Total posts: 2,049
Posted in:
CORRECTIONS:
- I will reveal flips after each lynch this time
- I didn't give Mafia any options for fake claims
I just copy-pasted the OP from my previous game, my bad. The rest is applicable.
Vote Count
SupaDudz (oromagi) -- 1/5 votes
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
@whiteflame
@ILikePie5
@MisterChris
Rules and some mod notes:
Standard rules apply. No editing or deleting posts, no copy and pasting roles, and no outside communication from non mod created messages with other players in the game. Flips will occur the following day phase, but I will acknowledge there is NO TAILOR in this game. DO NOT ASK ME ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE TAILOR ROLE. THERE IS NO TAILOR IN THE GAME. PERIOD.
Please ask me any questions in your private role PMs. I will not answer most questions publicly in the day phase. This is to avoid giving any potential game breaking information. I generally won’t answer questions about how the roles work mechanically, unless that role is already flipped and in the graveyard. I do this just to play on the safe side as a mod -- believe it or not sometimes even answering small questions can really screw over a scum team and it’s not fair to them. I will try to be consistent and as fair as possible while using my discretion about how to answer.
As far as roles go, your understanding of how a role works might not be the same as mine. I utilize role descriptions from all different sites, and sometimes I just take inspiration from the role and add my own tweaks to it. Sometimes I completely make roles up as an experiment as well. Sometimes my modding mechanics are not the same from game to game, i.e. if X-shot roles keep their abilities on being role blocked or not.
I will also not explicitly say if a player has been role blocked; I may utilize different phrasing if a night action does not go through. It all depends on the game. Everything is on the table, and I mod each game separately according to the specific vision I have for it. In this game I'm choosing to be pretty vague. If there are any questions on how a role role works that isn’t in the graveyard, I will refer you to this OP to make things simple.
All roles in this game were randomly assigned. I will replace players as I see fit with public and/or private warnings. Please do not try to analyze role PM structure or the timing of when you think someone is online or on Discord. I will not ban these kind of frivolous discussions, but I'm warning you that I may try to play games so consider this at your own risk :) I also gave scum options of fake character + role claims in this game, but you are welcome to focus on theme analysis if you wish. Good luck everyone!
LIVING
01 XLAV
02 Crocodile
03 iLikePie5
04 Speedrace
05 whiteflame
06 MisterChris
07 SupaDudz
08 oromagi
Day Phase 1 will end on Monday, 2/22/2020 at 9am EST unless otherwise noted in advance.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@XLAV
@oromagi
@Speedrace
@Crocodile
THEME: Black History Month
Created:
Posted in:
WELCOME TO THE GAME YOU NEVER SIGNED UP FOR!
I'm sorry, but Supa has had enough players to start his game for 2 weeks now. Apparently he does not want to start the game unless he gets more people, so I created a small game to host in the interim. I added Supa and removed Elminster. I don't think he will mind. If he does, I'm sure someone will back out or need to be replaced so he can join then.
If you don't want to play in this game... okay! If it completely falls apart... fine! Either way there is no game going on lol. And if Supa decides to get his shit together and post his game, I don't mind if ya'll abandon this one. I just think people are sick of waiting and he might very well hold out and wait until he gets like 3 more players. Who knows when that will be.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Hmm I haven't won anything that I know of, but I do know that had I wasted my time watching another one of your useless YouTube links, I probably would have deserved to go into the "loser" category.
(that is literally the headline)
Lol @ this fear mongering nut job. Okay Tucker -- which elites? I just want to know who to be terrified of! I have heard him make this claim like 100x in the last few months yet not once has he considered it newsworthy to specify who is trying to destroy the economy and every aspect of our lives. All he says is "the left" or "the elites" which is enough evidence for Tucker Carlson fans, obviously. They think this is great reporting lol. "The man makes a great case!" Can't argue with that logic 🤪
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Okay, please link me to it then.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Are you saying you don't know how to read and that's why you can't relay what's in the video?
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
What if a degenerate took authoritarian power? o_O
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Yeah, I'm a very curious person. I keep hearing this allegation about politicians being lobbied by corporations to keep small businesses closed through coronavirus lockdowns in particular. That may be true, but it's weird that I have to try so hard to get a straight answer about which politicians and which corporations are involved when this belief is so widespread and apparently so obvious. Lol @ people believing things but then being utterly incapable of answering a very straightforward question about those beliefs.
