Author Topic: F#%k Everything  (Read 3978 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #35 on: February 23, 2017, 07:49:33 AM »
. Though some might be, after seeing just how incompetent he's proven to be.

I still think it's way too early for this.

Yeah,  with you on that.  I don't much agree with most of what he's done, but he certainly hasn't "proven" himself incompetent.  He's only "proven" himself as a President who will do what he said he was going to do - better or worse - and who is immune to his critics, except at the most petty level.   

I have no doubt whatsoever that if his POLICIES were in line with the protestors, they would be shitting themselves with joy at the speed with which he has moved to take action.

I don't know when "incompetent" became a synonym for "I don't agree with". 


Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #36 on: February 23, 2017, 07:56:39 AM »
Not really. Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of misogyny, racism, homophobia, and so on. It's perfectly rational for people from those demographics, or who otherwise strongly believe those demographics shouldn't be discriminated against, to want a president like that to fail, to show that those attitudes have no place in modern society.

With deep respect, he most certainly was not.  That's the mantra from the left, to explain why their candidate didn't win, but it's largely a smoke screen.   Even the liberal screed "Rolling Stone" cops to that; they ran a decent enough (for them) article about some of the "Obama Republicans" (formerly "Reagan Democrats") that put him over the top, and almost to a person they rejected the "misogyny", "racism" - and by the way, you'd be hard pressed to find ANY homophobia in his campaign; for me, anyway, as soon as someone calls him a homophobe, I automatically recognize that they aren't interested in TRUTH, just tar and feather labeling - and opted for a guy that seemed to "hear" them in a way that the liberal elites historically have not.   He didn't pander to them, he didn't call them "deplorable" and he didn't ignore them (Google the number of visits Trump and Hillary each made to Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, all states she thought she had "in the bag").   Those voters gave Obama a chance, and whether they are right or not is up for debate, but they FELT like they were ignored for eight years.    They reacted.  They voted.   

Offline gmillerdrake

  • Proud Father.....Blessed Husband
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10387
  • Gender: Male
  • 1 Timothy 2:5
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #37 on: February 23, 2017, 08:02:06 AM »
Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of misogyny, racism, homophobia, and so on.

Yup, that's the platform he ran on  :facepalm:
I don't mean in policy terms, though some of that was questionable too. But in terms of rhetoric and what he said right throughout the campaign, yes absolutely.

This just isn't true.

Trump was elected because.....despite the 'left' and Democrats refusal to see or admit it.....Hillary Clinton was and is WAY more a despicable person than Trump is. Period. The level of international corruption that she's been involved in for 25 plus years coupled with the glaring examples over and over of just how bad she was at every 'job' or position she held on top of the fact she was and is an elitist snob.....all of that in addition to people were sick of the same old same old got Trump elected.

Even to this day the media and pundits alike.....who've been wrong about the pulse of this country for much of the past two or three years and is why Trumps victory was so 'surprising'......they all continue to try and shove these agendas down the throats of Americans who can see through their BS and are sick of it.
Without Faith.....Without Hope.....There can be No Peace of Mind

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 321
  • Gender: Male
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #38 on: February 23, 2017, 08:09:25 AM »

Hillary Clinton was and is WAY more a despicable person than Trump is. Period.

I strongly disagree with that,  you'll never convince of me of this.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18875
  • Bad Craziness
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #39 on: February 23, 2017, 08:10:50 AM »
I couldn't tell you the first thing about the ACA, but why do some think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread and others think it's the worst thing to happen to this country. How the hell can it be both??
Well, Tim, this right here sums up your problem. For one thing, who thinks it's the greatest thing ever? I haven't met those people. Some of us claim it's better than what was going on 6 years ago. That's not the same as liking it. Moreover, there's no conflict between great and awful (even if those groups don't exist). If you were able to get affordable insurance after years of being shafted because of a medical condition, you probably think it was pretty damned good. If you're just some guy suddenly forced to pay $400 a month for insurance you don't want, then yeah, it probably sucks balls.

