Holy Crap - The Revolution is about to start

[Emily Lake]

You know what's telling about the whole 'Trump doesn’t literally mean what he says; he means something else' argument? They don’t apply that same logic to liberals.

Okay, fine. Harris literally means that college students are all dumb, and Clinton literally means that half of the people who vote Republican are deplorable humans who are irredeemable. And Obama literally thinks there are 57 states. Happy now?

It's dumb to apply that logic at all, regardless of which party you're targeting.

 

[pood]

You know what's telling about the whole 'Trump doesn’t literally mean what he says; he means something else' argument? They don’t apply that same logic to liberals.

Okay, fine. Harris literally means that college students are all dumb, and Clinton literally means that half of the people who vote Republican are deplorable humans who are irredeemable. And Obama literally thinks there are 57 states. Happy now?

It's dumb to apply that logic at all, regardless of which party you're targeting.

The difference is that Trump has given EVIDENCE that he believes all the horrific things he says, and evidence he will act on those horrific beliefs. Also, I believe that the Harris bit was something taken out of context, but can’t be arsed to look it up now.

 

[Elixir]

Harris literally means that college students are all dumb, and Clinton literally means that half of the people who vote Republican are deplorable humans who are irredeemable

Thing is, Emily, those things are not true, whereas “Trump is an existential threat to American democracy” is as true as “water is wet at standard temperature and pressure”.
Furthermore, when Trumps says “I’m not a threat to democracy, SHE is the threat to democracy!” it is a bald faced lie.

 

[Gospel]

You know what's telling about the whole 'Trump doesn’t literally mean what he says; he means something else' argument? They don’t apply that same logic to liberals.

Okay, fine. Harris literally means that college students are all dumb, and Clinton literally means that half of the people who vote Republican are deplorable humans who are irredeemable. And Obama literally thinks there are 57 states. Happy now?

It's dumb to apply that logic at all, regardless of which party you're targeting.

I'm confused. I thought the point was not taking people out of context and to take a more nuanced view. Now you're saying it's dumb to do that at all? I was actually seeing valuable returns in what you were saying. Guess I misunderstood.

 

[Elixir]

One-off quips, misstatements and gaffes can be found from “both sides”.
But only one side repeats falsehoods ad nauseum in the hope of making people think there IS NO TRUTH, and they need an authoritarian to guide them out of harm’s way.
Trump wants to disempower people. Everyone. He wants it ALL. It’s nothing like Harris or any other president or candidate for president. He’s sick and he is making America sick - with lotsa help from his dictator donor acquaintances he thinks are friends.

 

[Emily Lake]

Guess I'm wrong for thinking intelligence would help someone recognize when ambition might cloud good judgment.

Intelligence is no guarantee of being able to set aside belief and bias.

 

[Emily Lake]

Wow, Pood! I was still in my momma's belly in Jamaica when all that craziness went down. I bet there’s a baby somewhere now, curled up and waiting out the Trump debacle.

We've got to be really close to the same age, within a few months I'd guess.

 

[Emily Lake]

@Emily Lake Just use the same translation skills you use on Trump on @Elixir and everything will start to make sense.

I'm trying. I'll keep trying.

 

[Emily Lake]

Ya sure ya betcha. Both sides.

I’m not going to waste my time explaining the difference for your benefit. It’s been done, to no effect.

You've explained what you believe the difference to be; I've explained that your explanation is fallacious.

 

[Emily Lake]

It's RIGHT FUCKING THERE.

WHAT is "right fucking there", besides THE FUCKING TRUTH, Emily?

I think you just heard of Trump in 2015. Some of us have been aware of his menace for decades longer.
There is no DOG WHISTLE there. Just some truths you find unpleasant.

They weren't banging the drum about fascist dictator for life, imprison political enemies, hunt down us citizens, repeat of hitler, existential threat.

Good for "them". I was sounding the alarm all along. You don't like the sound? Tough shit. It's the truth.
Yes, Trump says "I know you are but what am I?" to every accurate description of his character, actions and intent. So what?

Alright. I suppose I'll just go ahead and mark you down as laying the foundation for political violence for even longer than I thought you were doing. If that makes you feel better, then yay you?

 

[Emily Lake]

“They weren't banging the drum about fascist dictator for life, imprison political enemies, hunt down us citizens, repeat of hitler, existential threat.”

I was. Who is “they”?
I’ve been mouthing those truths since the orange shitbag first announced back in ‘15.
Actually since the 1980’s not much has changed about him other than dementia.
Remember The Central Park Five? Remember the full page ad he took out?
He probably didn’t mean it though - they were never executed so no harm done, right?

Sometimes your unwillingess to read is mind-boggling. Seriously. It's RIGHT FUCKING THERE.

The "irony" is that you didn't read what Elixir said..

I read what Elixir said. It doesn't at all follow from what I said.

For example, Elixir doesn't seem to have understood that "they" in this context (which isn't subtle or hidden, btw) refers to democratic politicians. Nor does Elixir seem to be able to follow the train of discussion from me positing that the nature and tenor of political campaigning by democrats has changed this cycle from what it's been in the past. You responded by noting that dems weren't happy hen Bush won a second term, nor when Trump won his first term. I don't disagree with that - but that reinforces my observation that the rhetoric has shifted. When Bush was running for re-election, Dems weren't campaigning that he was going to destroy the country and become a dictator, they weren't focused on stirring up antagonistic feelings and stirring fear and anger among their supporters. Even when Trump was running for his first term, the rhetoric wasn't as charged.

