This video shows how fascism wins...

ChristianProgressive · 7th November 2019, 01:30 PM

https://twitter.com/Politidope/statu...25605715873792

(play the clip included)

I am utterly appalled that these women are allowed to vote in the US. They are obviously morally unfit to have the franchise.

(and before anyone gets shirty about it, no it is NOT about gender, it is about what their statements says about their character)

smartcooky · 7th November 2019, 06:23 PM

best response... Tim Williams

"You CAN'T reach these people. They're collectively lost in their fear, anger, and ignorance. We have to press on without them and show up in larger numbers than them at the polls. They're lost."

Says it all for me!

As another poster said earlier... you can't fix stupid!

Safe-Keeper · 7th November 2019, 06:32 PM

I would go further than lost and call them deplorable and irredemable.

Norman Alexander · 7th November 2019, 06:38 PM

What if the person Trump shot was you, lady?

Stacyhs · 7th November 2019, 06:41 PM

Not all the women were as stupid as that one in the back row on the end in the gray cardigan. That woman is beyond stupid.
ETA: this is only a small portion of the entire interview.

Craig4 · 7th November 2019, 09:13 PM

You can't worry about their kind. They aren't like us. They aren't real Americans. Focus on the people you can bring back to America's side. The **** in your video will always be one of Trump's whores . That stupid **** deserves what she gets.

The Great Zaganza · 7th November 2019, 10:59 PM

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

What if the person Trump shot was you, lady?

Maybe he had a good reason...

Ladewig · 8th November 2019, 12:21 AM

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

https://twitter.com/Politidope/statu...25605715873792

(play the clip included)

I am utterly appalled that these women are allowed to vote in the US. They are obviously morally unfit to have the franchise.

(and before anyone gets shirty about it, no it is NOT about gender, it is about what their statements says about their character)

The woman is a chuckle-head.

But di want to point out how chilling I consider those highlighted words. All US citizens who have not been convicted of an election-related crime should have the right to vote. Even the morally unfit ones.

3point14 · 8th November 2019, 02:29 AM

I have no sound and can't lip read. Could someone post hat was said?

PhantomWolf · 8th November 2019, 02:40 AM

Originally Posted by 3point14

I have no sound and can't lip read. Could someone post hat was said?

It's a part of a CNN sit down with women voters who had a past of swing voting and who had voted for Trump in the 2016 elections.

The clip was the final question in which those that showed unwavering support of Trump were asked if they would still support him is he did shoot someone on 5th Avenue. The two of them that were supporting him no matter what replied "Well why did he shoot them?"

The full article can be seen here....

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

3point14 · 8th November 2019, 02:41 AM

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

It's a part of a CNN sit down with women voters who had a past of swing voting and who had voted for Trump in the 2016 elections.

The clip was the final question in which those that showed unwavering support of Trump were asked if they would still support him is he did shoot someone on 5th Avenue. The two of them that were supporting him no matter what replied "Well why did he shoot them?"

The full article can be seen here....

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Thank you.

rockysmith76 · 8th November 2019, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

https://twitter.com/Politidope/statu...25605715873792

(play the clip included)

I am utterly appalled that these women are allowed to vote in the US. They are obviously morally unfit to have the franchise.

(and before anyone gets shirty about it, no it is NOT about gender, it is about what their statements says about their character)

And yet your first move seems to be is to censure their rights in a most Bolshevik way.

BobTheCoward · 8th November 2019, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

It's a part of a CNN sit down with women voters who had a past of swing voting and who had voted for Trump in the 2016 elections.

The clip was the final question in which those that showed unwavering support of Trump were asked if they would still support him is he did shoot someone on 5th Avenue. The two of them that were supporting him no matter what replied "Well why did he shoot them?"

The full article can be seen here....

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

It is a fair question.

theprestige · 8th November 2019, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

It is a fair question.

Not really. I think everyone understands the question is really about committing murder. I think that subtext is clear even in the original statement by Trump himself.