TL, DR: the world's a more complicated place then many people realize.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2419
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #40 on: February 23, 2017, 08:25:21 AM »
I really don't like airing my views here on some of the trans stuff because I fear personal reprisals.  Not that I'm going to be beaten up, but certainly banned, or told by people I truly like and respect that I'm a "bigot".    It's come to the point where treating people with respect face-to-face isn't enough.  We can't even ask hard questions anymore.

If arbitrarily being labeled a "bigot" is by itself sufficient deterrent, I understand.  But if your fear is of being banned, don't let that stop you from airing your views.  As I have repeatedly said, ALL viewpoints are welcome, even arguably offensive ones (because there is always SOMEONE who will be offended by something), provided they are expressed respectfully.  A viewpoint, in and of itself, usually can't be disrespectful, and you won't be banned just for going against the "norm" or majority or whatever.

Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of misogyny, racism, homophobia, and so on.

Yup, that's the platform he ran on  :facepalm:
I don't mean in policy terms, though some of that was questionable too. But in terms of rhetoric and what he said right throughout the campaign, yes absolutely.

This just isn't true.

Correct.  Sad that people are so misguided as to legitimately think otherwise.  The fact that anyone even COULD think what ariich posted is true really goes to the heart of what this thread is about.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #41 on: February 23, 2017, 08:27:33 AM »

Hillary Clinton was and is WAY more a despicable person than Trump is. Period.

I strongly disagree with that,  you'll never convince of me of this.

And nor should you be convinced if that's how you feel.  Just understand that some do feel that way, and so measure your protest of Trump accordingly.   I'm tired of being branded a "RACIST!" and "MISGYNIST!" because I have the temerity to not be on the "Trump witch hunt".  I didn't vote for him, and wouldn't if I have the chance again, but I don't at all agree that because one of his platforms MIGHT be interpreted by some as potentially being anti-Muslim, that it makes him toxic and unable to be a competent President.   

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 321
  • Gender: Male
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #42 on: February 23, 2017, 08:29:36 AM »
I really don't like airing my views here on some of the trans stuff because I fear personal reprisals.  Not that I'm going to be beaten up, but certainly banned, or told by people I truly like and respect that I'm a "bigot".    It's come to the point where treating people with respect face-to-face isn't enough.  We can't even ask hard questions anymore.

If arbitrarily being labeled a "bigot" is by itself sufficient deterrent, I understand.  But if your fear is of being banned, don't let that stop you from airing your views.  As I have repeatedly said, ALL viewpoints are welcome, even arguably offensive ones (because there is always SOMEONE who will be offended by something), provided they are expressed respectfully.  A viewpoint, in and of itself, usually can't be disrespectful, and you won't be banned just for going against the "norm" or majority or whatever.

Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of misogyny, racism, homophobia, and so on.

Yup, that's the platform he ran on  :facepalm:
I don't mean in policy terms, though some of that was questionable too. But in terms of rhetoric and what he said right throughout the campaign, yes absolutely.

This just isn't true.

Correct.  Sad that people are so misguided as to legitimately think otherwise.  The fact that anyone even COULD think what ariich posted is true really goes to the heart of what this thread is about.

Then we have a problem

Online cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15910
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #43 on: February 23, 2017, 08:30:07 AM »

Hillary Clinton was and is WAY more a despicable person than Trump is. Period.

I strongly disagree with that,  you'll never convince of me of this.

Even if I agree with it, I don't think it's a "period" because the positives/negatives for Trump and Clinton were different that people will weigh those differently when determining who is more despicable.  And no one will ever agree on this IMO like the two of you, which is fine as I feel it's totally a personal opinion vs. a fact.

Offline Implode

  • Lord of the Squids
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 5432
  • Gender: Male
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #44 on: February 23, 2017, 08:32:46 AM »
@XeRocks81

It's not worth it. That's one of the topics where discussing it here gets us nowhere. :/

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18875
  • Bad Craziness
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #45 on: February 23, 2017, 08:34:11 AM »

Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of misogyny, racism, homophobia, and so on.

Yup, that's the platform he ran on  :facepalm:
I don't mean in policy terms, though some of that was questionable too. But in terms of rhetoric and what he said right throughout the campaign, yes absolutely.

This just isn't true.