If the video answers my question about who's involved... why can't you just name an example from the video?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
You tagged me in some post to say "Let us recall that impeachment has but two potential results: removal from office, and disqualification." I have no idea why. We all know that Trump can't be removed; now he should be disqualified. What's your point?
Before January 20th, McConnell had the ability to call the Senate back in session and they could have then moved to convict Donald Trump in an impeachment trial and try him before leaving office, but McConnell chose not to alter the Senate schedule which was his prerogative. So since impeachment was going to happen post January 20, Nancy took her time to deliver the articles. That has nothing to do with anything I said.
Please stop tagging me in your nonsensical posts about "wish balloons." Nobody knows or cares what you're talking about.
Created:
-->
@bmdrocks21
I find that really odd. I was libertarian starting senior in high school, but started slowly trending authoritarian about halfway through freshman year in college and never stopped lol.
That's strange! I never heard of someone becoming more authoritarian in college. Why lol did you witness too much debauchery?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Of course you don't have to present evidence, but it's worth noting that you can't.
You made a claim, and yet the second I asked you for one shred of evidence... like literally one single name or one single corporation to back up that wide sweeping generalization you made... you couldn't do it lol.
So then you brought up this incredibly wild red herring (income inequality) which has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic at hand. This is your M.O. When someone asks you for proof of something, for some reason you feel backed into a corner and try to distract by bringing up some other random ass point as if everyone is going to forget your inability to back up your claim but nobody ever does. Like I said: very weird.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
My reluctance to click on the video is because I knew it would be a waste of my time. Thank you for proving me right lol.
90% of the time your responses to me are wholly irrelevant. Case in point: you have now twice brought up income inequality as some sort of weird red herring for your inability to back up the claim you made. Very weird. If you can't name a single example when I press you for one... just say so. Don't bother posting random videos to me :)
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
I don't know which restaurant you're talking about. If you responded to me with some random video about a restaurant or business suffering from Covid lockdowns, then I was right not to bother clicking it. That has nothing to do with what I asked you so I don't understand why would be showing me a real world example of a suffering restaurant. I never once denied businesses are suffering as a result of lockdowns.
If you don't have the time to go into a comprehensive list of politicians and corporations, can you name just one or two? When you say the rich lobby and donate to politicians for exemptions, those are exactly the examples I'm talking about. Which donors or lobbies petitioned which politicians to keep big businesses open so small businesses suffer? You obviously have some in mind since you are making the claim.
Created:
Posted in:
Also: if prosecution or impeachment after someone is out of office is unconstitutional, I wonder what all those 2016 "lock her up" chants were referring to? 🤔
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Let us recall that impeachment has but two potential results: removal from office, and disqualification.
Yes. Trump was impeached while in office and the trial to remove him from office should have immediately been held, but Mitch McConnell chose to delay for political purposes. Now disqualification from holding future office is the priority, along with ensuring politicians know that crimes can be prosecuted even if they are committed while it's their last month in office. I don't know why you have to "recall" this; it is common sense knowledge to all.
Sorry that your wish balloon drone is just that. Keep blowing; the balloon needs more hot air.
I have no idea what "wish balloon" you are referring to, but this was a really horrible attempt at insulting me lol. Why bother.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Outsourcing obviously does happen and libertarians / free market capitalists argue that it's a good thing. People who want government regulation of the economy, from the likes of Bernie Sanders to Donald Trump, want to implement "Buy American" orders to force companies to purchase labor or products from within the U.S. In fact Joe Biden just signed executive orders saying the government would prioritize buying from U.S. companies. This is something Trump fans should obviously be happy about but can't bring themselves to acknowledge.
Libertarians and free market enthusiasts say it is beneficial to outsource as it #1 reduces the cost of goods for us here at home, and #2 gives opportunities to people overseas which helps them grow their economies (China used to be a third world country not too long ago -- people see that as both good and bad depending on their moral compass or political priorities).