That said, the whole thing is a rhetorical gotcha game. In that sense, I'm perfectly okay with "why did he shoot them" as a rhetorical counter-play. If nothing else, it might prompt some anti-Trumpers to declare that legitimate killing isn't when it's Trump doing it.

Safe-Keeper · 8th November 2019, 11:29 AM

Originally Posted by Norman Alexander

What if the person Trump shot was you, lady?

That's one of the risks you just have to run when you vote for the Leopards Eating Peoples' Faces Party.

Mumbles · 10th November 2019, 07:02 PM

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

That's one of the risks you just have to run when you vote for the Leopards Eating Peoples' Faces Party.

Yep.

To note: This is a show of how a fascist *could* win, not how he (*cough cough* or she...) will.

ChristianProgressive · 6th December 2019, 05:11 AM

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

And yet your first move seems to be is to censure their rights in a most Bolshevik way.

Same theory as to why felons are not allowed to vote in many states. Their ACTIONS (in this case words) demonstrate they are not fit to be allowed to vote.

bluesjnr · 6th December 2019, 05:21 AM

Ask a stupid question...........

rockysmith76 · 6th December 2019, 06:46 AM

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

Same theory as to why felons are not allowed to vote in many states. Their ACTIONS (in this case words) demonstrate they are not fit to be allowed to vote.

DENIED: Felons can't vote because of their actions. You're talking about disallowing someone to vote because their views differ from yours, which are often quite dubious as demonstrated here.

Like it or not, in America, at least in theory, EVERYONE not a felon gets a vote, not just the Liberals. That's how it is, and should be.

ChristianProgressive · 6th December 2019, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

DENIED: Felons can't vote because of their actions. You're talking about disallowing someone to vote because their views differ from yours, which are often quite dubious as demonstrated here.

Like it or not, in America, at least in theory, EVERYONE not a felon gets a vote, not just the Liberals. That's how it is, and should be.

The idea is the same, their words are their actions. Anyone who thinks like those women demonstrates a dangerously psychopathic personality that makes them morally unfit to have any voice in setting public policy.

dudalb · 6th December 2019, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

And yet your first move seems to be is to censure their rights in a most Bolshevik way.

Well, given so many of you Trumpets want to basically shut down any criticism of Dear Leader,it balances out.

dudalb · 6th December 2019, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive

The idea is the same, their words are their actions. Anyone who thinks like those women demonstrates a dangerously psychopathic personality that makes them morally unfit to have any voice in setting public policy.

Ah, but who decides who is a dangerously psychopathic personality?

cullennz · 7th December 2019, 01:03 PM

Incredibly stupid hypothetical scenario question purely designed as a gotcha

And why did he shoot them is a perfectly valid answer.

Was the person he shot shooting other people?

Were they in a truck trying to run people over?

Four simple words they were too dim to include.

Shot someone "for no valid reason"

ChristianProgressive · 7th December 2019, 01:42 PM

Originally Posted by dudalb

Ah, but who decides who is a dangerously psychopathic personality?

Society as a whole, acting in democratic fashion.

ChristianProgressive · 7th December 2019, 01:44 PM

Originally Posted by cullennz

Incredibly stupid hypothetical scenario question purely designed as a gotcha

We didn't write the quote, Trump did.

Quote:

And why did he shoot them is a perfectly valid answer.

No it isn't.

Quote:

Was the person he shot shooting other people?

Were they in a truck trying to run people over?

Four simple words they were too dim to include.

Shot someone "for no valid reason"

Translation: LOOK, A SQUIRREL!

cullennz · 7th December 2019, 01:59 PM

If Trump was walking down 5th avenue and saw someone shooting little kids, ran in front of them and acted as a human shield, was shot 10 times before the gunman was subdued, and miraculously survived only after the hospital forced him to stop personally ferrying the injured little kids by hand to the hospital....

Would you vote for him?

