Re: Re: Russian Dossier: Paid for by HRC and the DNC
I've seen people who are traditionally Democrats and people who are traditionally Republicans agree with me, on multiple occasions, that the Dems and GOP are mostly garbage. I do see hope in changing the system and truly draining the swamp. The conversation and change starts there: getting both sides to agree that their respective parties are shit.
I've always said both sides are corrupt as shit. The way I see the election is both were corrupt but Trump was incompetent to boot and emotionally unstable as it gets.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
The funny thing is the DNC came out and was all "this wasn't decided by the new people in charge!". Which would mean they are probably saying Debbie Wasserman Schultz was involved.
The elephant in the room is getting harder to ignore. They truly do have something to scream at the sky over lol.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Re: Re: Re: Russian Dossier: Paid for by HRC and the DNC
Cool we have established this is your go to style. You will no longer get a calm down type comment from me again.
"You have no idea and want someone to tell you about anyone outside of Ds and Rs, right?" You said that. You say things like that all the time. To everyone you debate with.
I'm pretty confident I have never questioned nor attacked your intelligence ever. The article spamming wasn't even about you. lol
No, I was explaining to you that what you were doing (posting look what they did articles) is exactly why they can't see both parties suck equally. I even pointed out that wasn't your intent. I was calling out the reason why they won't stop bickering. You took it as a personal attack for some strange reason.
I stand by the civil thing. We obviously have different interpretations of what civility is, but I will not concede that just because I don't want money taken from me, I'm not civilized. If someone disagreeing with you is considered trolling, then I really don't know what to tell you dude.
Fair enough. These were points that I do not remember you bringing up in your OP or any other post in this thread up until now.
I'm glad somebody saw that I wasn't attacking him, but this is being carried forward from another discussion we had. I missed his last post though. I have nothing against anyone on these boards personally.
I still can't believe you aren't a Trump supporter. I was sure of it!
Don't ask why.
__________________ What CDTM believes;
Never let anyone else define you. Don't be a jerk just to be a jerk, but if you are expressing your true inner feelings and beliefs, or at least trying to express that inner child, and everyone gets pissed off about it, never NEVER apologize for it. Let them think what they want, let them define you in their narrow little minds while they suppress every last piece of them just to keep a friend that never liked them for themselves in the first place.
Something that reflects the complexities and naunces of the American people.
Instead, the news ignores pro life Democrats, or same sex marriage supporting, moderate gun regulating Republicans.. Not to mention outright ignoring third rails..
Basically, our politics are broken because our way of getting information is compromised, imo...
__________________ What CDTM believes;
Never let anyone else define you. Don't be a jerk just to be a jerk, but if you are expressing your true inner feelings and beliefs, or at least trying to express that inner child, and everyone gets pissed off about it, never NEVER apologize for it. Let them think what they want, let them define you in their narrow little minds while they suppress every last piece of them just to keep a friend that never liked them for themselves in the first place.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Russian Dossier: Paid for by HRC and the DNC
I asked you to provide a quote where I was questioning your intelligence because you said I questioned your intelligence. You did not provide that at all. You didn't even provide something remotely close to that. Did you really intend for that to be your point? Do you not see why it is ridiculous to say someone is questioning your intelligence because they are trying to clarify your question?
I think you're confused because your reply does not really match up with what you quoted/responded to.
This is clearly a strawman on your part. It's a rather absurd one, too. I most certainly did not take that as a personal attack. I did not mention "personal attack" in reference to what you are talking about, here, and in temporal context (because we talked about 'stuff' later). You're mixing up things. I do not think you're following along in this conversation at all. And, no, I am not questioning your intelligence: you being unable to properly follow along in a forum discussion that spans many hours, while jumbling up tags and threads, while also probably doing normal human things throughout your day, is understandable. It is unnatural and awkward to try and have a conversation on the internet. So do not try to twist my words, here, into me questioning your intelligence.
This is also a strawman. You did not even come close to representing my perspective. You don't need to reply to me with "so then tell me what your actual point is so I can represent it properly" because that would be dumb when you can just go back and read my words and quote them, verbatim, to represent my point.