Some argue outsourcing is good as it would deter immigration to the U.S. Some argue outsourcing is okay it is always good economics to allow for the purchase of the cheapest goods and labor. Others argue outsourcing is righteous in the name of freedom. But libertarians are perfectly okay with outsourcing, just to be clear. So if you still champion that "buy American" mentality of Donald Trump, you might not be a libertarian. If you believe outsourcing + the free market is preferable, that is more in line with libertarian economics.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
You said corporate warfare was waged to get government to shut down businesses. I asked who dunnit - a very innocent question.
You didn't answer and responded with (a presumably irrelevant) YouTube link. Why are you so predictable lol. Please just answer. I'm curious.
Which specific politicians and corporations engaged in that practice you just said occurred? A very simple question which should have a straightforward answer that I don't have to click to get to.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
If you have evidence of conservatives being discriminated against, please show me or don't bother tagging me.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Most people start their libertarian phase in college. You're ahead of the game :)
I'm glad to see that you are more empathetic and open minded to the utility of immigrants.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
How about the arbitrary lockdowns as a recent example where corporate warfare is waged on who can pay the most to get the government to shut down select businesses?
Who paid to get government to shut down businesses?
Created:
Posted in:
One thing I love about Trump's utterly asinine defense is that it is predicated on him conceding the election. His lawyers continually referred to him as "the 45th president" in their legal brief rather than the former president because Trump believes he is the legitimate victor. But his first (god awful) lawyer actually argued yesterday that the American people removed Trump from office and so this case is redundant. Does that mean Trump concedes he lost because the American people removed him? I'd like to hear him say that.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
It is absolutely disgusting the way Obama's administration drone struck a citizen of the U.S. with impunity. Thank you for bringing everyone's attention to it in a thread about Trump's impeachment. It clearly seems very relevant.
Did you know that civilian casualties skyrocketed under Trump? Under Trump we killed more citizens than the Taliban did. We all remember the 40 citizens that were killed at a wedding party in 2019 as just one example. Of course they weren't American citizens though so it doesn't really matter. Anyway I agree killing Trump with a drone strike should be on the table.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
You won't hear any of these concerns on MSM. When DC power is threatened, then they will go back to pretending healthcare matters.
Democrats love talking about healthcare because it's popular, even among Republicans. The GOP still has no plan as far as I know, so I do think Democrats want to talk about it and that's why they bring it up so often during media segments. Maybe you just don't watch enough media that features interviews with Democrats. Before Covid relief that was their number one talking point. I believe nearly 70% of Republican voters don't want to overturn the provisions of the ACA that protect people with pre-existing conditions. Even Trump was for that. So what are Republicans to do? The ACA or some kind of government healthcare is popular with Independents as well.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
It is racist that when you think of unemployment insurance, you automatically think of black people trying to exploit the system. You did not mention white people in Mississippi "mooching off the system" until I pointed out that white people utilize social programs more than black people do.
Why do you assume people are mooching off the system and not legitimately unable to find work? Isn't the whole reason Donald Trump allegedly won in 2016 because people couldn't find good jobs? You can't have it both ways and say unemployed people are lazy and mooching but simultaneously can't find jobs because they're all being taken by illegal workers or sent overseas.
You can lose unemployment benefits if you refuse to accept reasonable work, i.e. work you are qualified for paying market salary. But if you acknowledge that people on the south side of Chicago (or Mississippi) live in poverty, why do you have a problem with them getting unemployment insurance?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Why does your mind automatically go to people on the south side of Chicago using drugs and guns when thinking of unemployment benefits? This racist thinking has been used strategically by politicians to stoke white resentment and demonize public assistance programs, despite the fact that white Americans are, and always have been, the biggest beneficiaries of welfare programs.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
My post doesn't discuss my position. That doesn't mean I don't have one.
A lot of Republicans claim to be "anti elite populists" now so they're anti capitalist. I don't know what the party's position on healthcare is these days. Do you?
Created:
Posted in:
What is the latest Republican proposal on healthcare?
And does anyone else find it funny that conservatives are having an epic meltdown about their lack of access to twitter (which is completely fake because they're all over twitter) but not their lack of access to life saving treatments or medicines they can't afford? Like, if they believe the government ought to step in to protect their GOD GIVEN RIGHT to post on twitter, why don't they feel as strongly about lack of access to medical care?