Stacyhs · 7th December 2019, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by cullennz

If Trump was walking down 5th avenue and saw someone shooting little kids, ran in front of them and acted as a human shield, was shot 10 times before the gunman was subdued, and miraculously survived only after the hospital forced him to stop personally ferrying the injured little kids by hand to the hospital....

Would you vote for him?

Trump's quote is well known so these people knew exactly what the question was referring to:

Quote:

You know what else they say about my people? The polls, they say I have the most loyal people. Did you ever see that? Where I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters, okay? It’s like incredible.

There was no "good reason"; it was all about how loyal his supporters are. So let's drop the "it was a legitimate answer" defense. It was nothing more than the woman doing exactly what Trump was referring to: defending him no matter what he does.

cullennz · 7th December 2019, 02:21 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

Trump's quote is well known so these people knew exactly what the question was referring to:

There was no "good reason"; it was all about how loyal his supporters are. So let's drop the "it was a legitimate answer" defense. It was nothing more than the woman doing exactly what Trump was referring to: defending him no matter what he does.

Trump saying a dumb thing because he is a complete ignorant nut job, does not make the question less stupid, or the answer less valid.

The women in the clip aren't Trump.

Stacyhs · 7th December 2019, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by cullennz

Trump saying a dumb thing because he is a complete ignorant nut job, does not make the question less stupid, or the answer less valid.

The women in the clip aren't Trump.

I didn't say it was a stupid question. I think it was a valid question. I said the "it was a legitimate answer" defense is nonsense. The question clearly referred directly to Trump's stupid statement which wasn't really about shooting someone but about his base's unquestioning loyalty.

Cabbage · 7th December 2019, 03:14 PM

Originally Posted by cullennz

If Trump was walking down 5th avenue and saw someone shooting little kids, ran in front of them and acted as a human shield, was shot 10 times before the gunman was subdued, and miraculously survived only after the hospital forced him to stop personally ferrying the injured little kids by hand to the hospital....

Would you vote for him?

Hell no.

If he turned water into wine: Hell no.

If he walked on water: Hell no.

Stacyhs · 7th December 2019, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by Cabbage

Hell no.

If he turned water into wine: Hell no.

If he walked on water: Hell no.

Wot? He hasn't already claimed to have done both as The Chosen One?

Ziggurat · 7th December 2019, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by theprestige

Not really. I think everyone understands the question is really about committing murder.

Not really. It's a sort of Rorschach question: you can make it be whatever you want it to be, because it's so detached from reality. Trump is never going to actually shoot anyone. So a question about a situation that can never happen is open to whatever interpretation you want to use. It should surprise no one that different people interpret it in radically different ways.

Responding with "why did he shoot them" isn't an illogical response.

Stacyhs · 7th December 2019, 04:33 PM

This is no Rorschach question. This same woman was asked immediately before the "shoot someone" question "Is there anything he could do or anything that could happen that would make you not vote for him?" Her answer: No. She did not qualify it with an "It depends on why he did it." It was a flat out 'no'. She was demonstrating exactly what Trump was pointing out: it doesn't matter what he does, his base is loyal to him. It has nothing to do with shooting someone. He could have said anything and she would have found some way to justify her support of him.

angrysoba · 7th December 2019, 05:22 PM

Originally Posted by BobTheCoward

It is a fair question.

I actually agree with Bob. It is a fair question. My uncle was once banned for drink-driving and had to attend a meeting about the dangers of drinking and driving. At one point he was asked, “how would you feel if you hit someone with your car?” He replied “it depends on whether or not it was deliberate.” The counselor and other attendees were astonished “why would you hit them with your car...deliberately!?!” So he explained that he was once commended by Hampshire police for doing just that when a guy held up a shop with a chanisaw and he drove his car into the robber to prevent him getting away. Suddenly the attendees wanted to hear more about this story than they wanted to listen to the counselor.

Roger Ramjets · 7th December 2019, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by cullennz

Four simple words they were too dim to include.

