|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Bare in mind that people who do and say horrible things with everyone's knowledge are generally way more confident saying even worse things behind closed doors. I've been wondering what ideas Trump has spouted whenever he let his guard down. The confidence with which he's openly racist and otherwise hostile is scary. We know he conducts himself differently in public, for example when he completely refused to look at Harris during their debate. He maintains some level of appearances when he deems it necessary, so he's evidently capable of holding back. He's not at 100% in public.
Trump's rhetoric became worse after he became president. In recent weeks he's been ramping it up more and more, and that's the strategy he's confident gives him the best chances to win. If that doesn't scare people, then I'm not sorry to say that they're willfully blind.
|
On November 02 2024 00:48 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 00:10 NewSunshine wrote:
I see some merit to the idea that Trump just blurted that shit out and didn't expressly mean to invoke a firing squad. I do, however, also think Trump has gotten away with a shitload of innuendo that always just happens to suggest violence against his political enemies. After a while, it's either a big coincidence, or it's a strategy.
Not to mention, if any other politician in American history meant "let's see how she does in real war" but says "let's see how she does with a specific number of rifles pointed at her", which btw is not really something that happens in war, you just get shot by somebody, a group of nine dudes doesn't stand there with rifles pointed at you, but... Anyway, any other politician says that, and that's a career-ending gaffe. Trump gets a pass again. Every other politician, moreso Democrats these days, are expected to craft their words so carefully as to make them bulletproof, impossible to interpret the wrong way, but Trump gets to be a rambling, hateful moron who just says shit like this constantly. The double standard is so striking as to be a cliff. Its a very good point. I'd probably judge other politicians much more harshly for saying the same thing. Weird.
Trump’s not really a traditional politician though. The difference between Trump and Biden/Harris is that Trump will do a 3 hour long interview and give rallies where he speaks off the cuff for 2 hours straight without the aid of a teleprompter. Harris/Biden give carefully prepare remarks and have an have taken extraordinarily few questions from the media. If they riffed on the microphone for hours on end we would probably get to a point where there wasn’t a 24 hour news cycle from a 6 second clip spliced from a 2 hour rally.
I’ve repeatedly made the point that a lot of this stuff is counterproductive because it seems more like anxious hyperventilating than legitimate criticism. They did a news cycle over Trump making some off the cuff remark about golfer Arnold Palmer having a legendary sized penis. They were outraged that he “pretended” to work at McDonalds as if they’ve never heard of a politician doing a photo-op before. They were outraged that a roast comedian told an offensive joke. Trying to sink Hitler for a penis joke just isn’t good strategy when there’s so many other things you can attack him on.
|
On November 02 2024 05:08 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 00:48 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 02 2024 00:10 NewSunshine wrote:
I see some merit to the idea that Trump just blurted that shit out and didn't expressly mean to invoke a firing squad. I do, however, also think Trump has gotten away with a shitload of innuendo that always just happens to suggest violence against his political enemies. After a while, it's either a big coincidence, or it's a strategy.
Not to mention, if any other politician in American history meant "let's see how she does in real war" but says "let's see how she does with a specific number of rifles pointed at her", which btw is not really something that happens in war, you just get shot by somebody, a group of nine dudes doesn't stand there with rifles pointed at you, but... Anyway, any other politician says that, and that's a career-ending gaffe. Trump gets a pass again. Every other politician, moreso Democrats these days, are expected to craft their words so carefully as to make them bulletproof, impossible to interpret the wrong way, but Trump gets to be a rambling, hateful moron who just says shit like this constantly. The double standard is so striking as to be a cliff. Its a very good point. I'd probably judge other politicians much more harshly for saying the same thing. Weird. Trump’s not really a politician though. The difference between Trump and Biden/Harris is that Trump will do a 3 hour long interview and give rallies where he speaks off the cuff for 2 hours straight without the aid of a teleprompter. Harris/Biden give carefully prepare remarks and have an have taken extraordinarily few questions from the media. If they riffed on the microphone for hours on end we would probably get to a point where there wasn’t a 24 hour news cycle from a 6 second clip spliced from a 2 hour rally. I’ve repeatedly made the point that a lot of this stuff is counterproductive because it seems more like anxious hyperventilating than legitimate criticism. They did a news cycle over Trump making some off the cuff remark about golfer Arnold Palmer having a legendary sized penis. They were outraged that he “pretended” to work at McDonalds as if they’ve never heard of a politician doing a photo-op before. They were outraged that a roast comedian told an offensive joke. Trying to sink Hitler for a penis joke just isn’t good strategy when there’s so many other things you can attack him on.
