Politics S2 MAGAs

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Fez Hammersticks

Fez Hammersticks

スーパーバッド Zero Cool
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
29,172
Likes
9,850
Points
113
Play Devil's advocate -- say all the evidence *is* true of a Trump/Russia partnership, how would you respond?
 
Not a Trump fan at all, but your thread title is offensive and probably a violation of board rules. If you want reasonable discussion (yeah, like that’s your objective) you might want to change that.
 
Fez Von Savage said:
I wrote it the way I imagined Trump would've wrote it if he were ....anti-Trump.
Click to expand...

Yeah, well try that tact with a thread about Obama and see where it gets you.

I don't see this as a thread worthy of discussion. I suspect that if undeniable evidence were brought forth showing that Trump actively colluded with the Russians to gain a win in a US presidential election even his most ardent supporters would favor impeachment. Not the insane ones, but most of those who otherwise believe in his policies and general anti-progressive agenda are still believers in the sanctity of our electoral system and would oppose someone like Putin trying to put a puppet in the White House.

That said, so far there's nothing approaching indisputable proof of collusion. How would you respond to a similar inflammatory question of board liberals about "proof" that Obama did nothing in Benghazi because he didn't want the blow-back to impact his campaign so close to the election? Or proof that Hillary's knowing misuse of a private email server to hide her correspondence was illegal and compromised government secrets. Or proof that the Clinton Foundation was actively paid by foreign governments in exchange for access to the Secretary of State?

Put up the proof about any of the hundreds of alleged political scandals and then have the discussion. As it stands, they're all just political talking points for the parties' bases and have a lot more smoke than fire.
 
e_blazer has nailed it.

The premise is on par with an actual Sharknado, but of course if it was proven true, I would want him prosecuted to the fullest extent. The Constitution means more that any single person.
 
e_blazer said:
Yeah, well try that tact with a thread about Obama and see where it gets you.

I don't see this as a thread worthy of discussion. I suspect that if undeniable evidence were brought forth showing that Trump actively colluded with the Russians to gain a win in a US presidential election even his most ardent supporters would favor impeachment. Not the insane ones, but most of those who otherwise believe in his policies and general anti-progressive agenda are still believers in the sanctity of our electoral system and would oppose someone like Putin trying to put a puppet in the White House.

That said, so far there's nothing approaching indisputable proof of collusion. How would you respond to a similar inflammatory question of board liberals about "proof" that Obama did nothing in Benghazi because he didn't want the blow-back to impact his campaign so close to the election? Or proof that Hillary's knowing misuse of a private email server to hide her correspondence was illegal and compromised government secrets. Or proof that the Clinton Foundation was actively paid by foreign governments in exchange for access to the Secretary of State?

Put up the proof about any of the hundreds of alleged political scandals and then have the discussion. As it stands, they're all just political talking points for the parties' bases and have a lot more smoke than fire.
Click to expand...

You're dodging. And quit it with this whataboutism tactic -- the premise is straight forward: play Devil's advocate.
 
e_blazer said:
Not a Trump fan at all, but your thread title is offensive and probably a violation of board rules. If you want reasonable discussion (yeah, like that’s your objective) you might want to change that.
Click to expand...

Not sure how it violates board rules, but considering currently we have a thread that goes "OBAMA NEEDS TO STFU" and "DID CLINTONS "SUICIDE" ANOTHER KEY WITNESS?" I'm not sure how we can be concerned about reasonable discussions.
 
julius said:
Not sure how it violates board rules, but considering currently we have a thread that goes "OBAMA NEEDS TO STFU" and "DID CLINTONS "SUICIDE" ANOTHER KEY WITNESS?" I'm not sure how we can be concerned about reasonable discussions.
Click to expand...

None of those things insults members of the board, which is what I understand the rule to be. They're inflammatory to be sure, but they don't call into question the intelligence of those who support Obama or the Clintons the way that "Trumpanzees" does Trump supporters.

I see the increasing nastiness in these political threads as something that needs to be moderated. But that's not my job around here, so flame on if it makes you happy.
 
yankeesince59 said:
Welcome to The United States of the Offended.
Click to expand...