Correct.  Sad that people are so misguided as to legitimately think otherwise.  The fact that anyone even COULD think what ariich posted is true really goes to the heart of what this thread is about.
I consider it more of a minor distinction. I would have said "Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of tremendous appeal to misogynists, racists and homophobes." While the meaning is quite different, the practical upshot remains the same.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2419
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #46 on: February 23, 2017, 08:34:53 AM »
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2419
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #47 on: February 23, 2017, 08:38:28 AM »

Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of misogyny, racism, homophobia, and so on.

Yup, that's the platform he ran on  :facepalm:
I don't mean in policy terms, though some of that was questionable too. But in terms of rhetoric and what he said right throughout the campaign, yes absolutely.

This just isn't true.

Correct.  Sad that people are so misguided as to legitimately think otherwise.  The fact that anyone even COULD think what ariich posted is true really goes to the heart of what this thread is about.
I consider it more of a minor distinction. I would have said "Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of tremendous appeal to misogynists, racists and homophobes." While the meaning is quite different, the practical upshot remains the same.

Not really.  In fact, I'd say not at all.  Unless I am misunderstanding you, your argument isn't really very different than:  "Fried rice has a tremendous appeal to misogynists, racists and homophobes.  Therefore, fried rice is racist food, and we need to immediately shut down Chinese restaurants for the good of society."
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Online cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15910
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #48 on: February 23, 2017, 08:43:21 AM »

Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of misogyny, racism, homophobia, and so on.

Yup, that's the platform he ran on  :facepalm:
I don't mean in policy terms, though some of that was questionable too. But in terms of rhetoric and what he said right throughout the campaign, yes absolutely.

This just isn't true.

Correct.  Sad that people are so misguided as to legitimately think otherwise.  The fact that anyone even COULD think what ariich posted is true really goes to the heart of what this thread is about.
I consider it more of a minor distinction. I would have said "Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of tremendous appeal to misogynists, racists and homophobes." While the meaning is quite different, the practical upshot remains the same.

But they are both still wrong.  Trump won the electoral vote because people in some swing states who voted for Obama last time, swung to Trump this time.  Are we calling those people misogynists, racists, and homophobes?  If so, then we can apply that to Obama I would assume.

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 321
  • Gender: Male
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #49 on: February 23, 2017, 08:44:01 AM »
Then we have a problem
???

Sorry what was way over the top, I'll reign it in.

What I was trying to express whas that the 65 million americans who voted for Hillary Clinton probably agree with ariich's assessment of Trump's campaign. 

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2419
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #50 on: February 23, 2017, 08:51:51 AM »
Well, first off, I don't know how anyone can possibly speak for what 65 million people supposedly "agree" on, other than the fact that they agreed to vote for Hillary.  But secondly, and more importantly, even if 65 million people DO feel that Trump ran "on a platform of misogyny, racism, homophobia, and so on" (which I think is doubtful), that "feeling" is objectively wrong because it is based on facts that are demonstrably false. 
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18875
  • Bad Craziness
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #51 on: February 23, 2017, 08:59:35 AM »

Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of misogyny, racism, homophobia, and so on.

Yup, that's the platform he ran on  :facepalm:
I don't mean in policy terms, though some of that was questionable too. But in terms of rhetoric and what he said right throughout the campaign, yes absolutely.

This just isn't true.

Correct.  Sad that people are so misguided as to legitimately think otherwise.  The fact that anyone even COULD think what ariich posted is true really goes to the heart of what this thread is about.
I consider it more of a minor distinction. I would have said "Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of tremendous appeal to misogynists, racists and homophobes." While the meaning is quite different, the practical upshot remains the same.

Not really.  In fact, I'd say not at all.  Unless I am misunderstanding you, your argument isn't really very different than:  "Fried rice has a tremendous appeal to misogynists, racists and homophobes.  Therefore, fried rice is racist food, and we need to immediately shut down Chinese restaurants for the good of society."
Except that there's a correlation with Trump's stated goals and the desired goals of that group of people. Just because non-misogynists, racists and homomphobes might also agree with those goals doesn't mean that they're not extremely appealing to those group who have been marginalized over the years.




Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of misogyny, racism, homophobia, and so on.

Yup, that's the platform he ran on  :facepalm:
I don't mean in policy terms, though some of that was questionable too. But in terms of rhetoric and what he said right throughout the campaign, yes absolutely.

