Talk about Trump (and other off topic stuff)

[Guest Kloaked]

13 minutes ago, stconquest said:

Does this seem normal to you?  Is it an acceptable way to have a disagreement?

No, but posting two threads of anti-Trump videos within hours of posting the first just to bait/troll people who disagree with you, talk to the people you disagree with in a super condescending manner and then complain about why people disagree with you in the way that they do is the definition of cognitive dissonance.

 

You didn't post the threads I'm talking about, but you do have a case of cognitive dissonance here even if you don't see it. You seem like a very intelligent person that I would like to converse with even though we disagree, but you will often use insulting language and subtly word your posts into a personal attack.

[stconquest]

20 minutes ago, PCMasterDebater said:

 

I'm not surprised, people are ridiculous with their beliefs either side of the pendulum. For those smart enough, we don't even show up to the debate. Cause there really isn't one to begin with... Ever.

I'd be satisfied if people simply understood what it means to be an individual, to have your own mind and own thoughts.  It seems that there is a lot of misrepresentation going on by attempting to group people to meet the needs of an argument.

 

Some people in these forums seem to think all "liberals" are responsible for acts of violence coming out of what seems to them to be "the left".  If someone does not identify as a Republican Conservative (or w/e) they are deemed violent, bigoted troublemakers.  Same goes for the opposite of the coin, Reps all being white, redneck, bigots and such.

 

I am not always right, I appreciate when someone proves me wrong; even if I don't like being wrong.  That user I referenced would not concede to being wrong to the point where he/she blames me for his/her broad generalizations that ultimately got the thread closed.  I was at fault for responding.  I was not terribly derogatory or spiteful towards him/her.  He/she just could not understand that not all "liberals" were what they believed all liberals to be. 

[stconquest]

12 minutes ago, MrDynamicMan said:

The worst part is I can't even tell who that is. 

It is better that way. 

12 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

No, but posting two threads of anti-Trump videos within hours of posting the first just to bait/troll people who disagree with you, talk to the people you disagree with in a super condescending manner and then complain about why people disagree with you in the way that they do is the definition of cognitive dissonance.

 

You didn't post the threads I'm talking about, but you do have a case of cognitive dissonance here even if you don't see it. You seem like a very intelligent person that I would like to converse with even though we disagree, but you will often use insulting language and subtly word your posts into a personal attack.

It is hard work to imply someone is not functioning with a proper level of logic without saying:  You're stupid.

 

When I am wrong, I don't even mind some saying I am stupid... but there needs to be be validity to the claim as it pertains to the argument.  Like my lack of awareness that MS's Visio is not the same as Vizio, the display company.  You could call me stupid, and it would not bother me as I was wrong.

 

Accusing me of cognitive dissonance is disturbing.  I would appreciate a small amount of elaboration.  If I truly suffer from cognitive dissonance, it would be difficult for me to detect sometimes.

[MrDynamicMan]

Wonder how long this one will last until it goes up in flames. Yay. 

1 minute ago, stconquest said:

It is better that way. 

Just read the thread. Pretty sure I know now, lol. 

1 minute ago, stconquest said:

It is hard work to imply someone is not functioning with a proper level of logic without saying:  You're stupid.

 

When I am wrong, I don't even mind some saying I am stupid... but there needs to be be validity to the claim as it pertains to the argument.  Like my lack of awareness that MS's Visio is not the same as Vizio, the display company.  You could call me stupid, and it would not bother me as I was wrong.

 

1 minute ago, stconquest said:

Accusing me of cognitive dissonance is disturbing.  I would appreciate a small amount of elaboration.  If I truly suffer from cognitive dissonance, it would be difficult for me to detect sometimes.

Yeah. I'm fine with being accused of cognitive dissonance, as long as it's being backed up. I hate being a hypocrite and will gladly take criticism on board, but don't hurl such things around as ad hominem or insults or generalizations. If you can say "person X said here something that goes completely against what they said here" is fine but simply saying "lol you're a sjw/Trump supporter, you (bigot/cuck/racist/etc/etc/etc.,)" 

[PCMasterDebater]

4 minutes ago, stconquest said:

It is better that way. 

It is hard work to imply someone is not functioning with a proper level of logic without saying:  You're stupid.

 

When I am wrong, I don't even mind some saying I am stupid... but there needs to be be validity to the claim as it pertains to the argument.  Like my lack of awareness that MS's Visio is not the same as Vizio, the display company.  You could call me stupid, and it would not bother me as I was wrong.

 

Accusing me of cognitive dissonance is disturbing.  I would appreciate a small amount of elaboration.  If I truly suffer from cognitive dissonance, it would be difficult for me to detect sometimes.

 

We should all practice intolerance for the greater good.

 

Don't agree with me?  Well you're just stupid.

 

 

I'm not helping am I? hehe

[stconquest]

It is weird.  I know that the recent violence at the university was terrible.

