Total Posts:21|Showing Posts:1-21
Jump to topic:

Blue v. Red Pill

Scruggs
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 6:19:51 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
"This is your last chance. After this there is no turning back. You take the blue pill: the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill: you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit hole goes."

The party colors go deeper this election than ever before. It just so happens that the Republican party is now red pilling the American people en masse. This movement has been brewing for a long time, but it really began to reach out to the masses when Donald J. Trump stepped onto the stage on June 16, 2016. It all started with this statement:

"We have losers. We have people that don't have it. We have people that are morally corrupt. We have people that are selling this country down the drain."

He could not have been more right, whether he fully knew it at the time or not. Throughout this election, the new age iron curtain has been pulled back to reveal the swamp that exists in the elite of this country. Elections should never be about party affiliation, but this one has to be. The Democrats have been proven to be empirically more corrupt than Republicans, as will be shown below. And the revelation of this information is not coming from the media networks like Fox, CNN, MSNBC, etc. Why? Because they have a hand in it, they are a part of the swamp. Rather, we have had to rely on the independent journalists of this country to do the work. We have had to rely on WikiLeaks, Project Veritas, and the like to restore transparency to the government that YOU own. So let's examine some of the revelations that have come out of this election.

1) Clinton has public and private positions.
Private Position: "My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere."

Public Position:
"I've been advocating for it: tougher, more secure borders, but let's do it the right way, cracking down on employers, who exploit undocumented workers and drive down wages for everyone else."

More directly, the Washington Times reported that Hillary told banking executives that she had both public and private positions when it came to Wall Street reform.

Source: https://wikileaks.org...
Source [immigration]: 2008 Democratic debate at University of Texas in Austin , Feb 21, 2008
Source [WT]: http://www.washingtontimes.com...

2) Democrats have incited violence at Trump rallies.
This was revealed by the first set of undercover video footage produced by Project Veritas. It very clearly and undeniably reveals that Democrats paid homeless and mentally ill people to cause violence at Trump rallies. Even the famous Shirley Teter, the 69-year-old woman supposedly punched at a Trump rally in North Carolina, turned out to be planted by the DNC to cause trouble at the rally.

Source [video]: https://www.youtube.com...
Source [article]: http://wlos.com...

3) Mass voter fraud.
In the second part of the undercover videos released by Project Veritas, it is revealed how the Democrats have committed voter fraud in the past and how they could potentially do it in future elections. Methods such as bussing people in, using personally owned vehicles, or even manipulating used car auctions.

Source: https://www.youtube.com...

4) Clinton hatched the Donald Duck idea.
In the third part of the undercover videos released by Project Veritas, the criminal Bob Creamer just could not bite his tongue and revealed that Hillary Clinton actually gave the order for the whole Donald Ducks idea. Besides the fact that this should reflect on just how childish she really is, it is also illegal for her to coordinate with AUFC.

Source: https://www.youtube.com...

5) Coordination with PACs.
Other than Project Veritas, we also see that WikiLeaks released information in regard to Hillary illegally coordinating with PACs. Namely, Priorities USA. They would share fundraiser leads, communicate with each other, and much more. And let's not forget that it ties in directly with the first proof I raised, that she takes both private and public positions. She claims in the public to be opposed to super PACs, yet coordinates with them in private.

Source: https://wikileaks.org...

6) "Needy Latinos"
Clinton may try her best to pander to the minority voters, but what has she said about them behind closed doors? John Podesta, her campaign chairman, sent an email to Hillary herself labeling the minority Latinos as "needy Latinos." Of course, they have done a rather poor job at locking up that demographic. The latest from the USCD/LA Times daybreak poll shows that Hillary has 46.7% to Trump's 43.6% when it comes to the Latino vote.

Source: http://www.cbsnews.com...
Source: http://graphics.latimes.com...