Shot someone "for no valid reason"

Q. Define 'valid reason'.

A:
1. I'm the president, so I can do whatever I want.

2. Obama didn't, so I have to.

3. Liberals kill 1 million babies every year!

4. IOIYAAR.

5. She was a Muslim terrorist from Mexico (I could tell by the dark skin).

6. I never even meet the man, why would I shoot him? You should investigate Biden's son! A very reliable source told me he did it.

Ziggurat · 7th December 2019, 05:40 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

This is no Rorschach question. This same woman was asked immediately before the "shoot someone" question "Is there anything he could do or anything that could happen that would make you not vote for him?" Her answer: No.

These questions aren't being asked in a vacuum. And they probably aren't being treated as purely hypothetical. For example, if Trump opened a hellmouth and summoned Satan to earth, she might not vote for him. But that's not going to happen. There's likely an implicit "what could Trump do that you think he actually would do" qualifier in her interpretation to the question.

Furthermore, people frequently don't do what they say they will do. A bunch of people said they'd move to Canada if Trump was elected, and promptly failed to do so when he was. I bet that a bunch of people who said that there was nothing Trump could do to lose their support actually would stop supporting him if he did something like murder someone in cold blood. But since there's essentially no risk of that happening (and the people who said they'd move to Canada probably thought there's no risk of Trump being elected), their answer is basically just a way to voice support for their chosen candidate in the face of criticism of him. The people who said they'd move to Canada weren't serious either, it was just a way of voicing opposition to him. It's a mistake to read more than that into it.

Stacyhs · 7th December 2019, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by Ziggurat

These questions aren't being asked in a vacuum.

I have no idea what that is supposed to mean.

Quote:

And they probably aren't being treated as purely hypothetical.

No, they're not being treated as hypothetical. The woman was asked a direct and specific question and she answered with a direct and specific answer.

Quote:

For example, if Trump opened a hellmouth and summoned Satan to earth, she might not vote for him. But that's not going to happen. There's likely an implicit "what could Trump do that you think he actually would do" qualifier in her interpretation to the question.

Now you're making assumptions for what the woman might do or not do according to her interpretation. I'm going on what she said.

Quote:

Furthermore, people frequently don't do what they say they will do. A bunch of people said they'd move to Canada if Trump was elected, and promptly failed to do so when he was. I bet that a bunch of people who said that there was nothing Trump could do to lose their support actually would stop supporting him if he did something like murder someone in cold blood. But since there's essentially no risk of that happening (and the people who said they'd move to Canada probably thought there's no risk of Trump being elected), their answer is basically just a way to voice support for their chosen candidate in the face of criticism of him. The people who said they'd move to Canada weren't serious either, it was just a way of voicing opposition to him. It's a mistake to read more than that into it.

And I think it's a mistake to read less into it considering the amount of people who voted for and still support Trump despite the things he's actually said and done. If any other candidate had behaved they way he has and said the disgusting things he has, s/he would have lost most people. But not Trump. There's something about him that induces a cult like following. He's the Jim Jones of politics.

cullennz · 7th December 2019, 06:16 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

This is no Rorschach question. This same woman was asked immediately before the "shoot someone" question "Is there anything he could do or anything that could happen that would make you not vote for him?" Her answer: No. She did not qualify it with an "It depends on why he did it." It was a flat out 'no'. She was demonstrating exactly what Trump was pointing out: it doesn't matter what he does, his base is loyal to him. It has nothing to do with shooting someone. He could have said anything and she would have found some way to justify her support of him.

Well then maybe the person posting the stupid seconds long twitter video on repeat should have posted the whole interview with them, rather than just the stupid question?

We don't even know if the women knew about Trump's quote on it.

cullennz · 7th December 2019, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets

Q. Define 'valid reason'.

A:
1. I'm the president, so I can do whatever I want.