Left-wingers have likewise criticized the hyper focus on absurd things such as Trump's McD stunt or the penis comment. We make fun of that and move on, we don't fixate on it. The people focusing on this stuff are not the same as Trump's regular critics. They're just farming engagement. If you think the left is collectively hyper focusing on absurd criticism of Trump, you've not been in left-wing circles.
|
On November 02 2024 05:12 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 05:08 BlackJack wrote:On November 02 2024 00:48 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 02 2024 00:10 NewSunshine wrote:
I see some merit to the idea that Trump just blurted that shit out and didn't expressly mean to invoke a firing squad. I do, however, also think Trump has gotten away with a shitload of innuendo that always just happens to suggest violence against his political enemies. After a while, it's either a big coincidence, or it's a strategy.
Not to mention, if any other politician in American history meant "let's see how she does in real war" but says "let's see how she does with a specific number of rifles pointed at her", which btw is not really something that happens in war, you just get shot by somebody, a group of nine dudes doesn't stand there with rifles pointed at you, but... Anyway, any other politician says that, and that's a career-ending gaffe. Trump gets a pass again. Every other politician, moreso Democrats these days, are expected to craft their words so carefully as to make them bulletproof, impossible to interpret the wrong way, but Trump gets to be a rambling, hateful moron who just says shit like this constantly. The double standard is so striking as to be a cliff. Its a very good point. I'd probably judge other politicians much more harshly for saying the same thing. Weird. Trump’s not really a politician though. The difference between Trump and Biden/Harris is that Trump will do a 3 hour long interview and give rallies where he speaks off the cuff for 2 hours straight without the aid of a teleprompter. Harris/Biden give carefully prepare remarks and have an have taken extraordinarily few questions from the media. If they riffed on the microphone for hours on end we would probably get to a point where there wasn’t a 24 hour news cycle from a 6 second clip spliced from a 2 hour rally. I’ve repeatedly made the point that a lot of this stuff is counterproductive because it seems more like anxious hyperventilating than legitimate criticism. They did a news cycle over Trump making some off the cuff remark about golfer Arnold Palmer having a legendary sized penis. They were outraged that he “pretended” to work at McDonalds as if they’ve never heard of a politician doing a photo-op before. They were outraged that a roast comedian told an offensive joke. Trying to sink Hitler for a penis joke just isn’t good strategy when there’s so many other things you can attack him on. Left-wingers have likewise criticized the hyper focus on absurd things such as Trump's McD stunt or the penis comment. We make fun of that and move on, we don't fixate on it. The people focusing on this stuff are not the same as Trump's regular critics. They're just farming engagement. If you think the left is collectively hyper focusing on absurd criticism of Trump, you've not been in left-wing circles.
I don't mind the occasional observation of Trump doing or saying something trivially stupid or fake, as long as most of the focus is still on the higher-stakes issues and more serious reasons to be wary of Trump.
|
On the topic of rhetoric this is tweet from Hilary:
This come across rather ominous from a women who has a running meme: "nobody have 56 friends who committed suicide"
|
What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day?
|
On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day?
What part of "This come across rather ominous" is unclear?
Also, how voting for Harris is gonna cause that you dont have to think of Trump "ever again"
On November 02 2024 01:51 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 01:42 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 02 2024 01:07 Magic Powers wrote:On November 02 2024 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 02 2024 00:33 Magic Powers wrote:
Ok yeah sure, why not. Lets use the same reasoning. Hitler was also only using hyperbole, right? He only acted on his words later, he wasn't doing anything bad until he started doing bad things.