7) Catholic Church needs a revolution.
Trump was right when he said Hillary was pretending to like Catholics at the Al Smith dinner. After all, her campaign chairman, John Podesta, received the following email from the president of Voices for Progress: "There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the Catholic church." In response, Podesta said the following: "We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a moment like this."

Source: https://wikileaks.org...

8) Debate questions.
We all know that Danna Brazile released a question to Hillary's campaign before the debate, but something new came out today. The DNC even helped CNN draft the interview questions for Republicans. This was released in the latest emails coming from WikiLeaks.

Source: https://wikileaks.org...
Source: https://wikileaks.org...

9) Rigged the primary.
However, none of this would really matter to most people if Hillary was not running for President of the United States. In fact, she needed just a little help from the DNC to make it out of the primaries against Bernie Sanders. The Observer reported on the released emails from the DNC, provided by WikiLeaks, that undeniably show the DNC had already selected Hillary to be their candidate.

Source: http://observer.com...

So this is where America stands. Are we going to take the red pill or the blue pill? Are we going to endorse and stand behind the swamp that is stinking up Washington DC or are we going to drain it? At Donald Trump's last rally in Virginia, one woman named Jennifer Krolick provided the following quote that I believe will end this post well:

"I have two kids going to come up -- I'm trying to make this country great again. I fear for our democracy, and our republic, if Hillary Clinton is elected. [...] She shoved corruption in the faces of the American people and dared us to react in this election."

The world will be watching tomorrow night.
"If a man does not put himself in the attitude of a sinner, his prayer will not be heard before God." A brother asked him, "what is a sinful soul?" And St. Abba Moses replied, "Everyone who bears his own sins, and does not consider those of his companion."
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 7:21:36 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
A part of me actually wants to see Trump win so that, when nothing changes during his presidency, I can watch folks tap dance about it. It would be entertaining to see all the folks whining about cronyism and corruption have to deal with their candidate himself displaying his own brand of it that would rival anything we've seen before. And to watch as those same supporters now have to try to justify voting for an idiotic, authoritarian demagogue because they just knew he would be able to change things. Despite all of the clear indications that he gives zero f*cks about it and this was all just a power trip, they were so sure his presidency, if not he himself, would really shake up the system. And so it was okay to vote for a thin-skinned, misogynistic bigot, because it was for a greater good that we all knew wasn't actually going to happen.

But that is a very small part of me. The rest of me will be relieved when Clinton wins tomorrow night. Yes, this election is a car wreck. To paraphrase a podcast, though, if the choice is between a wreck that injures two or one that kills a hundred, I'll take the former. You'll get no disagreement from me about the general idea that the system is flawed or even broken. Electing Trump isn't even the start to fixing it, though. He's just a stupid, dangerous distraction.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,317
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 7:23:19 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/7/2016 7:21:36 PM, Burzmali wrote:
A part of me actually wants to see Trump win so that, when nothing changes during his presidency, I can watch folks tap dance about it. It would be entertaining to see all the folks whining about cronyism and corruption have to deal with their candidate himself displaying his own brand of it that would rival anything we've seen before. And to watch as those same supporters now have to try to justify voting for an idiotic, authoritarian demagogue because they just knew he would be able to change things. Despite all of the clear indications that he gives zero f*cks about it and this was all just a power trip, they were so sure his presidency, if not he himself, would really shake up the system. And so it was okay to vote for a thin-skinned, misogynistic bigot, because it was for a greater good that we all knew wasn't actually going to happen.

But that is a very small part of me. The rest of me will be relieved when Clinton wins tomorrow night. Yes, this election is a car wreck. To paraphrase a podcast, though, if the choice is between a wreck that injures two or one that kills a hundred, I'll take the former. You'll get no disagreement from me about the general idea that the system is flawed or even broken. Electing Trump isn't even the start to fixing it, though. He's just a stupid, dangerous distraction.