2. Obama didn't, so I have to.

3. Liberals kill 1 million babies every year!

4. IOIYAAR.

5. She was a Muslim terrorist from Mexico (I could tell by the dark skin).

6. I never even meet the man, why would I shoot him? You should investigate Biden's son! A very reliable source told me he did it.

I did

Me

"Was the person he shot shooting other people?

Were they in a truck trying to run people over?"

cullennz · 7th December 2019, 06:42 PM

Originally Posted by Stacyhs

There's something about him that induces a cult like following. He's the Jim Jones of politics.

There is also something about him that induces a cult like, almost irrational hatred of him, which is even larger.

Which while semi relate-able as he is an utter misogynistic, bigoted, thick ********, it can be quite funny to watch the hand wringing with the slightest thing he says or does.

Especially when I think he will get back in again.

7th November 2019, 01:30 PM	#1
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,828	This video shows how fascism wins... https://twitter.com/Politidope/statu...25605715873792 (play the clip included) I am utterly appalled that these women are allowed to vote in the US. They are obviously morally unfit to have the franchise. (and before anyone gets shirty about it, no it is NOT about gender, it is about what their statements says about their character)
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

7th November 2019, 06:23 PM	#2
smartcooky Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Nelson, New Zealand Posts: 16,753	best response... Tim Williams "You CAN'T reach these people. They're collectively lost in their fear, anger, and ignorance. We have to press on without them and show up in larger numbers than them at the polls. They're lost." Says it all for me! As another poster said earlier... you can't fix stupid!
	__________________ I want to thank the 126 Republican Congress members for providing a convenient and well organized list for the mid-terms. - Fred Wellman (Senior VA Advisor to The Lincoln Project) If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

7th November 2019, 06:32 PM	#3
Safe-Keeper Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Norway Posts: 10,389	I would go further than lost and call them deplorable and irredemable.
	__________________ "He's like a drunk being given a sobriety test by the police after being pulled over. Just as a drunk can't walk a straight line, Trump can't think in a straight line. He's all over the place."--Stacyhs "If you are still hung up on that whole words-have-meaning thing, then 2020 is going to be a long year for you." --Ladewig

7th November 2019, 06:38 PM	#4
Norman Alexander Philosopher Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Gundungurra Posts: 8,743	What if the person Trump shot was you, lady?
	__________________ _{...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015}

7th November 2019, 06:41 PM	#5
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 17,984	Not all the women were as stupid as that one in the back row on the end in the gray cardigan. That woman is beyond stupid. ETA: this is only a small portion of the entire interview.
	Last edited by Stacyhs; 7th November 2019 at 06:42 PM.

7th November 2019, 09:13 PM	#6
Craig4 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: I live in a swamp Posts: 22,550	You can't worry about their kind. They aren't like us. They aren't real Americans. Focus on the people you can bring back to America's side. The ** in your video will always be one of Trump's whores . That stupid ** deserves what she gets.

7th November 2019, 10:59 PM	#7
The Great Zaganza Maledictorian Join Date: Aug 2016 Posts: 14,622	Originally Posted by Norman Alexander What if the person Trump shot was you, lady? Maybe he had a good reason...
	__________________ So what are you going to do about it, huh? What would an intellectual do? What would Plato do?

8th November 2019, 12:21 AM	#8
Ladewig I lost an avatar bet. Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 28,033	Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive https://twitter.com/Politidope/statu...25605715873792 (play the clip included) I am utterly appalled that these women are allowed to vote in the US. They are obviously morally unfit to have the franchise. (and before anyone gets shirty about it, no it is NOT about gender, it is about what their statements says about their character) The woman is a chuckle-head. But di want to point out how chilling I consider those highlighted words. All US citizens who have not been convicted of an election-related crime should have the right to vote. Even the morally unfit ones.
	__________________ I lost an avatar bet to Doghouse Reilly.

