The right’s shocking admission: Dems have been right about Republicans all along

[fredtoast]

(03-18-2016, 02:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: 4. I'm not sure how many times he has to denounce this.

How about every time he is asked?  Is it really too much of a burden for him to tell the truth when he is asked a question instead of just blatantly lying?    

What possible motive did he have to lie instead of just telling the truth?  What if your child said he told a lie just because it was just too much trouble to tell the truth?  Would you not have a problem with that?

[*Nately120*]

(03-18-2016, 03:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Link?

And what about his comment about Megan Kelley being upset because she was menstruating?

You really want a President who makes comments like that?

Maybe the fact that he is an un-PC misogynist plutocrat will give him common ground in dealing with the evil dictator leaders of our enemies?

[fredtoast]

(03-18-2016, 02:12 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Oh, so you qualify trust, yet make a statement only a "rube' would trust Trump. What is I trust him to abolish or reform NAFTA?

Then you bare a rube.  Does this statement sound like it is coming from a guy who will repeal NAFTA against the protests of large U.S. corporations?


"Taxes too high, wages too high," he later added. "We're not going to be able to compete against the world. I hate to say it, but we have to leave it the way it is. People have to go out, they have to work really hard and they have to get into that upper stratum. But we cannot do this if we are going to compete with the rest of the world. We just can't do it."

[*bfine32*]

(03-18-2016, 03:16 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Congratulations.  Your guess is correct.

But instead of making REAL arguments against immigrants he makes up lies about them based on their race he is being racists.  Many of the arguments against illegal immigrants are based on racists beliefs.  Just because he made the statement in regards to immigration that does not mean they are not racists.

And he did not just accuse them of being rapists and criminals.  He also accused them of being disease infested.  and he blamed the drug problem in the United States on mexican drug cartels.

This may come as surprise to may of you, but it is possible to make arguments against immigration without making up lies about a race.  But it is just much easier to stir up the rubes with racists lies.

(03-18-2016, 03:20 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So you are just fine with ISIS tactics?  That is what you want the United States to do?  You don't see anything wrong with their behavior?  If someone raped your daughter then you think it would be just fine for you to rape his daughter?

What Would Jesus Do?  Amirite? 

(03-18-2016, 03:23 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Link?

And what about his comment about Megan Kelley being upset because she was menstruating?

You really want a President who makes comments like that?

But I guess you think he is leading the polls because he is so good looking, right?

(03-18-2016, 03:28 PM)fredtoast Wrote: How about every time he is asked?  Is it really too much of a burden for him to tell the truth when he is asked a question instead of just blatantly lying?    

What possible motive did he have to lie instead of just telling the truth?  What if your child said he told a lie just because it was just too much trouble to tell the truth?  Would you not have a problem with that?

First off: Dont you know how to do that all in one post?

Secondly: I appreciate you further illustarting the point and going "Full Fred". A word of advise to the onlookers: Never go Full Fred.

You've also proved to be hypocritical (again). you call someone that trusts Trump a rube but when asked straight out do you trust Hillary you have to put qualifiers on your trust.

The point is everyone make an election about race and most focus on it much more than Trump; just ask your Abuela that changed her logo to a kwanzaa symbol; you know that person you trust so much. You and other just have a problem because he is not drawing a line. He is making the "mistake" of treating everyone the same.

The biggest bigot is the one that tries too hard not to look like one. If you are not a bigot, you don't mind folks looking your way.

[fredtoast]

(03-18-2016, 03:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: First off: Dont you know how to do that all in one post?

Secondly: I appreciate you further illustarting the point and going "Full Fred". A word of advise to the onlookers: Never go Full Fred.

You've also proved to be hypocritical (again). you call someone that trusts Trump a rube but when asked straight out do you trust Hillary you have to put qualifiers on your trust.

The point is everyone make an election about race and most focus on it much more than Trump; just ask your Abuela that changed her logo to a kwanzaa symbol; you know that person you trust so much. You and other just have a problem because he is not drawing a line. He is making the "mistake" of treating everyone the same.

The biggest bigot is the one that tries too hard not to look like one. If you are not a bigot, you don't mind folks looking your way.

Why did you quote 4 of my posts and then not address a single thing I said in any of them?

And how the hell doe it make me a hypocrite to put some limits on how much I trust Hillary?  I think this proves a big point about the Trump supporters.  The only way they can imagine following a political candidate is just to blindly believe everything that candidate says.

And to say that Trump "is not drawing a line" and "treats everyone the same" is absolutely absurd.  Does he accuse every white American citizen of being a terrorist threat.  Does he accuse every white US citizen of being a disease ridden rapist?  Does he accuse men of being upset just because of hormones?  Does he judge the male candidates by how good lookinmg they are?