Nothing will change under Hillary, start dancing.
Fernyx
Posts: 328
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 7:33:23 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/7/2016 7:23:19 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 11/7/2016 7:21:36 PM, Burzmali wrote:
A part of me actually wants to see Trump win so that, when nothing changes during his presidency, I can watch folks tap dance about it. It would be entertaining to see all the folks whining about cronyism and corruption have to deal with their candidate himself displaying his own brand of it that would rival anything we've seen before. And to watch as those same supporters now have to try to justify voting for an idiotic, authoritarian demagogue because they just knew he would be able to change things. Despite all of the clear indications that he gives zero f*cks about it and this was all just a power trip, they were so sure his presidency, if not he himself, would really shake up the system. And so it was okay to vote for a thin-skinned, misogynistic bigot, because it was for a greater good that we all knew wasn't actually going to happen.

But that is a very small part of me. The rest of me will be relieved when Clinton wins tomorrow night. Yes, this election is a car wreck. To paraphrase a podcast, though, if the choice is between a wreck that injures two or one that kills a hundred, I'll take the former. You'll get no disagreement from me about the general idea that the system is flawed or even broken. Electing Trump isn't even the start to fixing it, though. He's just a stupid, dangerous distraction.

Nothing will change under Hillary, start dancing.

Hopefully nothing will change and the country stays in relatively the same place for the 2020 elections. That is a best case scenario as it is likely the country will be awful after either.
Vaarka
Posts: 7,636
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 7:42:55 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
>Mentions the bias and unreliability of news media and the likes of it, including Fox and CNN
>Obviously biased towards Trump
>Uses unreliable sources to back his points

lol
You're probably thinking right now "haha I'm a genius". Well you're not -Valkrin

inferno: "I don't know, are you attracted to women?"
ButterCatX: "No, Vaarka is mine!"

All hail scum Vaarka, wielder of the bastard sword, smiter of nations, destroyer of spiders -VOT

"Vaarka, I've been thinking about this for a long time now," (pulls out small box made of macaroni) "W-will you be my noodle buddy?" -Kirigaya
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 7:56:00 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/7/2016 7:23:19 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 11/7/2016 7:21:36 PM, Burzmali wrote:
A part of me actually wants to see Trump win so that, when nothing changes during his presidency, I can watch folks tap dance about it. It would be entertaining to see all the folks whining about cronyism and corruption have to deal with their candidate himself displaying his own brand of it that would rival anything we've seen before. And to watch as those same supporters now have to try to justify voting for an idiotic, authoritarian demagogue because they just knew he would be able to change things. Despite all of the clear indications that he gives zero f*cks about it and this was all just a power trip, they were so sure his presidency, if not he himself, would really shake up the system. And so it was okay to vote for a thin-skinned, misogynistic bigot, because it was for a greater good that we all knew wasn't actually going to happen.

But that is a very small part of me. The rest of me will be relieved when Clinton wins tomorrow night. Yes, this election is a car wreck. To paraphrase a podcast, though, if the choice is between a wreck that injures two or one that kills a hundred, I'll take the former. You'll get no disagreement from me about the general idea that the system is flawed or even broken. Electing Trump isn't even the start to fixing it, though. He's just a stupid, dangerous distraction.

Nothing will change under Hillary, start dancing.

No one voting against Trump has been claiming anything would change. There's nothing to dance about.
Scruggs
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 10:27:55 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/7/2016 7:42:55 PM, Vaarka wrote:
>Mentions the bias and unreliability of news media and the likes of it, including Fox and CNN
>Obviously biased towards Trump
>Uses unreliable sources to back his points