Oh wait, Trump already delivered on his words when he picked three anti-choice justices. All three of them ended up overturning Roe v Wade. Here are the only three judges that opposed the new ruling:
Stephen Breyer, appointed by President Clinton, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, appointed by President Obama.
Awesome, under Trump many rape victims can no longer have a legal abortion. Fantastic.
And this is only one of plenty of examples of Trump already causing terrible harm to Americans and the world. Remember the Paris climate accord? Trump's fault. Iran nuclear deal? Trump's fault. Anti-immigration policies and rhetoric? Trump's fault. Attempts at undermining democracy? Trump's fault.
So we have sufficient evidence that Trump's words lead to real life consequences. Now that his rhetoric got even worse, we shouldn't trust him on any of it, right? We should just stick our fingers in our ears. If Trump wins and puts Kamala in front of a firing squad, you're welcome to say 'I told you so' Yeah if I just want to be right and that's my whole motivation, sure. Problem is I want to prevent an obvious train crash that people keep making excuses for, so my goal is ideally to never be proven right. I prefer if people don't have to explain away how they let a disaster happen that everyone could see coming from miles away. Apparently people never learned from the fallout of Nazi Germany. Now I understand much better how Hitler came into power. I'll be honest I didn't think I was going to be to blame for the holocaust today. Still, I love a new experience. I'm not sure what you mean by that. I'm talking about Trump being a fascist and people not understanding how these people come into power. We have facists in power in Austria right this very moment. History repeats itself much more easily than you'd think.
bolded - Oh, but people do understand. They took over state institutions, they censored people, they extended government power at the cost of citizens freedom and prosecuted political opponents. That's why people vote against Democrats.
|
Northern Ireland24390 Posts
On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day?
Not just murder him but possibly rip him open and feast on his gooey insides, she’s a devil that Hillary
|
On November 02 2024 07:05 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day? What part of "This come across rather ominous" is unclear? Also, how voting for Harris is gonna cause that you dont have to think of Trump "ever again"
Please answer my question; don't just reply with more questions. What do you think Hillary Clinton is saying with this post?
|
On November 02 2024 07:19 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day? Not just murder him but possibly rip him open and feast on his gooey insides, she’s a devil that Hillary
I bet if you read her post backwards and then apply some Biblical numerology, you literally summon Satan.
|
On November 02 2024 07:05 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day? What part of "This come across rather ominous" is unclear? Also, how voting for Harris is gonna cause that you dont have to think of Trump "ever again" Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 01:51 Magic Powers wrote:On November 02 2024 01:42 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 02 2024 01:07 Magic Powers wrote:On November 02 2024 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 02 2024 00:33 Magic Powers wrote:
Ok yeah sure, why not. Lets use the same reasoning. Hitler was also only using hyperbole, right? He only acted on his words later, he wasn't doing anything bad until he started doing bad things.
Oh wait, Trump already delivered on his words when he picked three anti-choice justices. All three of them ended up overturning Roe v Wade. Here are the only three judges that opposed the new ruling:
Stephen Breyer, appointed by President Clinton, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, appointed by President Obama.
Awesome, under Trump many rape victims can no longer have a legal abortion. Fantastic.
And this is only one of plenty of examples of Trump already causing terrible harm to Americans and the world. Remember the Paris climate accord? Trump's fault. Iran nuclear deal? Trump's fault. Anti-immigration policies and rhetoric? Trump's fault. Attempts at undermining democracy? Trump's fault.
So we have sufficient evidence that Trump's words lead to real life consequences. Now that his rhetoric got even worse, we shouldn't trust him on any of it, right? We should just stick our fingers in our ears. If Trump wins and puts Kamala in front of a firing squad, you're welcome to say 'I told you so' Yeah if I just want to be right and that's my whole motivation, sure. Problem is I want to prevent an obvious train crash that people keep making excuses for, so my goal is ideally to never be proven right. I prefer if people don't have to explain away how they let a disaster happen that everyone could see coming from miles away. Apparently people never learned from the fallout of Nazi Germany. Now I understand much better how Hitler came into power. I'll be honest I didn't think I was going to be to blame for the holocaust today. Still, I love a new experience. I'm not sure what you mean by that. I'm talking about Trump being a fascist and people not understanding how these people come into power. We have facists in power in Austria right this very moment. History repeats itself much more easily than you'd think. bolded - Oh, but people do understand. They took over state institutions, they censored people, they extended government power at the cost of citizens freedom and prosecuted political opponents. That's why people vote against Democrats.