[*PhilHos*]

(03-18-2016, 04:54 PM)fredtoast Wrote: And how the hell doe it make me a hypocrite to put some limits on how much I trust Hillary?  I think this proves a big point about the Trump supporters.  The only way they can imagine following a political candidate is just to blindly believe everything that candidate says.

So EVERY Trump supporter is a BLIND follower? EVERY Trump supporter is a rube?

[GMDino]

(03-19-2016, 02:02 PM)PhilHos Wrote: So EVERY Trump supporter is a BLIND follower? EVERY Trump supporter is a rube?

I can only speak to the ones I know.  Yes.  They think he will maintain white power, get rid of all foreigners and do whatever he wants...much like the dictator they post over and over they think Obama is.

[*bfine32*]

(03-19-2016, 02:02 PM)PhilHos Wrote: So EVERY Trump supporter is a BLIND follower? EVERY Trump supporter is a rube?

Now you're getting it. They are not near as smart as those that follow Hillary. The know she is untrustworthy but they are smart enough to know which traits to trust. Those that will back Hillary even though she can't be trustd are truly a special breed, while Trump supporters are blind rubes.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-19-2016, 02:02 PM)PhilHos Wrote: So EVERY Trump supporter is a BLIND follower? EVERY Trump supporter is a rube?

Fred won't answer this.  I've confronted him on this several times and he doesn't respond, or at best obfuscates.  It's one of the reasons I don't put him much above Lucie.  Fred is a much smarter man than Lucie but he lacks the moral courage to confront a solid argument against his positions.  Moral cowardice is ugly regardless of ideology.

[fredtoast]

(03-19-2016, 11:18 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Fred won't answer this.  I've confronted him on this several times and he doesn't respond, or at best obfuscates.  It's one of the reasons I don't put him much above Lucie.  Fred is a much smarter man than Lucie but he lacks the moral courage to confront a solid argument against his positions.  Moral cowardice is ugly regardless of ideology.

This is a complete lie and I challenge you to post a link to any thread where I have refused to answer this question. This is Brad-level childishness.  

Yes.  i have no problem saying that every person who supports Trump is rube.  There is not other explanation.  When TRUMP HIMSELF calls his own followers rubes ("I could shoot a man in the middle of the street and they would still support me.") then I have no problem agreeing with him.

[fredtoast]

(03-19-2016, 04:55 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Those that will back Hillary even though she can't be trustd are truly a special breed, while Trump supporters are blind rubes.

Except we do know she can be trusted.  I have already explained this to you.  I gave you a very detailed explanation of why we can trust Hillary to govern properly.

Apparently you just don't know how to read.

Or else you are just a complete liar like SSF.

[fredtoast]

(03-19-2016, 02:02 PM)PhilHos Wrote: So EVERY Trump supporter is a BLIND follower? EVERY Trump supporter is a rube?

Every single one of them that I have met in person or seen on TV.  They all say stuff like "We don't care if it is true.  we just like the way he says it."

And if you value an asshole attitude over the truth then you are a rube.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-20-2016, 11:55 AM)fredtoast Wrote: This is a complete lie and I challenge you to post a link to any thread where I have refused to answer this question. This is Brad-level childishness.  

Yes.  i have no problem saying that every person who supports Trump is rube.  There is not other explanation.  When TRUMP HIMSELF calls his own followers rubes ("I could shoot a man in the middle of the street and they would still support me.") then I have no problem agreeing with him.

Ahem, you are well known for dodging pointed question or simply not answering them.  To claim otherwise would be inaccurate.  If you want to get specific regarding this question then you may well be right, I don't really care enough to find out.  But my point in general stands and isn't really disputable.  I do appreciate you're admission to stereotyping people, although a defense attorney who engages in those kind of blanket judgments does disturb me a bit.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-20-2016, 11:55 AM)fredtoast Wrote: This is a complete lie and I challenge you to post a link to any thread where I have refused to answer this question. This is Brad-level childishness.  

Yes.  i have no problem saying that every person who supports Trump is rube.  There is not other explanation.  When TRUMP HIMSELF calls his own followers rubes ("I could shoot a man in the middle of the street and they would still support me.") then I have no problem agreeing with him.