This just isn't true.

Correct.  Sad that people are so misguided as to legitimately think otherwise.  The fact that anyone even COULD think what ariich posted is true really goes to the heart of what this thread is about.
I consider it more of a minor distinction. I would have said "Trump was elected (despite getting far fewer votes) on a platform of tremendous appeal to misogynists, racists and homophobes." While the meaning is quite different, the practical upshot remains the same.

But they are both still wrong.  Trump won the electoral vote because people in some swing states who voted for Obama last time, swung to Trump this time.  Are we calling those people misogynists, racists, and homophobes?  If so, then we can apply that to Obama I would assume.
No, and I agree with your assessment. I wasn't defending the idea that Trump run because of the deplorables. Simply that he had tremendous appeal to them. And as I said above, much like the deplorables thing from Hillary, Racist assholes and fair-minded, reasonable folk can want the same thing for different reasons. Just because racist fucksticks might love Trump doesn't mean that Trump's supporters are all racist fucksticks.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2419
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #52 on: February 23, 2017, 09:06:11 AM »
I wasn't defending the idea that Trump run because of the deplorables. Simply that he had tremendous appeal to them. And as I said above, much like the deplorables thing from Hillary, Racist assholes and fair-minded, reasonable folk can want the same thing for different reasons. Just because racist fucksticks might love Trump doesn't mean that Trump's supporters are all racist fucksticks.

Well, that was kinda the same point I was trying to make with the "fried rice" post, so I'm not sure where we are disagreeing.  (and, for the record, I was going to go with "tortillas" and banning Tex Mex restaurants, but I thought you might take it as a personal attack, so I chose the high road. :biggrin: )
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #53 on: February 23, 2017, 09:20:20 AM »
No, and I agree with your assessment. I wasn't defending the idea that Trump run because of the deplorables. Simply that he had tremendous appeal to them. And as I said above, much like the deplorables thing from Hillary, Racist assholes and fair-minded, reasonable folk can want the same thing for different reasons. Just because racist fucksticks might love Trump doesn't mean that Trump's supporters are all racist fucksticks.

Not to you, el Barto, but generally, I don't understand this line of reasoning.   Does every band, food, politician, uber driver that Ted Bundy liked become invalid?  I understand he drove a VW bug; is that now the car of choice for serial killers?   Conversely, is everyone that drives a Volkswagon a Nazi sympathizer (via their origins)?  I'm sure there are unsavory demographics that vote for ANY politician, and while the response is "well, Trump didn't specifically disavow those demographics", why should he?   His whole platform wasn't about "racists" or "homophobes", but it was about "I hear you."   And to disavow - even if politically correct to do so - was to undermine the confidence in those non-racists, non-homophobe people that haven't been heard that they were just being fed another line of bullshit.   

I don't think Trump is as dumb as people think, and I think to some degree - you don't have to AGREE with this, but at least acknowledge it - he's traded off the "anti-PC" moniker in a way that works on more levels than just "not disavowing the KKK". 


Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18875
  • Bad Craziness
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #54 on: February 23, 2017, 09:48:23 AM »
No, and I agree with your assessment. I wasn't defending the idea that Trump run because of the deplorables. Simply that he had tremendous appeal to them. And as I said above, much like the deplorables thing from Hillary, Racist assholes and fair-minded, reasonable folk can want the same thing for different reasons. Just because racist fucksticks might love Trump doesn't mean that Trump's supporters are all racist fucksticks.

Not to you, el Barto, but generally, I don't understand this line of reasoning.   Does every band, food, politician, uber driver that Ted Bundy liked become invalid?  I understand he drove a VW bug; is that now the car of choice for serial killers?   Conversely, is everyone that drives a Volkswagon a Nazi sympathizer (via their origins)?  I'm sure there are unsavory demographics that vote for ANY politician, and while the response is "well, Trump didn't specifically disavow those demographics", why should he?   His whole platform wasn't about "racists" or "homophobes", but it was about "I hear you."   And to disavow - even if politically correct to do so - was to undermine the confidence in those non-racists, non-homophobe people that haven't been heard that they were just being fed another line of bullshit.   

