Joe Biden Presidency thread *Please read OP - Threadbanned Users Added 4/5/21*

Faugheen

Deleted User wrote: »

When white people are racist, I condemn them as strongly as I condemn any other racist. I may not have much to add to the conversation other than to say how much I dislike racism so I don't chime in as much. I never defend white racists. I think any racist, regardless of colour, is a racist and beyond contempt.

You do, yeah.

astrofool

Deleted User wrote: »

I frankly couldn't care less what you believe about me.

I do not need to prove that I am not a racist. I just simply have to not be one. Your accusations are unfounded and predicated that I am not vocal enough in condemning white people?

When white people are racist, I condemn them as strongly as I condemn any other racist. I may not have much to add to the conversation other than to say how much I dislike racism so I don't chime in as much. I never defend white racists. I think any racist, regardless of colour, is a racist and beyond contempt.

Again, for the record, I abhor any racism.

And as the father of a mixed race child, I am acutely aware of the prevalence of racism and do not deny it exists. I do find it frustrating when people like you claim anything bad that happens to a person of colour as a racist incident.

You stand by everything you said? That I am Boards' Resident racist?

I can't change how you think of me, nor do I want to.

It just shows that regardless of a person's stance, your own bias is all that matters to you and you will paint anyone who doesn't align with your views, to the extent you want, as something they aren't to delegitimise them.

Sorry for allowing you to take this thread off topic in order for you to character assassinate me, but I do think it's only fair I defend myself against people like you.

I'll leave it at that when it comes to replying to you on this.

I think you have to accept that given your posting history and fixation around black on white racism as an answer to white on black and police on black racism, that others will view your posts through such a lens and not take posts seriously when you start accusing others, such as Biden, of being racist.

I don't frequent those threads but even seeing the few posts and responses here, I would not take your viewpoints when pointing out the racism of others. Now, there is a lot of nuance and detail to this, but most people believe that George Floyd's death was as a result of systemic racism in the US police force and had he been white, he would probably be alive. You don't seem to believe that, which is fine, and there are good reasons for you to take that view, but it does put you in:
a) the minority viewpoint
b) the viewpoint shared by most racists

And again, just because you are in a, does not mean b, but it does mean that others viewing your posts will.

astrofool

astrofool wrote: »

I think you have to accept that given your posting history and fixation around black on white racism as an answer to white on black and police on black racism, that others will view your posts through such a lens and not take posts seriously when you start accusing others, such as Biden, of being racist.

I don't frequent those threads but even seeing the few posts and responses here, I would not take your viewpoints when pointing out the racism of others. Now, there is a lot of nuance and detail to this, but most people believe that George Floyd's death was as a result of systemic racism in the US police force and had he been white, he would probably be alive. You don't seem to believe that, which is fine, and there are good reasons for you to take that view, but it does put you in:
a) the minority viewpoint
b) the viewpoint shared by most racists

And again, just because you are in a, does not mean b, but it does mean that others viewing your posts will.

I am not calling Biden a racist. I am simply saying that if the Biden zealots heard anyone else say it, no apology would suffice for them.

I do not have a fixation on black on white racism. I am extremely interested and have a vested interest in racism, full stop.

And I disagree that most people believe that George Floyd was a victim of systemic racism.

But I thank you for being civil about it. But by saying I am fixated about black on white racism is simply not true and although I am vocal about it, doesn't mean that my stance on racism (which I have repeatedly said) should be discounted.

boetstark

Faugheen wrote: »

You do, yeah.

Maube the poster calls out black on white racism because everybody else seems scared to do so.
Having grown up in SA and been back numerous times, I have seen both sides of the racism coin.
During apartheid as a white rhodesian / south african we were demonised by the moral west.
Where is the outcry over what is happening in southern Africa of late. White farmers murdered and stripped of property in Zim. Affirmative action and hate crime against White people in SA.
Even in Ireland the silence was deafening when it comes to condemning black thugs running wild in Dublin.
Maybe somebody needs to shout out regarding black on white racism because every other oke is too busy shouting and apologising about how racist white people are.
Amazing in USA the biggest killer of blacks are other blacks.