lol
Show some accountability and tag me in the post so that you don't go unnoticed. I just happened to look back through the thread and noticed your ridiculous post. Here is why it is ridiculous:
1) You are using green text outside of 4chan.
2) I never claimed to be unbias. Nor am I required to be.
3) Which sources were bias? You failed to name one.
4) LOL
"If a man does not put himself in the attitude of a sinner, his prayer will not be heard before God." A brother asked him, "what is a sinful soul?" And St. Abba Moses replied, "Everyone who bears his own sins, and does not consider those of his companion."
Scruggs
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 10:27:57 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/7/2016 7:21:36 PM, Burzmali wrote:
A part of me actually wants to see Trump win so that, when nothing changes during his presidency, I can watch folks tap dance about it. It would be entertaining to see all the folks whining about cronyism and corruption have to deal with their candidate himself displaying his own brand of it that would rival anything we've seen before. And to watch as those same supporters now have to try to justify voting for an idiotic, authoritarian demagogue because they just knew he would be able to change things. Despite all of the clear indications that he gives zero f*cks about it and this was all just a power trip, they were so sure his presidency, if not he himself, would really shake up the system. And so it was okay to vote for a thin-skinned, misogynistic bigot, because it was for a greater good that we all knew wasn't actually going to happen.
Well, let that part of you that wants Trump to win motivate you to go out and vote for him. I will give the same analogy to you that I give to everyone. This election has provided us with two guns and we are playing Russian roulette: one that is fully loaded and one that has a bullet in one of the chambers. Hillary is the loaded gun, if we pull the trigger we know the result: more of the same. The gun with only one bullet in the chamber is Trump. If we pull it, we may get the same result as we would of had with Hillary. However, there is also the likelihood of him being completely different and productive. Sorry, but I am not putting a loaded gun to my head.

Now it comes down to me needing you to do your job. You make the following claims about Trump without providing any evidence:
1) Trump is an idiot.
2) Trump is authoritarian.
3) Trump is a demagogue.
4) Trump gives "zero f*cks" about "it." (What is "it"? You never defined "it.")
5) Trump is simply on a "power trip."
6) Trump is thin-skinned.
7) Trump is a misogynistic bigot.

So those are the seven, count them, seven, claims you made without providing one shred of evidence. Did you expect me or anyone else to simply take your word for it? Surely not. So show some accountability and provide evidence for each of your seven claims. I will wait.

But that is a very small part of me. The rest of me will be relieved when Clinton wins tomorrow night. Yes, this election is a car wreck. To paraphrase a podcast, though, if the choice is between a wreck that injures two or one that kills a hundred, I'll take the former. You'll get no disagreement from me about the general idea that the system is flawed or even broken. Electing Trump isn't even the start to fixing it, though. He's just a stupid, dangerous distraction.
Oh, three more claims! Also provide evidence for those.
"If a man does not put himself in the attitude of a sinner, his prayer will not be heard before God." A brother asked him, "what is a sinful soul?" And St. Abba Moses replied, "Everyone who bears his own sins, and does not consider those of his companion."
Vaarka
Posts: 7,636
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 10:30:27 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/7/2016 10:27:55 PM, Scruggs wrote:
At 11/7/2016 7:42:55 PM, Vaarka wrote:
>Mentions the bias and unreliability of news media and the likes of it, including Fox and CNN
>Obviously biased towards Trump
>Uses unreliable sources to back his points

lol
Show some accountability and tag me in the post so that you don't go unnoticed. I just happened to look back through the thread and noticed your ridiculous post. Here is why it is ridiculous:
1) You are using green text outside of 4chan.
Yeah
2) I never claimed to be unbias. Nor am I required to be.
Eh, I guess that's true
3) Which sources were bias? You failed to name one.
Well I'm pretty sure FOX and CNN are both rather biased, but the information you were giving was clearly from a pro-Trump perspective, and you included stuff like "democrats have been known for voter fraud in the past", when I'm sure republicans have done so too.
4) LOL
IKR
You're probably thinking right now "haha I'm a genius". Well you're not -Valkrin

inferno: "I don't know, are you attracted to women?"
ButterCatX: "No, Vaarka is mine!"