What else do you think was in 5 days?
Also Trump himself has said he doesn't want to run again if he loses. He would be too old, and he would've lost twice in a row.
|
Canada2522 Posts
I've only skimmed the last few pages but what I'm getting is referencing 9 people pointing rifles at someone's face isn't invoking imagery of a firing squad, but dreaming of not thinking about Trump anymore is calling for his assassination.
Got it. Nothing strange here.
|
On November 02 2024 07:39 Fleetfeet wrote:
I've only skimmed the last few pages but what I'm getting is referencing 9 people pointing rifles at someone's face isn't invoking imagery of a firing squad, but dreaming of not thinking about Trump anymore is calling for his assassination.
Got it. Nothing strange here.
You have successfully caught up to where the rest of us are at lol.
|
On November 02 2024 07:39 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 07:05 Razyda wrote:On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day? What part of "This come across rather ominous" is unclear? Also, how voting for Harris is gonna cause that you dont have to think of Trump "ever again" On November 02 2024 01:51 Magic Powers wrote:On November 02 2024 01:42 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 02 2024 01:07 Magic Powers wrote:On November 02 2024 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 02 2024 00:33 Magic Powers wrote:
Ok yeah sure, why not. Lets use the same reasoning. Hitler was also only using hyperbole, right? He only acted on his words later, he wasn't doing anything bad until he started doing bad things.
Oh wait, Trump already delivered on his words when he picked three anti-choice justices. All three of them ended up overturning Roe v Wade. Here are the only three judges that opposed the new ruling:
Stephen Breyer, appointed by President Clinton, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, appointed by President Obama.
Awesome, under Trump many rape victims can no longer have a legal abortion. Fantastic.
And this is only one of plenty of examples of Trump already causing terrible harm to Americans and the world. Remember the Paris climate accord? Trump's fault. Iran nuclear deal? Trump's fault. Anti-immigration policies and rhetoric? Trump's fault. Attempts at undermining democracy? Trump's fault.
So we have sufficient evidence that Trump's words lead to real life consequences. Now that his rhetoric got even worse, we shouldn't trust him on any of it, right? We should just stick our fingers in our ears. If Trump wins and puts Kamala in front of a firing squad, you're welcome to say 'I told you so' Yeah if I just want to be right and that's my whole motivation, sure. Problem is I want to prevent an obvious train crash that people keep making excuses for, so my goal is ideally to never be proven right. I prefer if people don't have to explain away how they let a disaster happen that everyone could see coming from miles away. Apparently people never learned from the fallout of Nazi Germany. Now I understand much better how Hitler came into power. I'll be honest I didn't think I was going to be to blame for the holocaust today. Still, I love a new experience. I'm not sure what you mean by that. I'm talking about Trump being a fascist and people not understanding how these people come into power. We have facists in power in Austria right this very moment. History repeats itself much more easily than you'd think. bolded - Oh, but people do understand. They took over state institutions, they censored people, they extended government power at the cost of citizens freedom and prosecuted political opponents. That's why people vote against Democrats. What else do you think was in 5 days? Also Trump himself has said he doesn't want to run again if he loses. He would be too old, and he would've lost twice in a row.
Happy birthday, NewSunshine!
And to be clear, Razyda, wishing NewSunshine a happy birthday doesn't mean I wish you would murder Trump before his next one.
|
Northern Ireland24390 Posts
On November 02 2024 07:39 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 07:05 Razyda wrote:On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day? What part of "This come across rather ominous" is unclear? Also, how voting for Harris is gonna cause that you dont have to think of Trump "ever again" On November 02 2024 01:51 Magic Powers wrote:On November 02 2024 01:42 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 02 2024 01:07 Magic Powers wrote:On November 02 2024 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 02 2024 00:33 Magic Powers wrote:
Ok yeah sure, why not. Lets use the same reasoning. Hitler was also only using hyperbole, right? He only acted on his words later, he wasn't doing anything bad until he started doing bad things.
