Joe Biden is now officially the 46th President of the United States of America

[WeedZ]

Obviously you didn't have the attention span to watch this simple video. He literally says "in the primaries". This is exactly what I mean by the media instigating it.

"We will end deployment to the middle east. It has been a complete and total mess"

 

[tabzer]

"I'll release my new amazing healthcare plan in 2 weeks"

I didn't care about that one. The hydroxychloroquine fiasco is interesting.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

"We will end deployment to the middle east. It has been a complete and total mess"

It makes it look suspect, like he is apart of the swamp, and handing off to a wartime democratic term. Republicans start the wars, and Democrats just make sure they last forever.

 

[WeedZ]

I didn't care about that one. The hydroxychloroquine fiasco is interesting.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



It makes it look suspect, like he is apart of the swamp, and handing off to a wartime democratic term. Republicans start the wars, and Democrats just make sure they last forever.

I'm just naming the promises I was let down by

 

[smf]

As far as me having it. Does seem to be an original sin that I am born with and can't escape if I listen to people professing the good word. I should flagellate myself and consider my good fortune for the general world and poor fortune for the metaphysical that sees me need to take action on the matter I guess (wonder if there is some kind of Pascal's wager for privilege).

I see the issue here, nobody is asking you specifically to do anything with your privilege other than accept that it exists, not to judge people who don't have it as lazy/unworthy/etc & not cling onto it with your dying breath.

 

[Lacius]

Obviously you didn't have the attention span to watch this simple video. He literally says "in the primaries". This is exactly what I mean by the media instigating it.

Trump talks about fighting multiple times. This is the relevant part of the speech that isn't cherry picked by you:

And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore.

Our exciting adventures and boldest endeavors have not yet begun. My fellow Americans, for our movement, for our children, and for our beloved country.

And I say this despite all that's happened. The best is yet to come.

So we're going to, we're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And we're going to the Capitol, and we're going to try and give.

The Democrats are hopeless — they never vote for anything. Not even one vote. But we're going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones don't need any of our help. We're going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country.

So let's walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.

I want to thank you all. God bless you and God Bless America.

Thank you all for being here. This is incredible. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Trump instigated the riot against the Capitol, both with his speech and with his dangerous rhetoric about voter fraud leading up to the riot. In the middle of the violence, he responded to please for help from congress people by saying "they must care more about voter fraud than you" and attempted to use the violent mob as leverage to overturn the election results. There is video of Trump watching the violence, while it's happening, enthusiastically and gleefully. After he was told Pence was in immediate danger, Trump stoked the mob some more and tweeted attacks against Pence. Trump did not immediately condemn the violence after it was nearly over, instead calling them patriots and saying they should remember this day for the rest of their lives.

These are the facts, there was no deceptive video manipulation, and bipartisan majorities in the House and Senate voted to impeach and convict Trump respectfully. If it hadn't been for the fact that many Republican senators hid behind ridiculous questions of constitutionality, they might have even voted successfully to convict Trump. McConnell himself suggested Trump was guilty but voted to acquit on that technicality.

History is not going to remember Trump and the events at the Capitol kindly, and it's going to be embarrassing for you when you land on the wrong side of it.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

You caught the low hanging fruit, now tell us about how you counted on one of Trump's promises and were let down.

When you cry about low hanging fruit, which you've done repeatedly recently, you're essentially saying, "You demolished my piss poor argument, and I don't like that." In other words, if you don't want us responding to low hanging fruit, don't present us with such low hanging fruit. Calling it low hanging fruit is irrelevant to whether or not your argument was ridiculous and deserving of a response.

 

[smf]

I love the concern trolling in regards to Trump. A quick reality check tells me that not one of you will ever be as rich as Trump will be when he's "poor".

He also inherited more money than all of us combined & lost more money than all of us combined, what is your point?

The UK is racist did you fix your racism issue yet ?

I'm only responsible for my own actions, the uk got screwed by Bannon and some other awful people and that is going to take a while to fix.

 

[Lacius]

I love the concern trolling in regards to Trump. A quick reality check tells me that not one of you will ever be as rich as Trump will be when he's "poor".

A quick reality check tells me that not one of us will ever have as much debt as Trump.

 

[tabzer]

When you cry about low hanging fruit

I usually give low hanging fruit for the intention of it being grabbed. I wasn't crying or complaining. That's a fact. Apparently you fantasize about being a bully.
Does that mean I demolished your piss poor argument and you do not like that?

There is video of Trump watching the violence, while it's happening, enthusiastically and gleefully. After he was told Pence was in immediate danger, Trump stoked the mob some more and tweeted attacks against Pence. Trump did not immediately condemn the violence after it was nearly over, instead calling them patriots and saying they should remember this day for the rest of their lives.