All hail scum Vaarka, wielder of the bastard sword, smiter of nations, destroyer of spiders -VOT

"Vaarka, I've been thinking about this for a long time now," (pulls out small box made of macaroni) "W-will you be my noodle buddy?" -Kirigaya
YYW
Posts: 36,375
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 10:30:58 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/7/2016 6:19:51 PM, Scruggs wrote:

Dear boy, please try to write fewer stupid things in the future.
Tsar of DDO
Scruggs
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 11:30:26 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/7/2016 10:30:27 PM, Vaarka wrote:

1) You are using green text outside of 4chan.
Yeah
Yeah, that is ridiculous.

2) I never claimed to be unbias. Nor am I required to be.
Eh, I guess that's true
3) Which sources were bias? You failed to name one.
Well I'm pretty sure FOX and CNN are both rather biased, but the information you were giving was clearly from a pro-Trump perspective, and you included stuff like "democrats have been known for voter fraud in the past", when I'm sure republicans have done so too.
I said Democrats have committed voter fraud in the past because THEY HAVE. I provided the documented evidence for it. And Republicans may have, but they have not been dumb enough to let anyone prove it.

4) LOL
IKR
"If a man does not put himself in the attitude of a sinner, his prayer will not be heard before God." A brother asked him, "what is a sinful soul?" And St. Abba Moses replied, "Everyone who bears his own sins, and does not consider those of his companion."
Scruggs
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2016 11:30:29 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/7/2016 10:30:58 PM, YYW wrote:
At 11/7/2016 6:19:51 PM, Scruggs wrote:

Dear boy, please try to write fewer stupid things in the future.
Sorry, I am still waiting for your response to the post I made several weeks ago on your thread. You said you would prove me wrong, I am still waiting.
"If a man does not put himself in the attitude of a sinner, his prayer will not be heard before God." A brother asked him, "what is a sinful soul?" And St. Abba Moses replied, "Everyone who bears his own sins, and does not consider those of his companion."
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2016 5:21:04 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/7/2016 10:27:57 PM, Scruggs wrote:
At 11/7/2016 7:21:36 PM, Burzmali wrote:
A part of me actually wants to see Trump win so that, when nothing changes during his presidency, I can watch folks tap dance about it. It would be entertaining to see all the folks whining about cronyism and corruption have to deal with their candidate himself displaying his own brand of it that would rival anything we've seen before. And to watch as those same supporters now have to try to justify voting for an idiotic, authoritarian demagogue because they just knew he would be able to change things. Despite all of the clear indications that he gives zero f*cks about it and this was all just a power trip, they were so sure his presidency, if not he himself, would really shake up the system. And so it was okay to vote for a thin-skinned, misogynistic bigot, because it was for a greater good that we all knew wasn't actually going to happen.
Well, let that part of you that wants Trump to win motivate you to go out and vote for him. I will give the same analogy to you that I give to everyone. This election has provided us with two guns and we are playing Russian roulette: one that is fully loaded and one that has a bullet in one of the chambers. Hillary is the loaded gun, if we pull the trigger we know the result: more of the same. The gun with only one bullet in the chamber is Trump. If we pull it, we may get the same result as we would of had with Hillary. However, there is also the likelihood of him being completely different and productive. Sorry, but I am not putting a loaded gun to my head.

I would say it's more like a squirt gun. Hillary's is filled with water, so we know we're going to get a little wet. Trump's is filled with gasoline. so a little wet but with a likelihood of immolation.

Also, I already voted for Clinton last week. This is just an exercise in antagonism now.

Now it comes down to me needing you to do your job. You make the following claims about Trump without providing any evidence:
1) Trump is an idiot.
2) Trump is authoritarian.
3) Trump is a demagogue.
4) Trump gives "zero f*cks" about "it." (What is "it"? You never defined "it.")
5) Trump is simply on a "power trip."
6) Trump is thin-skinned.
7) Trump is a misogynistic bigot.

So those are the seven, count them, seven, claims you made without providing one shred of evidence. Did you expect me or anyone else to simply take your word for it? Surely not. So show some accountability and provide evidence for each of your seven claims. I will wait.

