Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2017 13:13:28 GMT -5
Yeah, while I voted to remain and think Trump is a ludicrous human being, some of the superior bullshit that gets thrown about towards people who voted that way doesn't sit well with me. Bang on. Awful, divisive mentality. Think like us or your opinion is worthless, you thick bastard. Most leave voters have lower education. Duuurrr. So their contributions to society aren't high enough to have an opinion? Probably worked a lot harder and paid more tax than the 'educated' mob who write them off.Bigoted beyond belief. Agree with most of your post, but the highlighted line doesn't sit well with the rest of the post imo. |
|
|
|
Post by rickypaglais on Dec 20, 2017 13:35:34 GMT -5
Bang on. Awful, divisive mentality. Think like us or your opinion is worthless, you thick bastard. Most leave voters have lower education. Duuurrr. So their contributions to society aren't high enough to have an opinion? Probably worked a lot harder and paid more tax than the 'educated' mob who write them off.Bigoted beyond belief. Agree with most of your post, but the highlighted line doesn't sit well with the rest of the post imo. How so? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2017 13:46:44 GMT -5
Agree with most of your post, but the highlighted line doesn't sit well with the rest of the post imo. How so? Just seemed slightly divisive assuming that a group of people who all say certain things are less hard working than another group of people. Wouldn't have commented on that as a standalone post, but just seemed jarring in the context of a post which appeared to be primarily against divisive rhetoric and against assuming things about certain groups of people. |
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Dec 20, 2017 13:58:22 GMT -5
I don't remotely believe that people who voted for Trump were morons.
I believe they willingly and blatantly ignored that someone was a detestable human being and gave them their vote.
When you're clearly presented with facts. When you're told that someone is homophobic, racist, sexist, a sexual harrasser and you still vote for him. That says either you didn't care or you didn't care enough.
That's not a judgement on intelligence. That's a judgement on morals.
Personally, I'm more than willing to debate philosophical aims and the trajectory of the country in a "respectful manner." I do believe that part of the issue with liberalism in America is it's overreaching judgment. It's the shutting down of debate before debate can happen. But who you voted for and what that person did before you voted for them isn't a debate. That's fact. That's as much fact as the sky being blue.
Because in actuality, morally, there's no defense and there's no debate in voting for the above. Morally, there's no defense for ignoring homophobia, sexism, racism, or sexual harassment, or letting those things being outweighed by any counterargument.
And as an addendum, when I say "voted" for those things. I don't mean that if you voted for Trump then that means you're homophobic, racist, sexist, or pro-sexual harassment. However, voting for Trump, whether one likes it or not, is voting for those things.
|
|
|
|
Post by rickypaglais on Dec 20, 2017 14:07:32 GMT -5
Just seemed slightly divisive assuming that a group of people who all say certain things are less hard working than another group of people. Wouldn't have commented on that as a standalone post, but just seemed jarring in the context of a post which appeared to be primarily against divisive rhetoric and against assuming things about certain groups of people. I'm just basing it on my own experiences as a student. The vast, vast majority of them weren't there to do much work; put it that way. Obviously it's not applicable across the board though. |
|
|
|
Post by rickypaglais on Dec 20, 2017 14:08:42 GMT -5
I don't remotely believe that people who voted for Trump were morons. I believe they willingly and blatantly ignored that someone was a detestable human being and gave them their vote. When you're clearly presented with facts. When you're told that someone is homophobic, racist, sexist, a sexual harrasser and you still vote for him. That says either you didn't care or you didn't care enough. That's not a judgement on intelligence. That's a judgement on morals. Personally, I'm more than willing to debate philosophical aims and the trajectory of the country in a "respectful manner." I do believe that part of the issue with liberalism in America is it's overreaching judgment. It's the shutting down of debate before debate can happen. But who you voted for and what that person did before you voted for them isn't a debate. That's fact. That's as much fact as the sky being blue. Because in actuality, morally, there's no defense and there's no debate in voting for the above. Morally, there's no defense for ignoring homophobia, sexism, racism, or sexual harassment, or letting those things being outweighed by any counterargument. And as an addendum, when I say "voted" for those things. I don't mean that if you voted for Trump then that means you're homophobic, racist, sexist, or pro-sexual harassment. However, voting for Trump, whether one likes it or not, is voting for those things. So everyone who voted for Trump is morally corrupt? |
