***Official Political Discussion Thread***

You're reading the conversation out of context. If you go back through the previous pages my position is quite clear. Really no need for me to rewrite my entire position. You can even just read the rest of the post you quoted and it should take away any ambiguity.
I've been following your nonsense. My reading comprehension is fine. On the other hand, your logic is featherweight garbage, so thanks for not republishing.

See, if Trump were ignorant to the fact that his actions were racist, he would correct himself. But he repeats his racists actions and statements, which means that he doesn't think he is wrong. BTW, did he not say he never apologizes?
I don't have to wait for him to declare to the world that he is racist. I know that, you know that, we know that.
 
I've been following your nonsense. My reading comprehension is fine. On the other hand, your logic is featherweight garbage, so thanks for not republishing.

See, if Trump were ignorant to the fact that his actions were racist, he would correct himself. But he repeats his racists actions and statements, which means that he doesn't think he is wrong. BTW, did he not say he never apologizes?
I don't have to wait for him to declare to the world that he is racist. I know that, you know that, we know that.

I've been said it is reasonable to conclude he is a racist. I just don't personally think so. Not sure what else to say on it.
 
Chapter 2.

An old lawyer in Alabama hangs out at the local high school and mall. He signs year books of underage girls. He is subsequently banned from the local high school football games because he is looking for dates. Dwalk supports this man and hopes he wins but wouldn't want his underage family hanging around said judge just like Robert Kelly's crisis manager. Due PROCESS must PREVAIL.

Defending due process is not defending/supporting individual people. The concept is what is important.
 
The chapter was a nice touch.

But, as is often the case, your analogy is off-point.

An actual analogy is that someone makes a false statement that they believe is true based on their knowledge at the time. That person did not tell the truth. Whether or not that person is a liar is a different question. As a lie requires intent.
I see that you are inserting a premise that isn't agreed upon to reject rusty's analogy. I don't think anyone else agreed with the statement below.
I do not think someone can unknowingly be a racist. I think what you are describing is implicit bias. And, believe or not, most people have implicit biases.
 
I see that you are inserting a premise that isn't agreed upon to reject rusty's analogy. I don't think anyone else agreed with the statement below.

I was asked if someone can be a racist without knowing it. It was not asked by Rusty. It was asked by @iamdef

There is no false premise.
 
I was asked if someone can be a racist without knowing it. It was not asked by Rusty. It was asked by @iamdef

There is no false premise.
I'm aware of what happened. You don't need to try shape the conversation every time you're called out.

I also didn't say anything about a false premise. I said it was a premise that wasn't agreed upon.

You really should stop acting like everyone is too stupid to catch on to your behavior. For your own sake.
 
I'm aware of what happened. You don't need to try shape the conversation every time you're called out.

I also didn't say anything about a false premise. I said it was a premise that wasn't agreed upon.

You really should stop acting like everyone is too stupid to catch on to your behavior. For your own sake.

Perhaps you are operating on a level that I can't comprehend. Because I fail to understand what point you are making. Earlier you said I had manipulative behavior but then said you didn't feel manipulated.

Now you are saying people didn't agree upon a premise in two unrelated posts.

It's like you want to be a part of the conversation, but haven't quite figured a way to engage other than saying random things about your perceived deficiencies in my posts.

There's no need to feel left out. If you have an opinion on the political discussion just say it. If you disagree with mine, that's cool too. But all this about a premise that wasn't agreed upon? I have no clue what you are talking about.
 
The Senate Intel Committee has released volume 1 of their multi-part final report on their Russia investigation. This one focuses specifically on Russian tampering with election infrastructure.
Here are what the other parts will focus on:
-Examining the Intel community's assessment of Russian interference
-The Obama administration's response to Russian interference
-The role of social media disinformation campaigns
-Remaining counterintelligence questions

The committee has submitted their completed volume on social media disinformation for declassification. The other volumes are expected to be released later this fall.
https://www.burr.senate.gov/press/r...s-in-first-volume-of-bipartisan-russia-report


 
Last edited:
Perhaps you are operating on a level that I can't comprehend. Because I fail to understand what point you are making. Earlier you said I had manipulative behavior but then said you didn't feel manipulated.

Now you are saying people didn't agree upon a premise in two unrelated posts.

It's like you want to be a part of the conversation, but haven't quite figured a way to engage other than saying random things about your perceived deficiencies in my posts.

There's no need to feel left out. If you have an opinion on the political discussion just say it. If you disagree with mine, that's cool too. But all this about a premise that wasn't agreed upon? I have no clue what you are talking about.
I think you're smart enough to realize that you're conflating a person exhibiting manipulative behavior with people being manipulated.

The rest of your post appears to be an attempt to deflect attention away from what I'm noting and redirect attention back to me to suggest that I'm actually the problem. This is an example of manipulative behavior.
 
I think you're smart enough to realize that you're conflating a person exhibiting manipulative behavior with people being manipulated.

The rest of your post appears to be an attempt to deflect attention away from what I'm noting and redirect attention back to me to suggest that I'm actually the problem. This is an example of manipulative behavior.

So you think I am "exhibiting manipulative behavior" without manipulating anyone.

Yea, this is above me now. You got it.
 
So you think I am "exhibiting manipulative behavior" without manipulating anyone.

Yea, this is above me now. You got it.
You keep trying to move the discussion away from you being manipulative onto who is being manipulated.

I also never said that I think you are exhibiting manipulative behavior without manipulating anyone.
 
Future sayin **** trump on big mood :pimp:


First he shouted out my tiny island, then he does this...
giphy.gif


#HENDRIX2020
 
Back
Top Bottom