Are there any post coup attempt EX-trump supporters here?

Post Reply New Topic

Oh, you noticed that too?  Too bad our moderators do not seem to care.

^ That's unfair - you have no idea what goes on in mod space and no idea how we deal with members in private.

As much as I disagree with most things Pepe says, don't put words in his mouth or assume we know what the moderators are or are not doing.

He gives me similar vibes to moderate 'both sides' Americans. And I have to imagine that to international moderates (who don't realize that the GOP is much, much further to the right than most of their countries' conservative parties) American politics can seem like a 'both sides' screaming fight media spectacle if all you have to go on is contemporary media coverage.

That said, the idea that Trump has been a great president for Americans of color is a complete line of crap being fed to undecided white voters who need help rationalizing the nonsense that Trump isn't racist, and that his policies don't benefit his wealthy friends before they benefit anyone else.

It’s a fair assessment for him to have said “seem,” IMO.

We cannot see the moderator forum or private messages. What we can see are Zero mod responses to the thread reprimanding anyone for such behaviour as mods do with other undesirable posts.

So, I don’t think Fnord was out of line with his post. It was accurate for him to say it seems that way.

And I have addressed it. End of discussion.

Cornflake has a point - we do not know what happens behind closed doors - and this makes sense. Members being reprimanded shouldn't be public knifings. The idea is to maintain order, not make a spectacle of the individual who committed the infraction - especially if the infraction might have been a minor affair, or accidental statement.

Some members are quite adept at skirting the rules, and making statements just vague enough to not overtly violate the rules. And in the interest of free speech, odds are the Mods try to err on the side of caution, and allow slightly too much freedom, rather than be overly restrictive beyond precedent.

Pepe is entitled to his opinion. Even if it is an unpopular opinion. Even if it changes constantly to suit whatever position they feel like taking in that moment. Pepe is allowed to express his beliefs. Even if literally nobody else agrees with them, he still has the right to express them. See it as an opportunity to gain insight to the nature of the character of the individual.

If the mods feel someone has gone too far, they will intervene. You'll know when it happens cos people who normally have QUITE A LOT to say, are suddenly uncharacteristically quiet.

You tend to only get that from right-wingers or conservatives who do not realize just how much further to the right our conservatives are than theirs. Unless one supports the Front National/Alternative fur Deutschland/VOX/English Defense League/True Blue Crew (or one is fed a steady diet of disinformation), one would be horrified by what the right is doing here in America.

Where were you when I was protesting the biased moderating on this board? You were perfectly willing to accept their decisions as long as you agreed with them.

I support your right to protest a moderator's decision. It's a shame you can't say the same.

[joke mode activated]

Saddam Hussein laughed in America's face, with no consequences.
Bin Hidin' Laden laughed in America's face, with no consequences.

Erm, OK, they were poor examples.

This is coming from a partisan point of view, imo.
It is also simply your opinion.

Your opinion, to me, seems to have the intent of playing the 'racist card' against me to silence my contribution.
That doesn't work on me, btw.

I try to see things from a holistic perspective.

People may have noticed that I continually mention that both sides of politics have problems with extremists.
I also mention that both sides of the political divide have good policies.
I point out that there are bad policy aspects to both sides of politics, also, health care not being adequately addressed by the Republicans, as an example.
I find it odd that I am seen as partisan when clearly I am not.
I also find it odd when people mock critical thinking skills.

I do have more (Australian) conservative leanings, due to my more rational, rather than an emotional way of thinking, so I reject any philosophy which embraces the concept of: "Morality is more important than the facts".

My best assessment is that having a partisan mindset distorts reality and filters out certain aspects of an argument.
This is the 'confirmation bias' phenomenon in evidence.

I did make a study, over 7 years ago, on how emotions distort reality, and I do think this is one of the main problems in political discussion, generally speaking.

Making a statement is fine, but not supporting that statement with a rational argument, especially when it can be construed as a personal attack, is not.

For clarity's sake, could you explain what makes you think I think "white privilege is just fine with me,” and “the coloured folk in America have nothing to complain about"?
Could you cut and paste examples of where you think I did this, and I will explain why I made those statements?

I have asked you, in another thread, to do "The Hard Yakka" in explaining your position, but you seem more intent in ridiculing me than providing rational reasons for your personal attacks on me.

To be clear, you have no emotional effect on me because we are playing on an even playing field.
These days I am virtually emotionally bulletproof.
If you have a problem with something I have said, provide "evidence" of where you think I have gone off the rails.
Making sniping comments from the sidelines weakens your position.

I very much appreciate your comment.



I agree that Australian conservatives are different from America conservatives.
Some members in America seem not to understand this.
Also, let me point out again that I am a moderate conservative *independent* and am no longer a "Liberal Party" voter, here in Australia.



Firstly, if you re-read my statement, you will see that I specifically included "in *some* areas", when I was referring to the coloured demographic benefiting from Republican economic policies.
I was very deliberate in this.
If you have evidence that there hasn't been a significant increase in jobs for the coloured community, or that the wage increase *percentage* hasn't favoured them, please present it.

I'm probably the most extreme left person here and I can vouch that Pepe is a really nice guy

But as for his poliitics

We can agree to disagree and that's fine....

Where were you when the Fnord Derangement Syndrome was in full swing last year?

I totally agree.
Public humiliation isn't helpful.



I think it is healthy to have *some* leeway.
If a pattern of behaviour is accurately determined, however, that should be taken into consideration.




I appreciate your comment.
But I would like to add that my position will adapt because I embrace the scientific methodology principle and will correct faulty reasoning on my part or simply incorporate new information.

Also, *context* is an extremely important component when considering a statement.



Agreed.
Everyone has a 'right' to have an opinion, here, and if within the rulz, express them without being attacked simply because they are in variance to others.

Use civil discussion to point out faulty reasoning, if you think there is any.



There seems to be a lot of private discussions, these days, than there used to be.
I have advocated this policy, in the past, on another website.