Leroy42

Deleted User wrote: »

I am not calling Biden a racist. I am simply saying that if the Biden zealots heard anyone else say it, no apology would suffice for them.

I do not have a fixation on black on white racism. I am extremely interested and have a vested interest in racism, full stop.

And I disagree that most people believe that George Floyd was a victim of systemic racism.

But I thank you for being civil about it. But by saying I am fixated about black on white racism is simply not true and although I am vocal about it, doesn't mean that my stance on racism (which I have repeatedly said) should be discounted.

Because you are not taking context into account. Clearly when Biden says something that one can consider racist, it is down to lack of ability to be eloquent. His positions would imply that he is very far from a racist.

On the other hand, people like Trump clearly have an agenda (Muslim ban etc) and their actions speak for themselves. Hence it is why people are prepared to accept that Biden misspoke, spoke poorly or whatever, when trying to get the main point across.

In many cases, people like Trump, hide their true intentions with muddled language and try to downplay what they said not because they don't agree with it but because of the blowback from it.

They are two completely different scenarios.

Leroy42

Leroy42 wrote: »

Because you are not taking context into account. Clearly when Biden says something that one can consider racist, it is down to lack of ability to be eloquent. His positions would imply that he is very far from a racist

That's a fair point.

Necro

Can we get back on topic please folks

Overheal

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Criticism of Biden doesn't necessarily mean fan of trump.

I find it funny that Biden sympathisers can't defend their guy without resorting to assuming if you think Biden is a tit, you must be a maga hat wearing zealot.

It's ok Leroy, trump is gone.

He was in an election campaign against Donald Trump. Seems fair to point out how he got the job in a heads up campaign against the former president, who could barely manage reading a teleprompter

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

He was in an election campaign against Donald Trump. Seems fair to point out how he got the job in a heads up campaign against the former president, who could barely manage reading a teleprompter

Absolutely fair.

But when any criticism is met with "but trump" it says something about the lack of faith people have in their defence.

mcmoustache

Deleted User wrote: »

Absolutely fair.

But when any criticism is met with "but trump" it says something about the lack of faith people have in their defence.

It depends. If people are going "but trump" as a deflection, it deserves to be called out. On the other hand, if it's a poster who cheered on or downplayed the sorts of things that they now criticise Biden for, it's fair to point out too.

For example, someone who had no issue with Ivanka isn't in any position to clutch their pearls over nepotism or corruption.

mcmoustache

mcmoustache wrote: »

It depends. If people are going "but trump" as a deflection, it deserves to be called out. On the other hand, if it's a poster who cheered on or downplayed the sorts of things that they now criticise Biden for, it's fair to point out too.

For example, someone who had no issue with Ivanka isn't in any position to clutch their pearls over nepotism or corruption.

Fair points.

But it works the other way too.

A lot of people who were gung-ho calling out trump for any and all mistakes, regardless of how small or insignificant are now downplaying any criticism (valid or not) of their dear leader for similar things

Two cheeks of the same ****ty arse but both seemingly oblivious to it.

Overheal

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Fair points.

But it works the other way too.

A lot of people who were gung-ho calling out trump for any and all mistakes, regardless of how small or insignificant are now downplaying any criticism (valid or not) of their dear leader for similar things

Two cheeks of the same ****ty arse but both seemingly oblivious to it.

Not really.

In reality Trump campaigned on many silly things which invited his own criticism: constantly bashing the former president for use of a teleprompter for example. So when Trump can’t even manage that, it became topical. Trump claimed he’d never leave the White House and would work day and night - he proceeded to golf and travel out of DC to private property more than any other president in 4 years, having again, widely panned the former president for golfing and vacationing. He attacked the former president for grifting the secret service and taxpayer. Then he charged the secret service extortion levels of rent.

