Page 3 of 9 [ 129 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 9  Next

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

21 Dec 2016, 9:19 pm

Adamantium wrote:
EzraS wrote:
The basket of deplorables according Hillary is half of Trump supporters or roughly 30 million people.

What do you hope to gain by arguing from a falsehood? Clinton already made it clear that that was not what she meant.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/h ... les-227988
Quote:
“Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that's never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ — that was wrong," Clinton said in a statement released Saturday afternoon.


How does Clinton admitting that she was being "grossly generalistic" make my statement a falsehood? Of course part of the problem is working with words like "deplorables" and "generalistic" which don't actually exist in the English language. I interpret the original statement and it being called by her as grossly generalistic (sic) as lumping everyone together in one basket. Of course she backpedaled as damage control after receiving so much negative backlash. But I'll stick with her own assessment of being grossly generalistic (sic).

Kraichgauer wrote:
What Adamantium said.


What Clinton said; grossly generalistic (sic).



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,790
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

21 Dec 2016, 10:15 pm

EzraS wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
EzraS wrote:
The basket of deplorables according Hillary is half of Trump supporters or roughly 30 million people.

What do you hope to gain by arguing from a falsehood? Clinton already made it clear that that was not what she meant.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/h ... les-227988
Quote:
“Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that's never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ — that was wrong," Clinton said in a statement released Saturday afternoon.


How does Clinton admitting that she was being "grossly generalistic" make my statement a falsehood? Of course part of the problem is working with words like "deplorables" and "generalistic" which don't actually exist in the English language. I interpret the original statement and it being called by her as grossly generalistic (sic) as lumping everyone together in one basket. Of course she backpedaled as damage control after receiving so much negative backlash. But I'll stick with her own assessment of being grossly generalistic (sic).

Kraichgauer wrote:
What Adamantium said.


What Clinton said; grossly generalistic (sic).


From the amount of vocal feces being expelled by Trump's Alt Right supporters, you'd think it would've been half of them.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

21 Dec 2016, 11:27 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
EzraS wrote:
The basket of deplorables according Hillary is half of Trump supporters or roughly 30 million people.

What do you hope to gain by arguing from a falsehood? Clinton already made it clear that that was not what she meant.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/h ... les-227988
Quote:
“Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that's never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ — that was wrong," Clinton said in a statement released Saturday afternoon.


How does Clinton admitting that she was being "grossly generalistic" make my statement a falsehood? Of course part of the problem is working with words like "deplorables" and "generalistic" which don't actually exist in the English language. I interpret the original statement and it being called by her as grossly generalistic (sic) as lumping everyone together in one basket. Of course she backpedaled as damage control after receiving so much negative backlash. But I'll stick with her own assessment of being grossly generalistic (sic).

Kraichgauer wrote:
What Adamantium said.


What Clinton said; grossly generalistic (sic).


From the amount of vocal feces being expelled by Trump's Alt Right supporters, you'd think it would've been half of them.


As I'm sure can also be said of Clinton's Alt Left supporters.



lostonearth35
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2010
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 11,896
Location: Lost on Earth, waddya think?

21 Dec 2016, 11:27 pm

Americans are racist, and that's all there is to it.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,790
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

21 Dec 2016, 11:36 pm

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
EzraS wrote:
The basket of deplorables according Hillary is half of Trump supporters or roughly 30 million people.

What do you hope to gain by arguing from a falsehood? Clinton already made it clear that that was not what she meant.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/h ... les-227988
Quote:
“Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that's never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ — that was wrong," Clinton said in a statement released Saturday afternoon.


How does Clinton admitting that she was being "grossly generalistic" make my statement a falsehood? Of course part of the problem is working with words like "deplorables" and "generalistic" which don't actually exist in the English language. I interpret the original statement and it being called by her as grossly generalistic (sic) as lumping everyone together in one basket. Of course she backpedaled as damage control after receiving so much negative backlash. But I'll stick with her own assessment of being grossly generalistic (sic).

Kraichgauer wrote:
What Adamantium said.


What Clinton said; grossly generalistic (sic).