Oh wait, Trump already delivered on his words when he picked three anti-choice justices. All three of them ended up overturning Roe v Wade. Here are the only three judges that opposed the new ruling:
Stephen Breyer, appointed by President Clinton, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, appointed by President Obama.
Awesome, under Trump many rape victims can no longer have a legal abortion. Fantastic.
And this is only one of plenty of examples of Trump already causing terrible harm to Americans and the world. Remember the Paris climate accord? Trump's fault. Iran nuclear deal? Trump's fault. Anti-immigration policies and rhetoric? Trump's fault. Attempts at undermining democracy? Trump's fault.
So we have sufficient evidence that Trump's words lead to real life consequences. Now that his rhetoric got even worse, we shouldn't trust him on any of it, right? We should just stick our fingers in our ears. If Trump wins and puts Kamala in front of a firing squad, you're welcome to say 'I told you so' Yeah if I just want to be right and that's my whole motivation, sure. Problem is I want to prevent an obvious train crash that people keep making excuses for, so my goal is ideally to never be proven right. I prefer if people don't have to explain away how they let a disaster happen that everyone could see coming from miles away. Apparently people never learned from the fallout of Nazi Germany. Now I understand much better how Hitler came into power. I'll be honest I didn't think I was going to be to blame for the holocaust today. Still, I love a new experience. I'm not sure what you mean by that. I'm talking about Trump being a fascist and people not understanding how these people come into power. We have facists in power in Austria right this very moment. History repeats itself much more easily than you'd think. bolded - Oh, but people do understand. They took over state institutions, they censored people, they extended government power at the cost of citizens freedom and prosecuted political opponents. That's why people vote against Democrats. What else do you think was in 5 days? Also Trump himself has said he doesn't want to run again if he loses. He would be too old, and he would've lost twice in a row.
Bon anniversaire!
|
On November 02 2024 07:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 07:05 Razyda wrote:On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day? What part of "This come across rather ominous" is unclear? Also, how voting for Harris is gonna cause that you dont have to think of Trump "ever again" Please answer my question; don't just reply with more questions. What do you think Hillary Clinton is saying with this post?
I did, didn't I? I highlighted part of my post which answers your question. I didn't say Hilary is calling to murder Trump, I said it sounds ominous. If I said to oBlade you wont have to worry about DPB ever again you would be like "WTF?" and rightly so. Moreso if Trump said, vote for me and you wont have to worry about Kamala "ever again", you would be up in arms saying that Trump said he is going to get her executed. That was kind of a point of my post. When Trump says army can be used against radical leftist you guys say: he says he is going to use army for people who dont vote for him.
When Democrat says, it would be great to not have to think about Trump ever again, she meant "vote for Harris"
Edit: Happy birthday New Sunshine.
Edit 2:
On November 02 2024 07:39 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 07:05 Razyda wrote:On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day? What part of "This come across rather ominous" is unclear? Also, how voting for Harris is gonna cause that you dont have to think of Trump "ever again" On November 02 2024 01:51 Magic Powers wrote:On November 02 2024 01:42 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 02 2024 01:07 Magic Powers wrote:On November 02 2024 00:37 Jockmcplop wrote:On November 02 2024 00:33 Magic Powers wrote:
Ok yeah sure, why not. Lets use the same reasoning. Hitler was also only using hyperbole, right? He only acted on his words later, he wasn't doing anything bad until he started doing bad things.
Oh wait, Trump already delivered on his words when he picked three anti-choice justices. All three of them ended up overturning Roe v Wade. Here are the only three judges that opposed the new ruling:
Stephen Breyer, appointed by President Clinton, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, appointed by President Obama.
Awesome, under Trump many rape victims can no longer have a legal abortion. Fantastic.
And this is only one of plenty of examples of Trump already causing terrible harm to Americans and the world. Remember the Paris climate accord? Trump's fault. Iran nuclear deal? Trump's fault. Anti-immigration policies and rhetoric? Trump's fault. Attempts at undermining democracy? Trump's fault.