I could just cite Trump's own tweets to support each of those. The problem is that you won't see vaccine-autism links and climate change denial as idiotic, or 3 a.m. tirades as evidence of being thin-skinned, or body-shaming as misogyny, etc. So I'll give it the level of effort it deserves and just leave it as is.

But that is a very small part of me. The rest of me will be relieved when Clinton wins tomorrow night. Yes, this election is a car wreck. To paraphrase a podcast, though, if the choice is between a wreck that injures two or one that kills a hundred, I'll take the former. You'll get no disagreement from me about the general idea that the system is flawed or even broken. Electing Trump isn't even the start to fixing it, though. He's just a stupid, dangerous distraction.
Oh, three more claims! Also provide evidence for those.

Again, his own tweets. But there's no amount of evidence that will affect your zealotry.
Scruggs
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2016 5:47:55 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/8/2016 5:21:04 PM, Burzmali wrote:

Well, let that part of you that wants Trump to win motivate you to go out and vote for him. I will give the same analogy to you that I give to everyone. This election has provided us with two guns and we are playing Russian roulette: one that is fully loaded and one that has a bullet in one of the chambers. Hillary is the loaded gun, if we pull the trigger we know the result: more of the same. The gun with only one bullet in the chamber is Trump. If we pull it, we may get the same result as we would of had with Hillary. However, there is also the likelihood of him being completely different and productive. Sorry, but I am not putting a loaded gun to my head.

I would say it's more like a squirt gun. Hillary's is filled with water, so we know we're going to get a little wet. Trump's is filled with gasoline. so a little wet but with a likelihood of immolation.
Except we lose with Hillary either way. If she actually tries to perform her public positions, then it will be a disaster. If she implements her private positions, then it will be an even worse disaster. I believe that Trump is the water gun that may get us a little wet in your own analogy.

Also, I already voted for Clinton last week. This is just an exercise in antagonism now.
Then I suppose you have lost all credibility when you complain about the direction this country is moving in and the corruption in politics, as you voted for it.

Now it comes down to me needing you to do your job. You make the following claims about Trump without providing any evidence:
1) Trump is an idiot.
2) Trump is authoritarian.
3) Trump is a demagogue.
4) Trump gives "zero f*cks" about "it." (What is "it"? You never defined "it.")
5) Trump is simply on a "power trip."
6) Trump is thin-skinned.
7) Trump is a misogynistic bigot.

So those are the seven, count them, seven, claims you made without providing one shred of evidence. Did you expect me or anyone else to simply take your word for it? Surely not. So show some accountability and provide evidence for each of your seven claims. I will wait.

I could just cite Trump's own tweets to support each of those. The problem is that you won't see vaccine-autism links and climate change denial as idiotic, or 3 a.m. tirades as evidence of being thin-skinned, or body-shaming as misogyny, etc. So I'll give it the level of effort it deserves and just leave it as is.
In short: you have no evidence. I have often found that Clinton supporters are uninformed and you have not broken the status quo.
"If a man does not put himself in the attitude of a sinner, his prayer will not be heard before God." A brother asked him, "what is a sinful soul?" And St. Abba Moses replied, "Everyone who bears his own sins, and does not consider those of his companion."
thett3
Posts: 14,372
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2016 6:40:16 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
What about the black pill?
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2016 7:15:40 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/8/2016 5:47:55 PM, Scruggs wrote:
At 11/8/2016 5:21:04 PM, Burzmali wrote:

Well, let that part of you that wants Trump to win motivate you to go out and vote for him. I will give the same analogy to you that I give to everyone. This election has provided us with two guns and we are playing Russian roulette: one that is fully loaded and one that has a bullet in one of the chambers. Hillary is the loaded gun, if we pull the trigger we know the result: more of the same. The gun with only one bullet in the chamber is Trump. If we pull it, we may get the same result as we would of had with Hillary. However, there is also the likelihood of him being completely different and productive. Sorry, but I am not putting a loaded gun to my head.