8th November 2019, 02:29 AM	#9
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 20,558	I have no sound and can't lip read. Could someone post hat was said?
3point14 Pi Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 20,558	__________________ Up the River! Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]

8th November 2019, 10:33 AM	#12
rockysmith76 Banned Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 1,990	Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive https://twitter.com/Politidope/statu...25605715873792 (play the clip included) I am utterly appalled that these women are allowed to vote in the US. They are obviously morally unfit to have the franchise. (and before anyone gets shirty about it, no it is NOT about gender, it is about what their statements says about their character) And yet your first move seems to be is to censure their rights in a most Bolshevik way.
rockysmith76 Banned Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 1,990

8th November 2019, 11:22 AM	#14
theprestige Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 49,523	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward It is a fair question. Not really. I think everyone understands the question is really about committing murder. I think that subtext is clear even in the original statement by Trump himself. That said, the whole thing is a rhetorical gotcha game. In that sense, I'm perfectly okay with "why did he shoot them" as a rhetorical counter-play. If nothing else, it might prompt some anti-Trumpers to declare that legitimate killing isn't when it's Trump doing it.
	Last edited by theprestige; 8th November 2019 at 11:24 AM.

8th November 2019, 11:29 AM	#15
Safe-Keeper Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Norway Posts: 10,389	Originally Posted by Norman Alexander What if the person Trump shot was you, lady? That's one of the risks you just have to run when you vote for the Leopards Eating Peoples' Faces Party.
	__________________ "He's like a drunk being given a sobriety test by the police after being pulled over. Just as a drunk can't walk a straight line, Trump can't think in a straight line. He's all over the place."--Stacyhs "If you are still hung up on that whole words-have-meaning thing, then 2020 is going to be a long year for you." --Ladewig

10th November 2019, 07:02 PM	#16
Mumbles Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 8,396	Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper That's one of the risks you just have to run when you vote for the Leopards Eating Peoples' Faces Party. Yep. To note: This is a show of how a fascist could win, not how he (cough cough or she...) will.
Mumbles Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 8,396

6th December 2019, 05:11 AM	#17
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,828	Originally Posted by rockysmith76 And yet your first move seems to be is to censure their rights in a most Bolshevik way. Same theory as to why felons are not allowed to vote in many states. Their ACTIONS (in this case words) demonstrate they are not fit to be allowed to vote.
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

6th December 2019, 05:21 AM	#18
bluesjnr Professional Nemesis for Hire Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Home. Posts: 8,468	Ask a stupid question...........
	__________________

6th December 2019, 06:46 AM	#19
rockysmith76 Banned Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 1,990	Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive Same theory as to why felons are not allowed to vote in many states. Their ACTIONS (in this case words) demonstrate they are not fit to be allowed to vote. DENIED: Felons can't vote because of their actions. You're talking about disallowing someone to vote because their views differ from yours, which are often quite dubious as demonstrated here. Like it or not, in America, at least in theory, EVERYONE not a felon gets a vote, not just the Liberals. That's how it is, and should be.
rockysmith76 Banned Join Date: Jul 2019 Posts: 1,990

6th December 2019, 04:27 PM	#20
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,828	Originally Posted by rockysmith76 DENIED: Felons can't vote because of their actions. You're talking about disallowing someone to vote because their views differ from yours, which are often quite dubious as demonstrated here. Like it or not, in America, at least in theory, EVERYONE not a felon gets a vote, not just the Liberals. That's how it is, and should be. The idea is the same, their words are their actions. Anyone who thinks like those women demonstrates a dangerously psychopathic personality that makes them morally unfit to have any voice in setting public policy.
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

6th December 2019, 04:37 PM	#21
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 50,310	Originally Posted by rockysmith76 And yet your first move seems to be is to censure their rights in a most Bolshevik way. Well, given so many of you Trumpets want to basically shut down any criticism of Dear Leader,it balances out.
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

6th December 2019, 04:39 PM	#22
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Sacramento Posts: 50,310	Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive The idea is the same, their words are their actions. Anyone who thinks like those women demonstrates a dangerously psychopathic personality that makes them morally unfit to have any voice in setting public policy. Ah, but who decides who is a dangerously psychopathic personality?
	__________________ Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty. Robert Heinlein.