Was there some other more specific example you felt was unfair to Trump and not invited upon Trump by himself or his own claims?

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Not really.

In reality Trump campaigned on many silly things which invited his own criticism: constantly bashing the former president for use of a teleprompter for example. So when Trump can’t even manage that, it became topical. Trump claimed he’d never leave the White House and would work day and night - he proceeded to golf more than any other president in 4 years, having again, widely panned the former president for golfing.

Was there some other more specific example you felt was unfair to Trump and not invited upon Trump by himself or his own claims?

This thread is not the time or place for going through criticism of trump, but be honest overheal, you can't say there were criticisms and rumours about trump which were fraudulent and unfair?

But if every criticism of Biden reverts to "yeah but trump lied about this" rather than tackling the crux of the criticism of Biden, it's not inviting healthy conversation.

Overheal

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This thread is not the time or place for going through criticism of trump, but be honest overheal, you can't say there were criticisms and rumours about trump which were fraudulent and unfair?

But if every criticism of Biden reverts to "yeah but trump lied about this" rather than tackling the crux of the criticism of Biden, it's not inviting healthy conversation.

Like?

Smee_Again

[Deleted User] wrote: »

This thread is not the time or place for going through criticism of trump, but be honest overheal, you can't say there were criticisms and rumours about trump which were fraudulent and unfair?

But if every criticism of Biden reverts to "yeah but trump lied about this" rather than tackling the crux of the criticism of Biden, it's not inviting healthy conversation.

Fraudulent?

I’m beginning to think Trump supporters don’t actually know what the word means.

It might explain their and his continued misuse of the word.

Smee_Again

Smee_Again wrote: »

Fraudulent?

I’m beginning to think Trump supporters don’t actually know what the word means.

It might explain their and his continued misuse of the word.

I'm not a trump supporter.

Fraudulent means "characterized by, based on, or done by fraud"

One definition of fraud is "an act of deceiving or misrepresenting"

You don't have to like that word, but again, anything that isn't a glowing praise of Biden, or a takedown of trump, is classed as being indicative of being a trump supporter.

Why did you feel the need to jump on and rather than address my post, deflect by attacking what you (wrongly) perceive to be misuse of language.

Overheal

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm not a trump supporter.

Fraudulent means "characterized by, based on, or done by fraud"

One definition of fraud is "an act of deceiving or misrepresenting"

You don't have to like that word, but again, anything that isn't a glowing praise of Biden, or a takedown of trump, is classed as being indicative of being a trump supporter.

Why did you feel the need to jump on and rather than address my post, deflect by attacking what you (wrongly) perceive to be misuse of language.

No examples of anything you’ve argued yet?

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

No examples of anything you’ve argued yet?

Jesus, this isn't the trump thread. And sorry I didn't get back to you immediately. I had to play dictionary with one of your friends.

The Russian prostitute pissing tapes. Glee by many and treated rumours as legit as it spread like wildfire.

Hunter Biden laptop? Immediately dismissed despite allegations of corruption with China involving the Biden.

That's just off the top of my head. I'm sure it won't be enough to quench your thirst but I've got my answer.

You don't believe that there were any untruthful rumours or invalid criticism of trump.

Can we get back onto Biden and perhaps try and avoid the comparisons with Donald trump now?

Smee_Again

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm not a trump supporter.

Fraudulent means "characterized by, based on, or done by fraud"

One definition of fraud is "an act of deceiving or misrepresenting"

You don't have to like that word, but again, anything that isn't a glowing praise of Biden, or a takedown of trump, is classed as being indicative of being a trump supporter.

Why did you feel the need to jump on and rather than address my post, deflect by attacking what you (wrongly) perceive to be misuse of language.

Ah would ya stop, fraudulent criticisms of Trump?

