Total posts: 5,875
Posted in:
-->@Dr. Franklin
Thanks. The mod team suddenly looks much better.
Created:
Posted in:
Most likely, yes.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Hi Poly,
Just thought I'd temp break my exile in honor of you and your idiot free thread.
I've been watching the theist free thread, and all they are doing there is talking about theists. Funny. Not a mention of atheists in the theist thread.
Enjoyed the exchange between you and Et. (Hi Et and TS!)
Sorry, I can't stay long, I just wanted to shout out a friend. You guys take it easy.
Created:
Now go to YouTube, and type in, "Election night fake news" and don't select any videos from the official fake news stations. Watch what they presented that night, not what their position is now after the fact.
Watch them burst into laughter when Ann Coulter, on a panel, says Trump would win the election. Watch Obama on SNL gaff, saying arrogantly to Trump, "At least I'll go down as president!" Oops.
But now, its like, "Oh no, we were all like so balanced with our polls."
Give me a break. We were there. Why do you think liberal democrats were shuffling around after the election in a daze? It was delicious.
Created:
-->
@dustryder
You get it. The fake polls said crooked Hillery would win in a landslide. Trump won. Don't be mad bro.
There were no fake polls as you have conceded by providing no evidence of fake polls.
Lol. It's understandable that you wish to forget that crushing election.
Maybe you should send a complaint to the election commission.
What does the election commission have to do with you twisting truth?
They will tell you that Trump won. Your nightmare is reality. Wake up.
Here. "America should have the best of the best, which he is clearly not."
Do you understand the differences between the concept of suitability and being qualified?
Yes. Neither of which is determined by you. You thinking he was not qualified does not mean he is not qualified. Reality does not reside between your ears.
Lol. He's a Judge now. You lack sense.
Kavanaugh being criticised and Kavanaugh being confirmed as a judge are mutually independent events. Do you agree or disagree with this?
Stop asking silly irrelevant questions. People more knowledgeable than you, both of law and of Kavenaugh, felt the judge was qualified and suitable. Your Trump hatred has made you illogical.
Your poor thinking is not my concern.
Your poor thinking is not my concern either.
Then stop asking me to accept your position.
No explanation needed either apparently. You backpedal like an Olympian.
Explanations should be given when an attempt to understand has already been made, and when the answer wouldn't be utterly wasted. It would be silly to give an explanation in this case
True, it would hamper your back peddling.
Not the "reality" between your ears no.
Your denials do not make reality false.
Not the "reality" between your ears no.
Nah, I think I got it. They don't call you snowflakes for your ability to stand heat.
False. Try again.
Nah, I think I got it. They don't call you snowflakes for your ability to stand heat.
Do you wish me to accept them?
Have you a need to accept them?
Lol. You do wish me to accept them.
Your imaginations of what you read in my posts does not make reality true
If you didn't need me to accept them, you would not have asked me to, and would have said "no" when I asked you.
OK, whomever "tacitly" accepted your nonsense will address it.
Great, I'll be waiting for your addressing
Stupidity is doing the same thing and expecting a different result. Keep waiting.
We know you think so.
We know you don't think so
Which is why I don't keep repeating the obvious. "Mirror" talk makes little sense if inverting the argument makes you wrong. But as you've run out of anything sensible to say, carry on.
You want me to tell you how keeping terrorists out of America is good? Sorry, Ethan doesn't do stupid. Unlike you, I don't need you to accept anything.
That seems racist. Are you racist?
If your loony liberal logic tells you that keeping terrorists out of America is racist, knock yourself out.
Accurate and objective representations are not hard to express. Your bias has crippled your thinking.
Now you say that, but your posts do say otherwise
Lol, my posts can say nothing about your crippled thinking except to point it out. Your posts scream out your loony crippled thinking.
But as you said, you liberals are many. Take solace in that you are not alone in your mental handicap.
Created:
Posted in:
Jimmy Carter was a good President if one counts "good" as moral. He was the only morally good president since Einsinhower. Trump is a good president if one counts "good" as technically qualified for the job.
Though morally poor presidents can be very bad, technically good presidents are better overall.
Created:
Posted in:
Trump has been a great President. That is what is so frustrating for the liberals. Not only did their predictions for his Presidency not come true, in most cases, the opposite occurred.
He has been refreshingly politically incorrect. Candid and with common sense in his thoughts.
Those 7 countries did need better screening.
Antifa are as bad as neo Nazis.
