Biden: "You can’t be pro-insurrection and pro-America."

[KingVamp]

"Rebellion is in our DNA". I'm totally sure you guys would be ok, if the the Democrats attack the police and the Capitol, let alone actually overturned an election this way.

 

[tabzer]

What extra authority?

By signing it, he gives them them an authoritative position as a mutual party in the "contract". He'd have to serve his office, and serve them, for no reason other than what would amount to useless virtue signaling on his end. It's not smart.

Everyone in America is representative of the office that he is running for.

So you agree, he should sign an oath to me? I'd take it!

He's running for President of the United States, not President of MAGA Town. If you're trying to say in a long-winded way that it wouldn't cost him votes with his base, that's true, but at this point I don't think anything would cost him votes with his base. People still willing to support him at this point will do it unconditionally.

And he isn't running for president of a state.

However, it would make it easier for independent voters to support him and it would, at least, not make it easier for people to reinforce the fact that Trump is pro-Insurrection.

I am not convinced that independent voters are so easily swayed. Some, maybe, while others would go the opposite direction.

 

[Xzi]

"Rebellion is in our DNA". I'm totally sure you guys would be ok, if the the Democrats attack the police and the Capitol, let alone actual overturned an election this way.

They would've been a lot more justified than MAGA in doing so when SCOTUS handed the election to GWB, too. I'd wager no GWB, no 9/11. Very different country in that universe.

 

[tabzer]

I think what you're not getting through your head is that he's already signed an oath of office to the constitution. Of course, he ended up violating the 14th amendment, but all refusing to sign this oath does at this stage is signal that he'd be unwilling to take that oath of office again, as it includes anti-insurrectionist language. Which is yet another reason he'd be ineligible for the presidency.

I think what you're not getting through your head is that he's already signed an oath of office to the constitution. You can believe what you want about the 14th amendment, but you already know the many ways I disagree with you there. No point in sneaking that in there. Unless, you are subversively scamming the dialogue.

 

[Hanafuda]

"Rebellion is in our DNA". I'm totally sure you guys would be ok, if the the Democrats attack the police and the Capitol, let alone actually overturned an election this way.

What if they attack the White House injuring over 60 Secret Service agents* and resulting in the Secret Service sheltering the President in an underground bunker?


*from projectiles such as bricks, rocks, bottles, fireworks and other items.

 

[Xzi]

I think what you're not getting through your head is that he's already signed an oath of office to the constitution.

...Which doesn't negate the part about him proceeding to then violate that oath, the more recent event. If he's unwilling to show any remorse or regret for that, then he shouldn't be surprised when states are unwilling to allow him on the ballot.

 

[tabzer]

...Which doesn't negate the part about him proceeding to then violate that oath, which is the more recent event. If he's unwilling to show any remorse or regret for that, then he shouldn't be surprised when states are unwilling to allow him on the ballot.

Ham-fisted one-sided agreement. @Xzi, meet @Xzi. When you are ready to talk to me, let me know.

 

[Chris2055]

By signing it, he gives them them an authoritative position as a mutual party in the "contract". He'd have to serve his office, and serve them, for no reason other than what would amount to useless virtue signaling on his end. It's not smart.

It doesn't give them any additional power, it's standard practice to sign it. Biden signed it. The article even states that Trump signed it in 2016 and 2020. It's also redundant because before you can become president you have to swear an oath to the constitution which says essentially the same thing about insurrection. It's not a big thing to sign it, but not signing it sends very bad optics, particularly when you've already been accused of doing that very thing.

So you agree, he should sign an oath to me? I'd take it!

This kind of gaslighting is why republicans have no credibility.

And he isn't running for president of a state.

He's running for president in the state.

 

[Xzi]

This kind of gaslighting is why republicans have no credibility.

Tabzer will tell you he's not a Trump supporter, too. Hilarious.

 

[tabzer]

Tabzer will tell you he's not a Trump supporter, too. Hilarious.

