Despite several attempts over the years to discuss possible GOP presidents, kaylasdad99, you insisted instead that the prospect of such a thing was a paradox and “unacceptable,” and thereby implied it would never come to pass.
Since we now seem on track to have it happen starting January 20th, 2017, I would like to revisit just precisely how you believe “unacceptable” will manifest itself.
Some examples:
(in response to a thread about a potential Romney win)
(in response to a question about an idealized GOP candidate)
(In response to my observation that when the Democrats are in the minority, they will “obstruct” and it won’t be criticized here)
(And in response to a question about Hillary Clinton’s notional opponent)
I agree that it’s classy to insist that people be accountable for what they say here, yes.
I suspect that you see it differently - that it was fine for a poster to simply insist that there was no point in even discussing a GOP president – that such a thing was a paradox. That, unchallengeable at the time, was fine? But now that there is a factual rebuttal, it’s not classy to offer it up in rebuttal?
That definition of “classy,” I don’t agree with. Classy argument would have involved acknowledging that of course there was some future chance of a GOP president and that this was neither a paradox nor “unacceptable.”
Instead of “classy”, I suggest… “meaningless”. in the sense that one can insist all one wants on something, but one has no (indeed, should have no) right to a response.
To be fair to Bricker, that fact that I called it a paradox can be reasonably construed as an implication of impossibility.
I hereby withdraw portions of any of my statements that characterized a Republican victory in a presidential election as “paradoxical.”
It’s still unacceptable. And I consider it to be a crime against humanity. Perpetrated by individuals who actively hate America and what she purports to stand for. Especially in the current instance.
I personally liken the current manifestation of the Republican Party to a desire to be punished for something, or at best a desire to punish others for something even if oneself suffers as much or worse in the process.
Similar to religion, actually, but not the “care for the poor” kind of religion, the classic old-timey smite-'em-all religion.
Eh, I take “paradox” to be absurdity or contradiction on the face of things, like the “twin paradox” and such. Not impossible, and not even necessarily contradictory, but going against the current knowledge.
I mean, I do consider it a paradox that someone would complain about clinton’s honesty, and then vote for trump. It is obviously not impossible though, just unacceptable.
How, exactly, do you think that you’re holding kaylasdad99 to be accountable?
You “suspect” that I see it differently? My use of the roll-eyes emoji wasn’t a blatant tipoff that my pst was sarcastic and not supportive of your OP? I would have thought your perceptions where much sharper than that, I admit. Next time, I’ll try and be a bit more explicit so as not to further confuse you.
Nothing about your OP or your subsequent posts in this thread has been classy. Was that explicit enough, or should I elaborate?
Would it be terribly upsetting for you to learn that if I were to assemble a list of people from whom I sought advice on aspects of acting classy, your name would not be found near the top?
