Heh, even Wiliamson/Gabbard/Delaney I’d vote for (ETA: if I was a yank) in a heartbeat over Trump. Considering they’ll soon be vapourized, though, is there someone in the Biden/Sanders/Warren/Buttigieg camp whom you’d feel would be an inferior chief executive to Prez. Pez?
Because right now it seems like you’ve got a lot of things that look really bad but no conclusive proof of wrongdoing. Sure there is plenty of evidence of wrongdoing but before you ask a republican to remove their own president, you need more than what it would take to convince chuck schumer.
They would be replaced by the conservative party or whatever. The republican party represents american voters. Some of them are voting against the democrats as much as they are voting for the republicans
Like fuck we were. This is what I responded to, fully quoted:
YOU were talking about Bush. Not, Der Trihs. You know perfectly well the comment made about Der Trihs was made in a derisive jest. That’s why you chose to ignore it in your reply. Until now. When it serves you as a weasel exit.
You really are fucking stupid if you thought you could get away with it.
Telling me to fuck off and calling me names is not really challenging my positions
Some of the things he does are defensible, some are not.
My rule of thumb is that anything that Trump does that Mitt Romney or John McCain might have done is defensible. If you don’t like those things then try winning an election.
The 2 main problems I have with trump are:
He is embarassing on global scale (literally). Other world leaders openly mock him at social gatherings. We will never live this down. We have put Trump in the same historical basket as men such as George Washington and Abraham Lincoln.
He is a racist and white supremacist. Between his birtherism, his immigration policies, his reluctance to condemn neo-nazis, and his racist comments and tweets, he is unacceptably racist.
And here is what I was responding to. You’ve always been a stupid fuck but until now you haven’t really struck me as a disingenuous stupid fuck. Well, live and learn I guess.
“The Dems could run Der Trihs and I’d still tell you that you were making a bad error in judgment even considering voting for Donald.”
You know what. I’m fucking done here. Have fun jerking each other off.
You are attacking a poster merely for expressing disgust at how you and people like you have dragged this once useful forum into an strictly enforced echo chamber. they are not even disagreeing with any of your positions only your behavior (which has been pretty fucking deplorable).
We agree on more things than we disagree; but I am ashamed that you are on the same side of the ideological fence as me because of how you treat people. People whose opinions only slightly differ from yours. You ought to be ashamed of yourself and what you and people like you have done to this site.
I’ve been on this site since 2001. This is entirely bullshit. What has changed is that the GOP has gone insane and supports the insupportable and defends the indefensible. When you are trying to argue from a position that has no relation to actual reality then you are going to get it here because we deal with reality. The age of Trump has also degraded discourse. For the right, winning on the facts does not matter anymore, what matters is pissing off liberals and trolling. That’s how they consider themselves winning an argument. That is what has changed, not this forum. You have noticed differences, but it is not us that has changed. The party of “fuck your feelings” and “lock her up” has lost the ability and/or desire to actually debate in good faith. Take it up with them and scold them.
I’m not asking you to speak for him. I’m asking you what you thought of his screed. Was it a responsible response to someone offering a view as requested? Do you feel responses like that are likely to help gain more enlightened responses in the future, some of which may actually make a decent point or two?
I hadn’t realize “hive mind” was a loaded term here, so I apologize. Sincerely. I do not wish to be associated with how you are characterizing it. Being outnumbered in a debate is not a hive mind, no. However, everyone having all the exact same opinions is, which this board demonstrates to a large degree as demonstrated by what happens when anyone dares offer an opinion, or just asks a question, that isn’t in alignment with the current majority opinion here.
I’ll try to not use those types of terms in the future. Thanks for being civil in the response. You are listening, which is a start, even if we disagree.
I’m not saying Trump isn’t wrong 99% of the time nor am I saying that even if he is right 1% of the time (I’m not sure it is that high), that redeems the times he is wrong. You are mischaracterizing what I’m saying. Again.
Suppose McConnell gets the Senate rules changed so they don’t need to wait for the articles of impeachment to be delivered. Someone comes on the board and asks, “Is it really legal for them to do that??” That someone isn’t supporting McConnell. It isn’t even the right thing to do in terms, ethically, in my opinion. But it is legally a right the Senate has.
Now, if someone comes in and asks if Trump can legally declare a national emergency and divert funds to a useless wall, they will be castigated and lambasted as a Trump supporter. At the very least accused of being a Trump supporter. And this is where I think this place has fallen down. Hard.
Worse, the accusations will come from multiple posters who will each pat each other on the back for having outed another one. Baseless, useless accusations will prevent a good discussion on the legality of such an action.
Was it a harsh response? Sure. Is this the pit? Yes. Do you know what the BBQ Pit is for here? Do you have any knowledge of past interactions between margin and the poster they were responding to? You seem to be assuming that response happened in a vacuum, that we aren’t currently in the pit, and that this is somehow part of a collective response from the board in total or something like that. The problem is it is very hard to defend Trump from any position even tangentially related to reality. This creates an uneven debate field because both sides are not on equal logical footing, or are equally ingenuous, or even both using actual real facts. They don’t even really want the same thing. The Right has the power right now in our country, so largely they don’t feel the need to convince anyone of anything, which is why we’ve had such an issue with posters that are not arguing in good faith and are sea-lioning and trolling on that side. That stuff does result in a reaction eventually, and it’s been happening for long enough that a lot of people have lost patience for it. There seems to be a lot of context and recent history missing in your analysis and it seems to be based more on individual posts you think are too harsh which you then assign responsibility for to the entire board.
I’m not bitching about not supporting bad debaters as much as you support good debaters. I’m bitching that people who hold a differing view, are screamed at with vitriol (see post 120) instead of actually, you know, discussing the facts.
What makes it even worse is that this happened in a thread ostensibly asking for people with a different opinion to come forward and offer up something that might be intelligent and insightful. Instead, when an opinion is offered, the opinion is spat upon and not one person says, “Hey, wait a minute… we asked for a different opinion. We can disagree and dismantle it without having to resort to insults. We should be encouraging open discussions.”
I don’t believe this is an accurate depiction. Specifically your example. Is there a particular thread where this discussion about wall funding happened? Can you provide a link and post numbers where we can see what you are referring to? I don’t think anyone has ever been chastised for simply asking if something is legal. I would need to see that for myself. I remember those threads and I never remember a simple question of fact responded to that way. On that topic or any other.