And – as the saying goes – you “ain’t just whistlin’ ‘Dixie’.”
Right-wingers can also be radicals. “Radical” isn’t synonymous with "wearing a beret and a neckerchief while holding a Molotov cocktail.
I’ve been struggling against the characterization of reactionary political rhetoric as being in any way conservative since the days of Newt Gingrich and his Contract on America, and I will continue to call it out when appropriate (that is, whenever I see it being egregiously overused, to the point where I can no longer remain silent, such as in this thread).
I will concede that it is my view, rather than yours that is idiosyncratic. Atamasama can dismissively mock me as a prescriptivist all he wants. It’s a label I will proudly wear.*
*(if inconsistently. I can’t be bothered to rail against the use of the word “bad” to describe what the speaker thinks of as good, for instance.)
I disagree with this. Having some smart, savvy Conservatives is a good thing for the forum. Of course being a Trumper rarely means you’re a Conservative and almost guarantees you’re not smart or savvy.
I do know Conservatives that held their nose to vote for Trump. Some only in 2016. This is how I felt about voting for the Kerry/Edwards ticket in 2004. I disliked/hated the pair, but they were both respectively better than Bush/Cheney.
I like having other points of view, if the person involved is willing to argue the issues without making snide attacks. In general I think PG manages this, although many of their efforts slide into ludicrous both-siderisms, pearl clutching, and an excessive willingness to give unearned benefit of the doubt. Despite this, I don’t consider them a troll, or even (normally) willfully dishonest, which is more than I can say about most.
And it’s a very good way for me to judge the general trends of what so-called ‘moderate’ conservatives are thinking or being bombarded with by their sources WITHOUT having to go to those websites myself. So beneficial as an aggregate.
The funny thing is that I almost mentioned that very example by comparison.
I’m actually laughing in real life as I type this.
Anyway, PG is someone I’ve had on ignore for a while. Don’t feel like I’m missing anything. Anything worth reading, I mean.
I see Amber13 created yet another non-sensical thread, refused to, or was utterly unable to answer questions in such a way as to make it sensical, and had their thread shut down again.
https://boards.straightdope.com /t/whats-the-difference-between-outlines-after-the-sketch-preparatory-drawing-and-line-art-without-a-sketch/991209/19
Link broken of course. I want to point out that in closing it ECG seemed to be more than slightly ticked off at the repeat pattern.
And said poster has created 4 threads in the last 30 days, but has only read 138 posts. I mean, this is the same poster that Chronos closed their first thread as “random pot-induced musings.”
Nobody has anything to say about the long time poster who started the ethnic cleansing thread? If he’s not trolling, he’s profoundly stupid. Or maybe he’s just a monster.
Actually, I’m about to bump that thread up to the Modloop or at least flag it and throw it open to the full staff to comment. He’s within the rules, except you know, the one about not being a jerk is what I’m thinking.
ETA: That moved quickly and thread is closed with a warning.
Minor on the filing side of things:
Do we need a tag for the Israel-Hamas War?
I have had so much to say that I don’t even read his posts anymore. My conclusion at the time was split between “stupid” and “trolling”, so I guess I missed out on the “evil” strain of thought.
As for the thread in question, I figured it wouldn’t last long just going by the title. But I never guessed it was Whack-a-Mole that started it. Just goes to show how some books can be judged by their covers, I suppose.
ETA: Although, the more I think on it, I do believe I briefly lifted my ignore listing of him, only to reinstate it after an alt-history-themed thread about the Battle of Midway, at which point I put him on ignore again and have never looked back because he is a negative-value poster who actually manages to get other posters pissed off at each other, in addition to himself, for the whack-a-mole (game) style of arguments he puts forward (he just keeps cycling through three or four, insisting that even if one isn’t correct this other argument must be, as if they haven’t each been soundly refuted). After 20 years, it’s time for people to realize the game isn’t going to change, an it isn’t going to end anytime soon, so you might as well just cut your losses and walk.
I don’t believe it will be going away soon.
Actually, I just added israel-hamas-war
Thank you, and thank you for closing that thread,
Yes, we obviously need non-news threads discussing the politics and what the kind of solutions might actually work, but it would not be a good look for the board for that to be the start of a multi-thousand post thread that gets into that issue.
I know another thread was started by puzzlegal. The tag link will auto-update to show them all. I did not include the thread I closed however.
I always go back and forth with the poster in question. I don’t -think- they are a troll, or even (by some standards) a jerk… but they LOOOOVE to poke, prod, and be adversarial. Which is DAMN close to most definitions of both troll and jerk, and certainly asshole. But I think they do it because they love the whole process of the argument as well as wanting to win their side of the argument. Which again, is a fine and blurry line between “enthusiastic debate” and the terms above.
I fall juuust on the side of the former, but I personally think they slip past the line on occasions regardless (and certainly in THIS case) and would not go any further than this in defending them.
ETA - for the record, I kept the fuck out of that thread because, as I said elsewhere, I’m far too emotionally involved to debate the topic in good faith. The fact that they started the thread (which as W_E said was borderline) was a flag for me, and the way they argued it later showed that they had no interest in such caution.
Amber? Hmmm? Where have I heard that name before?
Yep, I’ll bet she’s Depp’s ex. Writing style, etc.
Ex—actly 
It was an instant blood pressure-raiser. I’m pleased I had the mental fortitude to stay out of it. I suppose as long as it was there somebody had to take the bullet and go in and argue that shit, but better them than me 
.