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Dec 20, 2017 14:14:35 GMT -5
I don't remotely believe that people who voted for Trump were morons. I believe they willingly and blatantly ignored that someone was a detestable human being and gave them their vote. When you're clearly presented with facts. When you're told that someone is homophobic, racist, sexist, a sexual harrasser and you still vote for him. That says either you didn't care or you didn't care enough. That's not a judgement on intelligence. That's a judgement on morals. Personally, I'm more than willing to debate philosophical aims and the trajectory of the country in a "respectful manner." I do believe that part of the issue with liberalism in America is it's overreaching judgment. It's the shutting down of debate before debate can happen. But who you voted for and what that person did before you voted for them isn't a debate. That's fact. That's as much fact as the sky being blue. Because in actuality, morally, there's no defense and there's no debate in voting for the above. Morally, there's no defense for ignoring homophobia, sexism, racism, or sexual harassment, or letting those things being outweighed by any counterargument. And as an addendum, when I say "voted" for those things. I don't mean that if you voted for Trump then that means you're homophobic, racist, sexist, or pro-sexual harassment. However, voting for Trump, whether one likes it or not, is voting for those things. So everyone who voted for Trump is morally corrupt? Maybe. People ignored someone who was homophobic, racist, sexist, and a sexual harrasser. In the 21st century. These were known facts. These were things deemed not importance enough to change a vote. If those things don't change your vote then how is that not a moral judgement? If you want to die on that hill, go ahead. That's not to say I'm perfect. I'm far from it. But there are certain things that are morally wrong. Full stop. |
|
|
|
Post by rickypaglais on Dec 20, 2017 14:16:54 GMT -5
So everyone who voted for Trump is morally corrupt? Maybe. People ignored someone who was homophobic, racist, sexist, and a sexual harrasser. In the 21st century. These were known facts. These were things deemed not importance enough to change a vote. If those things don't change your vote then how is that not a moral judgement? If you want to die on that hill, go ahead. Outrageous. When there is a 50/50 split between two shitheads to vote for, I don't for one second believe even close the a majority of Trump voters did so because they morally overlooked things. We're talking 10s of millions of people. |
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Dec 20, 2017 14:20:33 GMT -5
Maybe. People ignored someone who was homophobic, racist, sexist, and a sexual harrasser. In the 21st century. These were known facts. These were things deemed not importance enough to change a vote. If those things don't change your vote then how is that not a moral judgement? If you want to die on that hill, go ahead. Outrageous. When there is a 50/50 split between two shitheads to vote for, I don't for one second believe even close the a majority of Trump voters did so because they morally overlooked things. We're talking 10s of millions of people. You may not want to believe, but the very act of people voting for him says that's what happened. You may say shitheads, but are you saying that that one person was worse than a racist, homophobic, sexist, sexual harasser? Mind you, Trump ALSO needed to make it through a primary to face Clinton. People in multiple primaries voted for him. He won multiple mini elections on his way to winning the big election. There wasn't just 1 moral test for voters, Trump against Clinton, there were multiple. And he won. The ONLY way that doesn't happen is if people weren't in full view of the facts. This isn't a surprise. There have been genocides predicated on tens of millions of people supporting them. The sheer number doesn't mean the act isn't possible. In fact, history has shown that tens of millions of people are always willing to ignore morals. |
|
|
|
Post by jxing on Dec 20, 2017 15:16:12 GMT -5
Outrageous. When there is a 50/50 split between two shitheads to vote for, I don't for one second believe even close the a majority of Trump voters did so because they morally overlooked things. We're talking 10s of millions of people. You may not want to believe, but the very act of people voting for him says that's what happened. You may say shitheads, but are you saying that that one person was worse than a racist, homophobic, sexist, sexual harasser? Mind you, Trump ALSO needed to make it through a primary to face Clinton. People in multiple primaries voted for him. He won multiple mini elections on his way to winning the big election. There wasn't just 1 moral test for voters, Trump against Clinton, there were multiple. And he won. The ONLY way that doesn't happen is if people weren't in full view of the facts. This isn't a surprise. There have been genocides predicated on tens of millions of people supporting them. The sheer number doesn't mean the act isn't possible. In fact, history has shown that tens of millions of people are always willing to ignore morals. I'm curious. What adjectives would you use to describe Hillary Clinton? |
|
|
|
Post by rickypaglais on Dec 20, 2017 15:20:23 GMT -5
You may not want to believe, but the very act of people voting for him says that's what happened. You may say shitheads, but are you saying that that one person was worse than a racist, homophobic, sexist, sexual harasser? Mind you, Trump ALSO needed to make it through a primary to face Clinton. People in multiple primaries voted for him. He won multiple mini elections on his way to winning the big election. There wasn't just 1 moral test for voters, Trump against Clinton, there were multiple. And he won. The ONLY way that doesn't happen is if people weren't in full view of the facts. This isn't a surprise. There have been genocides predicated on tens of millions of people supporting them. The sheer number doesn't mean the act isn't possible. In fact, history has shown that tens of millions of people are always willing to ignore morals. I'm curious. What adjectives would you use to describe Hillary Clinton? "Not Trump" |
|
|
|
Post by rickypaglais on Dec 20, 2017 15:21:15 GMT -5
Outrageous. When there is a 50/50 split between two shitheads to vote for, I don't for one second believe even close the a majority of Trump voters did so because they morally overlooked things. We're talking 10s of millions of people. You may not want to believe, but the very act of people voting for him says that's what happened. You may say shitheads, but are you saying that that one person was worse than a racist, homophobic, sexist, sexual harasser? Mind you, Trump ALSO needed to make it through a primary to face Clinton. People in multiple primaries voted for him. He won multiple mini elections on his way to winning the big election. There wasn't just 1 moral test for voters, Trump against Clinton, there were multiple. And he won. The ONLY way that doesn't happen is if people weren't in full view of the facts. This isn't a surprise. There have been genocides predicated on tens of millions of people supporting them. The sheer number doesn't mean the act isn't possible. In fact, history has shown that tens of millions of people are always willing to ignore morals. Are you really comparing Donald Trump being voted in, a lot on the novelty of having a celebrity POTUS, to genocide? |
|
|
|
Post by jxing on Dec 20, 2017 15:29:44 GMT -5
I don't remotely believe that people who voted for Trump were morons. I believe they willingly and blatantly ignored that someone was a detestable human being and gave them their vote. When you're clearly presented with facts. When you're told that someone is homophobic, racist, sexist, a sexual harrasser and you still vote for him. That says either you didn't care or you didn't care enough. That's not a judgement on intelligence. That's a judgement on morals. Personally, I'm more than willing to debate philosophical aims and the trajectory of the country in a "respectful manner." I do believe that part of the issue with liberalism in America is it's overreaching judgment. It's the shutting down of debate before debate can happen. But who you voted for and what that person did before you voted for them isn't a debate. That's fact. That's as much fact as the sky being blue. Because in actuality, morally, there's no defense and there's no debate in voting for the above. Morally, there's no defense for ignoring homophobia, sexism, racism, or sexual harassment, or letting those things being outweighed by any counterargument. And as an addendum, when I say "voted" for those things. I don't mean that if you voted for Trump then that means you're homophobic, racist, sexist, or pro-sexual harassment. However, voting for Trump, whether one likes it or not, is voting for those things. Please list all the "facts" that actually, without a doubt prove that he is a racist,homophobic,sexist,etc. I'm not talking about "accusations, assumptions, or hearsay"... Also, any example or "fact" has to be 100% never done,said,or an order given by a previous president or political figure. |
|
|
|
Post by Let It🩸 on Dec 20, 2017 15:33:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Let It🩸 on Dec 20, 2017 15:36:49 GMT -5
Everyone from Trump's campaign and cabinet are resigning or getting indicted, on top of the fact that no cats voted for Trump, says it all really....
