Trump supporters: What do you think of this information?

[Sandisk]

I despise both parties.

But it is obvious that Trump is done politically.
I don't begin to care what some silly poll says to the contrary.

Trump tried twice and never even won the popular vote.
And his actions on January 6 - whether illegal or not (I think not, personally) - finished him for good.
Even Murdoch is giving up on him.

The Trump era is over.

 

[Care4all]

well you claim there's evidence. what is it? come on, why you backing away now?

Google, is your friend!

 

[Mac1958]

The Trump era is over.

As an individual, maybe. But this is clearly metastasizing.

 

[Feeding Crows]

You are clearly disturbed.

 

[Correll]

Give them as much scrutiny as you like. That doesn’t bother me. Despite all your scrutiny, you still haven’t shown any other cases with similar mistakes. Shows how weak your argument is.

Your argument that there may have been nefarious intentions relies on exactly one incident out of hundreds. Just one. As your source says, and as I agree, it was most likely just a mistake. If you see more than that, it’s because you’re delusional.

My point stands.

Very few people are in position to personally review the cases themselves.

For you to act like that my argument was that we should personally investigate their treatment, is quite disingenuous of you.


I understand. You clearly suspect that something bad is going on, and you support it, but you want to stonewall. Thus you have a motive for dishonesty.

 

[schmidlap]

Like I said, how many He hired were career toadies?

"I’m going to surround myself with only the best and
most serious people! We want top of the line professionals!"...
“Bill Barr is a man of unbelievable credibility and courage
and he’s going to go down on the history books!”

e.g.​

Bill Barr Calls “Bullshit” on Trump’s Election Lies​

Bill Barr Outright Cackles at Dinesh D’Souza’s Nutty ‘2000 Mules'

It's Bullshit!"​

 

[jc456]

Google, is your friend!

nope, that's your claim, per the rules in here provide the link with the evidence you claim.

 

[Mac1958]

View attachment 677199
"I’m going to surround myself with only the best and
most serious people! We want top of the line professionals!"...
“Bill Barr is a man of unbelievable credibility and courage
and he’s going to go down on the history books!”

e.g.​

Bill Barr Calls “Bullshit” on Trump’s Election Lies​

Bill Barr Outright Cackles at Dinesh D’Souza’s Nutty ‘2000 Mules'


View attachment 677200
It's Bullshit!"​

In the orange alternate universe, 1 + (?) = Frog.

Soon the rest of the planet will need an interpreter to communicate with them.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Are you not following the conversation?

A single example of someone who is criticizing him specifically for his failure to stop the riot as opposed to the other stuff I just mentioned.

The "other stuff" you mentioned? You said "I’m not criticizing Trump for his failure to stop the riots. I’m criticizing him because he took no action (to stop the riot)..."

It's the same goddamn thing. You might as well have said "I’m not criticizing Trump for his failure to stop the riots. I’m criticizing Trump for his failure to stop the riots."

You claimed that pretty much every Trump hater in this discussion has done this and NOW you’re arguing that it’s gibberish. Make up your mind.

I'm arguing that what YOU are saying is gibberish.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I don’t expect you to care that you’re being inconsistent regarding whether Trump was acting immoral.

But that's not what you said earlier. You yourself are being inconsistent. While most of the time you said his behavior was immoral, in at least one post you said Trump himself was, and I quote: "..immoral, depraved, psychotic...".

This is where I have a problem. If I say Trump is immoral or even that his behavior on Jan 6 was immoral, I would have to say that Democrat behavior during the 2020 riots and CHAZ was immoral. If one is true, so is the other.

 

[schmidlap]

In the orange alternate universe, 1 + (?) = Frog.

Soon the rest of the planet will need an interpreter to communicate with them.

Cognitive dissonance.

E.g., "What is your opinion regarding Trump watching, for three hours, his goons savaging greatly-outnumbered police and trashing the Capitol in an attempt to sabotage the democratic process, while his minions, family, media shills, and others pleaded with him to call them off?"

"HILLARY!"
"HUNTER!"
"BAMBOO BALLOTS!"
"ITALIAN SATELLITES!"
"WHISPERING RAY"​

 

[Mac1958]

Cognitive dissonance.

E.g., "What is your opinion regarding Trump watching, for three hours, his goons savaging greatly-outnumbered police and trashing the Capitol in an attempt to sabotage the democratic process, while his minions, family, media shills, and others pleaded with him to call them off?"

View attachment 677218
"HILLARY!"
"HUNTER!"
"BAMBOO BALLOTS!"
"ITALIAN SATELLITES!"
"WHISPERING RAY"​

I'll frequently look at the screen at something they've said here, and rather than formulate a response, I'll find myself wondering about the thought processes that went into the post. What "information" they have received from their universe, how they process it, and how they apply it to the conversation.