I don't think Trump is as dumb as people think, and I think to some degree - you don't have to AGREE with this, but at least acknowledge it - he's traded off the "anti-PC" moniker in a way that works on more levels than just "not disavowing the KKK". 


I don't disagree. Being supported by deplorables doesn't make one deplorable. At the same time by not distancing himself from them he has taken advantage of them and emboldened them in the process. If I run for governor of Vermont and make prison reform a cornerstone of my platform, promising private rooms, cable television and ribeyes every Tuesday night, won't people say that I'm running on the convict vote? Won't I be accused of empowering the criminals?
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline jsbru

  • Posts: 956
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #55 on: February 23, 2017, 09:49:46 AM »
Trump was elected because.....despite the 'left' and Democrats refusal to see or admit it.....Hillary Clinton was and is WAY more a despicable person than Trump is. Period. The level of international corruption that she's been involved in for 25 plus years coupled with the glaring examples over and over of just how bad she was at every 'job' or position she held on top of the fact she was and is an elitist snob.....all of that in addition to people were sick of the same old same old got Trump elected.

See, I just don't get this.  There really aren't any examples of Hillary's "international corruption."  I can't think of one, to tell you the truth.  There's nothing nefarious about the Clinton foundation.  It's a foundation to help promote democracy worldwide.

Meanwhile, Trump has been involved in dozens of shady business deals with associates of the Russian mafia, multiple bankruptcies, failed business ventures.  He's cheated on all three of his wives, sometimes publicly.  Been sued for fraud many times.  He's a giant con man, and I can't believe people are falling for it.

I just don't know where people who are convinced Hillary is corrupt are getting their information.
“The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side.”

― Hunter S. Thompson

Online cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15910
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #56 on: February 23, 2017, 09:53:47 AM »
The Clinton Foundation is just as shady as Trump's deals in Russia.  They both look bad, they both have smoke, and we don't know if either had/have fire.  To just outlandishly deny any wrongdoings of the Clinton's is foolish and same with Trump.

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 321
  • Gender: Male
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #57 on: February 23, 2017, 09:56:25 AM »
The Clinton Foundation is just as shady as Trump's deals in Russia.  They both look bad, they both have smoke, and we don't know if either had/have fire.  To just outlandishly deny any wrongdoings of the Clinton's is foolish and same with Trump.

I think there's a false equivalency here but I can't pretend to be objective either, I despise Trump.

Offline jsbru

  • Posts: 956
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #58 on: February 23, 2017, 10:03:09 AM »
The Clinton Foundation is just as shady as Trump's deals in Russia.  They both look bad, they both have smoke, and we don't know if either had/have fire.  To just outlandishly deny any wrongdoings of the Clinton's is foolish and same with Trump.

Is it?  Why?  What did the Clinton Foundation actually do?  The only thing bad that it's actually been accused of is general being "spooooky" because "Clinton" and "global" and things.

http://fortune.com/2016/08/27/clinton-foundation-health-work/

The Clinton Foundation got top marks from two of the most prominent charity watchdog groups.  It raises money not just to promote democracy, but to fight disease, promote entrepeneurship, etc.  It got donations from many world leaders and powerful families.  Like most global charities do.  So what?
“The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side.”

― Hunter S. Thompson

Offline bosk1

  • Bow down to Boskaryus
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2419
  • Hard-hearted harbinger of haggis
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #59 on: February 23, 2017, 10:05:56 AM »
See, I just don't get this.  There really aren't any examples of Hillary's "international corruption."  I can't think of one, to tell you the truth.  There's nothing nefarious about the Clinton foundation. 

Well, okay.  If you honestly believe that, that's fine.  But there is likewise nothing "nefarious" about the things you mention about Trump, despite your bending over backwards to paint them as such.  Let's take a look.

Meanwhile, Trump has been involved in dozens of shady business deals with associates of the Russian mafia

Not really.  At least, not in the way you are describing.  There is nothing provably "shady" (i.e. illegal) about any of his dealings.  Implying that he was dealing directly with the Russian mafia, and doing so in an illegal manner, doesn't make it so.

multiple bankruptcies

So?  That doesn't make it "nefarious." 

failed business ventures. 