From the amount of vocal feces being expelled by Trump's Alt Right supporters, you'd think it would've been half of them.


As I'm sure can also be said of Clinton's Alt Left supporters.


There is no such thing as the Alt Left.
Why is it that conservatives are always defending those racist POS of the Alt Right?


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

21 Dec 2016, 11:44 pm

lostonearth35 wrote:
Americans are racist, and that's all there is to it.


Not just Americans



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

21 Dec 2016, 11:49 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
EzraS wrote:
The basket of deplorables according Hillary is half of Trump supporters or roughly 30 million people.

What do you hope to gain by arguing from a falsehood? Clinton already made it clear that that was not what she meant.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/h ... les-227988
Quote:
“Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that's never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ — that was wrong," Clinton said in a statement released Saturday afternoon.


How does Clinton admitting that she was being "grossly generalistic" make my statement a falsehood? Of course part of the problem is working with words like "deplorables" and "generalistic" which don't actually exist in the English language. I interpret the original statement and it being called by her as grossly generalistic (sic) as lumping everyone together in one basket. Of course she backpedaled as damage control after receiving so much negative backlash. But I'll stick with her own assessment of being grossly generalistic (sic).

Kraichgauer wrote:
What Adamantium said.


What Clinton said; grossly generalistic (sic).


From the amount of vocal feces being expelled by Trump's Alt Right supporters, you'd think it would've been half of them.


As I'm sure can also be said of Clinton's Alt Left supporters.


There is no such thing as the Alt Left.
Why is it that conservatives are always defending those racist POS of the Alt Right?


So what's the official made up term for extremest leftists?
Why is it that liberals are always defending those hypocritical kooks?



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,790
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 Dec 2016, 12:01 am

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
EzraS wrote:
The basket of deplorables according Hillary is half of Trump supporters or roughly 30 million people.

What do you hope to gain by arguing from a falsehood? Clinton already made it clear that that was not what she meant.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/h ... les-227988
Quote:
“Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that's never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ — that was wrong," Clinton said in a statement released Saturday afternoon.


How does Clinton admitting that she was being "grossly generalistic" make my statement a falsehood? Of course part of the problem is working with words like "deplorables" and "generalistic" which don't actually exist in the English language. I interpret the original statement and it being called by her as grossly generalistic (sic) as lumping everyone together in one basket. Of course she backpedaled as damage control after receiving so much negative backlash. But I'll stick with her own assessment of being grossly generalistic (sic).

Kraichgauer wrote:
What Adamantium said.


What Clinton said; grossly generalistic (sic).


From the amount of vocal feces being expelled by Trump's Alt Right supporters, you'd think it would've been half of them.


As I'm sure can also be said of Clinton's Alt Left supporters.


There is no such thing as the Alt Left.
Why is it that conservatives are always defending those racist POS of the Alt Right?


So what's the official made up term for extremest leftists?
Why is it that liberals are always defending those hypocritical kooks?


There is no name for leftist kooks other than kooks. I don't know of any where left wing fanatics have taken over the Democratic political establishment the way the Alt Right has sunk it's claws into the political right.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

22 Dec 2016, 2:51 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
EzraS wrote:
The basket of deplorables according Hillary is half of Trump supporters or roughly 30 million people.

What do you hope to gain by arguing from a falsehood? Clinton already made it clear that that was not what she meant.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/h ... les-227988
Quote:
“Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that's never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ — that was wrong," Clinton said in a statement released Saturday afternoon.


How does Clinton admitting that she was being "grossly generalistic" make my statement a falsehood? Of course part of the problem is working with words like "deplorables" and "generalistic" which don't actually exist in the English language. I interpret the original statement and it being called by her as grossly generalistic (sic) as lumping everyone together in one basket. Of course she backpedaled as damage control after receiving so much negative backlash. But I'll stick with her own assessment of being grossly generalistic (sic).

Kraichgauer wrote:
What Adamantium said.


What Clinton said; grossly generalistic (sic).


From the amount of vocal feces being expelled by Trump's Alt Right supporters, you'd think it would've been half of them.


As I'm sure can also be said of Clinton's Alt Left supporters.