So we have sufficient evidence that Trump's words lead to real life consequences. Now that his rhetoric got even worse, we shouldn't trust him on any of it, right? We should just stick our fingers in our ears. If Trump wins and puts Kamala in front of a firing squad, you're welcome to say 'I told you so' Yeah if I just want to be right and that's my whole motivation, sure. Problem is I want to prevent an obvious train crash that people keep making excuses for, so my goal is ideally to never be proven right. I prefer if people don't have to explain away how they let a disaster happen that everyone could see coming from miles away. Apparently people never learned from the fallout of Nazi Germany. Now I understand much better how Hitler came into power. I'll be honest I didn't think I was going to be to blame for the holocaust today. Still, I love a new experience. I'm not sure what you mean by that. I'm talking about Trump being a fascist and people not understanding how these people come into power. We have facists in power in Austria right this very moment. History repeats itself much more easily than you'd think. bolded - Oh, but people do understand. They took over state institutions, they censored people, they extended government power at the cost of citizens freedom and prosecuted political opponents. That's why people vote against Democrats. What else do you think was in 5 days? Also Trump himself has said he doesn't want to run again if he loses.He would be too old, and he would've lost twice in a row.
Bolded - And that is thing Trump said you believed in? Personally I think Trump will run as long as he can, whatever he said, If he loose he will keep running till he either die or win.
|
Northern Ireland24390 Posts
On November 02 2024 07:58 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 07:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 02 2024 07:05 Razyda wrote:On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day? What part of "This come across rather ominous" is unclear? Also, how voting for Harris is gonna cause that you dont have to think of Trump "ever again" Please answer my question; don't just reply with more questions. What do you think Hillary Clinton is saying with this post? I did, didn't I? I highlighted part of my post which answers your question. I didn't say Hilary is calling to murder Trump, I said it sounds ominous. If I said to oBlade you wont have to worry about DPB ever again you would be like "WTF?" and rightly so. Moreso if Trump said, vote for me and you wont have to worry about Kamala "ever again", you would be up in arms saying that Trump said he is going to get her executed. That was kind of a point of my post. When Trump says army can be used against radical leftist you guys say: he says he is going to use army for people who dont vote for him.When Democrat says, it would be great to not have to think about Trump ever again, she meant "vote for Harris"
Yes, people can reasonably interpret Trump in that manner and he’s only himself to blame for that.
He frequently uses the phrase ‘radical left’ to refer to anybody seemingly remotely left of centre, if he didn’t do that, hey people wouldn’t (mis)interpret him
This feels stretching ‘both sidesism’ really, really far.
|
On November 02 2024 07:58 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 07:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 02 2024 07:05 Razyda wrote:On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day? What part of "This come across rather ominous" is unclear? Also, how voting for Harris is gonna cause that you dont have to think of Trump "ever again" Please answer my question; don't just reply with more questions. What do you think Hillary Clinton is saying with this post? I did, didn't I? I highlighted part of my post which answers your question. I didn't say Hilary is calling to murder Trump, I said it sounds ominous. If I said to oBlade you wont have to worry about DPB ever again you would be like "WTF?" and rightly so. Moreso if Trump said, vote for me and you wont have to worry about Kamala "ever again", you would be up in arms saying that Trump said he is going to get her executed. That was kind of a point of my post. When Trump says army can be used against radical leftist you guys say: he says he is going to use army for people who dont vote for him. When Democrat says, it would be great to not have to think about Trump ever again, she meant "vote for Harris" Edit: Happy birthday New Sunshine.
The thing is that when people say multiple things at different times, other people tend to use all of those statements to make an image of what they are saying.
For example, if i say that we really should hire an exterminator to deal with the rat problem, that may have a different meaning when i previously described a group of people as rats.
Similarly, if i first call my opponents "radical leftists", and then later say that we should use the military to deal with "radical leftists", it is not unreasonable to conclude that i am actually saying "we should use the military to deal with my opponents".
This logic cannot be that hard to understand. If i say A is B, and then B is C, then i am logically also saying that A is C.