If you would like to debate this point on what it means to be in a civil and social group among other humans in a nation-state, I would be more than happy to discuss this with you, further, on a phone call. I will PM you my phone #.
Seriously, you use a strawman for most of your responses. Quite clearly, what I've pointed out is not that you disagree with me. Not once. But now you're trying to pretend that's what I'm doing. What's the matter, are you jealous of Robtard, Surtur, and co. so you want to try and bring someone down into a cesspool of shit, too? Are you bored? I seriously suspect you're bored.
To drive home this point that you're clearly using a strawman, do we even disagree on the point? Because I think we actually do agree on the foundation of the point. That point being that both parties are rife with corrupt practices and the system has to make a qualitative change to start better serving the people they represent.
I disagree. The part where it goes south is the condescension in the next post which you artifully left off:
And he used a strawman in his very first reply, regarding my question.
It was neither pointless nor an attack. He was either not being an honest actor in the conversation or he truly wanted to know. If it as the first, ignored and moving on. If it was the second, I would have been more than happy to explain that. However, his second reply to the thread clearly indicated he was not an honest actor because he already shit on third parties with the following:
So, no, he is not an honest actor and me wondering if he's trolling or if he really genuinely wants me to superficially educate him on American Third Parties is a legitimate concern on my part. It is perfectly okay to ask people for more information on the internet. It is actually a good thing. But he definitely did not seem genuine so I wanted him to clarify. And did he? Boy did he.
Let's draw your attention to his pretend "honest" reply to my question:
Oh, yes, he's so honest in his intentions, right? Right? But wait...he just said he did some research and threw out the third parties, already. So is he really honest? Does he REALLY want to know my opinion?
So he just read some independent third party beliefs (he even called them "beliefs") and now he's an expert, right? And he seems to want to throw it all away, right? Is that the statement of someone being honest? No, definitely not. Is that the statement of a closed-minded fool who thinks he just gleaned enough about 3rd parties to be able to dismiss them all? Yes, most definitely. But is he a close-minded fool? No, he's not. So what is really going on? He's probably just trolling.
Obviously, most people could pick up on this. But you have an agenda because I called out your trolling very early on. So of course you'll pop in to cheer-lead.
But I think you just wanted a lengthy reply. You can clearly see that he's not been an honest actor in this conversation from the beginning. Pretending I hurt his poor feelings when he started the condescension "flavor" to the conversation is plainly laughable.
__________________
Last edited by dadudemon on Oct 26th, 2017 at 05:06 AM
Oh, yeah, that's right. The vast majority of Republicans I know are about sensible gun control laws, for gay marriage, drug legalization, and some are in support of a universal healthcare solution.
The ones that oppose those thing are Christian Evangelical Republicans. Which are much different than the average Republican. If you let the vocal minority dictate policy and even "the voice of our opinion", you'll get a very distorted perspective.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Russian Dossier: Paid for by HRC and the DNC
Look dude, we leave it at you're clearly not going to see things from my perspective (as you think I'm trolling you for some odd reason) and leave it at that. It's obvious we see things quite differently and this back and forth will do nothing but derail the thread. Sound good?
I would agree the media picks and chooses the wrong viewpoints or blows certain political view points out of proportion for hits so to speak. The only way i would see to fix that though is some kind of boycott of news media or something of that nature.
It would be nice if every time you turn on the news they actually reported about the policies pros/cons rather Hillary's e-mails or Trump's stupid comments.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Russian Dossier: Paid for by HRC and the DNC
Okay, I concede. But I don't know what I'm conceding. But you're right about what we are arguing about and I was wrong. What do you want me to do, now? Meaning, what would you like to see happen from me regarding this situation or topic? I will execute if it is reasonable.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Russian Dossier: Paid for by HRC and the DNC
No concession to be had. i wasn't looking to win anything outside of letting you know that I wasn't attacking you and that i honestly wanted to know your thoughts on how we fix this political garbage we have going on right now. I just don't want to go back and forth on misinterpretations we both seemed to have had.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Russian Dossier: Paid for by HRC and the DNC
Okay, then my opinion is that the answer is with a combination of 2 or 3 third parties where we take the best of ideas and combine them into one "good idea" party.
Green Party, Libertarian Party, and Independent Party.