7th December 2019, 01:03 PM	#23
cullennz Suspended Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: NZ Posts: 19,832	Incredibly stupid hypothetical scenario question purely designed as a gotcha And why did he shoot them is a perfectly valid answer. Was the person he shot shooting other people? Were they in a truck trying to run people over? Four simple words they were too dim to include. Shot someone "for no valid reason"
	Last edited by cullennz; 7th December 2019 at 01:05 PM.

7th December 2019, 01:42 PM	#24
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,828	Originally Posted by dudalb Ah, but who decides who is a dangerously psychopathic personality? Society as a whole, acting in democratic fashion.
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

7th December 2019, 01:44 PM	#25
ChristianProgressive Master Poster Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 2,828	Originally Posted by cullennz Incredibly stupid hypothetical scenario question purely designed as a gotcha We didn't write the quote, Trump did. Quote: And why did he shoot them is a perfectly valid answer. No it isn't. Quote: Was the person he shot shooting other people? Were they in a truck trying to run people over? Four simple words they were too dim to include. Shot someone "for no valid reason" Translation: LOOK, A SQUIRREL!
	__________________ "As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man." - Matthew 24:37 "And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh." - Luke 21:28

7th December 2019, 01:59 PM	#26
cullennz Suspended Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: NZ Posts: 19,832	If Trump was walking down 5th avenue and saw someone shooting little kids, ran in front of them and acted as a human shield, was shot 10 times before the gunman was subdued, and miraculously survived only after the hospital forced him to stop personally ferrying the injured little kids by hand to the hospital.... Would you vote for him?

7th December 2019, 02:11 PM	#27
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 17,984	Originally Posted by cullennz If Trump was walking down 5th avenue and saw someone shooting little kids, ran in front of them and acted as a human shield, was shot 10 times before the gunman was subdued, and miraculously survived only after the hospital forced him to stop personally ferrying the injured little kids by hand to the hospital.... Would you vote for him? Trump's quote is well known so these people knew exactly what the question was referring to: Quote: You know what else they say about my people? The polls, they say I have the most loyal people. Did you ever see that? Where I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn’t lose any voters, okay? It’s like incredible. There was no "good reason"; it was all about how loyal his supporters are. So let's drop the "it was a legitimate answer" defense. It was nothing more than the woman doing exactly what Trump was referring to: defending him no matter what he does.

7th December 2019, 02:21 PM	#28
cullennz Suspended Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: NZ Posts: 19,832	Originally Posted by Stacyhs Trump's quote is well known so these people knew exactly what the question was referring to: There was no "good reason"; it was all about how loyal his supporters are. So let's drop the "it was a legitimate answer" defense. It was nothing more than the woman doing exactly what Trump was referring to: defending him no matter what he does. Trump saying a dumb thing because he is a complete ignorant nut job, does not make the question less stupid, or the answer less valid. The women in the clip aren't Trump.

7th December 2019, 02:34 PM	#29
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 17,984	Originally Posted by cullennz Trump saying a dumb thing because he is a complete ignorant nut job, does not make the question less stupid, or the answer less valid. The women in the clip aren't Trump. I didn't say it was a stupid question. I think it was a valid question. I said the "it was a legitimate answer" defense is nonsense. The question clearly referred directly to Trump's stupid statement which wasn't really about shooting someone but about his base's unquestioning loyalty.

7th December 2019, 03:14 PM	#30
Cabbage Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,598	Originally Posted by cullennz If Trump was walking down 5th avenue and saw someone shooting little kids, ran in front of them and acted as a human shield, was shot 10 times before the gunman was subdued, and miraculously survived only after the hospital forced him to stop personally ferrying the injured little kids by hand to the hospital.... Would you vote for him? Hell no. If he turned water into wine: Hell no. If he walked on water: Hell no.
Cabbage Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 2,598

7th December 2019, 03:17 PM	#31
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 17,984	Originally Posted by Cabbage Hell no. If he turned water into wine: Hell no. If he walked on water: Hell no. Wot? He hasn't already claimed to have done both as The Chosen One?