BTW, I confronted, and refuted, you on this very issue in this very thread and you didn't respond.  So I guess I did lie, about not looking for an example anyways.  In my defense I didn't have to look very hard.

http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-The-right%E2%80%99s-shocking-admission-Dems-have-been-right-about-Republicans-all-along?pid=194907#pid194907

[fredtoast]

(03-20-2016, 12:48 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: BTW, I confronted, and refuted, you on this very issue in this very thread and you didn't respond.  So I guess I did lie, about not looking for an example anyways.  In my defense I didn't have to look very hard.

http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-The-right%E2%80%99s-shocking-admission-Dems-have-been-right-about-Republicans-all-along?pid=194907#pid194907

So you linked a thread where I responded to prove that I did not respond?

WTF kind of an argument is this?

[fredtoast]

(03-20-2016, 12:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: But my point in general stands and isn't really disputable. 

My point is indisputable, but I can't come up with a single shred of evidence to support it other than my own opinion.

[*Nately120*]

(03-20-2016, 11:55 AM)fredtoast Wrote: This is a complete lie and I challenge you to post a link to any thread where I have refused to answer this question. This is Brad-level childishness.  

Yes.  i have no problem saying that every person who supports Trump is rube.  There is not other explanation.  When TRUMP HIMSELF calls his own followers rubes ("I could shoot a man in the middle of the street and they would still support me.") then I have no problem agreeing with him.

In all fairness, Trump said he could shoot someone in Manhattan and still be supported.  We all know Manhattan is full of liberal d-bags that Trump's supporters don't care about...er, unless it's about 9/11 in which case that blue state is solid gold USA.  If Trump said:

I could shoot a woman
I could shoot a child
I could shoot a police officer
I could shoot a US veteran
I could shoot a dog
I could rape someone
I could flash children

or so on, people wouldn't have been as sympathetic.  Face it, the concept of a man being shot isn't all that offensive to people.  I assure you if Trump said he could shoot a dog and implied that people still would like him that people would have actually lost their minds.  I'm only half-joking on this...wacky stuff.

This sort of makes me wonder if you asked people on the street "Would you shoot a man?" versus shoot a dog, or woman, etc. how the responses would differ.  Maybe the phrase "shoot a man" is just so generic it is accepted as being pretty simple in response.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-20-2016, 02:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So you linked a thread where I responded to prove that I did not respond?

WTF kind of an argument is this?

Uh, no you didn't respond to that post or the points made in it.  Did you eat some moldy bread or something?

(03-20-2016, 02:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: My point is indisputable, but I can't come up with a single shred of evidence to support it other than my own opinion.

Sorry Fred, it's not exactly a secret that you do this and always have.  I've said it before, we agree on more things than we don't but people who dodge direct questions or flat out refuse to answer them is a pet peeve of minor and you're historically one of the worst offenders.  If you disagree, which you obviously do, that's fine and we'll move on.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(03-20-2016, 02:06 PM)Nately120 Wrote: In all fairness, Trump said he could shoot someone in Manhattan and still be supported.  We all know Manhattan is full of liberal d-bags that Trump's supporters don't care about...er, unless it's about 9/11 in which case that blue state is solid gold USA.  If Trump said:

I could shoot a woman
I could shoot a child
I could shoot a police officer
I could shoot a US veteran
I could shoot a dog
I could rape someone
I could flash children

or so on, people wouldn't have been as sympathetic.  Face it, the concept of a man being shot isn't all that offensive to people.  I assure you if Trump said he could shoot a dog and implied that people still would like him that people would have actually lost their minds.  I'm only half-joking on this...wacky stuff.

This sort of makes me wonder if you asked people on the street "Would you shoot a man?" versus shoot a dog, or woman, etc. how the responses would differ.  Maybe the phrase "shoot a man" is just so generic it is accepted as being pretty simple in response.

The statement was also made as an obvious, tongue in cheek, exaggeration while he was talking about how loyal his voters are.  It's like his baiting the hook with restricting the media and relaxing libel laws.  People like Fred can't wait to swallow the hook whole.  It's partially why I find all of this so amusing.  trump is trolling the hell out of so many people and the vast majority don't seem to get it at all.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/23/politics/donald-trump-shoot-somebody-support/

That anyone could watch that and draw Fred's conclusion saddens me.

[*Nately120*]

(03-20-2016, 04:38 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The statement was also made as an obvious, tongue in cheek, exaggeration while he was talking about how loyal his voters are.  It's like his baiting the hook with restricting the media and relaxing libel laws.  People like Fred can't wait to swallow the hook whole.  It's partially why I find all of this so amusing.  trump is trolling the hell out of so many people and the vast majority don't seem to get it at all.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/23/politics/donald-trump-shoot-somebody-support/

That anyone could watch that and draw Fred's conclusion saddens me.

Still, the phrase was chosen carefully.  I honestly think you'd get more flack for saying you'd kick a dog than you would saying you'd shoot a man.