The impact and the degree of fearmongering is different from democrats this time.

 

[Emily Lake]

You know what's telling about the whole 'Trump doesn’t literally mean what he says; he means something else' argument? They don’t apply that same logic to liberals.

Okay, fine. Harris literally means that college students are all dumb, and Clinton literally means that half of the people who vote Republican are deplorable humans who are irredeemable. And Obama literally thinks there are 57 states. Happy now?

It's dumb to apply that logic at all, regardless of which party you're targeting.

I'm confused. I thought the point was not taking people out of context and to take a more nuanced view. Now you're saying it's dumb to do that at all? I was actually seeing valuable returns in what you were saying. Guess I misunderstood.

You implied that I don't use the same method of considering context when talking about liberals. I do. But it was a helluvalot more fun to flip it entirely and just go to taking everyone out of context and completely literally. I find it useful in highlighting the issue.

 

[bilby]

That's the alternate-universe Trump they’re talking about—you know, the one who said…

If you can't take care of your sick in the country, forget it, it's all over. I mean, it's no good. So I'm very liberal when it comes to health care, I believe in universal health care. I believe in whatever it takes to make people well and better.

Oh... that guy?

As your President, I will do everything in my power to protect our LGBT citizens from the violence and oppression of a hateful foreign ideology.

2016 RNC Convention

But didn't Sam leap out of Trump right as that speech ended?

Oh, boy.

 

[ZiprHead]

But at least I fucking acknowledge that left wing violence isn't just some made up fantasy,

Who said that???

 

[Elixir]

I've explained that your explanation is fallacious.

You misspelled “asserted”.
Kinda reminds me of the rationale for believing a stolen election; all those allegations!

 

[ZiprHead]

No, you don't see articles about it. It's less prevalent, but it's not absent. An unbiased person might ask why you don't hear about it in the media.

Who said it was absent??? Straw man much?

Why do you do this?

The implication in your post was perfectly clear. You knew it when you wrote it. It's obvious that your intention was to paint extremist violence as being something that is associated with the right wing, and to downplay any left wing activity as being no big deal or somehow understandable and excusable. You're not subtle, Zip.

Where did I downplay left wing violence? Where did I say anything about left wing violence?

Please stop atrributing arguments to me that I have not made.

If you're going to take a position, take it. Stand by it and say what you mean to say. Don't do this hint-hint-nudge-nudge-wink-knowhatimean bullshit and then try to pretend like you didn't mean anything at all by it.

Wow, you sure seem to be quite the mind reader. You know what Trump really meant despite what he says. You know what the people here really mean despite what they said. You're so good at it you can even put words into other people mouths without them saying it.

You should go to Vegas. You could be a big hit in the casino bars. Not the main room of course. That's reserved for real talent.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

“They weren't banging the drum about fascist dictator for life, imprison political enemies, hunt down us citizens, repeat of hitler, existential threat.”

I was. Who is “they”?
I’ve been mouthing those truths since the orange shitbag first announced back in ‘15.
Actually since the 1980’s not much has changed about him other than dementia.
Remember The Central Park Five? Remember the full page ad he took out?
He probably didn’t mean it though - they were never executed so no harm done, right?

Sometimes your unwillingess to read is mind-boggling. Seriously. It's RIGHT FUCKING THERE.

The "irony" is that you didn't read what Elixir said..

I read what Elixir said. It doesn't at all follow from what I said.

For example, Elixir doesn't seem to have understood that "they" in this context (which isn't subtle or hidden, btw) refers to democratic politicians. Nor does Elixir seem to be able to follow the train of discussion from me positing that the nature and tenor of political campaigning by democrats has changed this cycle from what it's been in the past. You responded by noting that dems weren't happy hen Bush won a second term, nor when Trump won his first term. I don't disagree with that - but that reinforces my observation that the rhetoric has shifted. When Bush was running for re-election, Dems weren't campaigning that he was going to destroy the country and become a dictator, they weren't focused on stirring up antagonistic feelings and stirring fear and anger among their supporters. Even when Trump was running for his first term, the rhetoric wasn't as charged.

The impact and the degree of fearmongering is different from democrats this time.

Yes, it did.

 

[Elixir]

“The implication in your post was perfectly clear. You knew it when you wrote it.”

What kinda bugs me … besides this mind reading crap (not even a seems to me)…

It's obvious that your intention was to paint extremist violence as being something that is associated with the right wing, and to downplay any left wing activity as being no big deal

… is Zip’s honest accuracy. It would be (is) wrong to paint R&L wing political violence as equal or equivalent. But for some reason that seems to be your schtick.

Nor does Elixir seem to be able to follow the train of discussion from me positing that the nature and tenor of political campaigning by democrats has changed this cycle from what it's been in the past.

Is there some reason to follow your sophomoric, repetitive, gossamer rationale for oversimplification just so you can complain? It’s getting predictable, Emmers.

Good thing nothing about the Republican party has changed over the last 8 years. Other than having been fucked up beyond all recognition, to the point where their former best and brightest have left and are voting blue due to the existential threat to democracy. But yeah, let’s harp on the blindingly obvious change of tone in the Dem response. Sheesh.

There is an existential threat to American democracy staring you in the face, but hey, let’s talk all about those blue meanies.