And yeah, not having to think about Trump ever again sounds really nice. Doesn't mean i want him dead. Though it would be nice to have him actually prosecuted for his crimes and given the kind of sentence any other person would get for the same crimes. But mostly, him just not constantly being in the news and trying to subvert democracy would be enough. Even if he just chills out for the rest of his life with his inherited money.
|
On November 02 2024 07:58 Razyda wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 07:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 02 2024 07:05 Razyda wrote:On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day? What part of "This come across rather ominous" is unclear? Also, how voting for Harris is gonna cause that you dont have to think of Trump "ever again" Please answer my question; don't just reply with more questions. What do you think Hillary Clinton is saying with this post? I did, didn't I? I highlighted part of my post which answers your question. I didn't say Hilary is calling to murder Trump, I said it sounds ominous. If I said to oBlade you wont have to worry about DPB ever again you would be like "WTF?" and rightly so. Moreso if Trump said, vote for me and you wont have to worry about Kamala "ever again", you would be up in arms saying that Trump said he is going to get her executed. That was kind of a point of my post. When Trump says army can be used against radical leftist you guys say: he says he is going to use army for people who dont vote for him. When Democrat says, it would be great to not have to think about Trump ever again, she meant "vote for Harris"
You didn't answer my question, you didn't highlight part of your post, and you haven't explained what you mean by Hillary Clinton's post "sounding ominous". What do you think Hillary is suggesting? I'm not a deteriorating 78-year-old man repeatedly running for president who's likely to be on his last attempt for winning the presidency, so your analogy isn't relevant. What do you think Hillary is suggesting?
I can answer my own question with my own interpretation of her post. I think Hillary is suggesting that if we can defeat Trump during this next election, then we won't need to worry about him becoming president again and that he'll generally leave politics. Of course, she could be wrong about that - even if Harris beats Trump next week, Trump may attempt to run again in four years, or he may successfully steal the election in a month or so, or even as a private citizen (non-president) he may still attempt to interfere in our lives with his still-existing political leverage - but that's still what I think Hillary is suggesting.
Now it's your turn. What do you think Hillary is suggesting?
|
On November 02 2024 08:22 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2024 07:58 Razyda wrote:On November 02 2024 07:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 02 2024 07:05 Razyda wrote:On November 02 2024 06:43 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:What are you saying? That Hillary Clinton is suggesting we murder Trump on Election Day instead of vote for Harris on Election Day? What part of "This come across rather ominous" is unclear? Also, how voting for Harris is gonna cause that you dont have to think of Trump "ever again" Please answer my question; don't just reply with more questions. What do you think Hillary Clinton is saying with this post? I did, didn't I? I highlighted part of my post which answers your question. I didn't say Hilary is calling to murder Trump, I said it sounds ominous. If I said to oBlade you wont have to worry about DPB ever again you would be like "WTF?" and rightly so. Moreso if Trump said, vote for me and you wont have to worry about Kamala "ever again", you would be up in arms saying that Trump said he is going to get her executed. That was kind of a point of my post. When Trump says army can be used against radical leftist you guys say: he says he is going to use army for people who dont vote for him. When Democrat says, it would be great to not have to think about Trump ever again, she meant "vote for Harris" You didn't answer my question, you didn't highlight part of your post, and you haven't explained what you mean by Hillary Clinton's post "sounding ominous". What do you think Hillary is suggesting? I'm not a deteriorating 78-year-old man repeatedly running for president who's likely to be on his last attempt for winning the presidency, so your analogy isn't relevant. What do you think Hillary is suggesting? I can answer my own question with my own interpretation of her post. I think Hillary is suggesting that if we can defeat Trump during this next election, then we won't need to worry about him becoming president again and that he'll generally leave politics. Of course, she could be wrong about that - even if Harris beats Trump next week, Trump may attempt to run again in four years, or he may successfully steal the election in a month or so, or even as a private citizen (non-president) he may still attempt to interfere in our lives with his still-existing political leverage - but that's still what I think Hillary is suggesting. Now it's your turn. What do you think Hillary is suggesting?
bolded - where did I say she is suggesting anything?? All I said is that it "came across ominous" isn't it personal interpretation?
Italic - cute, but with picture of Trump and no word about president doesn't hold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