Punishing Saudi Arabia will harm America.
We do need a wall.
The Paris Accords were detrimental to America.
The Mueller Investigation is a witch hunt.
Hillery is crooked.
Yeah, but Trump is insensitive! They bleet.
Trump is sensitive to the plight of the American working man. He's sensitive to the amount of taxes the govt takes from me. He is sensitive to the number of Islamic morons that want to come here and blow up innocents. He's sensitive to activist judges trying to legislate from the bench.
Those are the kinds of sensitivities that matter. Whether he said African countries are s-holes is unimportant. He is doing exactly what an American President should do, and he's doing it transparently and without the mealy-mouthed duplicitous politically correct gibberish of past presidents.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Plisken
Presidents don't decide deficits, congress does.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Imabench
With the irony totally lost on you, why not?Im probably gonna have to make a sequel now huh XD
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mharman
What is this poll for? I don't agree with moves designed simply to confirm a bias or to take shots at moderation. Valid gripes are OK.
Why would we vote on Mike? No one except the mods have enough experience with him to judge. And with bsh1 being supreme king, what would a poll do? Show how "right" your view is?
But I'm posting to say only this. Castin is great. She gets my vote.
Current circumstances mean were I to vote yes for bsh1, it would appear to him like I was trying to avoid a ban, and if I were to vote no, it would appear I was doing it because I was upset about being banned. So I will reserve that vote. It doesn't matter anyway.
So, no comment on the others, but Castin gets a wholehearted yes.
Created:
-->
@Swagnarok
Both America and Russia have nukes that would not (can not) be destroyed in a full nuclear attack, and can launch on their own. So it isn't just speed, its also durability.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TwoMan
Lol. Healther.
The problem with drugs that impair your decision making ability, is that they require better and better decision making, as they progressively make your decision making worse and worse.
We all know that addicts (yes, pot addicts) use more and more, not less. And the more they use, the less they are able to make sound decisions about use.
Its a vicious cycle man.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TwoMan
Oh, you mean only those using it for health reasons? That would be a tiny minority.
I just saw a study saying that the same amount of pot vaped makes you 3 times as high than smoking it. I'll post if I can find it again.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Hey outz,
Seems your status has risen since your DDO days. You go boy!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
Read my lips/text:I am mustardness. Duhh...
To me you're just some irrational guy on the net. You do not have the power or authority to tell me what to do. I didn't ask "who are you?" I asked, "Who are you to tell me what to do?" Your being "mustardness" means nothing. You are just an internet guy who makes irrational posts.
Can you keep your immoral nose out of my business?
If you dont want to hear the truth then leave the public forum.
Your posts aren't truth. They aren't even rational. Plus, I didn't direct my original posts to you. You just think your loony posts are "truth", but every confused guy on the net thinks his loony posts are truth.
Anyway, direct your " truth" to someone who can read your language and who cares. It isn't me. So please go chant and shout to someone else.
If you had a valid argument, you wouldn't need to chant and shout. You would also post in English.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@TwoMan
But the OP lists 2 big negative effects of pot. How do you abuse pot BTW? How much is just use, and how much abuse?
But I would guess taking smoke from burning plant material is abuse of your body.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
OMG, please step outside you armpit-of-ego and read my lips/text and address appropriately as a civilized human with access to morals.
I did. I told you your posts are illegible. They make no sense. Why do you use those weird symbols and random words? No one can respond to your posts like a civilized person when your posts are uncivilized.
Can you do that? No?
I do that every time. You seem to think your opinion can be orders for others. They aren't. Your morality cannot judge anyone else. No one has to do what you want them to do. But you get angry and start insulting the moment your opponent disagrees with you. And then you start with the incoherent writing. No one can understand you! Can you understand that? No?
Do you know how to keep your ____n immoral nose *v* out of womens bodies? No? I didnt think so.
Who are you to tell me to? Women's police? Can you keep your immoral nose out of my business? Why do you keep repeating the same thing? Do you think I will obey you if you shout the same thing over and over? I don't have to obey you. Your opinion means nothing.
The rest of your post is the same silly irrational gibberish, so I will just skip it.
But my answer to you is the same. I don't care for your opinion about women. You aren't an authority on women or on morals. I don't wish to speak to you.
I know no one wants to talk to you, and maybe that is why you have to force yourself on me, just to have someone to talk to. But being rude and posting gibberish is not the way to get people talking to you.