I try to embrace reality. And that includes Trump. I do not exclusively support Trump. The phrase "Trump supporter" indicates exclusive loyalty.

I'm the type of person who predicted Trump would win in 2016 but still didn't vote for him. I'm still upset that you let it come to that.

It doesn't give them any additional power

It gives them more power than if he doesn't sign it. Otherwise it's a platitude, and shouldn't be entertained in the first place.

It's also redundant because before you can become president you have to swear an oath to the constitution which says essentially the same thing about insurrection.

Thanks for admitting it's redundant, and therefore a waste of time. You are saying it, not me.

It's not a big thing to sign it, but not signing it sends very bad optics

To you. I'm sure if there is something Trump could do to win your vote, we'd all know about it by now.

particularly when you've already been accused of doing that very thing.

I can accuse you of anything I want to accuse you of. Guess who would suffer more in your current justice system?

This kind of gaslighting is why republicans have no credibility.

What? Please show the logical chain from "Everyone in America is representative of the office that he is running for" to "he should sign this oath but not yours".

He's running for president in the state.

As well as in "MAGA Town"

 

[Xzi]

I support reality. And that includes Trump. I do not exclusively support Trump. The phrase "Trump supporter" indicates exclusive loyalty.

Big contradiction there. Trump lives in his own world, and lies to everybody including himself. There's reality, and then there's Trump's reality, entirely separate. If you try to live in both realities at once, you're likely to rot your brain. So that would explain a lot about you, Tabz.

 

[tabzer]

Big contradiction there. Trump lives in his own world, and lies to everybody including himself. There's reality, and then there's Trump's reality, entirely separate. If you try to live in both realities at once, you're likely to rot your brain. So that would explain a lot about you, Tabz.

Ah, so you believe that you are in a real life inception game. Maybe.

You may believe that this world exists without Trump. That's not my contradiction.

I'm not the one who says, "well, what about Trump." That's a hallmark of youknowwho.

 

[Chris2055]

I try to embrace reality. And that includes Trump. I do not exclusively support Trump. The phrase "Trump supporter" indicates exclusive loyalty.

It doesn't indicate exclusive loyalty. It just means you support Trump, which you do.

It gives them more power than if he doesn't sign it. Otherwise it's a platitude, and shouldn't be entertained in the first place.

Thanks for admitting it's redundant, and therefore a waste of time. You are saying it, not me.

It's legally redundant, but that doesn't mean it's a waste of time. Trump both swore an oath to the constitution and signed that document in '16 and '20 but that didn't stop him from violating both anyway. It would've worked in his favor to sign it for the optics.

To you. I'm sure if there is something Trump could do to win your vote, we'd all know about it by now.

There's nothing Trump could do to win my vote even if he wasn't an insurrectionist, because I'm not a conservative. But I'm sure there are conservatives and independents out there that don't necessarily disagree with conservative ideology but are concerned about democracy.

I can accuse you of anything I want to accuse you of. Guess who would suffer more in your current justice system?

Are you saying he didn't?

What? Please show the logical chain from "Everyone in America is representative of the office that he is running for" to "he should sign this oath but not yours".

It's standard practice to sign the oath since he's running for president in the state and states run elections. He even signed it in the past. It's not a broad oath of undying loyalty to an individual, it's an oath saying he won't commit insurrection.

 

[Xzi]

I'm not the one who says, "well, what about Trump." That's a hallmark of youknowwho.

C'mon man, you're always the first to jump to his defense in any given conversation. I'm ready for that pedo POS to be buried six feet under a prison, but it's people like you who do everything possible to keep him relevant by consuming his "content."

 

[tabzer]

It doesn't indicate exclusive loyalty. It just means you support Trump, which you do.

By that merit, I support Biden, too.

It's legally redundant, but that doesn't mean it's a waste of time. Trump both swore an oath to the constitution and signed that document in '16 and '20 but that didn't stop him from violating both anyway. It would've worked in his favor to sign it for the optics.

I disagree on multiple points.