There is no such thing as the Alt Left.
Why is it that conservatives are always defending those racist POS of the Alt Right?


So what's the official made up term for extremest leftists?
Why is it that liberals are always defending those hypocritical kooks?


There is no name for leftist kooks other than kooks. I don't know of any where left wing fanatics have taken over the Democratic political establishment the way the Alt Right has sunk it's claws into the political right.


From what I can decipher, the "alt-right" is something with no definable ideology and is not a formal organization and it is not clear if the "alt-right" can even be considered as a movement due to its nebulous nature.

So what I'm figuring at this time is it's a label for anyone who's already been labeled racist, homophobic, misogynistic, antisemitic, xenophobic, this bic that ist or tic etc. I can imagine that all those labels get pretty jumbled, so I it's easier just to use the term "alt-right" in place of all the individual branding.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,790
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 Dec 2016, 2:56 am

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
EzraS wrote:
The basket of deplorables according Hillary is half of Trump supporters or roughly 30 million people.

What do you hope to gain by arguing from a falsehood? Clinton already made it clear that that was not what she meant.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/h ... les-227988
Quote:
“Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that's never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ — that was wrong," Clinton said in a statement released Saturday afternoon.


How does Clinton admitting that she was being "grossly generalistic" make my statement a falsehood? Of course part of the problem is working with words like "deplorables" and "generalistic" which don't actually exist in the English language. I interpret the original statement and it being called by her as grossly generalistic (sic) as lumping everyone together in one basket. Of course she backpedaled as damage control after receiving so much negative backlash. But I'll stick with her own assessment of being grossly generalistic (sic).

Kraichgauer wrote:
What Adamantium said.


What Clinton said; grossly generalistic (sic).


From the amount of vocal feces being expelled by Trump's Alt Right supporters, you'd think it would've been half of them.


As I'm sure can also be said of Clinton's Alt Left supporters.


There is no such thing as the Alt Left.
Why is it that conservatives are always defending those racist POS of the Alt Right?


So what's the official made up term for extremest leftists?
Why is it that liberals are always defending those hypocritical kooks?


There is no name for leftist kooks other than kooks. I don't know of any where left wing fanatics have taken over the Democratic political establishment the way the Alt Right has sunk it's claws into the political right.


From what I can decipher, the "alt-right" is something with no definable ideology and is not a formal organization and it is not clear if the "alt-right" can even be considered as a movement due to its nebulous nature.

So what I'm figuring at this time is it's a label for anyone who's already been labeled racist, homophobic, misogynistic, antisemitic, xenophobic, this bic that ist or tic, KKK, neo-Nazi etc. I can imagine that all those labels get pretty jumbled, so I it's easier just to use the term "alt-right" in place of all the individual labels.


Alt Right is an umbrella term for all those ideologies that represent the west's, and America's dark side. The sooner that dark side is exorcised, the better.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,577
Location: Seattle-ish

22 Dec 2016, 3:08 am

EzraS wrote:
So what's the official made up term for extremest leftists?
Why is it that liberals are always defending those hypocritical kooks?


SJWs, though I rather like the newer "Ctrl-Left", as they do seem to want to control everything, particularly through the government. Most liberals will deny they exist however, as you're learning right now.


_________________
“The totally convinced and the totally stupid have too much in common for the resemblance to be accidental.”
-- Robert Anton Wilson


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

22 Dec 2016, 3:13 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
EzraS wrote:
The basket of deplorables according Hillary is half of Trump supporters or roughly 30 million people.

What do you hope to gain by arguing from a falsehood? Clinton already made it clear that that was not what she meant.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/h ... les-227988
Quote:
“Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that's never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ — that was wrong," Clinton said in a statement released Saturday afternoon.


How does Clinton admitting that she was being "grossly generalistic" make my statement a falsehood? Of course part of the problem is working with words like "deplorables" and "generalistic" which don't actually exist in the English language. I interpret the original statement and it being called by her as grossly generalistic (sic) as lumping everyone together in one basket. Of course she backpedaled as damage control after receiving so much negative backlash. But I'll stick with her own assessment of being grossly generalistic (sic).

Kraichgauer wrote:
What Adamantium said.


What Clinton said; grossly generalistic (sic).


From the amount of vocal feces being expelled by Trump's Alt Right supporters, you'd think it would've been half of them.


As I'm sure can also be said of Clinton's Alt Left supporters.


There is no such thing as the Alt Left.
Why is it that conservatives are always defending those racist POS of the Alt Right?


So what's the official made up term for extremest leftists?
Why is it that liberals are always defending those hypocritical kooks?


There is no name for leftist kooks other than kooks. I don't know of any where left wing fanatics have taken over the Democratic political establishment the way the Alt Right has sunk it's claws into the political right.


From what I can decipher, the "alt-right" is something with no definable ideology and is not a formal organization and it is not clear if the "alt-right" can even be considered as a movement due to its nebulous nature.

So what I'm figuring at this time is it's a label for anyone who's already been labeled racist, homophobic, misogynistic, antisemitic, xenophobic, this bic that ist or tic, KKK, neo-Nazi etc. I can imagine that all those labels get pretty jumbled, so I it's easier just to use the term "alt-right" in place of all the individual labels.


Alt Right is an umbrella term for all those ideologies that represent the west's, and America's dark side. The sooner that dark side is exorcised, the better.


Yes umbrella term is exactly what I was thinking. Along with all purpose or one size fits all. I'm guessing the dark side is anything that's not leftist. It needs to be driven out so that the liberal/leftist way will dominate America and the West. The main thrust has been an attempt to marginalize by way of labeling people and drumming up fervor in the name of political correctness and social justice etc. Hillary Clinton represented a leap forward, while Trump represents a huge setback.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,790
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 Dec 2016, 3:17 am

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
EzraS wrote:
The basket of deplorables according Hillary is half of Trump supporters or roughly 30 million people.

What do you hope to gain by arguing from a falsehood? Clinton already made it clear that that was not what she meant.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/h ... les-227988
Quote:
“Last night I was ‘grossly generalistic,’ and that's never a good idea. I regret saying ‘half’ — that was wrong," Clinton said in a statement released Saturday afternoon.


How does Clinton admitting that she was being "grossly generalistic" make my statement a falsehood? Of course part of the problem is working with words like "deplorables" and "generalistic" which don't actually exist in the English language. I interpret the original statement and it being called by her as grossly generalistic (sic) as lumping everyone together in one basket. Of course she backpedaled as damage control after receiving so much negative backlash. But I'll stick with her own assessment of being grossly generalistic (sic).

Kraichgauer wrote:
What Adamantium said.


What Clinton said; grossly generalistic (sic).


From the amount of vocal feces being expelled by Trump's Alt Right supporters, you'd think it would've been half of them.


As I'm sure can also be said of Clinton's Alt Left supporters.


There is no such thing as the Alt Left.
Why is it that conservatives are always defending those racist POS of the Alt Right?


So what's the official made up term for extremest leftists?
Why is it that liberals are always defending those hypocritical kooks?


There is no name for leftist kooks other than kooks. I don't know of any where left wing fanatics have taken over the Democratic political establishment the way the Alt Right has sunk it's claws into the political right.


From what I can decipher, the "alt-right" is something with no definable ideology and is not a formal organization and it is not clear if the "alt-right" can even be considered as a movement due to its nebulous nature.

So what I'm figuring at this time is it's a label for anyone who's already been labeled racist, homophobic, misogynistic, antisemitic, xenophobic, this bic that ist or tic, KKK, neo-Nazi etc. I can imagine that all those labels get pretty jumbled, so I it's easier just to use the term "alt-right" in place of all the individual labels.


Alt Right is an umbrella term for all those ideologies that represent the west's, and America's dark side. The sooner that dark side is exorcised, the better.


Yes umbrella term is exactly what I was thinking. Along with all purpose or one size fits all. I'm guessing the dark side is anything that's not leftist. It needs to be driven out so that the liberal/leftist way will dominate America and the West. The main thrust has been an attempt to marginalize by way of labeling people and drumming up fervor in the name of political correctness and social justice etc. Hillary Clinton represented a big leap forward, while Trump represents a huge setback.


No, it's not anything outside the left, it's anything with a racist, Antisemitic, nativist, ideology, often tied to fascism. If the mainstream American right doesn't want to be associated with this, and risk marginalization, they should be condemning the Alt Right, as so many of them had during the election.
And what's wrong with social justice?


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

22 Dec 2016, 3:20 am

Dox47 wrote:
EzraS wrote:
So what's the official made up term for extremest leftists?
Why is it that liberals are always defending those hypocritical kooks?


SJWs, though I rather like the newer "Ctrl-Left", as they do seem to want to control everything, particularly through the government. Most liberals will deny they exist however, as you're learning right now.


You know what really bothers me is I start feeling like I'm becoming a conspiracy nut and dreaming up crazy scenarios, but then it ends up, nope I didn't come up with anything new at all. That's exactly the way it actually is.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

22 Dec 2016, 4:00 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Yes umbrella term is exactly what I was thinking. Along with all purpose or one size fits all. I'm guessing the dark side is anything that's not leftist. It needs to be driven out so that the liberal/leftist way will dominate America and the West. The main thrust has been an attempt to marginalize by way of labeling people and drumming up fervor in the name of political correctness and social justice etc. Hillary Clinton represented a big leap forward, while Trump represents a huge setback.


No, it's not anything outside the left, it's anything with a racist, Antisemitic, nativist, ideology, often tied to fascism. If the mainstream American right doesn't want to be associated with this, and risk marginalization, they should be condemning the Alt Right, as so many of them had during the election.
And what's wrong with social justice?


I take it what you're saying is mainstream America needs to condemn anything or anyone that's been labeled/branded by the left as "alt-right". Or else they risk being marginalized by the Leftist movement. What's wrong with social justice is if "social justice" is just a euphemism for social control. I keep having thoughts of people being scarlet letter branded, accused of being "witches" and witch hunting, or those accused of being "Commies" and being blacklisted. As well as "thought police". You can't see a problem with this? They say a lot of Trump's voters are millennials, who I believe are seeing what I'm seeing, and that's even more true I believe of the post 2000 generation I belong to. And needless to say what's been going on with the left post election really makes the whole thing seem even more repellent. The riots. The harassment, stalking and death threats the electors suffered. All the threats of assassination. A very scary militant mob.



Tollorin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada

22 Dec 2016, 11:56 am

EzraS wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Yes umbrella term is exactly what I was thinking. Along with all purpose or one size fits all. I'm guessing the dark side is anything that's not leftist. It needs to be driven out so that the liberal/leftist way will dominate America and the West. The main thrust has been an attempt to marginalize by way of labeling people and drumming up fervor in the name of political correctness and social justice etc. Hillary Clinton represented a big leap forward, while Trump represents a huge setback.


No, it's not anything outside the left, it's anything with a racist, Antisemitic, nativist, ideology, often tied to fascism. If the mainstream American right doesn't want to be associated with this, and risk marginalization, they should be condemning the Alt Right, as so many of them had during the election.
And what's wrong with social justice?


I take it what you're saying is mainstream America needs to condemn anything or anyone that's been labeled/branded by the left as "alt-right". Or else they risk being marginalized by the Leftist movement. What's wrong with social justice is if "social justice" is just a euphemism for social control. I keep having thoughts of people being scarlet letter branded, accused of being "witches" and witch hunting, or those accused of being "Commies" and being blacklisted. As well as "thought police". You can't see a problem with this? They say a lot of Trump's voters are millennials, who I believe are seeing what I'm seeing, and that's even more true I believe of the post 2000 generation I belong to. And needless to say what's been going on with the left post election really makes the whole thing seem even more repellent. The riots. The harassment, stalking and death threats the electors suffered. All the threats of assassination. A very scary militant mob.

So to prevent the "extremist left" with no political power from taking over peoples need to go against moderate right politicians (Like are a lot of democrats and Clinton) and give power to the extreme right (Like the GOP is nowadays)? What could go wrong!? :roll:


_________________
Down with speculators!! !