EL Rich
Gold Member
- Sep 23, 2018
- 423
- 141
- 180
It was over-simplification for the sake of expediency, your criticism is fair. Mea Culpa.Great, insults.What you are saying is completely trivial. If you think the only way to conclude that Trump is and has been bad for the Country is by arbitrary opinion, and the facts cannot support that - then it's not by some colloquial interpretation of the facts to say that you are wrong, and perhaps stupid. Universal you, in the hypothetical...not you you. You knew that.No, what I am saying, is that raw data is factual, but what we all do is use our reason to extrapolate truth out of those facts. I am not defending those who willfully stick their heads in the sand and deny reality. I am simply suggesting that reasonable people can have reasonable disagreements about what the facts “mean”. This is not me saying, Alternative Facts are anything but lies, but I am suggesting like an statistician will tell you, numbers can be manipulated to derive meaning almost any meaning, yet they are factual.That's trivial - nobody is the arbiter of what a fact is besides reality. Just because someone recognizes what the facts are, doesnt mean theyre the ones deciding its a fact...glad I could clear up that distinction, though...because it seems to me that in the interest of some magical fairness you're suggesting that everyone is entitled to their own facts.No I am not, I am suggesting that you alone are not the arbiter of what is or is not factual and what conclusions can be drawn.Are you suggesting there's not a right thing to do, and that people aren't personally responsible if they cannot understand what a fact is?Yeah, really doesn’t matter who you are supporting, the idea that you know the facts and anyone who disagrees with you is lost, is some of the most ignorant nonsense our society is dealing with right now. While I wouldn’t vote for President Trump to be my village dog catcher, I know plenty of caring, thoughtful people who see him as needed to stem the tide of over reaching government. When I talk to these folks and try to change their minds, I don’t start by calling “fucking idiots”, I reserve that distinction for folks who display their idiocy in what they have to say.To all of the "neither candidate is good and you are all being duped by the deep state" crowd,
The problem with your POV is that facts exist. Look to the facts and the path reveals itself.
Which you?
The letter. The letter u.
Or two of them, or the letter that says two of them. Double you. Or W.
All I am saying is that a reasonable person can completely disagree with you while looking at the same data. Maybe they believe that immigration and people of color are destroying our culture. I disagree with them, but the second you say they have no right to express that opinion at all, you are betraying democratic norms. There is a reason the ACLU fought for the rights of Nazis to hold a march. Freedom belongs to everyone or no one. By the way, all I have advocated for is not dismissing people before you hear why they think what they think. I fear that you do not see how your unwillingness to accept the ability of others to disagree With you, without being wrong, exists whether you wish to accept it or not. And you are exposing the most legitimate criticism of the modern left, you are intolerant of any type of digression from the doctrines of critical theory.
If your curious where that leads check out China under Mao and that is not hyperbol.
We're not against immigration, we're against ILLEGAL immigration. And we aren't against "people of color" coming here, we only want whites to come here LEGALLY too. Fuck the shit out of you.
To say you're open to hearing things you disagree with then you denigrate and demagogue people who disagree with you and intentionally misrepresent our views as racist and xenophobic really is no better than anything any other anti-free speech leftist does