That in itself can be exhausting. I don't even bother responding a majority of the time, knowing that anything I say is pointless. I'll often thank them anyway, which is sincere, since I definitely appreciate their willingness to share those thought processes with me. I just don't know what to DO with them.

 

[XponentialChaos]

The "other stuff" you mentioned? You said "I’m not criticizing Trump for his failure to stop the riots. I’m criticizing him because he took no action (to stop the riot)..."

It's the same goddamn thing. You might as well have said "I’m not criticizing Trump for his failure to stop the riots. I’m criticizing Trump for his failure to stop the riots."

Clearly they‘re not the same. One is criticizing for the outcome of a riot. The other is criticizing for their lack of desire to get the riot under control. This is simply outcome vs effort. Related but not the same.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Possibly. I asked you for a link supporting your claim and you instead threw a hissy fit, so I remain skeptical of this claim.

The first thing you asked is, was it about peaceful protests or violent riots. I had already told you it was about the Ferguson riots which everyone knows had turned violent. If it's true I had a "hissy fit", it was because of this.

As for a link, I couldn't find one after a long search. But I can tell you it was a press conference before or during a climate summit or conference which I believe was somewhere in Europe or the U.K.. I remember there were other world leaders there but the only one I knew by sight was Ann Merkel.

Now, take from this what you will but I was watching it in real time and I remember the question and Obama's response so well because it angered me.

 

[XponentialChaos]

But that's not what you said earlier. You yourself are being inconsistent. While most of the time you said his behavior was immoral, in at least one post you said Trump himself was, and I quote: "..immoral, depraved, psychotic...".

This is where I have a problem. If I say Trump is immoral or even that his behavior on Jan 6 was immoral, I would have to say that Democrat behavior during the 2020 riots and CHAZ was immoral. If one is true, so is the other.

So which did you agree to? That he was immoral or that his behavior was immoral?

Because then it appears that you flipped your position.

 

[XponentialChaos]

The first thing you asked is, was it about peaceful protests or violent riots. I had already told you it was about the Ferguson riots which everyone knows had turned violent. If it's true I had a "hissy fit", it was because of this.

As for a link, I couldn't find one after a long search. But I can tell you it was a press conference before or during a climate summit or conference which I believe was somewhere in Europe or the U.K.. I remember there were other world leaders there but the only one I knew by sight was Ann Merkel.

Now, take from this what you will but I was watching it in real time and I remember the question and Obama's response so well because it angered me.

Ok. Well I would need supporting evidence to believe that one.

I suspect that he was promoting the behavior of peaceful protestors, not violent rioters.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Clearly they‘re not the same. One is criticizing for the outcome of a riot.

For failure to stop it.

The other is criticizing for their lack of desire to get the riot under control.

Again, failure to stop it.

This is simply outcome vs effort. Related but not the same.

Uh, no. The outcome was the same regardless.

I understand what you're saying, you're just not expressing it very well. Your problem with Trump's behavior was his motive for choosing not to stop it. That's understandable. But regardless of the motive, the outcome was the same.

 

[XponentialChaos]

Very few people are in position to personally review the cases themselves.

For you to act like that my argument was that we should personally investigate their treatment, is quite disingenuous of you.


I understand. You clearly suspect that something bad is going on, and you support it, but you want to stonewall. Thus you have a motive for dishonesty.

You can scrutinize it to the best of your ability. Other people can scrutinize it. I don’t mind that at all. Scrutinize away.

Let me know when more than one such incident is found.

My point stands.

 

[schmidlap]

I'll frequently look at the screen at something they've said here, and rather than formulate a response, I'll find myself wondering about the thought processes that went into the post. What "information" they have received from their universe, how they process it, and how they apply it to the conversation.

That in itself can be exhausting. I don't even bother responding a majority of the time, knowing that anything I say is pointless. I'll often thank them anyway, which is sincere, since I definitely appreciate their willingness to share those thought processes with me. I just don't know what to DO with them.

Theirs is an apparently faith-based ethos, devoid of reason.

I've wondered how they can actually harbor a notion of a stolen "Landslide!" when, 20 months after the election, after their recounts, after their audits, after their investigations, after their death threats directed at Republican officeholders, poll workers, and their families, after dozens of court challenges, after a goon attack on Congress, after their failure to hang the vice President, after their fake elector scheme, after their plot to seize the states' voting machines, not only have they not contrived any credible evidence needed to litigate, they don't have a single suspect in their monumental caper that would have demanded legions of conspirators.

The rectum has its reasons that reason knows not of.

 

[XponentialChaos]

For failure to stop it.


Again, failure to stop it.


Uh, no. The outcome was the same regardless.

I understand what you're saying, you're just not expressing it very well. Your problem with Trump's behavior was his motive for choosing not to stop it. That's understandable. But regardless of the motive, the outcome was the same.

Clearly, motive and outcome are not the same thing. I’m not sure why you waste time arguing about what we both know to be obvious.