Should be as easy for you to provide evidence of these fraudulent criticisms as it was for Trump to provide evidence of fraudulent votes for Biden.

Overheal

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Jesus, this isn't the trump thread.

The Russian prostitute pissing tapes. Glee by many and treated rumours as legit as it spread like wildfire.

Hunter Biden laptop? Immediately dismissed despite allegations of corruption with China involving the Biden.

That's just off the top of my head. I'm sure it won't be enough to quench your thirst but I've got my answer.

You don't believe that there were any untruthful rumours or invalid criticism of trump.

Can we get back onto Biden and perhaps try and avoid the comparisons with Donald trump now?

You’re the one who made an argumentative post that dragged it on. Don’t be upset that someone calls you out and expects an example. Not a good one, either, at that, as though that’s anything like the type of criticisms we are talking about - ie. gaffes and flubbing speeches, not being whisper-campaigned against.

Faugheen

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not a trump supporter.

Fraudulent means "characterized by, based on, or done by fraud"

One definition of fraud is "an act of deceiving or misrepresenting"

You don't have to like that word, but again, anything that isn't a glowing praise of Biden, or a takedown of trump, is classed as being indicative of being a trump supporter.

Why did you feel the need to jump on and rather than address my post, deflect by attacking what you (wrongly) perceive to be misuse of language.

Would you ever stop. You always say 'but, but the Democrats' any time there is criticism of Trump and a simple search of your posting history indicates that.

"Fraudulent criticisms," then pointing to something that hasn't actually been disproven, followed by a comparison to someone's laptop where the evidence suddenly disappeared from Fox News.

You're having a f*cking laugh if you think anybody here is going to fall for that nonsense. There have been enough 'I'm not a Trump supporter, but Biden..' types around here for people to know when someone is bullsh*tting.

At least own it.

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

Would you ever stop. You always say 'but, but the Democrats' any time there is criticism of Trump and a simple search of your posting history indicates that.

"Fraudulent criticisms," then pointing to something that hasn't actually been disproven, followed by a comparison to someone's laptop where the evidence suddenly disappeared from Fox News.

You're having a f*cking laugh if you think anybody here is going to fall for that nonsense. There have been enough 'I'm not a Trump supporter, but Biden..' types around here for people to know when someone is bullsh*tting.

At least own it.

Lol.

Ok.

The laptop has been settled but the jury is still out on the prostitute piss.

I'm not asking anyone to fall for anything.

I don't like biden. I'm not hiding that.

I did enjoy the trump presidency in a twisted way. Not denying that. Wouldn't be classed as a supporter though.

When trump was in power and anyone said "but Obama did", the likes of you rightly said, Obama isn't in power anymore, focus on trump.

You don't hold yourself to the same standard obviously.

Overheal

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Lol.

Ok.

The laptop has been settled but the jury is still out on the prostitute piss.

I'm not asking anyone to fall for anything.

I don't like biden. I'm not hiding that.

I did enjoy the trump presidency in a twisted way. Not denying that. Wouldn't be classed as a supporter though.

When trump was in power and anyone said "but Obama did", the likes of you rightly said, Obama isn't in power anymore, focus on trump.

You don't hold yourself to the same standard obviously.

We aren’t talking pee tapes and laptops though we are talking about gaffes and racist dog whistling.

Neither the pee tape or laptop rumor were in the control of either persons direct action. Why bring either up as your tour de force? Don’t you have any legitimate examples of what you are trying to argue is a double standard?

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

We aren’t talking pee tapes and laptops though we are talking about gaffes and racist dog whistling.

Neither the pee tape or laptop rumor were in the control of either persons direct action. Why bring either up as your tour de force? Don’t you have any legitimate examples of what you are trying to argue is a double standard?

When trump said the "good people on both sides" speech, it was widely claimed he never denounced white supremacists. He did so in the exact same speech.

Didn't stop people claiming he didn't.