See previous point.  And by the way, this is true of the vast majority of successful business people.  And not just the billionaire BIG business people either.  Most "mom and pop" business owners have probably had multiple failed business ventures.  You fail, you learn, you hopefully succeed at some point down the road.

He's cheated on all three of his wives, sometimes publicly. 

I certainly don't approve, but this has little to do with him being "nefarious" or a con man.

Been sued for fraud many times. 

Again, so what?  Anyone can sue anyone any time for anything.  You know this.  And while I certainly understand the plaintiffs' lawyer's view of, "well, if there is enough to sue for, the defendant MUST have done SOMETHING illegal," that isn't the way the system (or reality) works.

He's a giant con man, and I can't believe people are falling for it.

So, again, we're back to labeling, but no actual EVIDENCE to show he is anything you have suggested.  Something isn't true simply because someone keeps repeating that it MUST be.  But this post is an example of PRECISELY the type of failure to engage in honest dialog that is the subject of two threads.
"The Supreme Court of the United States has descended from the disciplined legal reasoning of John Marshall and Joseph Story to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie."

Online cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15910
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #60 on: February 23, 2017, 10:17:46 AM »
The Clinton Foundation is just as shady as Trump's deals in Russia.  They both look bad, they both have smoke, and we don't know if either had/have fire.  To just outlandishly deny any wrongdoings of the Clinton's is foolish and same with Trump.

Is it?  Why?  What did the Clinton Foundation actually do?  The only thing bad that it's actually been accused of is general being "spooooky" because "Clinton" and "global" and things.

http://fortune.com/2016/08/27/clinton-foundation-health-work/

The Clinton Foundation got top marks from two of the most prominent charity watchdog groups.  It raises money not just to promote democracy, but to fight disease, promote entrepeneurship, etc.  It got donations from many world leaders and powerful families.  Like most global charities do.  So what?

Pay to play.  So what about Trump's dealings?  You can make the exact same argument.  Nothing has been proven on either side here.  But to act like you know it all is just silly.

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 18875
  • Bad Craziness
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #61 on: February 23, 2017, 10:24:11 AM »
The Clinton Foundation is just as shady as Trump's deals in Russia.  They both look bad, they both have smoke, and we don't know if either had/have fire.  To just outlandishly deny any wrongdoings of the Clinton's is foolish and same with Trump.

Is it?  Why?  What did the Clinton Foundation actually do?  The only thing bad that it's actually been accused of is general being "spooooky" because "Clinton" and "global" and things.

http://fortune.com/2016/08/27/clinton-foundation-health-work/

The Clinton Foundation got top marks from two of the most prominent charity watchdog groups.  It raises money not just to promote democracy, but to fight disease, promote entrepeneurship, etc.  It got donations from many world leaders and powerful families.  Like most global charities do.  So what?

Pay to play.  So what about Trump's dealings?  You can make the exact same argument.  Nothing has been proven on either side here.  But to act like you know it all is just silly.
I haven't seen any evidence of pay to play. All I've seen is conjecture and jsbru-type accusations, along with some good ole fashioned condtioning.
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Online cramx3

  • Chillest of the chill
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 15910
  • Gender: Male
    • The Home of cramx3
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #62 on: February 23, 2017, 10:53:30 AM »
The Clinton Foundation is just as shady as Trump's deals in Russia.  They both look bad, they both have smoke, and we don't know if either had/have fire.  To just outlandishly deny any wrongdoings of the Clinton's is foolish and same with Trump.

Is it?  Why?  What did the Clinton Foundation actually do?  The only thing bad that it's actually been accused of is general being "spooooky" because "Clinton" and "global" and things.

http://fortune.com/2016/08/27/clinton-foundation-health-work/

The Clinton Foundation got top marks from two of the most prominent charity watchdog groups.  It raises money not just to promote democracy, but to fight disease, promote entrepeneurship, etc.  It got donations from many world leaders and powerful families.  Like most global charities do.  So what?

Pay to play.  So what about Trump's dealings?  You can make the exact same argument.  Nothing has been proven on either side here.  But to act like you know it all is just silly.
I haven't seen any evidence of pay to play. All I've seen is conjecture and jsbru-type accusations, along with some good ole fashioned condtioning.