So since you are now stuck at posting the same stupidity over and over, I will leave you to your issue. When you can make a coherent post in English, I'll take you off ignore.
So, when you tire, go away.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dk-McDan
You Trumpbot nutjobs are all about cracking the jokes.
Liberals have no sense of humor. Has to do with a lack of intelligence.
It's a number one priority when you otherwise are losing an argument.
Lol. I found all that evidence you offered of Bush being a pedo unsurmountable.
It would appear that mocking libs to "own" them is your best bet.
If you guys were not so ridiculously stupid, it wouldn't be so tempting.
But I'll wait till you have presented an actual argument before declaring you the winner, OK?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
He might have to show you his backside to display the evidence.
Created:
Not in my post.
You've even copied the hyper-link in your replying comment. Regardless, sources?
Untrue.
Thanks, but that is what we were talking about.
I know in conservative land, saying "Trump won" is sufficient to waive all arguments and criticisms, however in reality this is not the case.
You get it. The fake polls said crooked Hillery would win in a landslide. Trump won. Don't be mad bro.
I know you think so. The country stood by mouths agape at how liberals did not know what due process was. Thanks for the confirmation.
The country stood by, mouths agape at how the conservatives have once again twisted any semblance of truth
Maybe you should send a complaint to the election commission.
Enough to know Kavenaugh was extremely qualified, lauded by other legal professionals, and admired for his body of published works and work ethic. You the lefty liberal thinks he was "clearly" unqualified. Why? Because when you dragged him and his family through the mud, he fought back! Lol.
When did I say he was unqualified?
Here. "America should have the best of the best, which he is clearly not."
Don't place words in my mouth. Kavanaugh was extremely qualified. However he was also criticised by other legal professionals which you seem to have ignored. That and of course he lacks decorum.
Lol. He's a Judge now. You lack sense.
They weren't. You think controversial means what you find distasteful.
And you seem to think that they aren't controversial based on nothing but your own subjective opinion.
Your poor thinking is not my concern.
You backpeddle like a champ.
No backpedaling needed when you've hideously misread something
No explanation needed either apparently. You backpedal like an Olympian.
And then you woke up. Calling it nepotism is not showing it to be nepotism.
Your denials do not make reality false.
Not the "reality" between your ears no.
You are a pinko leftist liberal. Everything triggers you.
False. Try again
Nah, I think I got it. They don't call you snowflakes for your ability to stand heat.
Do you need me to accept them?
Do you wish to accept them?
Do you wish me to accept them?
You have to show something negative of Trump laddie. Ghosted up "controversies" by the fake news media doesn't cut it.
Lewd speech is negative. Just because you deny and ignore such occurrences isn't sufficient to say they weren't controversies.
Lol. You do wish me to accept them.
You're liberal, so you cannot tell your opinion from reality, but in reality, the one not between your ears, assumptions don't stand until they are proven. Things you say don't "stand" until they are disproven. That is loony liberal "logic". But keep your delusion that whatever you say "stands" until proven wrong. There is no need to wake you.
Assumptions that are tacitly accepted are accepted until further proven otherwise. Your loony conservative logic doesn't make this any less true
OK, whomever "tacitly" accepted your nonsense will address it.
Yes. Remember when I told you controversies have to be in between groups?
Then those examples can't be "good"
We know you think so.
All of them are good for America. Liberals do not like what is good for America. Tell us something we don't know.
Good? How so?
You want me to tell you how keeping terrorists out of America is good? Sorry, Ethan doesn't do stupid. Unlike you, I don't need you to accept anything.
You asked. I supplied them.
I know accurate and objective representations are hard to express, but it's better to not say anything at all than to mislead.
Would that you had followed that advice before you posted.
This is part of why you are against fake news yes?
Accurate and objective representations are not hard to express. Your bias has crippled your thinking.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ResurgetExFavilla
We'll just agree to see only dylan and drafter. Only 2 renegade. Only 2. But good choices. Draft especially.
Created:
Posted in:
You didn’t crawl far enough up my arsehole with that reply!
I suspected you might be a little light in your loafers. Now I know how the Fuhrer pays you to ring. Yuck.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dk-McDan
Well, I'm sorry he buggered you. But can't you translate being boffed in the bum by a president into some fame?He was a warhawk and pedophile, yes.
It funny how all you molested kids who took active part in your affair today act like you hate your molester.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
Please take your meds loony. Here's some more gibberish for you.
