Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
Yeah, at this point, it's abundantly clear that Series of Numbers isn't a Trump supporter, just a Bernie Bro, and the Democratic party cannot affort to splinter into factions any more than it already has. Perhaps someone should refute their claims and arguments with evidence and proof instead of simply discounting them.
Except that Trump is vastly worse in every conceivable way, so no, it doesn't. Which is the point that the post saying it was irrelevant was making.
That's not what the phrase means. Having a hard on for someone means having it out for them.
Right. That's why they showed up in the thread on fighting Islamaphobia thread to make Islamaphobic comments that derailed the discussion and got the thread moderated.
As for refuting their claims, it's been done. They just disappear for a few weeks, then return to push the same tired lines about the evils of Clinton, often while implicitly or explicitly defending Trump. We've argued with them. Nothing takes. At this point disregard is the only thing saving us from getting this thread modded too.
edited 16th Feb '17 7:53:14 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
Betsy DeVos praises Magnet Schools, scolds protesters for fearing 'change'
. For those who don't know, Magnet Schools
are highly specialized, highly diversified Public schools.
@Parable-
Me Too!. I think the "opposite" is to have a "hate boner" for something.
Probably best to avoid either expression.
edited 16th Feb '17 8:04:07 PM by Hodor2
(disclaimer: agnostic here - this is just a trend I've noticed)
edited 16th Feb '17 8:22:18 PM by Pseudopartition
Wow, that's...I'm at a loss for words here everyone. The sheer amount of stupid/denial/myopia...I cannot think of the right words for this. At least none that wouldn't get me banned from this thread.
Yeah, but they at least usually spare some time to deriding other religions for their bullshit too. For the record, I'm an atheist.
edited 16th Feb '17 8:12:17 PM by M84
Disgusted, but not surprisedDe Vos is quite sure of herself for someone who has the dubious honor of enduring the greatest backlash among Trump's picks—and nominees in general in living memory, and is opposed by about all the people in her subject area, including the school system she used to work with in Michigan.
Also comment from the Mc Carthy impersonator story: "Man, roasting the Trump administration is rapidly supplementing football as one of humanity's great uniters."
edited 16th Feb '17 8:17:37 PM by CenturyEye
Look with century eyes... With our backs to the arch And the wreck of our kind We will stare straight ahead For the rest of our livesI'd say he's vastly worse in some ways and only marginally worse in other ways. It's entirely legitimate that someone might evaluate differently, though, even if none of us here agree with them.
Actually, I originally showed up to complain about some of the same people you complained about. I simply expressed disagreement with the idea that the people in question were islamophobic and pointed to polls to prove my point. Apparently you think pointing out what the polls actually say is Islamophobic if it doesn't support what you want to believe. And even if your characterization of what I said and did on the Islamophobia poll were accurate, it wouldn't be mutually exclusive with being a Bernie supporter and there's no reason someone can't be a genuine Islamophobe without being a Trump supporter, so this argument of yours doesn't make sense on any level.
It's been attempted occasionally, but I haven't found the counterarguments very convincing. Often times my points have simply been ignored.
Well, watching people miss my point and falsely accuse me of being a troll and/or Trump supporter over and over gets exhaustively frustrating after a while, so I take a break.
Because I haven't found the defenses of Clinton very convincing and people here keep making the same nonsensical points in her defense.
Nope. I've occasionally defended people who voted for Trump because I think there are some who voted for him for non-malicious reasons and/or didn't know the worst things about him, but any case of me defending Trump himself exists only in your mind.
An argument has to actually be accurate and a good argument in order to stick. It doesn't help if, for example, you claim that a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist is just as unreliable a source as Fox News and then you don't provide any evidence of that.
Anyone want to take bets on how long before this post is thumped to supposedly protect my dignity while it's apparently totally dignified for Ambar Sonof Deshar to falsely brand me a troll just for disagreeing with him and an Islamophobe just for going where the evidence of polling data leads me? I'm betting about one minute or less.
Ford to continue with plan to create Manufacturing Plants in Mexico
.
Trump's threats no longer work, it appears.
Pushover: The points have already been debated and refuted. The goalposts keep getting moved instead. If you pay attention the arguments have gone from "Hillary would have butchered untermensch ragheads the residents of the Middle East" to "Hillary is eeeeevil".
If one side consistently refuses to play ball there is no point in welcoming that side into the fold. They are welcome to join their local black bloc's war on store windows.
I have disagreed with her a lot, but comparing her to republicans and propagandists of dictatorships is really low. - An idiotThat's certainly true. On The Daily Banter, an otherwise pragmatic leftist site that I enjoy, there's an author named Michael Luciano who does literally nothing but publish articles railing about Islam. Numerous other authors on the site have in fact argued with him, and he keeps getting shredded in the comments, yet the site keeps publishing his garbage about how "Islam is the problem".
That said when we've got an Islamaphobe who actively defends Trump voters while continuing to go on about the evils of Clinton, I've got to look askance at that.
edited 16th Feb '17 8:30:14 PM by AmbarSonofDeshar
Islamophobia and Trump support are closely correlated. That an Islamophobe is a Trump supporter is just a reasonable assumption to make.
There's a rather solid consensus that Secretary Clinton was the most qualified candidate in ever, and the only qualified candidate in the 2016 election. Beyond that, one theme of 2016 was the perfect was the archenemy of the good. Trying to repeat the she was flawed argument rubs salt on fresh wounds and rather overlooks that the people shunning Clinton effectively elected Trump. Personally, I never look for the messiah when voting, but competence and a relative lack of bigotry are luxuries as it turns out.
Voting for Trump was a massively irresponsible act by which 60 millions (not including the people who stayed home) greatly harmed about 400 millions and possibly 7 billions.
There were even less good reasons to vote for Trump than there are to invest in a Ponzi scheme. You can understand why they were suckered and try to prevent it next time, but the act was neither good nor excusable.
Never heard of or read the intercept. That's another's point to make.
edited 16th Feb '17 8:34:22 PM by CenturyEye
Look with century eyes... With our backs to the arch And the wreck of our kind We will stare straight ahead For the rest of our livesThose who, whether willfully or through ignorance, exaggerated Clinton's flaws and scandals while minimizing her strengths contributed directly to Trump's victory by causing people who might have voted Democrat to stay home or waste their votes on Stein or Johnson. Many other factors contributed, including some gross failures of competence by the campaign itself, but you cannot overlook anything when the outcome was so close.
Those who, even now, continue on that "Clinton was evil" line, are basically no longer Democrats. They've sold out to the propaganda of the alt-right, with Steve Bannon laughing in his beer.
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"Shepherd Smith of Fox News had this to say in response to Trump's treatment of the media:
Smith then started to look into the camera and added, “Really? Your opposition was hacked, and the Russians were responsible for it, and your people were on the phone on the same day it was happening, and we are fools for asking those questions? No sir, we are not fools for asking those questions, and we demand to know the answer to this question. You owe this to the American people.”

edited 16th Feb '17 7:48:43 PM by Gilphon