The trump presidency

[Chrysippus]

nor will I write in upper caps like crazed individuals often do on these forums.

He is not a crazed individual because he posts in caps.

 

[1287160]

He is not a crazed individual because he posts in caps.

In my experience, people who write like that are often overly emotional and borderline irrational.

 

[1287160]

How about YOU not assuming MY motives by suggesting I'm a crazed individual because of my choice of type font. That's the first thing.

And yes, there are Democrats, including myself, who've come to the realization that "going high" when conservatives and the GOP go low hasn't resulted in many of them trying to reciprocate, trying to meet half way, or "going high" in return, or anything of the sort. So no, in fact Democrats CAN'T be civil right now.

As to your reference to Madonna, you, like some others seem to have CONVENIENTLY missed her larger point, which in fact was to suggest a higher more nobler course of action as an alternative to giving in to thoughts of violent action. And you're quoting a fkn rapper?? Please...........

And yes, I did compare Trump's demagoguery and ideology to that of Hitler's and supported it with links to others even more knowledgable that I who've made similar observations, and I stand by that analogy.

He's tried to stoke distrust of the media by calling them the "enemy of the people" he creates his own "reality" out of outright lies and distortion of the truth, he demonizes people who disagree with him, engages in racist demagoguery, has restricted media access, has sought to undermine balance of power in government and rule of law, believes his A.G. should be at his complete beck and call... the list of similarities goes on.

As for your attempt to draw parallels between Obama's RIGHTFUL calling out of racial disparity in law enforcement and Bernie Sanders rightful observation on economic disparity in America, with Trump's venomous brand of rhetoric, your objectivity becomes QUESTIONABLE.

Because in EITHER case, I don't recall Obama saying how he'd like to "bash somebody in the face," or Bernie saying how someone should be "body slammed" or calling protestors "son of a bitches" or suggesting 2nd Amendment people might take the law in their own hands.

So that's just plain bullshit, as is your contention that "much rhetoric on the part of Democrats and left-wingers... is worse that [sic] President Trump's rhetoric." And even if some it WERE, we're talking about the rhetoric coming from someone who's supposed to be a fkn PRESIDENT... a leader for ALL the people .... SUPPOSED to be.

So no, I don't agree with your assessment at ALL. Even to this day, this guy continues with nasty assed, mean spirited, hate fueled lies, distortions, and rhetoric at his rallies... to the cheers of his followers.

And now those who've BEEN calling it out for exactly what it IS are being told to "calm down."

Right. Tell YOUR president to calm down, bud.

Let's just take your final sentence. I voted for Hillary Clinton and you have no evidence to the contrary. Regardless of who either of us voted for, Donald Trump is our President (if you're an American citizen) regardless of whether we like it or not. This final sentence renders everything else you wrote pointless in reading as I can sum it up in one sentence: "Its only wrong when people I don't like do it." Such thinking is amoral relativism and I won't bother wasting any more time on it.

 

[b.c.]

In my experience, people who write like that are often overly emotional and borderline irrational.

Bwaaahahahahaha... "In your experience..." Now you're a psychoanalyst. That's funny shit.

Let's just take your final sentence. I voted for Hillary Clinton and you have no evidence to the contrary. Regardless of who either of us voted for, Donald Trump is our President (if you're an American citizen) regardless of whether we like it or not. This final sentence renders everything else you wrote pointless in reading as I can sum it up in one sentence: "Its only wrong when people I don't like do it." Such thinking is amoral relativism and I won't bother wasting any more time on it.

Says the person who deigns to diagnose me from afar. LOL.

And your pitiful attempt to equate Obama's statement on police disparity and Bernie's statement on income equality with the mean spirited, divisive rhetoric of that back biting, hate mongering, misogynistic, rabble rousing con artist effectively renders everything else YOU wrote pointless in reading.

So yeah... we're done.

 

[1287160]

Only to you.

That’s your opinion, not a fact.

It is my opinion, which I've logically argued with no rebuttal on your part.

Those who endorse, excuse, minimize and engage in harassment, doxxing, threats, vandalism & physical violence upon those they disagree with (including self-avowed Nazis and white nationalists) have no right to complain about that same behavior being repaid in kind. Incitement of violence is legally defined by a direct verbal threat of violence (i.e.: Go bomb this place.), which I apply equally to charged rhetoric from Bernie Sanders to Donald Trump.