Rand Paul acknowledges that likening a right to healthcare is slavery cuz if you have a right to something that requires other people, it means you have a right to other people's services and labor whether they want to serve you or not. Yet he has a problem with "political bias" dictating access to people's alleged right to speak to an audience online. That also requires other people's labor (software engineers, IT people, etc.) so who cares? It's their choice if they want to serve people, Rand.
Anyway this isn't the best analogy/explanation cuz it's early and I'm tired, but in general conservatives really seem to think their ability to post online is more significant than their ability to get insulin or other medications without going bankrupt. Very strange what they want the government to regulate and ensure access to and what they think the market should deal with by itself. Libertarians are obviously a bit more consistent. Conservatives are just... like...the most bizarre people to me. They'd happily eat shit if I told them doing so would pwn the libs.
Anyway this post is neither advocating for or against government healthcare.
I'm just curious what the latest, most comprehensive Republican advocacy is.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Your point doesn't make any sense because twitter makes a fuck ton of money off conservatives and their participation on the site. It is not in their monetary interest to alienate people but rather to keep as many people engaged on the site for as long as possible, and that is exactly what their algorithms are designed to do. Trump was one of THE most popular people on the site and there are still conservatives with huge followings all over the site. How many times do people have to disprove your point before you will concede?
Liberals aren't screaming at twitter to kick conservatives off the site (and if they are, they would be ignored). They are yelling to take down threats of violence or outright lies and conspiracy theories that are permeating society and causing people to have meltdowns over falsehoods that have proven to be threatening democracy. People do not believe the results of the election are valid and are willing to violently react to that widespread conspiracy being shared on social sites. That's what's getting taken down - the conspiracy theories and threats of violence - not conservative positions of lower taxes, pro guns, Jesus nonsense, removal of social programs, etc. None of that conservative stuff is being taken down en masse (i.e. not a one off mistake). Imagine that.
I have been penalized on Instagram and Facebook for insults; my account has been suspended. The bias and double standard you speak of is minimal. You have no response to the OP which laughably obliterates Josh Hawley's embarrassingly stupid position about being "muzzled." It is beyond asinine and pathetic for conservatives to whine incessantly about how "muzzled" they are all over social media. Stop amplifying this monumentally idiotic position. You can't defend it beyond repeating the points everyone keeps dismantling. You should have debated warren about it so he could have defeated them in real time. I'm only pushing you on it because I like you as a person and don't want you to come off dim or be manipulated by low information and gullible right wingers who like to scream about how oppressed they are (more irony).
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
Twitter is toxic - it sucks - and that's why I can't shut the fuck up about how it's unfair that I can't use it!
I can't stop bitching on twitter about how I'm being silenced on twitter. It's insane. Please send help.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Yes the millions and millions of conservatives (some with massive followings) whining incessantly all over social media are proof they are being censored.
You can hear all about how they are being censored along with their other views... on their social media accounts. That makes sense. Thanks for explaining.
Created:
Posted in:
“It’s time to stand up against the muzzling of America.” — Senator Josh Hawley in a tweet and op-ed for the New York Post
"Hi there, thanks for reading this. I’m being censored. That’s why I’m writing a piece in a major publication that you are consuming easily and for free. Because I am being absolutely and completely muzzled.
Also, I just went on a massively-watched TV show to let you know that my voice is being down-right suffocated. I basically can’t talk to anyone. Which is why I’m talking to all of you.
And now I’m here, in this widely-read media outlet, to say that there is a giant piece of tape over my mouth and, more importantly, the mouth of America. I have the eyes and ears of the world on me, and I am just totally and entirely gagged.
There’s no avoiding it: I am being silenced. We’re all being silenced. And it’s all any of us can talk about.
The truth is, you can’t say anything anymore without someone else saying something about what you just said. And that’s censorship. There’s no two ways about it.
I weep for this country, where the media completely cancels anyone with a different point of view, like the one I’m expressing in this highly popular newspaper.
So, what can we do about it? How do we make our voices heard when all we can do is write opinion pieces in major magazines, do interviews on popular TV shows and speak on the floor of the US Senate? Well, as you can see, we’re in a tight, quiet spot.