I would say it's more like a squirt gun. Hillary's is filled with water, so we know we're going to get a little wet. Trump's is filled with gasoline. so a little wet but with a likelihood of immolation.
Except we lose with Hillary either way. If she actually tries to perform her public positions, then it will be a disaster. If she implements her private positions, then it will be an even worse disaster. I believe that Trump is the water gun that may get us a little wet in your own analogy.

I have no problem with most of Hillary's policies. So complaining that we lose either way won't play with me.

Also, I already voted for Clinton last week. This is just an exercise in antagonism now.
Then I suppose you have lost all credibility when you complain about the direction this country is moving in and the corruption in politics, as you voted for it.

The only vote against corruption in politics is to vote third party. You're just ignoring Trump's version of corruption for some reason.

Now it comes down to me needing you to do your job. You make the following claims about Trump without providing any evidence:
1) Trump is an idiot.
2) Trump is authoritarian.
3) Trump is a demagogue.
4) Trump gives "zero f*cks" about "it." (What is "it"? You never defined "it.")
5) Trump is simply on a "power trip."
6) Trump is thin-skinned.
7) Trump is a misogynistic bigot.

So those are the seven, count them, seven, claims you made without providing one shred of evidence. Did you expect me or anyone else to simply take your word for it? Surely not. So show some accountability and provide evidence for each of your seven claims. I will wait.

I could just cite Trump's own tweets to support each of those. The problem is that you won't see vaccine-autism links and climate change denial as idiotic, or 3 a.m. tirades as evidence of being thin-skinned, or body-shaming as misogyny, etc. So I'll give it the level of effort it deserves and just leave it as is.
In short: you have no evidence. I have often found that Clinton supporters are uninformed and you have not broken the status quo.

Rather, Trump has validated all of this himself. You're just blind and deaf to it.
Scruggs
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2016 7:44:20 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/8/2016 7:15:40 PM, Burzmali wrote:
Except we lose with Hillary either way. If she actually tries to perform her public positions, then it will be a disaster. If she implements her private positions, then it will be an even worse disaster. I believe that Trump is the water gun that may get us a little wet in your own analogy.

I have no problem with most of Hillary's policies. So complaining that we lose either way won't play with me.
You say you have no issue with her policies, but which ones? Her public or private ones? And after you decide which ones you like better, how do you know she won't implement the other?

Then I suppose you have lost all credibility when you complain about the direction this country is moving in and the corruption in politics, as you voted for it.

The only vote against corruption in politics is to vote third party. You're just ignoring Trump's version of corruption for some reason.
Corrupt in what sense? He has never held public office, so that makes corruption rather hard.

I could just cite Trump's own tweets to support each of those. The problem is that you won't see vaccine-autism links and climate change denial as idiotic, or 3 a.m. tirades as evidence of being thin-skinned, or body-shaming as misogyny, etc. So I'll give it the level of effort it deserves and just leave it as is.
In short: you have no evidence. I have often found that Clinton supporters are uninformed and you have not broken the status quo.

Rather, Trump has validated all of this himself. You're just blind and deaf to it.
You say that, but you cannot provide any evidence of it. So the wait continues.
"If a man does not put himself in the attitude of a sinner, his prayer will not be heard before God." A brother asked him, "what is a sinful soul?" And St. Abba Moses replied, "Everyone who bears his own sins, and does not consider those of his companion."
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2016 7:51:43 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/8/2016 7:44:20 PM, Scruggs wrote:
At 11/8/2016 7:15:40 PM, Burzmali wrote:
Except we lose with Hillary either way. If she actually tries to perform her public positions, then it will be a disaster. If she implements her private positions, then it will be an even worse disaster. I believe that Trump is the water gun that may get us a little wet in your own analogy.

I have no problem with most of Hillary's policies. So complaining that we lose either way won't play with me.
You say you have no issue with her policies, but which ones? Her public or private ones? And after you decide which ones you like better, how do you know she won't implement the other?

I don't see any significant difference or conflict between her alleged private and her public policies. Feel free to pick two that seem at odds and I'll sort it out for you.

Then I suppose you have lost all credibility when you complain about the direction this country is moving in and the corruption in politics, as you voted for it.

The only vote against corruption in politics is to vote third party. You're just ignoring Trump's version of corruption for some reason.
Corrupt in what sense? He has never held public office, so that makes corruption rather hard.

His business practices are dishonest, bordering on criminal, and he has corrupted his own foundation.

I could just cite Trump's own tweets to support each of those. The problem is that you won't see vaccine-autism links and climate change denial as idiotic, or 3 a.m. tirades as evidence of being thin-skinned, or body-shaming as misogyny, etc. So I'll give it the level of effort it deserves and just leave it as is.
In short: you have no evidence. I have often found that Clinton supporters are uninformed and you have not broken the status quo.

Rather, Trump has validated all of this himself. You're just blind and deaf to it.
You say that, but you cannot provide any evidence of it. So the wait continues.

Like I said, you only have to look at his tweets. I have a hard time believing you haven't seen the numerous anti-vaxxer, climate change denying, misogynistic, and vindictive tweets he's posted.
Scruggs
Posts: 89
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2016 10:16:22 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/8/2016 7:51:43 PM, Burzmali wrote:

You say you have no issue with her policies, but which ones? Her public or private ones? And after you decide which ones you like better, how do you know she won't implement the other?

I don't see any significant difference or conflict between her alleged private and her public policies. Feel free to pick two that seem at odds and I'll sort it out for you.
Read my original post.

Corrupt in what sense? He has never held public office, so that makes corruption rather hard.

His business practices are dishonest, bordering on criminal, and he has corrupted his own foundation.
And your evidence for any of this?

You say that, but you cannot provide any evidence of it. So the wait continues.

Like I said, you only have to look at his tweets. I have a hard time believing you haven't seen the numerous anti-vaxxer, climate change denying, misogynistic, and vindictive tweets he's posted.
I don't have a Twitter and I don't generally read Tweets in my free time. So you still have yet to provide any evidence for your claims.
"If a man does not put himself in the attitude of a sinner, his prayer will not be heard before God." A brother asked him, "what is a sinful soul?" And St. Abba Moses replied, "Everyone who bears his own sins, and does not consider those of his companion."
Burzmali
Posts: 1,310
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2016 1:01:57 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 11/8/2016 10:16:22 PM, Scruggs wrote:
At 11/8/2016 7:51:43 PM, Burzmali wrote:

You say you have no issue with her policies, but which ones? Her public or private ones? And after you decide which ones you like better, how do you know she won't implement the other?

I don't see any significant difference or conflict between her alleged private and her public policies. Feel free to pick two that seem at odds and I'll sort it out for you.
Read my original post.

The tired old open/closed borders thing? It's clear from the full context of the first that she's talking about stuff like energy, not people, while talking about people in the second quote.

Corrupt in what sense? He has never held public office, so that makes corruption rather hard.

His business practices are dishonest, bordering on criminal, and he has corrupted his own foundation.
And your evidence for any of this?

He has a history of not fully paying people and forcing them to settle:
http://www.cnn.com...

He misuses his foundation's funds:
https://www.theguardian.com...

You say that, but you cannot provide any evidence of it. So the wait continues.

Like I said, you only have to look at his tweets. I have a hard time believing you haven't seen the numerous anti-vaxxer, climate change denying, misogynistic, and vindictive tweets he's posted.
I don't have a Twitter and I don't generally read Tweets in my free time. So you still have yet to provide any evidence for your claims.

Before I dig out the tweets, do you agree that insulting the appearance of various women, apropos of nothing, is misogynistic? That calling climate change a hoax perpetrated by China is idiotic? That saying vaccines cause autism is idiotic? That firing off a bunch of tweets in the middle of the night, in response to some perceived slight, makes someone thin-skinned?