*v*/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ *v* 25
Loony moron.
Shut up loony, and go away.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
Back to your stupid repetition eh?
Here, I have been studying your idiot language.
.....SPACE(><)(><)SPACE........
Two, flat transition points between positive and negative on a torus, are 180 degree, diametric opposite.
torus is a tube
The metro is a tube
My throat is a tube
....1----437----7--------11-----45-----------17----19----------73--------........,,,,.positive curvature ( )
0 *v*/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ *v* 25....positive peaks ^+^ and v-vnegative trough charges
.......2--------8----10-----------14-----16----------20----22-----------.........,,,.negative curvature )(
my finger is a tube
My peni.....
Whoa there moron. Enough with the gibberish. Can you not see how loony you are?
Anyway, same message. You are an internet moron. You can't tell any one what to do. No one has to listen to your crazy rantings.
Shut up, and go away.
Created:
-->
@dustryder
Did you give sources for your 0% poll?
Yes. The 0 was hyperlinked. So again, sources for your claims?
Not in my post.
Trump won. So I'm fine.
Nice deflect
Thanks, but that is what we were talking about.
It didn't occur. There was absolutely no evidence. That is what innocent until proven guilty means.
That is not what innocent until proven guilty means
I know you think so. The country stood by mouths agape at how liberals did not know what due process was. Thanks for the confirmation.
Lol. Decorum? False allegations with no evidence? Liberals calling him a rapist? Attacking his family? Decorum?
Is decorum an undesirable trait?
Along with pretending to be obtuse, to you, yes.
Yeah, "clearly". Your liberal siblings were triggered. The rest of America went on with life.
How much is the rest of America?
Enough to know Kavenaugh was extremely qualified, lauded by other legal professionals, and admired for his body of published works and work ethic. You the lefty liberal thinks he was "clearly" unqualified. Why? Because when you dragged him and his family through the mud, he fought back! Lol.
That is why I have denied no controversy. You keep claiming them. Logic would help you my friend.
You've denied my examples as being controversial
They weren't. You think controversial means what you find distasteful.
Repeat it and place it in neon, it will be just as stupid. Nepotism refers to family members, not just anyone.
Can the class say "backpeddle"?
Agreed. Didn't claim otherwise, which is why you're incorrect.
You backpeddle like a champ.
You haven't shown it to be nepotism. You don't even seem to know what nepotism is. Until you do, it isn't nepotism.
I have shown that it is nepotism.
And then you woke up. Calling it nepotism is not showing it to be nepotism.
You're denials do not make reality false.
Lol. Reality.
I know that what triggers you has nothing to do controversies. Both are false.
How would you know this? You don't know what triggers me
You are a pinko leftist liberal. Everything triggers you.
No sir. We will not do it the silly liberal way, where you make a dumb assumption and it becomes my burden to prove it wrong. If you cannot prove your claims they get dismissed.
You've rejected multiple events which I consider to be controversies.
Do you need me to accept them?
Some a objectively negative for Trump. I assumed you ignore anything that is negative of Trump. You have not proven otherwise.
You have to show something negative of Trump laddie. Ghosted up "controversies" by the fake news media doesn't cut it.
The assumption stands
You're liberal, so you cannot tell your opinion from reality, but in reality, the one not between your ears, assumptions don't stand until they are proven. Things you say don't "stand" until they are disproven. That is loony liberal "logic". But keep your delusion that whatever you say "stands" until proven wrong. There is no need to wake you.
What is an example of "good" Trump behaviour that is viewed as controversy?
*Keeping terrorists out of the country.
*Telling the moron antifa that they were as bad, if not worse than the neo Nazis.
*Not being a lemming and punishing Saudi Arabia.
*Nominating and installing the wonderful Judge Kavanaugh
Should I continue or are you triggered enough?
What is good depends on which side you are viewing it from.
Yes. Remember when I told you controversies have to be in between groups?
Those examples are debatably good.
All of them are good for America. Liberals do not like what is good for America. Tell us something we don't know.
Some you have mischaracterised. etc etc etc
You asked. I supplied them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Ouch RM. Don't be so hard on the poor guy....you, sir, are nothing but a pigeon that shits votes around here and thinks it has the place to judge this alpha Owl.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Goldtop
Hey Goldy!
Fresh from your ban and here you are again, chasing me around the board, and probably begging bsh1 to ban me. Of course, you.... forgot to post the comments of his looniness, mustardness.
My god you're a tortured person! How it must suck to be you.
Well, I'll wait for bsh1 to investigate your snitchi....ahem....your complaints. In the main time, how was your vacay? Seems you came back as bitter and caustic as ever.
Be careful now. If you can't post here anymore that bitterness might just consume you.
Created:
-->
@dustryder
Many. MSNBC, CNN, BBC, HUFFPOST, VOX and small fake news outlets.
Sources?
Did you give sources for your 0% poll?
What is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.
That is why I dismissed your silly defense of Hillery and the crooked polls.
Lol. Let me guess. You will still say poll results are accurate for the other states too.
If you are asserting they are not, you're free to pick and choose the examples which are not
Trump won. So I'm fine.
No logical methodology gives you that wide a spread and then be wrong.
Internet polling is one example that can give inaccurate results.
CNN and MSNBC share that trait.
No. But liberals "respect" whatever confirms their bias.
Conservatives "respect" whatever confirms their bias.
Trump's election confirmed our bias. And now you liberals have to respect that too.
Do you think Judge Kavenaugh was guilty of assault of Mrs. Ford?
1. Not enough information but I'm going to lead towards no, due to how long ago it occurred
It didn't occur. There was absolutely no evidence. That is what innocent until proven guilty means.
Do you think he should have been made a supreme court judge?
2. No. Assault allegations aside, he lacks decorum.
Lol. Decorum? False allegations with no evidence? Liberals calling him a rapist? Attacking his family? Decorum?
Supreme court judges are for life, America should have the best of the best, which he is clearly not.
Yeah, "clearly". Your liberal siblings were triggered. The rest of America went on with life.
And of course, as I told you, just because you do find something triggering, doesn't mean it is controversial. Your subjective opinion of her qualifications do not affect reality one bit.
Just because you do not find something triggering doesn't mean it isn't controversial.
That is why I have denied no controversy. You keep claiming them. Logic would help you my friend.
No sir. I am correct. Please educate yourself on what nepotism means.
You are absolutely incorrect
Repeat it and place it in neon, it will be just as stupid. Nepotism refers to family members, not just anyone.
You said your "it" referred to nepotism. Then later claimed you did not say it was nepotism. I satisfied enough to leave that bit of illogic unmolested.
Making arguments against fictional arguments still does not work.
Must be why you're dodging it. That works for me.
Because I don't use as my definition of nepotism, "Whenever someone is given a public post whom dustryder thinks is unqualified."
Nor is that my definition of nepotism.
Can the class say "backpeddle"?
You still haven't said what about Ivanka's post isn't nepotism.
You haven't shown it to be nepotism. You don't even seem to know what nepotism is. Until you do, it isn't nepotism.
You don't know what "controversial" means. You seem to think it means "whatever triggers you." It doesn't.
You seem to think whatever triggers me is automatically non-controversial. This is false.
I know that what triggers you has nothing to do controversies. Both are false.
How would you know this? You don't know what I find controversial, and you assume something "controversial" would be critical of Trump. Your bias is crippling you son.
Knowing what you do not find controversial sets a lower bound for what you do find controversial. Hence I made an assumption.
You make many. Most wrong.
If that assumption is wrong, prove it.
No sir. We will not do it the silly liberal way, where you make a dumb assumption and it becomes my burden to prove it wrong. If you cannot prove your claims they get dismissed.
You have latched on to controversies. Finding an objective controversy will do nothing. A behavior of Trump could be good or bad and still also be controversial.
What is an example of "good" Trump behaviour that is viewed as controversy?
*Keeping terrorists out of the country.
*Telling the moron antifa that they were as bad, if not worse than the neo Nazis.
*Not being a lemming and punishing Saudi Arabia.
*Nominating and installing the wonderful Judge Kavanaugh
Should I continue or are you triggered enough?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
You need to get mental help with these obsessions Ethang. Seriously. This kind of thinking can only lead to darker head places. It is scary for others and bad for your health.
Oho! You do speak English! Or did your meds just kick in?
Obsessions? You are the moron posting the same gibberish over and over again. What is wrong with you? Psychosis?
You are so stupid, you're addressing other posts not even in this thread. How retarded are you? The bottom line is,
Shut up and go away.
Everyone thinks you are a nut. Hardly anyone answers your scatterbrain posts. All you do is clog up the board and kill threads, like you killed the Star Trek thread. My goodness, you went full loony on that one, posting complete gibberish in repeated posts to no one.
I have nothing to do with you. Your opinions are that of a crazy loon.
Shut up. Go away.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@mustardness
Hey, moron. No matter how many times you repost stupidity, you will get the same answer. Shut up and go away.
Or should I post in gibberish do you understand?
][:--( )--:]**[ ed ][:--( Tr&u%++se *v* ouite @@@ m0r0n.
It means shut your retarded mouth and go away.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
I guess your pimp sending me an invite to this thread was stalking then. Grow a brain ringer....you sure as hell spend a lot of time following me around saying things.
You were a fake voter for hire. You got caught. Deal with it. Stop posting to me when I have directed no posts to you, and then buttaching about stalking. Stop being stupid.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Hey doofus,
I have nothing to say to you. I'm not going to play your "I'm innocent" game. You are a ringer, anyone who looks at your voting record will see it. Why do I need to argue with you? Honesty obviously isn't your strong suit.
If I'm not addressing you, then stop addressing me and whining about being called out as a ringer.
You people sicken me. You're running around the board deceitfully fixing votes, and when it's pointed out, YOU get angry and all uppity righteous. Do you see me prostituting myself to the mod? The only pos here is you.
My only regret in outing you is that more atheists now know of your ringer service. Voting debate requests must be pouring in to you. Go honor them. I tire of your guilty whining.
Created:
Posted in:
Feelings getting hurt =/= rights getting infringed upon
This shouldn't be unpopular, but is all too relevant.
As the guy playing the little violin in your avatar says, "Facts don't care about your feelings."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Or he's sobered up and is ashamed of insulting my mom. One can never know with these Klan types.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
Because we don't know something doesn't change whether it is true or false.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Ramshutu
Please stop being stupid. I received an invitation to this thread from the site mod. You overrate your importance.Please stop stalking me.
If you’re just going to follow me around and insult me, then I’ll direct you to the book.
I have no interest in what you're babbling about. But I will post when, where, and what I want.
You will have to deal with your guilty conscience on your own.
Created:
-->
@dustryder
Very well, lets dig a little deeper. How many polls showed Hillary with a 20% lead on election day?
Many. MSNBC, CNN, BBC, HUFFPOST, VOX and small fake news outlets.
How many of such polls are viewed with veracity?
By thinking people? None. By loony liberals? All.
Can such abnormal numbers be explained away with explanations that do not include fictional people or claims of "fakeness"?
Not by anyone not mentally crippled by irrational Trump hate.
To start, how many polls showed Hillary with at least a 20% lead on election day? Exactly 0.
Maybe you don't get MSNBC in your country.
Are any of these state specific evidence for fake polls? No not really. The states in question were for California and Massachusetts which are rampantly blue states and the poll results are accurate for their specific states.
Lol. Let me guess. You will still say poll results are accurate for the other states too.
I would've gone further, but obviously I can't if I cant find the data in which your basing your logic off.
Well it requires you to have been alive on election night, to have watched the coverage, and not pretend to be obtuse about it now.
Did you look at their methodologies?
No logical methodology gives you that wide a spread and then be wrong.
Are they respected polls in the grand scheme of things?
No. But liberals "respect" whatever confirms their bias.
No, I will not. I will ask you another question. That is what you've been doing. I will not answer your questions if you won't answer mine. That you need to dodge questions is telling.
Ok go ahead.
Do you think Judge Kavenaugh was guilty of assault of Mrs. Ford?
Do you think he should have been made a supreme court judge?
Controversies between which groups? As I told you, just because easily triggered liberals don't like something, does not automatically make that thing a controversy.
Liberals are indeed a group, and a pretty significantly large group at that.
Yes. Sadly for America.
And of course, as I told you, just because you don't find something triggering, doesn't mean it isn't controversial.
OK. Do you often tell people things they already know?
Nice deflection, but what is subjective and what is objective is irrelevant here. Whether a person is appropriate for a job is not up to you. You do not have all the details about the person. Whether the person has education or not is not the question, but whether the president thinks the person is right for the position. He did think she was capable, and from the success of his administration, his assessment of her capability was correct.
I see there as being a difference between employing a qualified family member and an unqualified family member.
I do too.
Hopefully you do too. Since this is in terms of controversy, I think outsider perception of Ivanka's qualifications is important.
Important for the unjustified point you're trying to make, sure.