But I’m not ready to give up — not yet! The media elite can do their best to silence me by letting me write and speak anywhere I want, but I won’t stop saying exactly what I believe to everyone, everywhere, through every means of communication that exists.
And what I believe (the thing nobody will let me tell you) is this: I’m being censored, and you can read, hear, and see me talk more about it in the news, on the radio, and on TV."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
Again for your reference: In order to have a case heard there are standards of evidence that must be met. If a case does not achieve that bare minimum standard of evidence, then it is thrown out because of conjecture. You present all of your evidence at the gate and the court will evaluate if that case if worth their time. These cases were not due to an explicit lack of evidence. And then when that was disputed on appeal, each and every one of the appellate courts agreed there was not enough evidence to try any of the cases.
Think of how insane it is and how brainwashed one has to be to think that the entire justice system and every single judge all over the country (including Trump's ideological equals and his own appointees) are in some type of ridiculous conspiracy against him. Seriously, think about it. Think.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Edit: Immediately repeal minimum wage during the coronavirus pandemic, absolutely, and on small businesses or start-ups probably yes unless you offer some kind of subsidy which seems complicated.
So probably yes in general.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
The name of the thread is obviously a joke.
Why didn't Trump push to end the tax loop holes that he said were criminal?
Why did Trump revoke his executive order and allow his administration to become lobbyists?
These are the questions I asked and what this thread is about.
You are likely part of the deranged Trump cult that cannot admit your dear leader was a monumental failure at "draining the swamp" despite that being what he campaigned on and what he deluded people into thinking was his mission as president. Poor people are still poor; they still don't have access to healthcare even if they saw their wages go up a dollar. The wall didn't get built. The swamp is still full. People still worship this man as if he was their lord and savior but cannot answer these questions, prefer to ignore them and feel compelled to bring up other presidents or red herrings as a sad deflection.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
When does a litigator try the entire case in pre-trial? Absurd.
You don't have to "try the entire case;" that is not the standard. But thinking you don't have to prove a case is justified in the first place is equally absurd and proves a blatant ignorance of how the law and justice system works.
If your evidence is so incredibly low you can't even get a TRIAL... and then lose appeal after appeal... that is extremely telling.
Think of how insane it is and how brainwashed you have to be to think that the entire justice system and every single judge all over the country (including Trump's ideological equals and his own appointees) are in some type of ridiculous conspiracy against him. Do you also believe that we didn't land on the moon, that the Earth is flat and that the Sandy Hook shooting was a false flag? Think.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
You're so nasty sometimes lol, (go take a hit before you respond to this) but anyway,
I think I misunderstood the tone of your first response to me and took your not answering me as rude dismissiveness. It seems you have added to the post, but I may have misread it initially and if so I apologize. I thought you were baiting me into a "discussion" but then ignoring my questions again, which, to be fair, you do all the time lol. But my intent is not to be nasty to you so I am sorry if you felt I was.
my solution is a mix between Yang and Freidman policies with an immediate repeal of the minimum wage.Do you agree?
To be honest I am not as confident in an immediate repeal as I once was. The capitalist in me wants to say yes, of course, but as someone who doesn't make minimum wage I admit I feel a weird sense of guilt knowing people's income would immediately go down and the cost of living would not. For instance someone who makes $15 minimum wage in NYC working as an administrator in a doctor's office would suddenly be offered $13. Assuming the person agreed to the pay cut to keep their job, it's not like their rent would immediately go down. It's not like the bus fare would immediately go down to get them to work.
I would have to think more about it and I try to consume as much information from as many different perspectives as possible.
A mix between Yang and Friedman policies is extremely vague...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I agree with Peterson's point that some people are inherently low-functioning, so more education wouldn't help them. But liberals saying "everyone should have equal access to education" doesn't translate to "everyone is the same" so he mispresented. Liberals know everyone isn't the same and don't have the same circumstances or capacity to provide, which is why they advocate for support through minimum wage hikes or social programs (welfare, unemployment, disability) which Republicans are always trying to cut even though some people don't have the faculties to work. What do conservatives advocate for to address this issue? Assuming the only thing they have to offer is BUY AMERICAN, I fail to see how that addresses the 10% of people who won't see any of that money either. You predictably did not answer my question about any ideas or solutions you might have.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I was just able to watch. Peterson makes a good point, but I don't think it's accurate to say liberals advocate "everyone being the same" when it comes to intelligence or skills. Instead they push for more equal opportunities (like access to education) or for social safety nets regarding those who might not be able to become lawyers or plumbers. Isn't that largely the idea behind the minimum wage - that everyone deserves a living wage regardless of whether their job doesn't require very many skills? Liberals are the ones who consistently make that point and argue it's not just 16 year olds working for minimum wage anymore (relevant meme).
I know Peterson didn't mean to make a "liberal vs. conservative" point here and in fact tried to do the opposite, and I know that's not your intention either, but I can't help but note that did not feel like a fair or accurate assessment.
That being said, this 10% statistic + automation concerns is precisely the sentiment behind Universal Basic Income and Andrew Yang's presidential campaign. It feels a little unfair to send you a 17 minute video in response to your 2 minute video, but that is a clip of Andrew Yang discussing UBI on the Joe Rogan Experience. There is another clip of him getting into it a bit more with Joe as well here. I'm not sure if you're willing to watch a little bit of either video, but I would be curious to know what, if anything, you disagree with him on -- and that way we can have a more productive conversation knowing where to start from.
It appears we all acknowledge this very real 10% problem. Yang has put forth a proposed solution. Has Peterson put forth any suggestions? Do you have a solution you're leaning toward?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I didn't watch any videos because I was asking whether you think it's okay for government to force business owners to pay more than necessary so Americans can earn a living wage, and I didn't see how a video of someone else talking would answer that for me.
Donald Trump was right about some things, but seemingly not very effective at implementing positive, meaningful change.
I'm willing to have good faith discussions about almost anything! What is the video about? I can't listen at the moment but would be willing to later.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Source on Trump advocating for free trade with China?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Friedman also advocated for free trade with China.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
We have at-will employment in this country. You know a person can be fired at any time for any reason outside of their inherent identity.
So it appears you do think it's okay for government to force business owners to pay more than necessary so Americans can earn a living wage.
Just wanted to confirm.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
That is wrong. The courts heard testimony and oral arguments in each case. When all of those cases were thrown out (for lack of evidence) which was unanimously determined by every single judge, including Republican judges and judges that Trump appointed, then the Appellate and Supreme Courts refused to hear some cases because they were not persuaded by the contents of the appeals.
You can read what all of those judges said by looking it up online, but here is a brief summary from the media.
Also note that Giuliani will be able to make that argument ("I didn't get to present my cases!") if he goes to trial. We'll see how that defense holds up in court.
Created:
Posted in:
The failures of other presidents has absolutely, positively nothing to do with the OP.
It's just that the Trump cult can't bring themselves to acknowledge criticism of their dear leader at all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@fauxlaw
You obviously don't know what the word "straw man" means.
A "straw man" is when you misrepresent someone else's argument to make it easier to negate.
I have not made any arguments against Trump in the OP (and your response addressed nothing I said).
What I did in the OP was give two major examples where Trump has proven to be a monumental failure at draining the swamp.
You replied with a RED HERRING (irrelevant counter points) about Trump's alleged accomplishments.
I am not denying Trump did good things so your reply is wholly irrelevant.
Why didn't Trump push to end the tax loop holes that he said were criminal?
Why did Trump revoke his executive order and allow his administration to become lobbyists?
These are the questions I asked and what the OP was about. There was no straw man and your reply does not address my points.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Okay. Do you believe it is wrong for government to force business owners to pay more than they have to just so Americans can earn a living wage?
A one word yes or no answer will suffice.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Okay. But it's wrong for government to force business owners to pay more than they have to just so Americans can earn a living wage, right?
Created:
Posted in:
I wonder why Mr. "Send In the National Guard" Trump didn't make sure the capitol was protected on a day when his supporters threatened to riot. I guess we'll never know.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Maybe business owners should be able to reduce labor and other supply costs by sourcing outside of the U.S.
(Since it's wrong for government to force business owners to pay more than they have to just so Americans can earn a living wage, right?)
Created: