It’s the latest fashion, don’t you know.
Ain’t no one got time to respond to all of that, I heard someone say recently.
Yeah, he’s learned well from his leaders.
I know exactly what I said. This board had a nasty way of trying to twist and contort what people-- conservatives, really-- say. I’ve grown used to it, thus I feel no need to get embroiled in 5,000 word responses defending a position I never took to begin with, while people like Bryan outright lie and get defended in doing so.
I’m not the only conservative who has ever said this. There a reason so few conservatives post here, you know.
There is a record. Of your words. That YOU typed. That we can go back and look at.
This is not called “contorting your words”. This is called VIEWING your words.
How nice that you two are getting along so well! Tea?
[INDENT]“But you know as well as I do that there was no coordinated effort against Obama from the right in the way of mass protests or trying to get the election overturned”[/INDENT]
-the amount of twisting one would have to do to make this NOT bullshit would validate String Theory.
I know exactly what I typed. I, you know, typed it.
I also know that I typed none of what Bryan said I did (take note I asked him where I ever defended birtherism or denied it was a thing, or even where I said it’s okay for the right to do those things the left can’t do, which he failed to provide a quote for), AND also that he twice ignored a question I asked requesting for him to show me the mass protests, the riots, the concerted effort in asking for and funding a recount, the inundation of phone calls, emails and death threats to electoral college voters or the post inauguration protest when Obama won in 2008 and 2012 and got… well, “But, but, but… birtherism!”. Which isn’t a response at all. It’s a deflection (and, no, I won’t mention “selected, not elected!”), since that in no way has anything to do with the aforementioned things.
But that’s par for the course around here, five years in. Strawman, deflect and ignore is what y’all deem fighting ignorance, apparently.
Buuut, hey. What do I know?
:rolleyes:
This conversation is like:
A: I don’t know why Democrats are so sensitive. Look at us tough Republicans! Why, one of our presidents, Lincoln, got shot in the head and you don’t hear us complaining about it. No Democrat president was ever shot in the head and they won’t stop complaining.
B: What about Kennedy? He was a Democrat who got shot in the head.
A: How DARE you say I support the assassination of Kennedy! Show me ONE time I ever did that! One time! You can’t!
B: I didn’t say you supported the assassination of Kennedy, but he WAS a Democrat and he DID get shot in the head, so when you said, quote, “No Democrat president was ever shot in the head”, that was a lie, or maybe you just misspoke.
A: I never called for the assassination of Kennedy, and look at these ten examples of bad stuff Democrats have done!
B: Fine, but the specific phrase “No Democrat president was ever shot in the head” is still wrong. Did you have some particular definition of “shot” or “head” in mind so that Lincoln counts but Kennedy doesn’t?
A: Don’t play semantics with me. Here is some more bad stuff Democrats have done. Can you find examples of Republicans doing exactly those things? NO, I thought not!
B: Still, though, “No Democrat president was ever shot in the head” is pretty damn incorrect. Here’s a point-by-point description of the events of November 22, 1963 in which a President who was a member of the Democratic Party was shot in the head.
A: TLDR, boil it down.
B: Okay, you’re a liar.
I’m going to be as fair about this as I believe I can.
You’re asking for us to show you some very specific things: public calls for recounts, calls for electoral college voters to vote against their state, and so forth. In response, the birther movement is cited.
The issue here is that the very specific kinds of protests and reactions that you’re asking to be shown didn’t happen, because the elections weren’t at all the same. The elections in 2008 and 2012 were clear and decisive. There were not calls for recounts or for electors to go faithless because the elections weren’t even close. By contrast, the 2016 election was won by about 112,000 votes, in key counties in the three battleground states of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. The winning candidate lost in the nationwide popular vote, by a wide margin. It is therefore natural for this narrow margin to have been the focus of protest.
The 2008 and 2012 elections, as I said, weren’t even close, so challenging on the same grounds wouldn’t have made sense. However, the people who had supported the losing candidate still attempted to make claims that the winning candidate wasn’t a legitimate winner. The most prominent such protest was the birther movement. This is why it’s being brought up to you as an example of similar behavior: it was an attempt by the people who didn’t win to challenge the legitimacy of the winning candidate.
So, it’s not really a deflection. It’s not an identical protest, but at its core, it’s a claim of illegitimacy.
As you’ve demonstrated over and over, you don’t know shit.
Now will you fuck off?
You’re quibbling. It should be obvious to everyone that you are quibbling. She may or may not have committed a crime but the failure to recommend prosecution does not indicate the absence of a crime nor does it warrant use of the term “imaginary” to describe the possible crime.
The fact of the matter is that she meets all the elements of a crime but Comey didn’t feel he could establish intent and the government used its prosecutorial discretion to stop pursuing the case.
WTF does it mean to normalize the president?
And what would you know about self respect?
If you think I’m losing the debate at every level, then you are not simply retarded, you’re deluded.
I don’t remember a coordinated effort to get Obama’s election overturned. I recollect a modest effort to snatch the nomination away from him through the superdelegates but I don’t recall an effort to get a bunch of electors to switch their votes or a violent protest during his inauguration, do you?
Conservatives like OMG are just as likely to be wrong or talk out of their ass as anyone else but on this board, but they always get called out. Liberals frequently do not.
That is called psychological projection X100, Comey concluded that there was no evidence for of a crime.
Total case in point. Even the last letter of Comey to congress only allowed one that maybe something was found, but no responsible person (of course Trump and the Republicans were irresponsible) would assume it meant that the early conclusion regarding Clinton was going to be overturned. And together with what it actually ended up happening the reality is that you and Trump had really bupkis.
Because morans like you give us a bad name.
Intent is one of the elements of a crime.
It’s nothing like that at all. But, again, par for the course. Are you going to continue to flail around and outright refuse to respond to the things I ask you or the things I type, or are you going to continue to play coy and engage in strawmen?
Because if its the latter, you’re free to continue paying that by yourself while I continue to enjoy a Trump presidency 
Yep, you make a good case that he is.