I see her as being unqualified, and hence placing her into such an important position is controversial
And of course, as I told you, just because you do find something triggering, doesn't mean it is controversial. Your subjective opinion of her qualifications do not affect reality one bit.
That isn't what nepotism does either.
You are incorrect
No sir. I am correct. Please educate yourself on what nepotism means.
Again. I asked you what your "it" was. You said "nepotism". Only to later tell me you didn't say it was nepotism. Equivocating and substituting an "it", that you later morph into nepotism will not work.
Making arguments against fictional arguments also does not work.
You said your "it" referred to nepotism. Then later claimed you did not say it was nepotism. I satisfied enough to leave that bit of illogic unmolested.
No. As it isn't nepotism, no, I don't think its an issue.
How is it not nepotism?
Because I don't use as my definition of nepotism, "Whenever someone is given a public post whom dustryder thinks is unqualified."
You want it to be because you began by blaming Trump for "controversies". The silliness and unfairness of blaming Trump for fake "controversies" drummed up by the fake media is objectionable.
The media comes up with some fakery, you get triggered, and then blame Trump for the "controversy" in society? No sir.
Logic will be required of you here.
You don't seem to care what other people find controversial,
You don't know what "controversial" means. You seem to think it means "whatever triggers you." It doesn't.
So the only question now is, how do we evaluate which of my events are objectively controversial, and which are fake controversial? Because you seem to ignore anything that is remotely critical of Trump
How would you know this? You don't know what I find controversial, and you assume something "controversial" would be critical of Trump. Your bias is crippling you son.
You have latched on to controversies. Finding an objective controversy will do nothing. A behavior of Trump could be good or bad and still also be controversial.
Trump is perfectly correct to attack the fake press. There would be a problem if he didn't. Controversies, objective or not, do nothing to excuse the fake press. Especially when it's the fake press drumming most controversies up out of thin air in the first place.
We finally have a president who calls out the fake news media instead of pretending that journalists can never be wrong. Kudos.
All those angry, uneducated Trump supporters seemed to understand what his policies were. They figured it out by listening to him. It was only fair. No one listened to Trump, except the voters; and no one listened to the voters, except Trump.
Created:
Posted in:
Besides yourself, name the 2 posters at Dart who you think consistently make the best posts.
(Please don't use this as an excuse to throw shade at anyone.)
Mine are PGA2.0 and dylancatlow
There are others, but the post limits it to only 2.
Created:
Posted in:
My only regret with Timothy McVeigh is he did not go to the New York Times building.
Of course I regret it. I should have added, "after everyone had left the building except the editors and reporters."
-Ann Coulter
On being asked if she regretted the comment about Timothy McVeigh.
Created:
Posted in:
I've been tempted to ask them sometimes when their disjointed thinking is particularly silly. But they would most likely lie.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
But what if the 'something' is 'lauren is prettier than ingrid'? According to G it is either true or false and not subject to interpretation.
It IS either true or false. Because it can apply to Ethan or Keith is not "interpretation" or subjectivity.
Here is another one - is it true or false: 'Infinity is even'.
Because we don't know something doesn't change whether it is true or false. And "infinity is even" is nonsensical.
is this true or false: "it will rain tomorrow".
Again, just because we don't know doesn't affect reality. If tomorrow has not come, then the statement is speaking to something nonexistent. That is irrational. All your examples are semantic tricks.
Did I already say philosophy was obtuse nitpicking? (that is true, btw)
You won't be able to reclassify your semantics as benign nit picking. You have to make sense. His claim stands.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
I am gratified that it doesn't seem to be fooling too many people.
It isn't. And I will make it my burden to introduce him to new posters whenever he posits his vileness.
Keith is usually a much better poster than this, but his brain switches off, when it comes to discussion of race.
If his brain was off, you could have excused him. But he implies his brain was on (we assume he has one) You were correct to hold him to his vile beliefs. He is free to be a racist, but he will not be one surreptitiously.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@KingLaddy01
So do idiots.We test them during gestation. Homosexuals and Trans get aborted.
Created:
Posted in:
Don't Be An Asshole!: Creating a Better World through Self Awareness, Common Sense and Decency.
Lol. This just gets better and better. Decency? Really?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@keithprosser
It was...
My point is that truth is not subjective. Something is either true or it is false. Truth is not subject to interpretation.
Truth applying to a particular person does not make it subjective.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@KingLaddy01
We test them during gestation. Homosexuals and Trans get aborted.
Created: