30 total posts
....how great all future elections would be if they dropped a few of those on California, Nevada, and New Mexico. Liberal crybabies,.....LOOK TO THE SKIES!
(idiots, they'd probably believe such a rumor, LOL)
Hey! I'm in New Mexico!!
Though I hate foul language itself
I know that it's use has varying purposes. The same expletive used out of personal frustration can also be used like a bullet against another person. Such language can be used as both criticism and as an explosive force of hatred. While, IMO, foul mouthed language is never acceptable, its intentioned use is everything when we consider the possible damage that a person would like to inflict.
So how do you think Trump is using foul language?
Frustration OR hatred?
I say hatred.
So when he says
"What the hell do you have to lose" to blacks and Latinos, it's out of hatred? For whom?
You gave me only two choices
My answer can only be for what I've seen on TV and that answer is "neither". Guess what?..even bigotry doesn't infer hatred. Hatred, in my definition, is shown when on wishes harm to another person. On TV, I've seen many acts of such hatred directed toward Trump but nothing I could describe as hatred towards others from him. Wanting to deport persons here illegally doesn't mean hate towards them exits.
RE:You gave me only two choices
In this post by you.....I know that it's use has varying purposes. The same expletive used out of personal frustration can also be used like a bullet against another person. Such language can be used as both criticism and as an explosive force of hatred. While, IMO, foul mouthed language is never acceptable, its intentioned use is everything when we consider the possible damage that a person would like to inflict.
Are there any more "choices" in YOUR post that YOU suggested.
Your post is where I got the "choices".
I mentioned only two
That doesn't mean more aren't possible. Ignorance is another possibility as well as is learned response or prejudice learned through observation. This isn't about me but your pattern here is to generally attack a person or their answer rather than express your own thoughts. You indicated that you believe Trump acted out of hatred and gave me only two options. You got my answer to those two.
RE:This isn't about me but your pattern here is to generally
This isn't about me but your pattern here is to generally attack a person or their answer rather than express your own thoughts.
Me thinks we're more alike than either one of us will admit, and you do a way better job of sitting on the fence than I ever could. I attack a position and you take both sides of an argument.
RE:You indicated that you believe Trump acted out of hatred and gave me only two options.
NO...i gave 2 "examples" of what the RNC AND TheRUMP consider "foul language"...the word "hatred" wasn't used FIRST by me. It was your choice of words.
Me thinks you've forgotten something
The OP referred to the screaming of obscenities. You're reply reduced that to the use of foul language. My argument was that obscene language isn't the equivalent of be foul mouthed. There's a big difference between someone casually using a word but deliberately using it to apply to a person. One can utter the expletive "Oh S**t" and mean no harm to anyone. But, calling someone a "POS" in anger is another story. The same goes for the "F" word. One can say they'd like to do that to someone and I'd call that surely vulgar and despicable. Now shout that word out loudly, end it "you" (or the name of a person), and punctuate that with extending the middle finger, and you've got yourself an act of hatred. Did you see any of that going on in the news lately? I sure did. This should not be that difficult to understand.
As I stated
YOU used "hatred" first, so don't claim I limited your choices.
2 words YOU will never post in SE....Trump and/or Clinton?
You will never put either of those names to actions that you claim people do.
Sitting on the fence.
Consider my context of the word "hatred". Here's a reminder.
"Such language can be used as both criticism and as an explosive force of hatred....to which you followed with;
"Frustration OR hatred?
I say hatred."
You want me to name names to make this more clear? Well...I did. I said that I didn't hear hatred from "Trump" but did hear it leveled toward him. I have often used the other name you mentioned.
You seem to really like trying to put people on the defensive rather than engage in intelligent dialog. BTW, that statement doesn't imply hatred of you.
RE: I didn't hear hatred from "Trump"
Examples of "not hatred"?
The following day, Trump implied that the attackers were justified.
"Maybe [the protester] should have been roughed up,"
HE doesn't "spit it out" he "implies"?
And, by the way
what you might term "fence sitting", I call "a reluctance to pass judgment". I am quite comfortable with that attitude.
RE:a reluctance to pass judgment".
You must have passed judgement when/if you voted, and you are keeping your judgement secret....BUT you won't say anything negative about TheRUMP OR anything positive about Clinton?
My very last reply to this ridiculous sub-thread
I have said from the beginning that I was not in favor of either candidate and I gave my negative viewpoints of both. My greater negativity has been directed at the media, however, and how they distort the truth in a manner that seems to rile people enough to take to the streets. Without that kind of media coverage, such events would likely be fewer.
I happen to have a sore spot for improperly placed charges of such things as racism, sexism, and many other "isms" that Trump was being cited as having. My opinion is that we toss these charges out too loosely and too often. They become the nukes in the armory of politicians fighting to win elections. I don't like it and I'll defend against it when I feel these weapons are being used inappropriately regardless of who is their intended target. Fair is fair but sometimes even a pit bull deserves to be defended.
RE:they distort the truth
By broadcasting live coverage of what the candidates say? HOW?...watch their speeches turn your tv off. No one is being forced to watch the commentary.
You think they have to "distort" what the candidates say....others don't, they shall be know as supporters.
Without that kind of media coverage, such events would likely be fewer.
AND if the candidates didn't make speeches...the media wouldn't have the ammo....It's easy to twist what someone says...really difficult to lie about what someone says.
Fair is fair but sometimes even a pit bull deserves to be defended.
No defense for Hillary IF/WHEN she supposedly throws a tantrum.
Multiple online sources are reporting a claim that the former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton threw a “drunken and violent temper tantrum” upon learning that she had lost the 2016 election.
Multiple online sources are reporting a claim that the former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton threw a “drunken and violent temper tantrum” upon learning that she had lost the 2016 election. According to various versions of the claim appearing online, Clinton became so “physically violent” on the night of November 8, 2016, after it became clear that she had lost the election that she had to be restrained.
Kincannon claimed in a series of tweets posted on November 14 and 15 that he obtained the information from an unnamed CNN reporter who filed a report about Clinton’s “psychotic drunken rage” that his editors refused to publish it.
However, Kincnannon apparently later took down the tweets after several blogs, including the Gateway Pundit, had reported it.
Your News Wire, a source of online rumors and conspiracy theories, also reported Kincannon’s claim, adding new, wholly unsubstantiated details under the headline “Drunk Hillary Beat S**t Out Of Bill Clinton On Election Night.”
Watch their speeches draw your own conclusions? Don't be influenced by what you hear unless it comes out of their mouth?
End of month
....I will engage in some fowl mouthed activity.
nixon had a very foul mouth
I personally do not cuss. the worse I will do is to call someone a stupid jerk but, I will not hold anything against anyone who has a foul mouth.
whether or not hillary when a bit crazy on election night depends whether or not you are supporter. You must admit, everyone thought she was going to win, she thought she was going to win and it was a major crash when she fell to earth after learning the truth. It was such a major disappointment I would not have been surprised if she ended up in the hospital. I mean, she was on the cover of Newsweek as the next president of the US. I saw on sale at the local Krogers. I wished I picked up a copy...
I'm fairly certain you can still buy
Cleveland Indians World Series Champion T-shirts. Stuff like this gets pre-made all the time. News media folks are also famous for publishing fiction before facts are known. You'll also hear that reports of famous person's deaths are written while they're alive with just a few blanks to fill in when they actually pass.
RE:News media folks are also famous for publishing fiction
News media folks are also famous for publishing fiction before facts are known.
I disagree, here's the culprit
So you think social media tipped the election?
I don't use it...unless SE is is considered part of it. But, from what I see, the age group that uses it most favored Hillary by a wide margin.
90% of 18-29 year olds use social media
and voted for her in similar fashion.
18-28 year olds prefer Hillary 55% to 37% over Trump
If social media is that powerful, Hillary's team would have an advantage in the gender and rural vs urban/suburban categories. When I look at voting data, it would appear that population density of an area played big role in how people voted. In the heaviest population areas where voters tend to be about 10 years younger than rural voters, Hillary wins by a huge margin. (sorry, no link to that statistic but you can look it up). It was in the rural areas (older voters who use social media less) that Trump supporters coalesced to put him over the top in the electoral college vote.
I've heard many reports that the main reason Hillary lost is that Trump, though he had less overall support, had his supporters show up at the polls while too many of Hillary's did not. True or untrue?...I can't say. But, if that truly is the case, those whose tweets weren't followed up by their actions got what they deserved.
Nice work, Toni.
Your thread now has a shouting match of its own.
I thought it was a nice touch
and showed who really didn't have the temperament to be president......
At least one of us is whispering, rarely raises his voice and not at all prone to violence. Now, if you want to dispute that, I'll ask "Would you like to try and pick up your teeth with two broken arms!!"
He pushed me down the escalator!!
Isn't it nice to be older
We can say what we want and no one feels threatened. They just think we're cute.
I touched you,...
..now you have cooties.