There's nothing Trump could do to win my vote even if he wasn't an insurrectionist, because I'm not a conservative. But I'm sure there are conservatives and independents out there that don't necessarily disagree with conservative ideology but are concerned about democracy.

Seeing as you disagree with conservatives full-stop, I have a hard time swallowing the whole "I understand conservatives" rhetoric. You are giving yourself credit on a premise you reject. Can't have your cake and eat it.

Are you saying he didn't?

No. I'm not saying that. We are agreeing that he's been accused.

It's standard practice to sign the oath since he's running for president in the state and states run elections. He even signed it in the past. It's not a broad oath of undying loyalty to an individual, it's an oath saying he won't commit insurrection.

To a state, in a political landscape where states are trying to overrule a federal election. It's late to ask him to pledge allegiance to a state.

C'mon man, you're always the first to jump to his defense in any given conversation. I'm ready for that pedo POS to be buried six feet under a prison, but it's people like you who do everything possible to keep him relevant by consuming his "content."

I'm literally not. I attempt to digest your content about him, but I have my own experiences that don't allow me to reconcile. I'm only trying to be the best version of myself. In my mind, any vote for Trump is a vote against me. Same goes with any other politician that's not me. Trump is your favorite topic, and I think you are an idiot. It's not much more subtle than that.

 

[Xzi]

In my mind, any vote for Trump is a vote against me. Same goes with any other politician that's not me.

Ah you both share NPD, no wonder you can relate to him.

 

[Chris2055]

By that merit, I support Biden, too.

How...?

I disagree on multiple points.

Okay. Care to share what they are...?

Seeing as you disagree with conservatives full-stop, I have a hard time swallowing the whole "I understand conservatives" rhetoric. You are giving yourself credit on a premise you reject. Can't have your cake and eat it.

I don't pretend to understand conservative ideology but I do know there are conservatives that are concerned about democracy. Many of them served in Trump's administration. I don't think those ones could be fooled, but I do know there are plenty of ignorant voters that would drink the Kool-Aid, if only he would offer it to them. Instead he's doing the opposite, giving people even more reason to be concerned.

No. I'm not saying that. We are agreeing that he's been accused.

Then it's hard to understand the point of your statement. Presumably it was meant as a counter-argument.

To a state, in a political landscape where states are trying to overrule a federal election. It's late to ask him to pledge allegiance to a state.

What effect do you think this document would have on that decision? It's already going to SCOTUS.

 

[tabzer]

Ah you both share NPD, no wonder you can relate to him.

Don't pretend you aren't on the spectrum. That's obtusively ironic. You think your words matter.

 

[Xzi]

You think your words matter.

Not particularly, but I do enjoy that I can still get a rise out of you.

 

[tabzer]

How...?

I think he might be relevent, somehow. You know, other than not being Trump.

Okay. Care to share what they are...?

1st. Legal redundancy regarding a platform of no bullshit, it's bullshit, and hurts his platform.

2nd. The insinuation that he violated the constitution, but without an authority that says so.

3rd. You think that if he kowtowed, it would work out for his benefit. I don't. (It's similar to 1)

I don't pretend to understand conservative ideology but I do know there are conservatives that are concerned about democracy. Many of them served in Trump's administration. I don't think those ones could be fooled, but I do know there are plenty of ignorant voters that would drink the Kool-Aid, if only he would offer it to them. Instead he's doing the opposite, giving people even more reason to be concerned.

I honestly think that states barring him from the election is doing a lot more for him than against. You say that you understand that there are conservatives that are concerned about democracy, but have you talked to them about how they feel about the Colorado thing? You are free to believe what you do, but I cannot, despite my attempt.

Then it's hard to understand the point of your statement. Presumably it was meant as a counter-argument.

It was to point out that accusing someone of something has a lot less at stake than to be guilty of the accusation.

What effect do you think this document would have on that decision? It's already going to SCOTUS.

That document wouldn't involve SCOTUS.

Not particularly, but I do enjoy that I can still get a rise out of you.

Good enough. Thank you.