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by jxing on Dec 20, 2017 15:38:19 GMT -5
Everyone from Trump's campaign and cabinet are resigning or getting indicted, on top of the fact that no cats voted for Trump, says it all really.... Thanks. As did with Obama,Bush,Clinton,Bush. |
|
|
|
Post by Let It🩸 on Dec 20, 2017 15:40:04 GMT -5
Everyone from Trump's campaign and cabinet are resigning or getting indicted, on top of the fact that no cats voted for Trump, says it all really.... Thanks. As did with Obama,Bush,Clinton,Bush. Ok, comrade........ God bless. |
|
|
|
Post by The Escapist on Dec 20, 2017 15:41:46 GMT -5
Hillary is just your typical corporate capitalist representative, but on virtually every issue her position was distinctly superior to Trump's.
God, Donald Trump is the president. That still hits me every now and then. Like, he's ACTUALLY the president. DAMN.
|
|
|
|
Post by Let It🩸 on Dec 20, 2017 15:43:44 GMT -5
Hillary is just your typical corporate capitalist representative, but on virtually every issue her position was distinctly superior to Trump's. God, Donald Trump is the president. That still hits me every now and then. Like, he's ACTUALLY the president. DAMN.It really is insane..... Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by jxing on Dec 20, 2017 15:48:43 GMT -5
As did with Obama,Bush,Clinton,Bush. Ok, comrade........ God bless. Here is a list of those presidents with the most cabinet turnover: (Including the cabinet members who resign between terms of a multi-term president, Hillary Clinton for ex) The biggest changes came under President Reagen at 28, many as a result of the Iran-Contra Affair. George W Bush - 27. Bill Clinton - 24. Harry Truman 23. Barack Obama, Theodore Roosevelt, Richard Nixon - 20. Ulysses S Grant - 18. Franklin D Roosevelt had 17 which is surprising little considering he served 4 terms and all the chaos during his terms. Grover Cleveland - 16 - complete turnover for his second term as well as a few changes during each term. John Tyler - 15. Andrew Jackson and Lyndon Johnson - 14. James Madison and Gerald Ford - 12. |
|
|
|
Post by Let It🩸 on Dec 20, 2017 15:53:25 GMT -5
Ok, comrade........ God bless. Here is a list of those presidents with the most cabinet turnover: (Including the cabinet members who resign between terms of a multi-term president, Hillary Clinton for ex) The biggest changes came under President Reagen at 28, many as a result of the Iran-Contra Affair. George W Bush - 27. Bill Clinton - 24. Harry Truman 23. Barack Obama, Theodore Roosevelt, Richard Nixon - 20. Ulysses S Grant - 18. Franklin D Roosevelt had 17 which is surprising little considering he served 4 terms and all the chaos during his terms. Grover Cleveland - 16 - complete turnover for his second term as well as a few changes during each term. John Tyler - 15. Andrew Jackson and Lyndon Johnson - 14. James Madison and Gerald Ford - 12. So, all of those were indictments, and within the first 11 months in office? I don't know, I'm not arguing about this, no one will ever convince me elected an idiot like Donald Trump into office was, or is a good idea. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by batfink30 on Dec 20, 2017 16:54:55 GMT -5
Hillary is just your typical corporate capitalist representative, but on virtually every issue her position was distinctly superior to Trump's. God, Donald Trump is the president. That still hits me every now and then. Like, he's ACTUALLY the president. DAMN. It's beyond insane, the guy is an absolute nut case. A real threat to the world. |
|
|
|
Post by anothergreatdivide on Dec 20, 2017 17:15:19 GMT -5
Medicinal Marijuana is one step closer to being allowed here. So so so so happy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elie De Beaufour 🐴 on Dec 21, 2017 4:25:29 GMT -5
Find it interesting that Daniel Andrews refuses to ban SUV's in the CBD of Melbourne despite two incidents happening in just over a year. My thoughts with the victims.
|
|
|
|
Post by janedoe on Dec 21, 2017 4:36:51 GMT -5
Find it interesting that Daniel Andrews refuses to ban SUV's in the CBD of Melbourne despite two incidents happening in just over a year. My thoughts with the victims. The Bourke Street incident did not involve an SUV. I was at that intersection this morning. Horribly crowded. There would be nowhere to move if a car drove into pedestrians |
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5