American election.

[Walker]

You’re insistent so I went back and read your link again to see if I missed something.

Nope. No facts. It still stinks.

It’s just some partisan Trump hater on an unsubstantiated rant, making a lot of noise by spouting off his absurdities.

He should have his professor badge taken away and lose his parking spot. He discredits academia.

If anyone tells you Trump derangement syndrome isn't real, don't you believe it.

[Dubious]

You’re insistent so I went back and read your link again to see if I missed something.

Nope. No facts. It still stinks.

It’s just some partisan Trump hater on an unsubstantiated rant, making a lot of noise by spouting off his absurdities.

He should have his professor badge taken away and lose his parking spot. He discredits academia.

If anyone tells you Trump derangement syndrome isn't real, don't you believe it.

Trump's direct words and actions, including in-actions, speak much louder and overrules anything you can say. But as I said, to cultists and theists it makes no difference.

As Trump himself said: "I could ‘shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose voters", he was obviously talking about those like you...one of the very few times he wasn't lying!

[Walker]

Trump promised to the people, and delivered. So much for the allegations about lies.

*

He did that sort of thing all through his campaign and presidency.

Brilliant, crafty street fighter.

That's the kind of talk totalitarians throughout the world understand.

Trump is a master troll who doesn't swallow the Left's phony unity, which anyone can see is crap. Yet, his nature is to deal rather than lie about dealing, like the politicians do.

That was a great tactic he used, I must say.

Trump is pretty good at rattling the pious, holier-than-thou literalists, and nothing like shoving their own petard right back in their faces.

That's why working folks love stuff like that.

He's quite aware of the childish attitudes of the Left.

When he exaggerates, they take it literally.
When he tells a joke, they frown.
When he's serious, they laugh.

Knowing this fact of life allows for simple formulas to publically deal with middle-school mentality of the media, who he knows do not speak for him.

Plus, I think he likes to see the holier-than-thou hypocrites swell up and turn purple with phony indignation when someone on the Right thumbs their nose at the Left's little moralistic land-mines.

Kind of like watchin' a tick on a hound-dog's back swell up purple with blood on an August afternoon when there ain't much else to do but shoot the flies off the screen door with the 38.

Y'all better be careful in 'Merica, eh Amigo? (slang from each N. American country.)

That should end your confusion about his words.



*


What about his actions?

That is the stumble, you know.

Leftists get so rattled by his words, they think those are his actions.
(If not for their maliciousness and willful ignorance, I'd say poor little Leftists.)


It's the downside of living in your head all the time.

If you did physical labor for a living you would understand more about the nature of action.

Truth is, his actions delivered on his promises.
(Chalk that up as another lie because he wasn't 100% on that)

*

But as you said, nothing I say will make any difference to a moron.

You should be so lucky as to have more like Trump.

[tillingborn]

Since you have no affinity for Donald Trump, you will not mind me pointing out that his success as a politician is based on his understanding and manipulation of that point.

It will be as irrelevant as the rest of your message. But more predictable.

That's just rude. In another thread you say this:

My hope is this: if two people who have such different leanings as you and I can speak together truthfully, with mutual respect, then maybe there's hope for a more civil kind of political discourse. So it's worth trying. And however strongly we may disagree, we don't have to become disagreeable, do we?

I agree with that, so without meaning to be confrontational, here's something said in that same thread that seems at odds with what you have said in this thread:

To me, if someone SELLS any idea with the intention of deceiving the listener, it doesn't REQUIRE the listener to be at fault.

Are the many victims of Socialism "at fault" for not being more aware of their own best interests? Perhaps. Or perhaps they're just naive "lambs to the slaughter." I think the truth is probably a mix of those two.

In your conservative-side view, however, you reverse this as "Buyer Beware"

Absolutely. That's called "being an adult." People have to take responsibility for themselves. And there's no alternative. Do you think the Socialist regime won't come for you if you just believe and don't ask questions?

Sorry: in the matter of selecting a government, there are no excuses for naivete. And the naive generally get eaten.

What I have argued in this thread is that the same principle extends to journalism. Now it seems that we agree.

[Gary Childress]

Hmm. Looks like there could be an investigation into a phone call Trump made to the Georgia Secretary of State, Brad Raffensperger. In the phone call, Trump seems to be pressuring Raffensperger to "find 11,780 votes" so that he can win the state. Some are saying this could be a violation of certain state and federal criminal statutes.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... d=msedgdhp

To be honest, I think we had a really bad pair of candidates for the 2020 election. Both seem to cross various ethical lines. I think the Feds should go ahead and do all their investigations and if either or both are found guilty, then throw either or both of them in prison--in adjacent cells, if both. Then the two of them can drive each other crazy for the remainder of their lives. I wouldn't want either one running this country.

[Walker]

Sure. He called someone who is cheating him and demands that the cheater cheat for him.

Dig just a little past the headline and use your brain this time.

[Gary Childress]

Sure. He called someone who is cheating him and demands that the cheater cheat for him.

Dig just a little past the headline and use your brain this time.

Not sure what you are saying here. Are you saying that it's OK for Trump to ask someone to cheat for him on the grounds that he (Trump) may have been cheated out of the election? So two wrongs make a right?

[Walker]

Here's a thinker who sees the obvious.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/20 ... erger.html

[Gary Childress]

Why would Georgia, run by a Republican governor and Republican secretary of State (Raffensperger) try to cheat another Republican out of the election in favor of a Democrat? It doesn't seem to make much sense. If anything I would think they would do everything legally in their power to ensure that their fellow Republican won through a fair election.

But I guess if the "American Thinker" says so, then it must be so?

[Walker]

What’s offensive and somewhat sad is the eagerness to jump on such an obvious bunch of bulls**t with alacrity, and propagate it to the world without even a breath of critical thinking.

Shame on you, Gary.

That's makes you a sucker as in hook, line, and sinker.


“A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.”

[Walker]

Dialogue with your delusional interpretations of reality and causation?

I'm not feeling the need.

Take that fantasy and play with it yourself, or better yet, wise up.

Maybe read some American Thinker and get some thinking tips.

[Gary Childress]

What’s offensive and somewhat sad is the eagerness to jump on such an obvious bunch of bulls**t with alacrity, and propagate it to the world without even a breath of critical thinking.

Shame on you, Gary.

That's makes you a sucker as in hook, line, and sinker.


“A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.”

Speak for yourself.

[Sculptor]

Why would Georgia, run by a Republican governor and Republican secretary of State (Raffensperger) try to cheat another Republican out of the election in favor of a Democrat? It doesn't seem to make much sense. If anything I would think they would do everything legally in their power to ensure that their fellow Republican won through a fair election.

But I guess if the "American Thinker" says so, then it must be so?

I think you make the mistake of assuming that people are rational. Walker is utterly devoid of this chartacteristic.

[Sculptor]

Here's a thinker who sees the obvious.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/20 ... erger.html

There's no need to lie when we have all heard Trump asking his to CHEAT.
Try and get a life!

[Walker]

What's that feeble sound I hear?

Sheeple?

So that's the whining sound they make.


Gull-a-bull.