2020 the battle of the septuagenarians - Trump vs Biden, Part 2

mcmoustache

Biker79 wrote: »

There is a flagrant abuse of language among Bidenistas.

Every sentence of yours is an abuse of language. They're structured well, don't get me wrong but you don't seem to understand the meaning of words. The idea that the Democratic Party is marxist suggest that you don't know what marxism is or what the Democratic Party or both. It's like a failed Turing test.

ohnonotgmail

Irishman80 wrote: »

Who does that? Do you know how stupid you sound now?

who quotes people correctly? those of us with incredible wit, charm and intelligence try to quote people correctly.

ohnonotgmail

Biker79 wrote: »

There is a flagrant abuse of language among Bidenistas.

The root cause is that they are fundamentally wrong in the choice they have made. But its hard to admit you are wrong. Much easier to continue spouting nonsense and blindly supporting a party being eaten alive by marxism. Its less trouble deflecting criticism with daft questions and juvenile sarcasm, while shifting goalposts and calling observant posters trolls. Classy stuff.

Must be exhausting being full of it.

PS: I prefer the term ' Trumpeteer '.

the projection here is impressive. the Savoy cinema have a job waiting for you if you need one.

Irishman80

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

yeah, right.

So where's the word idiots there?

You should quote people exactly if you are going to say something like that. Point it out to me or else accept you have been corrected and move on.

Irishman80

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

who quotes people correctly? those of us with incredible wit, charm and intelligence try to quote people correctly.

You didn't quote me directly. Why not?

ohnonotgmail

Irishman80 wrote: »

So where's the word idiots there?

You should quote people exactly if you are going to say something like that. Point it out to me or else accept you have been corrected and move on.

i didnt quote you . you need to learn what that actually means. now that is out of the way can you explain what the repeated utterances of

Duh, duh, hur du dur..duh.

are supposed to mean? If i am mistaken and you are not calling others idiots then i will of course apologise. for that to happen you have to explain what you actually meant and it has to be convincing.

Irishman80

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

i didnt quote you . you need to learn what that actually means. now that is out of the way can you explain what the repeated utterances of

Duh, duh, hur du dur..duh.

are supposed to mean? If i am mistaken and you are not calling others idiots then i will of course apologise. for that to happen you have to explain what you actually meant and it has to be convincing.

Where does it say idiots there? You said I called people idiots.

Where did I call people idiots? Show me my quote.

Cody montana

Irishman80 wrote: »

Anyone who has any criticism of the Dems must be a Trump supporter. If you dont agree with everything Biden says or does, you must be a Trump supporter.

Do you know how that sounds?

Because it’s nonsense,

Overheal

Sean.3516 wrote: »

Booker is a supporter of Louis Farrakhan. As is Tamika Mallory who said in an interview that there shouldn't be a Jewish state. In her defence, she's not very bright and I don't think she realised the implications of what she was saying. She resigned from the Women's March committee over this. Rashida Tlaib said something very similar although not quite as on the nose. Ilhan Omar said on Twitter “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and let them see the evil doings of Israel” and of course her infamous "It's all about the Benjamins" comment obliquely invoking the conspiracy theory that the US only supports Israel because of the Jewish money. Her and Tlaib have hobnobbed with people connected to the Palestinian Liberation Organisation which is a terrorist group which pays the families of suicide bombers who kill Jews. Both congresswomen refused to take a congressional trip to Israel and instead took a trip to Palestine with a group that is openly anti-semitic. Linda Sarsour is the more fringe of all these characters she has spoken alongside people such as Rasmea Yousef Odeh who was convicted of a bombing that killed two people in Israel. Because of this, 100 holocaust survivors signed a letter trying to cancel her from giving the commencement speech at CUNY. She's a delightful character who tweeted to Ayaan Hirsi Ali that she wished she could take her vagina away. Ali is a victim of female genital mutilation.

Of course, all of these people have openly supported BDS, the Boycott, Divestment, Sanction movement against Israel. BDS is a movements, the leaders of which reject the two-state solution.

Yes, there's nothing anti-semitic about simply criticising Israeli policy, but once you question it's right to exist, or to exist as a Jewish state, you are treating a Jewish state in a way that no Arab or Christian state would be treated. That's anti-semitic.

Got to hand it to you that was a great, informative summary. I agree there needs to be a line between criticizing Israel and their entire right to exist etc. - on BDS, I think it's absurd that Republicans (including my Rep) are championing anti free speech bills that would prohibit anyone talking about boycotts, divestment from, or sanctions of Israel.

I'm happy to take all of this at face value since I don't think it bears any relevance to Nicki Haley's conduct. She was a very good governor and proved herself capable of standing up for her principles. It was her who ordered the taking down of all Confederate flags from public property after a mass shooting by a white supremacist in her state who posed with the flag before the shooting.

She's not altogether terrible or anything however she will need to answer more for her ethics violations if she ever plans to take another elected office. It would be silly to think she wouldn't run again.

Fair play to you for owning up to your whataboutism but nonetheless it is whataboutism and I'd sooner discuss the merits of the issues rather trading sideswipes.

Aye that's fair enough.

Okay, so if your standard for a country being racist is that it has "problems of racism" then every single country on earth is racist. Every. Single. One. Because you can be sure that every country with more than a million people has racists in it. The question is: Are the racists influential enough that they have permeated societal and legal institutions? In most Western countries I would say the answer is no. By and large Americans do not hold racist opinions. A Gallup poll found that less than 4% of Americans would have objections to living in a neighbourhood with members other races. The percentage was lowest among english speaking countries. It got higher in continental European countries such as France. It was highest in Africa, the Middle East and Asia.

Well, that's not exactly what I was getting at but then I'd agree with you, globally there are racism problems. However I was more referring to the fact that there is still institutional racism problems in the US, which I've discussed at length here and in other threads.

America is not a racist country. It elected a black president to two terms, before that it had had black Secretaries of State and a black Supreme Court Justice etc.
The state that started the Civil War, South Carolina elected a black man to the US Senate and an Indian governor.

I still am inclined to disagree. We have seen systematic voter suppression for example in majority black districts; the 2018 election in Georgia should have been an eye opener for everyone. None of that is to say that voters cannot get a minority person elected, but there is not a level playing field for doing so.

I apologise for the mischaracterisation.
If Tim Scott is a more prominent Senator than he would otherwise be if he were white, then that is a result of the fact that Democrats have attempted to maintain the black vote, not by the merits of policy but by racialising party loyalty. They've established the narrative that the Republican Party is racist through and through while it was the Republicans who freed the slaves and attempted (unsuccessfully) to stop Jim Crow and advance the cause of blacks during Reconstruction. It was Republican President Ulysses Grant who decimated the KKK and the first black US Senator was elected in 1870 from Mississippi during his term. Lyndon Johnson could never have passed the Civil Rights Act without Republican support in Congress. Blacks voted reliably Republican up until this time. Yet, the Democrats lied and claimed that once the South started voting Republican, all the racist Democrats became racist Republicans even though studies have shown that the older racist Democrats never stopped voting Democrat.

They got away with instituting this racial loyalty test among blacks. It's for that reason that whenever someone like Tim Scott bucks the trend that we all take notice. It's a shameful thing that his race is an issue at all. But it's an issue because Democrats made it an issue. Not Republicans.

I would be interested in seeing those studies, as it's my firm understanding that as a result of the Southern Strategy, we have seen a noticeable ideological shift between the parties on race, and that's undeniable whether or not some older people still vote democrat.

Yes. Republicans.

No I don't think you viewed my link at all then, because blacks represented in Congress have been overwhelmingly Democrat, not Republican.

ohnonotgmail

Irishman80 wrote: »

Where does it say idiots there? You said I called people idiots.

Where did I call people idiots? Show me my quote.

so what does

Duh, duh, hur du dur..duh.

mean? btw you are fooling nobody. a six year old knows what those words mean.

mcmoustache

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the projection here is impressive. the Savoy cinema have a job waiting for you if you need one.

It's always projection. It was the same in 2016. Trumpers thought that those who dislike Trump venerated Clinton in the same way that they venerate Trump. It's the same this time around with Biden when it's clear that nobody's excited about Biden. In fact, I would say that most people find him to be the human equivalent of white bread - you'd go for better options but it'll do in a pinch.


There isn't this cultish devotion for Biden at all. There's no QAnon equivalent with him. There's no Trump-van bomber fanatics or synagogue mass shooters devoted to him. There's no dedicated mainstream media channel working overtime heaping North Korean levels of praise on him every night.


They know that they're way down a rabbit hole and the only way to avoid facing the reality of having been conned is to convince themselves that there are two sides and that "the other" is just as bad as what they're having difficulty facing up to.

Irishman80

Cody montana wrote: »

Because it’s nonsense,

No, it's actually OK to criticise candidates/parties.

If you find yourself needing to defend against every criticism of a candidate or party, your probably not looking at a situation objectively anymore.

Overheal

Sean.3516 wrote: »

Can you name one of those barriers?

The gender pay gap.

I don't even know what that means.

It means that rather than looking at the glass ceiling - how high one person or minority was able to fly, you should be looking at the floor: where the vast majority of women and minorities exist, and what their situation is. Yes, Obama got to be president but also almost 27% both of blacks and hispanics are below the poverty line while just 9% of whites are.

ohnonotgmail

Irishman80 wrote: »

You said I called people idiots. I've asked you to point out that quote.

6 year olds know what those words mean. if you want to be taken seriously then stop with the outright lies.

namloc1980

Biker79 wrote: »

There is a flagrant abuse of language among Bidenistas.

The root cause is that they are fundamentally wrong in the choice they have made. But its hard to admit you are wrong. Much easier to continue spouting nonsense and blindly supporting a party being eaten alive by marxism. Its less trouble deflecting criticism with daft questions and juvenile sarcasm, while shifting goalposts and calling observant posters trolls. Classy stuff.