Given that I'm firmly in the kick Trump's ass out of the White House camp, I'm not sure how I'm personally supposed to be offended by the thread title. I do think it violates board rules to refer to those who disagree with you as __panzees.

I think, "Welcome to the United States of the Needlessly Offensive" is becoming a more correct way of looking at it.

In what way was Fez's question made more effective by referring to those who support Trump as "Trumpanzees"? I generally find that when I want to discuss something with someone, it's best to avoid starting the conversation by calling someone an asshole.
 
CupWizier said:
You don't find libtards as offensive? I see that in many posts by guys such as maris, dalincoln, el presidente etc. have used.
Click to expand...

When it's used in a way as to refer to liberals on the board, yes I do find it offensive for the same reason as I'm stating here.

FFS, it's not that hard people. Start having better discussions and stop needlessly insulting each other.
 
e_blazer said:
Given that I'm firmly in the kick Trump's ass out of the White House camp, I'm not sure how I'm personally supposed to be offended by the thread title. I do think it violates board rules to refer to those who disagree with you as __panzees.

I think, "Welcome to the United States of the Needlessly Offensive" is becoming a more correct way of looking at it.

In what way was Fez's question made more effective by referring to those who support Trump as "Trumpanzees"? I generally find that when I want to discuss something with someone, it's best to avoid starting the conversation by calling someone an asshole.
Click to expand...
I agree 100%! Thank you!
 
e_blazer said:
When it's used in a way as to refer to liberals on the board, yes I do find it offensive for the same reason as I'm stating here.

FFS, it's not that hard people. Start having better discussions and stop needlessly insulting each other.
Click to expand...
Its crazy and really paints a clear picture to me when all parties preach tolerance, but are actually less tolerant. To me thats real sad, because we certainly need more tolerance within our communities.
 
Hoopguru said:
Its crazy and really paints a clear picture to me when all parties preach tolerance, but are actually less tolerant. To me thats real sad, because we certainly need more tolerance within our communities.
Click to expand...

Once this dangerous idiot is out of office, you will likely see more unity. When you have a president that preaches and supports dividing people then these actions will be the norm.
 
e_blazer said:
Given that I'm firmly in the kick Trump's ass out of the White House camp, I'm not sure how I'm personally supposed to be offended by the thread title. I do think it violates board rules to refer to those who disagree with you as __panzees.

I think, "Welcome to the United States of the Needlessly Offensive" is becoming a more correct way of looking at it.

In what way was Fez's question made more effective by referring to those who support Trump as "Trumpanzees"? I generally find that when I want to discuss something with someone, it's best to avoid starting the conversation by calling someone an asshole.
Click to expand...


...I think you are making this into something it's not...it was in no way directed at anyone in particular nor a race....and no one called anyone an ass hole.

...the mods have already said that it did not violate the rules...again, I'm not sure why you are offended by something that was clearly harmless. If you saw the thread title and clicked on it anyway, that's on you.
 
Last edited:
CupWizier said:
Once this dangerous idiot is out of office, you will likely see more unity. When you have a president that preaches and supports dividing people then these actions will be the norm.
Click to expand...

Oh, bullshit. I don't recall things being more polite when Obama was in office, or Bush, or Clinton. Regardless of how polarized things are, I don't see any excuse for being deliberately offensive on this board.
 
yankeesince59 said:
...my god, get over it...it was in no way directed at anyone in particular nor a race....and no one called anyone an ass hole.

...the mods have already said that it did not violate the rules...again, I'm not sure why you are offended by something that was clearly harmless. If you saw the thread title and clicked on it anyway, that's on you.
Click to expand...

The "mods" didn't issue a ruling say it didn't violate the rules. Julius just said he didn't see how it violated the rules. I've since explained how I see it as a violation of the rules, perhaps Julius or Sly would like to weigh in now.

I am not offended personally, as I've said above. It was clearly aimed at the "S2 Trumpanzees". You can't get more direct in aiming a barb at members of this board than that. I don't see this kind of crap as "harmless" in any way. It is symptomatic of a larger and increasing problem in this country of it becoming more accepted to express outright hatred for those who disagree with you. I don't see any reason that it should be an accepted thing here.
 
e_blazer said:
Oh, bullshit. I don't recall things being more polite when Obama was in office, or Bush, or Clinton. Regardless of how polarized things are, I don't see any excuse for being deliberately offensive on this board.
Click to expand...