Nothing proven about pay to play, just the accusations and some evidence to support but not prove it (just like Trump in Russia, accusations and some evidence to support those accusations like Flynn but that doesn't prove anything), which was what I was trying to say.  These arguments can be made all day, from either side.  But to act like it's a fact (pay to play, or Trump is Putin's toy) is wrong.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #63 on: February 23, 2017, 10:57:29 AM »
Trump was elected because.....despite the 'left' and Democrats refusal to see or admit it.....Hillary Clinton was and is WAY more a despicable person than Trump is. Period. The level of international corruption that she's been involved in for 25 plus years coupled with the glaring examples over and over of just how bad she was at every 'job' or position she held on top of the fact she was and is an elitist snob.....all of that in addition to people were sick of the same old same old got Trump elected.

See, I just don't get this.  There really aren't any examples of Hillary's "international corruption."  I can't think of one, to tell you the truth.  There's nothing nefarious about the Clinton foundation.  It's a foundation to help promote democracy worldwide.

Meanwhile, Trump has been involved in dozens of shady business deals with associates of the Russian mafia, multiple bankruptcies, failed business ventures.  He's cheated on all three of his wives, sometimes publicly.  Been sued for fraud many times.  He's a giant con man, and I can't believe people are falling for it.

I just don't know where people who are convinced Hillary is corrupt are getting their information.

Why do you jump from his "BUSINESS" deals to his infidelity?  Your argument is all over the map with respect to continuity.   Trump is a racist by virtue of not distancing himself from racists, and is deplorable because he cheats on his wives.   But I've already shown elsewhere here that Bill is a far more successful philanderer than Trump.   Hillary didn't distance herself from him, so by your logic, she's as despicable as Bill, and more despicable than Trump.   

Add to that the whole uranium thing (yes, you gave an article that "didn't find evidence of a quid pro quo" but couldn't rule it out, and clearly indicated that it looked fishy, and that at least one person DID profit directly and concurrently with the uranium deal).    That Trump got some of the details wrong about the deal doesn't mean the deal itself is kosher.  That's a sloppy argument.

She also knowingly and provably lied under oath on at least two occasions.  You can't at all say that she was acquitted when any absolution is based on her false - and perjurous - testimony.  That makes NO sense. 
« Last Edit: February 23, 2017, 11:04:19 AM by Stadler »

Online TAC

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 24264
  • Gender: Male
  • Just a decent, normal metal-head fellow
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #64 on: February 23, 2017, 11:16:43 AM »
I couldn't tell you the first thing about the ACA, but why do some think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread and others think it's the worst thing to happen to this country. How the hell can it be both??
Well, Tim, this right here sums up your problem. For one thing, who thinks it's the greatest thing ever? I haven't met those people. Some of us claim it's better than what was going on 6 years ago. That's not the same as liking it. Moreover, there's no conflict between great and awful (even if those groups don't exist). If you were able to get affordable insurance after years of being shafted because of a medical condition, you probably think it was pretty damned good. If you're just some guy suddenly forced to pay $400 a month for insurance you don't want, then yeah, it probably sucks balls.

TL, DR: the world's a more complicated place then many people realize.

Phew, when you started with "Well, Tim", I thought I was about to be reprimanded! :lol

I hear you Bart. I know it's complicated. I have issues too, which probably not at the point where you've been but I understand there's a million intentions being addressed in one bill. I understand the enormity. Well I don't. But I get what you're saying.

I think I used extremes for the positions to make my general point, which is that if both sides really have the same goal, I am frustrated by the chasm of rhetoric.
would have thought the same thing but seeing the OP was TAC i immediately thought Maiden or DT related
Winger Theater Forums................or WTF.  ;D

Offline chknptpie

  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2950
  • Gender: Female
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #65 on: February 23, 2017, 12:29:03 PM »

I'm not a Trump supporter, but all these people protesting...where were they on election day?

He lost the popular vote by 2.8 million.... 2.8 million marched the day after his inauguration. I think there is some correlation there?