PS: I prefer the term ' Trumpeteer '.

I asked this already but the Trumpists didn't answer but please explain how the Democratic party or Joe Biden is in any way Marxist? I suspect you have no idea what Marxism or socialism is. It's just a bullshit Fox News and GOP talking point. Anybody who thinks Joe Biden is a Marxist is utterly deluded and has simply descended into regurgitating Trumpian talking points and has lost the ability to think for themselves.

So again, what exactly about the Democratic party and Joe Biden is Marxist? Take your pick of Biden's multiple policies https://joebiden.com/joes-vision/

Irishman80

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

6 year olds know what those words mean. if you want to be taken seriously then stop with the outright lies.

You're the person who is stating we should quote people directly. You said I called people idiots.

I'm asking you to point out where I called people idiots. That's all. If you can't, that's fine. Just accept the correction and move on.

extra gravy

Kamala Harris:

"We must always defend peaceful protest & peaceful protesters. We should not confuse them with those looting & committing acts of violence, including the shooter who was arrested for murder... We will not let these vigilantes and extremists derail the path to justice

The reality is that the life of a black person in America has never been treated as fully human. And we have yet to fulfill that promise of equal justice under law.

The Republican convention is designed for one purpose -- to soothe Donald Trump's ego. To make him feel good.

Here's what you have to understand about the nature of a pandemic. It's relentless. You can't stop it with a tweet. You can't create a distraction and hope it will go away.

Instead of rising to meet the most difficult moment of his presidency, Donald Trump froze... the tragedy in all of this is it didn't have to be this bad. Look around. It's not like this in the rest of the world... all we needed was a competent president."

Nail on head. And a tonic to the drivel we've heard at the RNC all week.

Professor Moriarty

Biker79 wrote: »

There is a flagrant abuse of language among Bidenistas.

The root cause is that they are fundamentally wrong in the choice they have made. But its hard to admit you are wrong. Much easier to continue spouting nonsense and blindly supporting a party being eaten alive by marxism. Its less trouble deflecting criticism with daft questions and juvenile sarcasm, while shifting goalposts and calling observant posters trolls. Classy stuff.

Must be exhausting being full of it.

PS: I prefer the term ' Trumpeteer '.

Your childish name calling aside, Biden, Harris and Pelosi are Marxists? Okie dokie.

ohnonotgmail

Irishman80 wrote: »

You're the person who is stating we should quote people directly. You said I called people idiots.

I'm asking you to point out where I called people idiots. That's all. If you can't, that's fine. Just accept the correction and move on.

you did call people idiots. i have already pointed out where you did that multiple times. if you are going to be this dishonest then nobody will engage with you and you will be screaming into the void. best of luck with that.

relax carry on

Jesus, trying to have a discussion with Trump/Republican loyalists is just bananas. Reading some of those posts is just torturous. I don't know what's worse, those posters posting inane drivel to wind people up or those posters posting inane drivel that they truly believe to be a defence of/praise of the leader.

Cody montana

Irishman80 wrote: »

No, it's actually OK to criticise candidates/parties.

If you find yourself needing to defend against every criticism of a candidate or party, your probably not looking at a situation objectively anymore.

Are you talking about yourself and the republican party?

Irishman80

Cody montana wrote: »

Are you talking about yourself and the republican party?

I made a general statement. Not directed at anyone in particular.

Why would you think it is?

Cody montana

Irishman80 wrote: »

I made a general statement. Not directed at anyone in particular.

Why would you think it is?

Because of what you post.

namloc1980

Irishman80 wrote: »

Where is the word idiots there?

I never called anyone an idiot. I've just read back my messages and yes, no mention of the word idiots.

Can you please quote me directly in future if you are accusing me of calling people idiots? Thank you.

Can you translate "duh, duh, hur du dur" and what it means? That will clear up the issue.

ohnonotgmail

Irishman80 wrote: »

If you can't point out where I called people idiots, just accept the correction and move on.

In future, if you are going to accuse me of calling people idiots or some other term, can you please directly quote me?

that is a direct quote.

Irishman80

Cody montana wrote: »

Because of what you post.

It's was a general statement.

Irishman80

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

that is a direct quote.

No, I didn't call anyone an idiot.

Filling the system with s--t is something everyone can do.

MadYaker

Don't understand the thinking behind this pushing of the "Biden will pull out of the debates" narrative. Saying it over and over won't make it happen.

ohnonotgmail

MadYaker wrote: »

Don't understand the thinking behind this pushing of the "Biden will pull out of the debates" narrative. Saying it over and over won't make it happen.

wishful thinking. they dont want to see their idol Donnie be embarrassed when he loses his train of thought and starts rambling like a lunatic.

Irishman80

MadYaker wrote: »

Don't understand the thinking behind this pushing of the "Biden will pull out of the debates" narrative. Saying it over and over won't make it happen.

I don't think Biden will pull out of the debates. My original point was on the mixed messaging the Democrats were making on the issue today.

I found out pretty quickly that any criticism of the Democrats and Biden will not be tolerated.