"Oh, bullshit". Is this your way of responding politely?
 
e_blazer said:
The "mods" didn't issue a ruling say it didn't violate the rules. Julius just said he didn't see how it violated the rules. I've since explained how I see it as a violation of the rules, perhaps Julius or Sly would like to weigh in now.

I am not offended personally, as I've said above. It was clearly aimed at the "S2 Trumpanzees". You can't get more direct in aiming a barb at members of this board than that. I don't see this kind of crap as "harmless" in any way. It is symptomatic of a larger and increasing problem in this country of it becoming more accepted to express outright hatred for those who disagree with you. I don't see any reason that it should be an accepted thing here.
Click to expand...


...lol...well, Julius is a mod, no?

...did you report it as "offensive"?...if yes, it has likely been ruled as not a violation...if no, and it helps you to sleep better or feel better about yourself, maybe you should....or grow a thicker skin...just my 2 cents

...and maybe people who are so easily offended should realize that everything is not intended to be purposely and maliciously offensive or racial just because they themselves interpreted it that way.

.
 
Last edited:
CupWizier said:
Once this dangerous idiot is out of office, you will likely see more unity. When you have a president that preaches and supports dividing people then these actions will be the norm.
Click to expand...
maybe so, but I think regardless of who's in high places as long liberal and conservative extremist, each will be at each other and not to tolerant. Much of this was going on in Obamas term as well. If you listen to MSBNC, CNN you get one side if you listen to FOX you get another.
 
yankeesince59 said:
...lol...well, Julius is a mod, no?

...did you report it as "offensive"?...if yes, it has likely been ruled as not a violation...if no, and it helps you to sleep better or feel better about yourself, maybe you should....or grow a thicker skin...just my 2 cents

...and maybe people who are so easily offended should realize that everything is not intended to be purposely and maliciously offensive or racial just because they themselves interpreted it that way.

.
Click to expand...
He said nothing about race.
 
I actually have to agree with @e_blazer
It's been said to the pro-trump posters on this board.
When they start a thread and it can be interrupted as belittling/baiting people you wish to engage with.
That you're then not looking to have a discussion.

This thread while it's a valid hypothesis, and as @Chris Craig it'll be nearly impossible to get an answer.
The title itself is a hindrance to the discussion you wish to have.

Consistency on my part.
 
Since the title doesn't specify who is being referred to as a "Trumpanzee", I'd say it's technically not a personal attack.

However, if I were a Trump supporter, I would have no interest in responding.

As someone who has not yet decided that Trump needs to be ousted or impeached (simply defeated in the next election by someone with some class, integrity, credibility, etc), I could answer that if the collusion is all legit, then he obviously should step down, and if he doesn't, he should be removed.
 
yankeesince59 said:
...lol...well, Julius is a mod, no?

...did you report it as "offensive"?...if yes, it has likely been ruled as not a violation...if no, and it helps you to sleep better or feel better about yourself, maybe you should....or grow a thicker skin...just my 2 cents

...and maybe people who are so easily offended should realize that everything is not to be purposely and maliciously offensive or racial just because they themselves interpreted it that way.

.
Click to expand...

Yes, Julius is "A" mod. He simply said he didn't see how it violated rules. I pointed out why I think it does, and I don't believe he or any other mod has said anything about it since.

I don't see any need to "report it" since we already know that Julius and Sly are aware of my concern. My intent in saying something was not to get anyone in trouble regarding board rules, it's to try to get people to stop with all of the subtle and not so subtle insults and simply discuss things.

Maybe you should stop trying to decide whether I'm offended or how thick my skin is. I've already said that there's absolutely no reason why I should be personally offended since I don't support Trump in any way and am mystified why anyone would. That doesn't mean that I'm down with calling those who do "Trumpanzees" or those at the other end of the spectrum on this board "Libtards". I think maybe people here should get over the idea that there aren't consequences to this kind of crap. The tensions on the OT board are higher than I ever recall them being and this stuff does nothing but make it worse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top