Those who don't equally apply these principles are using their own subjective beliefs/definitions of incitement based purely on interpretation & confirmation bias to selectively to apply to their political opponents, which is a form of hypocrisy that ignores the fact such methods can/will be used against them.

If that position is incorrect, I welcome a cogent, civil explanation for why its incorrect without straw-manning the opposition. Beyond that, you're just making a Moses-like pronouncement without explanation and its as worthless as the most incendiary protest placard.

 

[Chrysippus]

In my experience, people who write like that are often overly emotional and borderline irrational.

That’s your personal experience, it’s anecdotal and therefore not a fair generalization.
Borderline irrational? Gimme a fuckin’ break—quit exaggerating.

 

[1287160]

Bwaaahahahahaha... "In your experience..." Now you're a psychoanalyst. That's funny shit.



Says the person who deigns to diagnose me from afar. LOL.

And your pitiful attempt to equate Obama's statement on police disparity and Bernie's statement on income equality with the mean spirited, divisive rhetoric of that back biting, hate mongering, misogynistic, rabble rousing con artist effectively renders everything else YOU wrote pointless in reading.

So yeah... we're done.

I am not reading this statement. Goodbye.

 

[Chrysippus]

It is my opinio

And, fairly, that’s all it is.

 

[1287160]

That’s your personal experience, it’s anecdotal and therefore not a fair generalization.
Borderline irrational? Gimme a fuckin’ break—quit exaggerating.

Given his response, I'm claiming that he's irrational. I'm also claiming those who write like that have a hint of conducting rhetorical arguments. You don't have to agree but I could care less.

 

[Chrysippus]

I am not reading this statement. Goodbye.

You did read this statement if you responded to it.

 

[1287160]

And, fairly, that’s all it is.

Given you have no counter-opinion to offer, I'm simply disinterested in anything you have to say from this point on. Goodbye.

 

[b.c.]

I am not reading this statement. Goodbye.

Okay. The "rational" thing to do, I'd imagine.

You did read this statement if you responded to it.

shhhhhhhhhh..... don't tell him.

 

[Chrysippus]

Given his response, I'm claiming that he's irrational. I'm also claiming those who write like that have a hint of conducting rhetorical arguments. You don't have to agree but I could care less.

You’re pissing up a rope, and it’s funny to watch.

 

[1287160]

You did read this statement if you responded to it.

I didn't read it. I replied with a statement without reading a single word.

 

[1287160]

You’re pissing up a rope, and it’s funny to watch.

If you're rope, I'm happy to piss on it. I'm putting you ignore now, so I won't read another word or get the alert.

 

[Chrysippus]

If you're rope, I'm happy to piss on it. I'm putting you ignore now, so I won't read another word or get the alert.

Great—I want to be ignored by you.

 

[Chrysippus]

I didn't read it. I replied with a statement without reading a single word.

Hilarious.

 

[Klingsor]

When Donald Trump praises body-slamming a reporter yet talks about mob violence to the silence of the right, it seems that the ends justify the means.

When Hillary Clinton claims you cannot be civil to your opposite political party simply because they stand against your beliefs (which is the very definition of politics) yet criticizes Trump's stoking of divisive rhetoric, the ends justify the means.

I can understand dispensing with civility when dealing with someone who praises body-slamming a reporter.

 

[keenobserver]

Let's just take your final sentence. I voted for Hillary Clinton and you have no evidence to the contrary. Regardless of who either of us voted for, Donald Trump is our President (if you're an American citizen) regardless of whether we like it or not. This final sentence renders everything else you wrote pointless in reading as I can sum it up in one sentence: "Its only wrong when people I don't like do it." Such thinking is amoral relativism and I won't bother wasting any more time on it.

No. Wrong. Trump is the president, he is not MY president. There is a critical difference. Trump does not wish to be MY president, he wishes to rule, not lead. The only acknowledgement he is entitled to is that he IS president. He is not a leader, he does not want to build consensus, find solutions that involve compromise or ever admit anyone anywhere ever made a contribution of value. Saying he is somehow "our" president sets us on a slippery slope towards, "just roll over and take it," that is unacceptable.

 

[keenobserver]

I can understand dispensing with civility when dealing with someone who praises body-slamming a reporter.

Yes, Thank you.