Post the proof please.

 

[D34DL1N3R]

Obviously you didn't have the attention span to watch this simple video. He literally says "in the primaries". This is exactly what I mean by the media instigating it.

Another one of your moronic videos. The guy who made is even sells "Arrest Cuomo" shirts. Do you have any unbiased sources, EVER? Do I need to point you in the direction of all of the times Trump, the White House, and Fox News posted completely manipulated media to attack dems during the last 4 years? Hypocrite much? Because, you know, obviously you didn't have the attention span to watch.

 

[tabzer]

Another one of your moronic videos. The guy who made is even sells "Arrest Cuomo" shirts.

When you learn to differentiate between facts and ad hominins, then I will respect you accordingly.

Do I need to point you in the direction of all of the times Trump, the White House, and Fox News posted completely manipulated media to attack dems during the last 4 years? Hypocrite much?

If it pleases you, then do so by all means. The topic is specifically about the claim Trump telling people to mount a limp insurrection.

 

[Plasmaster09]

When you learn to differentiate between facts and ad hominins, then I will respect you accordingly.



If it pleases you, then do so by all means. The topic is specifically about the claim Trump telling people to mount a limp insurrection.

First off, ad hominem*. If you're going to throw around logical terms simply as weapons to chuck at an argument, at least bother to spell them correctly.
Second off, that isn't an ad hominem attack. The fact that the same guy sells "Arrest Cuomo" shirts gives a very clear idea of his political affiliation.

I usually give low hanging fruit for the intention of it being grabbed. I wasn't crying or complaining. That's a fact. Apparently you fantasize about being a bully.
Does that mean I demolished your piss poor argument and you do not like that?

No, it means your argument was piss poor to begin with.
Oh, and thanks for stating that you deliberately give low hanging fruit. You've just admitted that a decent chunk of your statements on this thread and its predecessor were nothing but baiting!

 

[Lacius]

I usually give low hanging fruit for the intention of it being grabbed. I wasn't crying or complaining. That's a fact. Apparently you fantasize about being a bully.
Does that mean I demolished your piss poor argument and you do not like that?




Post the proof please.

Are you saying you intentionally make what you acknowledge to be bad arguments? That's the only way your statement of "I usually give low hanging fruit for the intention of it being grabbed" makes sense. At least twice now, you've condemned someone for going after low hanging fruit.

I'm not sure where you got the idea that I "fantasize about being a bully." I don't.

As for your proof:

• https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/12/politics/trump-mccarthy-shouting-match-details/index.html
• https://www.businessinsider.com/tru...nger-when-tweeting-attack-capitol-riot-2021-2
• https://people.com/politics/trump-s...s-continues-to-falsely-claim-stolen-election/

 

[Lacius]

When you learn to differentiate between facts and ad hominins, then I will respect you accordingly.



If it pleases you, then do so by all means. The topic is specifically about the claim Trump telling people to mount a limp insurrection.

It's not an ad hominem to point out bias. The argument wasn't "X sells these shirts, so he is wrong." The argument was "X sells these shirts, so he is biased." Ironically, what you just did is called the fallacy fallacy.

Trump instigated the insurrection via his months of harmful rhetoric about voter fraud and via his speech to the mob. He also literally orchestrated the mob attack on the Capitol, getting the permits to be there, etc. They were all part of his plan to use them as leverage to overturn the election, regardless of how far they actually went. This was all his fault. They were all a part of his attempted coup.

 

[tabzer]

First off, ad hominem*. If you're going to throw around logical terms simply as weapons to chuck at an argument, at least bother to spell them correctly.

First, sorry about that. For some reason the auto-correct chose that for me. It's not correct, as you say.

Second off, that isn't an ad hominem attack. The fact that the same guy sells "Arrest Cuomo" shirts gives a very clear idea of his political affiliation.

Second, it is. He is criticizing the publisher instead of tackling the source.

No, it means your argument was piss poor to begin with.

No. The meaning behind that low hanging fruit was to bait you into revealing that you aren't personally invested or betrayed by "Trump's lies". I stated a fact, and you said that the fact doesn't matter--and the reasoning is easily deducible by anyone. I, for one, am disappointed with Trump--but for reasons that are at least a little bit genuine.

Oh, and thanks for stating that you deliberately give low hanging fruit. You've just admitted that a decent chunk of your statements on this thread and its predecessor were nothing but baiting!

Well, the bait is usually coupled with something else. I don't often post nothing but bait, but sometimes I do when I feel that the discourse has reached satirical levels.

 

[D34DL1N3R]

When you learn to differentiate between facts and ad hominins, then I will respect you accordingly.

