If Trump loses, will we be done with him?

[XponentialChaos]

You inferred it by correlating its success with Biden being in office, as if it represents consumer sentiment.

You really need to stop trying to speak for me. You’re absolutely terrible at it.

I meant exactly what I said. I don’t need you to try to infer what you think I mean.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You really need to stop trying to speak for me. You’re absolutely terrible at it.

I meant exactly what I said. I don’t need you to try to infer what you think I mean.

If you're citing it to support your argument, one can infer you agree with it.

It isn't hard. Look at the quote chain.

 

[XponentialChaos]

If you're citing it to support your argument, one can infer you agree with it.

It isn't hard. Look at the quote chain.

Oh. So you’re aware of the fact that this conversation between her and I originated in another thread entirely, right?

Do tell. Please tell me where this chain originated from since you claim to know what I mean better than I do.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Oh. So you’re aware of the fact that this conversation between Sue and I originated in another thread entirely, right?

Do tell. Please tell me where this chain originated from since you claim to know what I mean better than I do.

This deflection isn't helping you.

It doesn't matter what thread it originated in. No bearing whatsoever. You're citing it here. That makes it, and you, fair game.

 

[BrokeLoser]

Anyway, the question is, will Trump go away if he loses, and if not, will Republicans be done with him?

If Trump loses, will we be done with him?​

“We”?
NO….BUT all nutless as fuck establishment bitches / traditional ‘Republicunts’ who never had the balls to conserve, preserve or protect ANYTHING will definitely be done with him.
All legit new-age Conservatives with a ballsack will be hunting for the next MAGA Populist with the sack to spend their days bitch-slapping the living fuck out of the filthy Left.

 

[TemplarKormac]

And from what I can see the chain doesn't originate in another thread. The majority of the conversation takes place here.

But it is neither here nor there. Moving on.

 

[XponentialChaos]

This deflection isn't helping you.

It doesn't matter what thread it originated in. No bearing whatsoever. You're citing it here. That makes it, and you, fair game.

So you weren’t aware of the origins of the conversation we were having. Gotcha.

I don’t need you to infer what you think I mean. I meant exactly what I said.

 

[XponentialChaos]

And from what I can see the chain doesn't originate in another thread.

You’re wrong again.

But it is neither here nor there. Moving on.

Great.

 

[TemplarKormac]

So you weren’t aware of the origins of the conversation we were having. Gotcha.

I don’t need you to infer what you think I mean. I meant exactly what I said.

So you blindly post stuff then. Alright. Whatever.

 

[TemplarKormac]

How many Trump losses do you need before you figure it out?

How many times are you going to roll his senile orange ass out there before you realize that America doesn’t like him?

The quote chain starts here, page five. With your post 88 and Sue's 90.

I honestly didn't peg you for someone who had to be handheld.

But like I said, moving on.

 

[XponentialChaos]

So you blindly post stuff then. Alright. Whatever.

No. More terrible inferring from you.

 

[XponentialChaos]

The quote chain starts here, page five. With your post 88 and Sue's 90.

I honestly didn't peg you for someone who had to be handheld.

But like I said, moving on.

Holy shit. You’re tripling down on this stupid nonsense of yours. Read my previous post very carefully:

“Oh. So you’re aware of the fact that this conversation between her and I originated in another thread entirely, right?”

Are you able to infer what “originated in another thread” means?

 

[TemplarKormac]

No. More terrible inferring from you.

You're so naive. You seem to think there is no nuance in a discussion. No precognitive, preconceived, or confirmatory biases when citing something.

I got a crash course on debating here, being a member for 11 years. I think I have an more of an idea about what someone actually means by their posting habits than you.

Now if you will, I will get back on topic.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Holy shit. You’re tripling down on this stupid nonsense of yours. Read my previous post very carefully:

“Oh. So you’re aware of the fact that this conversation between her and I originated in another thread entirely, right?”

Are you able to infer what “originated in another thread” means?

Yes, I followed your conversation back to your first post in this thread. I never got redirected to another thread while following the chain.

No. This conversation originated in this thread.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Yes, I followed your conversation back to your first post in this thread. I never got redirected to another thread while following the chain.

No. This conversation originated in this thread.

LoL, it was a conversation I had with her in another thread. I know. I was there.

You like to infer things you have no clue about. Stop doing that.

 

[TemplarKormac]

LoL, it was a conversation I had with her in another thread. I know. I was there.

You like to infer things you have no clue about. Stop doing that.

No, because I go off of actionable evidence. What I see as opposed to what I don't. I followed the chain to its origination point.

I was never redirected to your previous conversation, nor did you link to it despite your insistences.

However, it has no bearing on what I originally called you on:

The stock market does not infer consumer sentiment. Average consumers are not stock brokers.

 

[XponentialChaos]

No, because I go off of actionable evidence. What I see as opposed to what I don't. I followed the chain to its origination point.

I was never redirected to your previous conversation, nor did you link to it despite your insistences.

However, it has no bearing on what I originally called you on:

The stock market does not infer consumer sentiment. Average consumers are not stock brokers.

If I link you to it, will you admit that you’re wrong?

 

[TemplarKormac]

If I link you to it, will you admit that you’re wrong?

No. Because the chain I followed is unique to this thread. You have yet to address my original question. This is a fruitless pursuit.

 

[XponentialChaos]

No. Because the chain I followed is unique to this thread.

The conversation her and I were having is not unique to this thread, as I explained to you.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The conversation her and I were having is not unique to this thread, as I explained to you.

I followed the conversation you were having with her to your first unique post here. In this thread.

You're using this to avoid answering my question. It's irrelevant. It's obfuscatory.

If you can't or won't answer my question, just say so.