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9491
  • Gender: Male
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #66 on: February 23, 2017, 02:04:19 PM »

I'm not a Trump supporter, but all these people protesting...where were they on election day?

He lost the popular vote by 2.8 million.... 2.8 million marched the day after his inauguration. I think there is some correlation there?

Almost all in California.  My take only, but I think more is being made of that 2.8 million than is really there.    I don't at all think it means what some think it means.   It certainly doesn't invalidate the Trump election, and in many ways it validates it.  Much of what propelled Trump to his win was that perceived divide between the elites and the proletariat.   What better example of the elites than liberal celebrity-driven Hollywood (i.e. California) and blue-collar, United Auto Workers-driven Detroit (i.e. Michigan)?  If you're inclined to a poetic look at these sorts of things, there is a beautiful symmetry to Michigan deciding the election, and California being the primary source of that voter surplus.   

Offline XeRocks81

  • Posts: 321
  • Gender: Male
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #67 on: February 23, 2017, 02:06:30 PM »

I'm not a Trump supporter, but all these people protesting...where were they on election day?

He lost the popular vote by 2.8 million.... 2.8 million marched the day after his inauguration. I think there is some correlation there?

Almost all in California.  My take only, but I think more is being made of that 2.8 million than is really there.    I don't at all think it means what some think it means.   It certainly doesn't invalidate the Trump election, and in many ways it validates it.  Much of what propelled Trump to his win was that perceived divide between the elites and the proletariat.   What better example of the elites than liberal celebrity-driven Hollywood (i.e. California) and blue-collar, United Auto Workers-driven Detroit (i.e. Michigan)?  If you're inclined to a poetic look at these sorts of things, there is a beautiful symmetry to Michigan deciding the election, and California being the primary source of that voter surplus.

But that math still means that it's not surprising that there's so much pushback. 

Offline Adami

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 25075
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #68 on: February 23, 2017, 02:09:33 PM »

I'm not a Trump supporter, but all these people protesting...where were they on election day?

He lost the popular vote by 2.8 million.... 2.8 million marched the day after his inauguration. I think there is some correlation there?

Almost all in California.  My take only, but I think more is being made of that 2.8 million than is really there.    I don't at all think it means what some think it means.   It certainly doesn't invalidate the Trump election, and in many ways it validates it.  Much of what propelled Trump to his win was that perceived divide between the elites and the proletariat.   What better example of the elites than liberal celebrity-driven Hollywood (i.e. California) and blue-collar, United Auto Workers-driven Detroit (i.e. Michigan)?  If you're inclined to a poetic look at these sorts of things, there is a beautiful symmetry to Michigan deciding the election, and California being the primary source of that voter surplus.

I get your basic point about where voters live, but are you suggesting that liberal votes shouldn't count as much as conservative votes?
fanticide.bandcamp.com

Offline Shadow Ninja 2.0

  • Heir Transparent
  • Posts: 6130
  • Gender: Male
  • Transcribing Existence Rivets
Re: F#%k Everything
« Reply #69 on: February 23, 2017, 02:15:10 PM »
. Though some might be, after seeing just how incompetent he's proven to be.

I still think it's way too early for this.

Yeah,  with you on that.  I don't much agree with most of what he's done, but he certainly hasn't "proven" himself incompetent.  He's only "proven" himself as a President who will do what he said he was going to do - better or worse - and who is immune to his critics, except at the most petty level.   

I have no doubt whatsoever that if his POLICIES were in line with the protestors, they would be shitting themselves with joy at the speed with which he has moved to take action.

I don't know when "incompetent" became a synonym for "I don't agree with".

Obviously I don't speak for anyone but myself, but I called him incompetent because he is incompetent, not because I disagree with him. There are lots of people I disagree with who I don't consider incompetent. Hillary, for example, I think is an incredibly odious person, but for better or worse I don't think she's incompetent. The same could be said for any number of politicians who I find extraordinarily contemptible.

And honestly I think we could dispense with the hypothetical 'if the shoe were on the other foot' stuff. Sure, some of these people are hypocrites and would probably be fine if Trump was being an asshole about things they supported. But that's not what happened, so discussing it is kind of pointless.
if the flow checks out and your rhymes are dope enough then the police start unholstering their guns