back? When did it ever leave? When we elected a black president? Did it leave then? I must have been asleep when national pride was lost. And each president has stood up to NK. They just never threatened them with unilateral war because...reasons? Dude you are putting words into people's mouth and that's not cool. It temporarily left during the election (or even prior to that as dems was carefully setting up for a Hillary win, but failed) when dems played identity politics by pitting LGBT/PoC/women against white heterosexual males. It was basically identity politics vs economical nationalism in 2016 and we all know what decision people came to. So I know you and others like to say "identity politics" like it's some kind of filthy word, but what would you have discriminated peoples do? All the systemic racism PoC face, the rights continuously being contested/denied for LGBT folk, and even the sexism that women put up with, you just want them to keep quiet and not rock the boat? Identity politics is real politics. Because when you're constantly treated like shit because of how you look or how you live, your existence has been made political by the people doing it. Plain and simple. You can clearly protest without painting one subset of the nation into horrible monsters. And using violent manners in shutting down dissenting thoughts in various platforms is DEFINITELY NOT helping. Instead it would be much more efficient to be to nice to dissenting voices and present them with provable facts (none of that wage gap/rape epidemic bs) first instead of going at it w/ "You are racists/sexists/(insert your favorite buzzword here) if you are not with us!". Plain and simple. you're not presenting us with provable facts to support your arguments. I'm presenting you with logic and reason. This is the problem. You are not. How is it logical to say the president is trying to unite the country? Almost none of his actions ever have had that effect. His number one way to respond to questions is blaming someone else or saying 'but what about this other person he/she is worse than me'. He holds grudges against those who don't agree with him and constantly flames them instead of trying to understand their reasoning. He is rude and calls people names. There is no way to logically conclude from this that he is trying to unite a nation. Just none.
Well, I'm not saying that I agree with RiK, but...
There is a logical basis from which to say that Trump is trying to unite the country. There's a ton of evidence to support the notion that Trump is incompetent and incapable of doing things without messing them up. Based on that and his actions, one could presume that at least some of his unnecessary comments on Twitter are an attempt to rebuild national pride and unite the people, as RiK suggests. He's just really bad at it and has no clue that what he's doing is the opposite.
Trying and succeeding are two different things. Whether or not you think this logical basis is the most reasonable one is up to you.
|
On September 26 2017 01:14 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:10 brian wrote:On September 26 2017 01:07 RealityIsKing wrote:On September 26 2017 01:04 brian wrote:
you’re the only one flame baiting by denouncing in he harshest terms people that are ‘using violence’ in a discussion about peaceful protest.. If you actually read my post, I specifically attached the violent act to antifa/BLM not for the NFL protest. Again don't put words into people's mouth, its not cool. except we were talking about the NFL, you laid out your thoughts on the nfl protest with your flame, and you made the violence/antifa straw man to attach to the conversation. how is it relevant? who are you talking to? At that point, it was mainly Trump talk. This thread is about US politics in general, not NFL Politic talk. Thank you.
please, don’t avoid the question. and what an absurd reply. that doesn’t mean i can come here and tell you you’re an ignorant flame baiter and say it’s Congress’s fault for xyz reason and back pedal all day claiming ‘it’s congress and this is the us politics thread ok?’
|
On September 26 2017 01:14 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 01:03 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 00:59 Velr wrote:
@reality
If you would start your statements with a reason or even a little argument, posters probably would react diffrently to you.
There have been plenty of people as far out there, compared to most people here, as you that managed to get into actual discussions.
Most not long term but well, atleast there were actual exchanges. About half of the people responding to him are shitposting. Singling RiK out for the shittiness in the thread is badly misplaced. He barged into the thread with a garbage post that showed no education on actual issues, and doubled down when people called him on it. Garbage in, garbage out. You and Danglars know this very well.
Not really. I see the same type of shit in response to most of my posts, as does Danglars. Y'all are oblivious to how shitty most of your posting is on a consistent basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