When Biden says something that would be perceived as racist, you have media and supporters making excuses for him and passing it off as a gaffe.

I'm not here to debate trump though.

Overheal

[Deleted User] wrote: »

When trump said the "good people on both sides" speech, it was widely claimed he never denounced white supremacists. He did so in the exact same speech.

Didn't stop people claiming he didn't.

When Biden says something that would be perceived as racist, you have media and supporters making excuses for him and passing it off as a gaffe.

I'm not here to debate trump though.

Except that by saying there was “very fine people” on both sides Trump was in fact refusing to actually condemn them, it was a case of trying to say the right words to keep his racist base without appearing like he was doing so. It’s like Biden saying Israel has a right to defend itself and condemning violence on both sides - nobody is disillusioned by what side the US is on when he says all that. They know exactly that the US will defend Israel and that Trump defended racists.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

Except that by saying there was “very fine people” on both sides Trump was in fact refusing to actually condemn them, it was a case of trying to say the right words to keep his racist base without appearing like he was doing so. It’s like Biden saying Israel has a right to defend itself and condemning violence on both sides - nobody is disillusioned by what side the US is on when he says all that. They know exactly that the US will defend Israel and that Trump defended racists.

Except where he said he totally condemns white supremacists.

No point in talking to you about this and it's why I don't engage in the trump thread.

Trump has said many many outlandish and controversial things I disagree with and was his own worst enemy. That's undeniably true. But ascribing stuff he hasn't said to him is dishonest.

I'll leave it at that.

Overheal

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Except where he said he totally condemns white supremacists.

No point in talking to you about this and it's why I don't engage in the trump thread.

Trump has said many many outlandish and controversial things I disagree with and was his own worst enemy. That's undeniably true. But ascribing stuff he hasn't said to him is dishonest.

I'll leave it at that.

He totally condemns them, “but” there are many fine people on both sides. Nevermind his entire history as a human and a president, he does far from condemn them totally, he often whistles to them; he loved it when anti maskers stormed capital buildings but he teargassed the blacks when it was their turn to exercise political speech.

Trying really hard to give you the benefit of the doubt. The best example I can come with is that Trump didn’t literally mention bleach injections - he mentioned disinfectant injections. Completely different, obviously, since bleach is not a disinf- **** wait.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

He totally condemns them, “but” there are many fine people on both sides. Nevermind his entire history as a human and a president, he does far from condemn them totally, he often whistles to them; he loved it when anti maskers stormed capital buildings but he teargassed the blacks when it was their turn to exercise political speech.

Trying really hard to give you the benefit of the doubt. The best example I can come with is that Trump didn’t literally mention bleach injections - he mentioned disinfectant injections. Completely different, obviously, since bleach is not a disinf- **** wait.

With all due respect overheal, we won't agree on this. So rather than going back and forth on it, I'll leave it.

It's pointless and will only lead to infractions when others jump in and accuse me of racism because I don't hate trump as much as they do.

Overheal

Deleted User wrote: »

With all due respect overheal, we won't agree on this. So rather than going back and forth on it, I'll leave it.

It's pointless and will only lead to infractions when others jump in and accuse me of racism because I don't hate trump as much as they do.

When you say things like

"I did enjoy the trump presidency in a twisted way. Not denying that."

It's not hard to understand why people might not assume you are posting in an honest manner. Happy to leave it there.

Overheal

Overheal wrote: »

When you say things like

"I did enjoy the trump presidency in a twisted way. Not denying that."

It's not hard to understand why people might not assume you are posting in an honest manner. Happy to leave it there.

Lol, ok one last one to clarify that.

I enjoyed seeing certain people get wound up. The hatred for trump, the nonsense he would sometimes spout and the unrelenting bias in the media was car crash television and strangely enjoyable.

If people think by my honesty in admitting that means I am not posting honestly, then I don't know what to tell you.

But cool, let's leave it.