When you learn use sources that arent from far right fruit-fucking-cakes, POSSIBLY I will have a very small smidgen of respect for you. But I highly doubt it. You're not worth my respect, at all. Period.

If it pleases you, then do so by all means. The topic is specifically about the claim Trump telling people to mount a limp insurrection.

More proof of your constant hypocrisy. The topic is actually SPECIFICALLY "Joe Biden is now officially the 46th President of the United States of America". Your video wasn't even "specifically about the claim Trump telling people to mount a limp insurrection", it was about claims that dems manipulated info during the hearing, so I'm not so sure YOU even know what you're talking about. My reply to that was that you're a hypocrite telling people they werent paying attention because the right has been doing it for the last 4 years.. INCLUDING at the very same hearing that you're posting videos about. So regardless if I was off topic for the main topic, I was still very much on topic in relation to your video.

 

[Lacius]

First, sorry about that. For some reason the auto-correct chose that for me. It's not correct, as you say.



Second, it is. He is criticizing the publisher instead of tackling the source.




No. The meaning behind that low hanging fruit was to bait you into revealing that you aren't personally invested or betrayed by "Trump's lies". I stated a fact, and you said that the fact doesn't matter--and the reasoning is easily deducible by anyone. I, for one, am disappointed with Trump--but for reasons that are at least a little bit genuine.



Well, the bait is usually coupled with something else. I don't often post nothing but bait, but sometimes I do when I feel that the discourse has reached satirical levels.

If you know something is low hanging fruit, you probably shouldn't be posting it. It's completely reasonable for someone to post a response to a bad point or argument. If I made a long post with substantive information but made a single quip that includes a logical fallacy, for example, you wouldn't be wrong to respond just to that logical fallacy, whether or not I put it there intentionally.

 

[Plasmaster09]

First, sorry about that. For some reason the auto-correct chose that for me. It's not correct, as you say.



Second, it is. He is criticizing the publisher instead of tackling the source.




No. The meaning behind that low hanging fruit was to bait you into revealing that you aren't personally invested or betrayed by "Trump's lies". I stated a fact, and you said that the fact doesn't matter--and the reasoning is easily deducible by anyone. I, for one, am disappointed with Trump--but for reasons that are at least a little bit genuine.



Well, the bait is usually coupled with something else. I don't often post nothing but bait, but sometimes I do when I feel that the discourse has reached satirical levels.

Second one: he's making clear that the publisher is fundamentally biased and thus would themselves cherry-pick 'evidence' to use against Dems. Considering the guy's entire channel is cherry-picked bullshit used to make fun of Dems, this isn't wrong.
Third and fourth: I absolutely am invested in Trump's lies- or rather, horrified at the amount of people that still follow him blindly regardless of how many times he backstabs them for personal gain. Taking your shitty bait doesn't change that, and all it shows is that you're too busy baiting and trolling to bother with a legitimate argument.
Stop baiting. That's it. No more bait on this thread.

 

[tabzer]

It's not an ad hominem to point out bias.

It's ad hominem to dismiss the substance because of whatever he claims about the character posting it. It's an angle. The guy who posted it is biased. But what he posted is proof that Trump's quotes are being manipulated with the intention of provoking violence.

 

[Plasmaster09]

It's ad hominem to dismiss the substance because of whatever he claims about the character posting it. It's an angle. The guy who posted it is biased. But what he posted is proof that Trump's quotes are being manipulated with the intention of provoking violence.

No, it really isn't.
If I have a bag of shit, and cover the top with some straw or something, that does not mean that there is no shit in the bag.
Anyone that bothers smelling the thing or looking through the thin layer of dogwhistles straw will still immediately notice the large quantities of incitement of violence shit in this rhetoric bag.

 

[tabzer]

If you know something is low hanging fruit, you probably shouldn't be posting it. It's completely reasonable for someone to post a response to a bad point or argument. If I made a long post with substantive information but made a single quip that includes a logical fallacy, for example, you wouldn't be wrong to respond just to that logical fallacy, whether or not I put it there intentionally.

I'm not saying that it is wrong. I have done that too.

No, it really isn't.

You are right in a way, because the poster didn't make the argument. He "re-tweeted" the argument. If the poster was making the argument, but some jerk decided that the evidence was useless because of the guy's political affiliation, then lol--what are you disputing?

If I have a bag of shit, and cover the top with some straw or something, that does not mean that there is no shit in the bag.
Anyone that bothers smelling the thing or looking through the thin layer of dogwhistles straw will still immediately notice the large quantities of incitement of violence shit in this rhetoric bag.

So you are saying that the fact that Trump specifically said "how" to "fight" is irrelevant because he said "fight"?