 

The way I think is:  Those acting out by doing property damage and assaulting individuals are not helping any liberal movement in any way.  A peaceful protest raises awareness at the very least.  If the violence does not help "the left", what does it do for the right?  In actuality, it does nothing good for them either.  Individuals that identify these violent groups as liberals/democrats/progressive, use that determination to point a finger at people that have nothing to do with the violence.  It irks me.

 

With a tin foil hat firmly in place:  I could easily argue the violence was perpetrated due to a financial incentive from someone wishing to paint "the left" in a bad light.  ...but I have no evidence of that; pure speculation. 

 

I just see the level of stupidity in the form of rampant and needless violence and think:  How can this be truly political?  These acts are perpetrated in a 100% level of error.  Being political should mean there is a level of understanding of how to act as it affects others around you; to communicate ideas to raise awareness or inform.  Acting out in violence is not a political endeavor, it is a act of desperation.  The problem is that the perpetrators at the university were not under duress of any kind.  It is just weird, because it is so pointless.

[Guest Kloaked]

Just now, stconquest said:

It is hard work to imply someone is not functioning with a proper level of logic without saying:  You're stupid.

That goes both ways. That's what goes through people's minds when they disagree with someone, but it seems to be a minority of people today who can keep the rudeness in their head and not let it get the best of the conversation. Instead, they shove the insults away and will have a conversation "like adults". I've wanted to call you and other people on this forum names countless times and I have refrained since for one, the forum has rules, and two, name-calling is fucking pointless and doesn't validate anything you say any more than you think it does.

 

3 minutes ago, stconquest said:

When I am wrong, I don't even mind some saying I am stupid... but there needs to be be validity to the claim as it pertains to the argument.  Like my lack of awareness that MS's Visio is not the same as Vizio, the display company.  You could call me stupid, and it would not bother me as I was wrong.

The problem with the topics that get discussed here about Trump is that we cannot confirm anything about Trump that would paint him as a better choice for POTUS over other people - not just Clinton. This is especially hard when you already have a preconception about Trump and are hardhearted about your opinion about him already. Most of it becomes merely an anecdotal debate/argument anyways so asking for proof of something in that case is kinda pointless in my opinion. I'm not saying you can say some shit and not have to back it up, but when you've been going on with your own anecdotal arguments with the person you're arguing with and then you end up asking for evidence, that's pretty dumb.

 

3 minutes ago, stconquest said:

Accusing me of cognitive dissonance is disturbing.  I would appreciate a small amount of elaboration.  If I truly suffer from cognitive dissonance, it would be difficult for me to detect sometimes.

Just above you were complaining about someone on the forum who is a Trump supporter, and then you quoted a PM they sent you. I know who you're talking about because they sent me a PM earlier and the language sounds like the same person. You're using him as your Trump supporter token to say that you can't have a proper debate or argument with a Trump supporter because they do things like that - saying does this seem normal to you?  Is it an acceptable way to have a disagreement?

 

Yet you do exactly what you're accusing him of doing. That's cognitive dissonance. I'm not going to link you to every single post you've ever made, but you are one of the people on my mental list of trying to avoid on the forum since you will eventually turn the seemingly okay debate into a shit show. You are not the worst one, but you still do it.

[TidaLWaveZ]

 

buh dee buh duh dee buh duh dee buh duh dee buh duh, that's all folks!

[stconquest]

38 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

That goes both ways. That's what goes through people's minds when they disagree with someone, but it seems to be a minority of people today who can keep the rudeness in their head and not let it get the best of the conversation. Instead, they shove the insults away and will have a conversation "like adults". I've wanted to call you and other people on this forum names countless times and I have refrained since for one, the forum has rules, and two, name-calling is fucking pointless and doesn't validate anything you say any more than you think it does.

I have noticed you refraining from any hostility, just saying.

 

Quote

 

The problem with the topics that get discussed here about Trump is that we cannot confirm anything about Trump that would paint him as a better choice for POTUS over other people - not just Clinton. This is especially hard when you already have a preconception about Trump and are hardhearted about your opinion about him already. Most of it becomes merely an anecdotal debate/argument anyways so asking for proof of something in that case is kinda pointless in my opinion. I'm not saying you can say some shit and not have to back it up, but when you've been going on with your own anecdotal arguments with the person you're arguing with and then you end up asking for evidence, that's pretty dumb.

If you string enough anecdotal evidence together, you sometimes get a pattern.  I was heavily critical of Obama for the things he did wrong but I was nowhere near the level of some of the members that would arbitrarily accuse the former president of being the anti-christ and such.  I criticize on a case by case basis.  Trump is a "target rich" president from the get go.  It is seemingly never ending.

 

My understanding of Trump goes back well before this election cycle.  To many people, Trump is just a loudmouth showman that deserves a chance.  I don't see him in that light, I can't.  His chance to be a decent person was long gone before the election, and now he can change into someone worthy of the office... but that is not happening  (apparently).  I worry that he can be manipulated to a degree well beyond that of Obama... maybe worse than Bush.  I will continue to be critical, that is not going to change.  I have established an understanding of what Trump is capable of ideologically based on his public past; his only avenue to success being that of someone that can change for the better.

 

Quote

Just above you were complaining about someone on the forum who is a Trump supporter, and then you quoted a PM they sent you. I know who you're talking about because they sent me a PM earlier and the language sounds like the same person. You're using him as your Trump supporter token to say that you can't have a proper debate or argument with a Trump supporter because they do things like that - saying does this seem normal to you?  Is it an acceptable way to have a disagreement?

 

Yet you do exactly what you're accusing him of doing. That's cognitive dissonance. I'm not going to link you to every single post you've ever made, but you are one of the people on my mental list of trying to avoid on the forum since you will eventually turn the seemingly okay debate into a shit show. You are not the worst one, but you still do it.

Please, we can go back into the thread and go post by post if you want.  Equating me to my "opponents" in that thread is not a fair fight.  One of them was completely off his/her rocker and the other has spread so much garbage about the greatness of Trump in this forum I would be hard pressed to weigh his fact:totalbull ratio.

 

Now honestly, I know what I am like and how some of the members here have "given up on me".  I am okay with it. 

 

A while back (1.5 months) I found myself being overly aggressive with members and decide it would be interesting to push as far as I could.  I have always been someone that had a tendency to do something simply because I was told not to.  Some emergency trips to the hospital ensued... I am serious.  My internally questioning mechanism is probably off as it pertains to the "why" when told something. 

 

I got as far as I could go and the mods here were gracious enough to put me in my place.  I sure did deserve it. 

 

So I go back to what I know works.  Be polite and try to be knowledgeable.  Question everything, and reflect on every idea you promote to members here.  If you have noticed, my "reminding device" is to not curse on the forums.  It is not that cursing is inherently wrong.  I chose that device as a reminder to "be cool".

 

Thanks for the input Kloaked, much appreciated.

[Guest Kloaked]

25 minutes ago, stconquest said:

If you string enough anecdotal evidence together, you sometime get a pattern.  I was heavily critical of Obama for the things he did wrong but I was nowhere near the level of some of the members that would arbitrarily accuse the former president of being the anti-christ and such.  I criticize on a case by case basis.  Trump is a "target rich" president from the get go.  It is seemingly never ending.

People saying Obama is the anti-Christ don't know anything about what the Judaeo Christian belief about the anti-Christ is, so it's best to just ignore those people because you will get nowhere with them. I have a family member who likes Trump, but he thinks he is the anti-Christ. This person is also a deacon of a church. Figure that one out.

 

Trump is all about capitalism, but he has also historically been liberal on many issues and still is compared with the established Republican party before he ran. This isn't something people ignore. Trump supporters know the dude is filthy rich and likes to make money. The logic in supporting him, at least for me, is that he has policies that will potentially benefit the economy in a conservative way. Meaning if everyone would have some personal responsibility, a trait that is seemingly rare if you judge the mass population of America by what is posted online and what you see in the media, you can have some of the wealth that is going to be created by less taxes and regulations that will help everyone from big businesses to the little man who started his own business by himself - something extremely hard to do since I know someone who went through hell to get his plumbing business started.

 

So I don't know what you mean by "target rich" President.

 

No, I cannot sit here and tell you that whatever Trump wants to do will be perfect or will be good at all. It sounds good on paper, just like a ton of CPU cores on a single die. But if it doesn't actually perform well, then you know the rest I think.

 

25 minutes ago, stconquest said:

My understanding of Trump goes back well before this election cycle.  To many people, Trump is just a loudmouth showman that deserves a chance.  I don't see him in that light, I can't.  His chance to be a decent person was long gone before the election, and now he can change into someone worthy of the office... but that is not happening  (apparently).  I worry that he can be manipulated to a degree well beyond that of Obama... maybe worse than Bush.  I will continue to be critical, that is not going to change.  I have established an understanding of what Trump is capable of ideologically based on his public past; his only avenue to success being that of someone that can change for the better.

Trump is a dick, a troll, arguably a misogynist, whatever. This isn't new to anyone. The difference here is he has a history that people can look at since he is such a loudmouth asshole on Twitter and has been for years just for example - compared to other politicians like Obama for example who came from a legal background of being a professor and an attorney which looks good on paper. Trump came from wealth and built more wealth from his share of it and was the typical rich dude who thinks he can get away with anything. Obama had an actual legal background. Which one would you vote for if they were competing today? I would probably even vote for Obama because he is extremely convincing in his speeches and makes you believe what he wants to do is the way to go. Trump did the same thing except he strategically campaigned in certain areas with his usual rhetoric and it got him in the White House.

 

People wanted Trump as President for the same reason people wanted Obama as President. They ran successful campaigns despite the negative crap that people dug up about them. Trump did exactly what Hillary tried to do except she failed miserably because she is a shill and got too comfortable with the people who were already going to vote for her anyways. I'm not going to say everyone who voted for Trump or Hillary did it because it wasn't the other candidate, but you're kidding yourself if you think people who voted for Trump are doing so ignorantly. They know what they were getting into. It was a risk that hopefully will pay off.

 

25 minutes ago, stconquest said:

Please, we can go back into the thread and go post by post if you want.  Equating me to my "opponents" in that thread is not a fair fight.  One of them was completely off his/her rocker and the other has spread so much garbage about the greatness of Trump in this forum I would be hard pressed to weigh his fact:totalbull ratio.

I'm not equating you to them. I'm saying you do the same things that you're accusing Trump supporters of doing. When someone says something you disagree with that you think is complete bullshit, you mock them. When someone counters what you say, you will word your post in a condescending way. You do the same things that they do. Even if you believe you are correct in doing so since they did it to you, it's still wrong to do it because you're automatically making every Trump supporter out to be an ignorant fool.

 

25 minutes ago, stconquest said:

Now honestly, I know what I am like and how some of the members here have "given up on me".  I am okay with it. 

 

A while back (1.5 months) I found myself being overly aggressive with members and decide it would be interesting to push as far as I could.  I have always someone that had a tendency to do something simply because I was told not to.  Some emergency trips to the hospital ensued... I am serious.  My internally questioning mechanism is probably off as it pertains to the "why" when told something. 

 

I got as far as I could go and the mods here were gracious enough to put me in my place.  I sure did deserve it. 

 

So I go back to what I know works.  Be polite and try to knowledgeable.  Question everything, and reflect on every idea you promote to members here.  If you have noticed, my reminding device is to not curse on the forums.  It is not that curing is inherently wrong.  I chose that device as a reminder to "be cool".

 

Thanks for the input Kloaked, much appreciated.

Again, you still do these things. I've seen you and Ivan circlejerking each other in other political threads. You may not realize you're doing it, but you do it. Go check out your own post history. If you seriously want me to link you to specific posts I will, but no promises because I'm losing interest in this to be honest.

[Tech_Dreamer]

in a nutshell it's an alternate version of #NotMyPresident , Pretty decent analysis, but cramming in things which reinforces the general theme of the video,  he does have the points , But the smelly thing was The way he reasons all the fact check list is like WebMD diagnosing a simple headache checklist to severe brain tumer at the end & you have a few days to live , the genuine intention of it is pretty visible , but hate is a good distraction.

 

this is basic behavior analysis that focuses on whats wrong with the individual from the persons behavior & social interactions so far ,  then exaggerated things to a point he compares it to a , for real?? "the president can barely read", the first thing he burned through was revoking the TPP, pretty sure he just nodded his head because he felt not reading it *pun intended*  pretty sure according to him the rest of the legit literates were doing it right , this was the first right thing and he completely avoided that fact &  he probably avoided all of the rest of the videos on him properly & professionally (yes he does it rarely, ) explaining things ..oh wait, that's not the point he was trying to make, if he does do that then it wont adhere to the whole political message on trump is an idiot , 

 

that the the last quote the person may have problems with "understanding & solving problems"  , so far he's done things ,  thing is the problem side is he wasn't that much of political correct doing those things,

[dexT]

1 hour ago, Kloaked said:

Just above you were complaining about someone on the forum who is a Trump supporter, and then you quoted a PM they sent you. I know who you're talking about because they sent me a PM earlier and the language sounds like the same person. You're using him as your Trump supporter token to say that you can't have a proper debate or argument with a Trump supporter because they do things like that - saying does this seem normal to you?  Is it an acceptable way to have a disagreement?

I'm the one that sent stconquest the PM but I never messaged you. I have no problem with you.

[Guest Kloaked]

Just now, dexT said:

I'm the one that sent stconquest the PM but I never message you. I have no problem with you.

It sounded like someone else. Your message still makes things worse.

[dexT]

7 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

It sounded like someone else. Your message still makes things worse.

Yeah poor judgement. Already done though. I don't care for Trump to tell the truth.

[ivan134]

51 minutes ago, stconquest said:

I have noticed you refraining from any hostility, just saying.

 

If you string enough anecdotal evidence together, you sometimes get a pattern.  I was heavily critical of Obama for the things he did wrong but I was nowhere near the level of some of the members that would arbitrarily accuse the former president of being the anti-christ and such.  I criticize on a case by case basis.  Trump is a "target rich" president from the get go.  It is seemingly never ending.

 

My understanding of Trump goes back well before this election cycle.  To many people, Trump is just a loudmouth showman that deserves a chance.  I don't see him in that light, I can't.  His chance to be a decent person was long gone before the election, and now he can change into someone worthy of the office... but that is not happening  (apparently).  I worry that he can be manipulated to a degree well beyond that of Obama... maybe worse than Bush.  I will continue to be critical, that is not going to change.  I have established an understanding of what Trump is capable of ideologically based on his public past; his only avenue to success being that of someone that can change for the better.

 

Please, we can go back into the thread and go post by post if you want.  Equating me to my "opponents" in that thread is not a fair fight.  One of them was completely off his/her rocker and the other has spread so much garbage about the greatness of Trump in this forum I would be hard pressed to weigh his fact:totalbull ratio.

 

Now honestly, I know what I am like and how some of the members here have "given up on me".  I am okay with it. 

 

A while back (1.5 months) I found myself being overly aggressive with members and decide it would be interesting to push as far as I could.  I have always been someone that had a tendency to do something simply because I was told not to.  Some emergency trips to the hospital ensued... I am serious.  My internally questioning mechanism is probably off as it pertains to the "why" when told something. 

 

I got as far as I could go and the mods here were gracious enough to put me in my place.  I sure did deserve it. 

 

So I go back to what I know works.  Be polite and try to be knowledgeable.  Question everything, and reflect on every idea you promote to members here.  If you have noticed, my "reminding device" is to not curse on the forums.  It is not that cursing is inherently wrong.  I chose that device as a reminder to "be cool".

 

Thanks for the input Kloaked, much appreciated.

I commend you for that, but I can't do it anymore. I've been doing that doing the last 9 years and I'm tired. There's only one language they understand.

 

Contrary to the popular belief of right wing bubbles, and I know you already know this, the authoritarian left is just a vocal minority. Most liberals in the U.S. like to "take the higher ground", "be the better person" and think that the truth, facts and logic will always win against spin. This kind of thinking is why we got Trump and I don't think "being cool" works. Attempting to have a rational conversation with irrational people is a fool's errand as far as I'm concerned.

 

I saw an analysis that got me thinking about how liberals tend to frame an issue in a logical manner when logic doesn't work on the average person. Conservative ruling class tend to have backgrounds in marketing and are skilled at manipulating the general populace (I might be using some wrong words here, I'll try and find the analysis). 

 

I'm not attacking you, in fact I commend you, but IMO that approach doesn't get anything done against the majority of conservatives.

[Guest Kloaked]

2 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

I commend you for that, but I can't do it anymore. I've been doing that doing the last 9 years and I'm tired. There's only one language they understand.

 

Contrary to the popular belief of right wing bubbles, and I know you already know this, the authoritarian left is just a vocal minority. Most liberals in the U.S. like to "take the higher ground", "be the better person" and think that the truth, facts and logic will always win against spin. This kind of thinking is why we got Trump and I don't think "being cool" works. Attempting to have a rational conversation with irrational people is a fool's errand as far as I'm concerned.

 

I saw an analysis that got me thinking about how liberals tend to frame an issue in a logical manner when logic doesn't work on the average person. Conservative ruling class tend to have backgrounds in marketing and are skilled at manipulating the general populace (I might be using some wrong words here, I'll try and find the analysis). 

 

I'm not attacking you, in fact I commend you, but IMO that approach doesn't get anything done against the majority of conservatives.

This right here is a prime example of cognitive dissonance. You're expecting everyone to have a rational conversation with you, yet when someone disagrees with what you say you want to respond in a condescending manner. You're assuming almost every single person who identifies as a conservative and/or republican has some form of idiocy so bad that they cannot be reasoned with. You assume that the average person is a sheep.

 

Yet in every political thread here recently, you have responded to me with smugness and condescension since you're assuming everything about me. You talk about "right wing bubbles" yet you're living in a bubble yourself if this is the way you talk to people that you disagree with in person. 

[stconquest]

9 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

People saying Obama is the anti-Christ don't know anything about what the Judaeo Christian belief about the anti-Christ is, so it's best to just ignore those people because you will get nowhere with them. I have a family member who likes Trump, but he thinks he is the anti-Christ. This person is also a deacon of a church. Figure that one out.

 

Trump is all about capitalism, but he has also historically been liberal on many issues and still is compared with the established Republican party before he ran. This isn't something people ignore. Trump supporters know the dude is filthy rich and likes to make money. The logic in supporting him, at least for me, is that he has policies that will potentially benefit the economy in a conservative way. Meaning if everyone would have some personal responsibility, a trait that is seemingly rare if you judge the mass population of America by what is posted online and what you see in the media, you can have some of the wealth that is going to be created by less taxes and regulations that will help everyone from big businesses to the little man who started his own business by himself - something extremely hard to do since I know someone who went through hell to get his plumbing business started.

 

So I don't know what you mean by "target rich" President.

 

No, I cannot sit here and tell you that whatever Trump wants to do will be perfect or will be good at all. It sounds good on paper, just like a ton of CPU cores on a single die. But if it doesn't actually perform well, then you know the rest I think.

 

Trump is a dick, a troll, arguably a misogynist, whatever. This isn't new to anyone. The difference here is he has a history that people can look at since he is such a loudmouth asshole on Twitter and has been for years just for example - compared to other politicians like Obama for example who came from a legal background of being a professor and an attorney which looks good on paper. Trump came from wealth and built more wealth from his share of it and was the typical rich dude who thinks he can get away with anything. Obama had an actual legal background. Which one would you vote for if they were competing today? I would probably even vote for Obama because he is extremely convincing in his speeches and makes you believe what he wants to do is the way to go. Trump did the same thing except he strategically campaigned in certain areas with his usual rhetoric and it got him in the White House.

Target Rich in regards to the things he does and says.  Things like:  His first military strike being a dismal failure and reporting it as a success; having administrative representatives spout falsehoods into the news; constant stream of garbage ranting on his twitter; trying to institute a immigration/travel ban and trying to convince everyone it is not targeting Muslims, when that is what it effectively does;... oh there is so much more it hurts; draining the swamp/cleaning up Washington; prosecuting Clinton; attacking (not criticizing per incident) the media to get cheers;  lying about his candidacy/presidency causing particular businesses to set up shop in the US (Fiat Plant is a good example); lying about his wealth and finances; fictitious people referenced by him as evidence to his arguments being right; running scams like Trump U; publicly persecuting innocent people with the intention of having them deemed criminals (Central Park Five); climate change denial; you mentioned misogyny, but that is a personal thing...

 

...target rich as in easy to rightly criticize.

 

9 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

 

People wanted Trump as President for the same reason people wanted Obama as President. They ran successful campaigns despite the negative crap that people dug up about them. Trump did exactly what Hillary tried to do except she failed miserably because she is a shill and got too comfortable with the people who were already going to vote for her anyways. I'm not going to say everyone who voted for Trump or Hillary did it because it wasn't the other candidate, but you're kidding yourself if you think people who voted for Trump are doing so ignorantly. They know what they were getting into. It was a risk that hopefully will pay off.

I hope you are right about it paying off.  I also hope that payoff does not come at a big cost to the public welfare.

 

9 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

 

I'm not equating you to them. I'm saying you do the same things that you're accusing Trump supporters of doing. When someone says something you disagree with that you think is complete bullshit, you mock them. When someone counters what you say, you will word your post in a condescending way. You do the same things that they do. Even if you believe you are correct in doing so since they did it to you, it's still wrong to do it because you're automatically making every Trump supporter out to be an ignorant fool.

 

Again, you still do these things. I've seen you an Ivan circlejerking each other in other political threads. You may not realize you're doing it, but you do it. Go check out your own post history. If you seriously want me to link you to specific posts I will, but no promises because I'm losing interest in this to be honest.

I went through that thread entirely, again.  You are right.  I am still aggressive, with stop gaps.  I am condescending, fair assertion.  I did mock a member in that thread.  I can't say you are wrong about that.  I probably will continue, to some degree.  We'll see.

[Guest Kloaked]

1 minute ago, stconquest said:

Target Rich in regards to the things he does and says.  Things like:  His first military strike being a dismal failure and reporting it as a success; having administrative representatives spout falsehoods into the news; constant stream of garbage ranting on his twitter; trying to institute a immigration/travel ban and trying to convince everyone it is not targeting Muslims, when that is what it effectively does;... oh there is so much more it hurts; draining the swamp/cleaning up Washington; prosecuting Clinton; attacking (not criticizing per incident) the media to get cheers;  lying about his candidacy/presidency causing particular businesses to set up shop in the US (Fiat Plant is a good example); lying about his wealth and finances; fictitious people referenced by him as evidence to his arguments being right; running scams like Trump U; publicly persecuting innocent people with the intention of having them deemed criminals (Central Park Five); climate change denial; you mentioned misogyny, but that is a personal thing...

 

...target rich as in easy to rightly criticize.

 

I hope you are right about it paying off.  I also hope that payoff does not come at a big cost to the public welfare.

 

I went through that thread entirely, again.  You are right.  I am still aggressive, with stop gaps.  I am condescending, fair assertion.  I did mock a member in that thread.  I can't say you are wrong about that.  I probably will continue, to some degree.  We'll see.

You have legitimate criticisms of Trump, but based on what you're saying it sounds like you're getting your information from people who have an agenda against this new administration. I have my own grievances with Trump but the media is generally lying about what he's doing.

 

I can PM you later if you'd like to discuss this stuff more. I feel like this thread is going to get locked soon™.

[ivan134]

12 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

This right here is a prime example of cognitive dissonance. You're expecting everyone to have a rational conversation with you, yet when someone disagrees with what you say you want to respond in a condescending manner. You're assuming almost every single person who identifies as a conservative and/or republican has some form of idiocy so bad that they cannot be reasoned with. You assume that the average person is a sheep.

 

Yet in every political thread here recently, you have responded to me with smugness and condescension since you're assuming everything about me. You talk about "right wing bubbles" yet you're living in a bubble yourself if this is the way you talk to people that you disagree with in person. 

False. I am not expecting anything out of anyone. That is just your assumption. I've done the last of my expecting over the last 9 years. I have come to fully grasp what I'm dealing with. Unfortunately, most liberals still don't get it.

1 hour ago, Kloaked said:

People saying Obama is the anti-Christ don't know anything about what the Judaeo Christian belief about the anti-Christ is, so it's best to just ignore those people because you will get nowhere with them. I have a family member who likes Trump, but he thinks he is the anti-Christ. This person is also a deacon of a church. Figure that one out.

 

Trump is all about capitalism, but he has also historically been liberal on many issues and still is compared with the established Republican party before he ran. This isn't something people ignore. Trump supporters know the dude is filthy rich and likes to make money. The logic in supporting him, at least for me, is that he has policies that will potentially benefit the economy in a conservative way. Meaning if everyone would have some personal responsibility, a trait that is seemingly rare if you judge the mass population of America by what is posted online and what you see in the media, you can have some of the wealth that is going to be created by less taxes and regulations that will help everyone from big businesses to the little man who started his own business by himself - something extremely hard to do since I know someone who went through hell to get his plumbing business started.

 

So I don't know what you mean by "target rich" President.

 

No, I cannot sit here and tell you that whatever Trump wants to do will be perfect or will be good at all. It sounds good on paper, just like a ton of CPU cores on a single die. But if it doesn't actually perform well, then you know the rest I think.

 

Trump is a dick, a troll, arguably a misogynist, whatever. This isn't new to anyone. The difference here is he has a history that people can look at since he is such a loudmouth asshole on Twitter and has been for years just for example - compared to other politicians like Obama for example who came from a legal background of being a professor and an attorney which looks good on paper. Trump came from wealth and built more wealth from his share of it and was the typical rich dude who thinks he can get away with anything. Obama had an actual legal background. Which one would you vote for if they were competing today? I would probably even vote for Obama because he is extremely convincing in his speeches and makes you believe what he wants to do is the way to go. Trump did the same thing except he strategically campaigned in certain areas with his usual rhetoric and it got him in the White House.

 

People wanted Trump as President for the same reason people wanted Obama as President. They ran successful campaigns despite the negative crap that people dug up about them. Trump did exactly what Hillary tried to do except she failed miserably because she is a shill and got too comfortable with the people who were already going to vote for her anyways. I'm not going to say everyone who voted for Trump or Hillary did it because it wasn't the other candidate, but you're kidding yourself if you think people who voted for Trump are doing so ignorantly. They know what they were getting into. It was a risk that hopefully will pay off.

 

I'm not equating you to them. I'm saying you do the same things that you're accusing Trump supporters of doing. When someone says something you disagree with that you think is complete bullshit, you mock them. When someone counters what you say, you will word your post in a condescending way. You do the same things that they do. Even if you believe you are correct in doing so since they did it to you, it's still wrong to do it because you're automatically making every Trump supporter out to be an ignorant fool.

 

Again, you still do these things. I've seen you and Ivan circlejerking each other in other political threads. You may not realize you're doing it, but you do it. Go check out your own post history. If you seriously want me to link you to specific posts I will, but no promises because I'm losing interest in this to be honest.

Aka you have no grasp on economic systems and purposely deciding to ignore history. Those are the exact policies that led to the crash of 08 and is the reason why most red states are doing terribly financially and have a ridiculous number of people on welfare. Care to cite any point in history this method has worked for any state, the U.S. Or any country in the world?

 

Trump did not become more successful with the had he was dealt. He made lots of really bad decisions and lost almost $1 billion at one point and had to be bailed out by people who had invested in him. If Trump had just invested the money he inherited, he would have been better off today 

 

Ummm, target rich means he's an easy target with lots of things to attack him on. Has nothing to do with his wealth.

[ivan134]

38 minutes ago, Tech_Dreamer said:

in a nutshell it's an alternate version of #NotMyPresident , Pretty decent analysis, but cramming in things which reinforces the general theme of the video,  he does have the points , But the smelly thing was The way he reasons all the fact check list is like WebMD diagnosing a simple headache checklist to severe brain tumer at the end & you have a few days to live , the genuine intention of it is pretty visible , but hate is a good distraction.

 

this is basic behavior analysis that focuses on whats wrong with the individual from the persons behavior & social interactions so far ,  then exaggerated things to a point he compares it to a , for real?? "the president can barely read", the first thing he burned through was revoking the TPP, pretty sure he just nodded his head because he felt not reading it *pun intended*  pretty sure according to him the rest of the legit literates were doing it right , this was the first right thing and he completely avoided that fact &  he probably avoided all of the rest of the videos on him properly & professionally (yes he does it rarely, ) explaining things ..oh wait, that's not the point he was trying to make, if he does do that then it wont adhere to the whole political message on trump is an idiot , 

 

that the the last quote the person may have problems with "understanding & solving problems"  , so far he's done things ,  thing is the problem side is he wasn't that much of political correct doing those things,

Judging by your grammar, I can see why you don't think this a serious issue.

[Mooshi]

Billionaire and Preaident. Obviously doing something right lmao

[Tech_Dreamer]

4 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

Judging by your grammar, I can see why you don't think this a serious issue.

Just the grammar? oh please
 

[stconquest]

51 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

You have legitimate criticisms of Trump, but based on what you're saying it sounds like you're getting your information from people who have an agenda against this new administration. I have my own grievances with Trump but the media is generally lying about what he's doing.

 

I can PM you later if you'd like to discuss this stuff more. I feel like this thread is going to get locked soon™.

Nah we are doing okay. 

 

I don't like the Trump Admin. at all(for some reason [mostly his intellect] I have faith that Mattis will be okay, but he is a soldier at heart so I don't know where to go with that), and I surely don't like the core republican establishment either... I don't like corporate interests affecting any political official, this include the establishment DNC as well.  I have an ideological agenda against these admins.  I want to see them change into admins that really do work for a better life/world, or just die off.  I won't lie about Trump because I don't like him, I would actually commend him when it is called for.  Him saying that the US is 'not that innocent' was an incident I can't fault him for.  I know he is right.  I just don't know if he plans to fix issues related to "human rights", or make them worse, globally.  It is never really clear with Trump because he is often an ideological trash heap, he is all over the place.

 

Example:  I will never let go of the idea that all war can cease on a global scale.  Objectively it is possible and makes a helluva lot of sense to work towards.  Bombing dozens of civilians to try to kill one guy in a foreign country automatically raises my IHATETRUMP flag.  Maybe this will be a lesson for him.... oh wait... that idiot went onto the podium and said it was a success.  Tomorrow Trump will come out saying he wants world peace, but the world is just to messed up... that type of guy.

 

The "media" is not generally lying about what Trump does.  If all you see the media for is the mistakes in reporting that any news outlet will experience than the "media" is 100% wrong all the time.

 

I have been watching DemocracyNow steadily for over a decade and TYT off and on for years.  I have learned that what people say reveals a path to the truth about anything, not who is saying what.  Actually listening to people simply talk reveals their convictions and indicates whether or not they know what they are talking about or even lying outright.  I used to use news outlets to motivate myself to investigate thing more thoroughly; a way to decide where to look.  I still do sometimes. 

 

If you think TYT is like Breitbart, I can't help you.  Prove it.  No they are not perfect, but they are not out to deceive people the way the Breitbart outlet will happily do.  TYT interviews is awesome.  Again:  Listening to people talk about subjects is what I like most; one real reason that someone like Trump falls off of my credibility cliff.

[Atmos]

59 minutes ago, ivan134 said:

I commend you for that, but I can't do it anymore. I've been doing that doing the last 9 years and I'm tired. There's only one language they understand.

 

Contrary to the popular belief of right wing bubbles, and I know you already know this, the authoritarian left is just a vocal minority. Most liberals in the U.S. like to "take the higher ground", "be the better person" and think that the truth, facts and logic will always win against spin. This kind of thinking is why we got Trump and I don't think "being cool" works. Attempting to have a rational conversation with irrational people is a fool's errand as far as I'm concerned.

 

I saw an analysis that got me thinking about how liberals tend to frame an issue in a logical manner when logic doesn't work on the average person. Conservative ruling class tend to have backgrounds in marketing and are skilled at manipulating the general populace (I might be using some wrong words here, I'll try and find the analysis). 

 

I'm not attacking you, in fact I commend you, but IMO that approach doesn't get anything done against the majority of conservatives.

 

You don't live in california do you?

I consider myself a liberal, one of the very few actually left living where I do, and I can say with absolute certainty you are wrong; at least, where I live in the mostly above middle class area of southern california.

Even though I agree more with the left than the right on stances of policy, if I were to voice my opinions in any sort of public form here I would be absolutely shouted down. That 'minority' you speak of, is the majority here of politically active persons, and its fucking terrifying.

 

Antifa is something I'm actually legitimately concerned about on my campus, as if the radical gender-bending marxist terrorists weren't enough. They already started violent riots on a nearby campus, and a lot of that sentiment is held at the campus I currently attend. Its fucking bad, like, really fucking bad.

[stconquest]

1 hour ago, ivan134 said:

I commend you for that, but I can't do it anymore. I've been doing that doing the last 9 years and I'm tired. There's only one language they understand.

 

Contrary to the popular belief of right wing bubbles, and I know you already know this, the authoritarian left is just a vocal minority. Most liberals in the U.S. like to "take the higher ground", "be the better person" and think that the truth, facts and logic will always win against spin. This kind of thinking is why we got Trump and I don't think "being cool" works. Attempting to have a rational conversation with irrational people is a fool's errand as far as I'm concerned.

 

I saw an analysis that got me thinking about how liberals tend to frame an issue in a logical manner when logic doesn't work on the average person. Conservative ruling class tend to have backgrounds in marketing and are skilled at manipulating the general populace (I might be using some wrong words here, I'll try and find the analysis). 

 

I'm not attacking you, in fact I commend you, but IMO that approach doesn't get anything done against the majority of conservatives.

This "SJW" bull is still beyond me.  I get what SJW opponents see, but I don't get how they correlate the general ideology of an entire majority of the population (very possible majority) to some very fringe ideology.  They have to push the space cadet ideology of wackos onto a viable target, like "moderates".

 

You are right about force, it is necessary.  Don't get me wrong, I don't mean play patty-cakes with fundamentalists of any sort and I also don't mean violence.  Just a "say no to crack" type of engagement policy as a general rule.  You control how far you want to go, or stop entirely.  I will still engage opposing views, hopefully to a productive means even if I am the only one benefiting from the experience.

 

Don't forget, this is a tech forum... we ain't getting nothing done in these political threads =P 

 

If it was not for this forum, I might not have ever learned about the threat to global freedoms that SJWs are... ...