7th December 2019, 04:00 PM	#32
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 48,282	Originally Posted by theprestige Not really. I think everyone understands the question is really about committing murder. Not really. It's a sort of Rorschach question: you can make it be whatever you want it to be, because it's so detached from reality. Trump is never going to actually shoot anyone. So a question about a situation that can never happen is open to whatever interpretation you want to use. It should surprise no one that different people interpret it in radically different ways. Responding with "why did he shoot them" isn't an illogical response.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

7th December 2019, 04:33 PM	#33
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 17,984	This is no Rorschach question. This same woman was asked immediately before the "shoot someone" question "Is there anything he could do or anything that could happen that would make you not vote for him?" Her answer: No. She did not qualify it with an "It depends on why he did it." It was a flat out 'no'. She was demonstrating exactly what Trump was pointing out: it doesn't matter what he does, his base is loyal to him. It has nothing to do with shooting someone. He could have said anything and she would have found some way to justify her support of him.
	Last edited by Stacyhs; 7th December 2019 at 05:35 PM.

7th December 2019, 05:22 PM	#34
angrysoba Philosophile Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Osaka, Japan Posts: 29,309	Originally Posted by BobTheCoward It is a fair question. I actually agree with Bob. It is a fair question. My uncle was once banned for drink-driving and had to attend a meeting about the dangers of drinking and driving. At one point he was asked, “how would you feel if you hit someone with your car?” He replied “it depends on whether or not it was deliberate.” The counselor and other attendees were astonished “why would you hit them with your car...deliberately!?!” So he explained that he was once commended by Hampshire police for doing just that when a guy held up a shop with a chanisaw and he drove his car into the robber to prevent him getting away. Suddenly the attendees wanted to hear more about this story than they wanted to listen to the counselor.
	__________________ "The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before." "Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)

7th December 2019, 05:25 PM	#35
Roger Ramjets Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2008 Posts: 5,328	Originally Posted by cullennz Four simple words they were too dim to include. Shot someone "for no valid reason" Q. Define 'valid reason'. A: 1. I'm the president, so I can do whatever I want. 2. Obama didn't, so I have to. 3. Liberals kill 1 million babies every year! 4. IOIYAAR. 5. She was a Muslim terrorist from Mexico (I could tell by the dark skin). 6. I never even meet the man, why would I shoot him? You should investigate Biden's son! A very reliable source told me he did it.
	__________________ We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.

7th December 2019, 05:40 PM	#36
Ziggurat Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 48,282	Originally Posted by Stacyhs This is no Rorschach question. This same woman was asked immediately before the "shoot someone" question "Is there anything he could do or anything that could happen that would make you not vote for him?" Her answer: No. These questions aren't being asked in a vacuum. And they probably aren't being treated as purely hypothetical. For example, if Trump opened a hellmouth and summoned Satan to earth, she might not vote for him. But that's not going to happen. There's likely an implicit "what could Trump do that you think he actually would do" qualifier in her interpretation to the question. Furthermore, people frequently don't do what they say they will do. A bunch of people said they'd move to Canada if Trump was elected, and promptly failed to do so when he was. I bet that a bunch of people who said that there was nothing Trump could do to lose their support actually would stop supporting him if he did something like murder someone in cold blood. But since there's essentially no risk of that happening (and the people who said they'd move to Canada probably thought there's no risk of Trump being elected), their answer is basically just a way to voice support for their chosen candidate in the face of criticism of him. The people who said they'd move to Canada weren't serious either, it was just a way of voicing opposition to him. It's a mistake to read more than that into it.
	__________________ "As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

7th December 2019, 06:02 PM	#37
Stacyhs Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2016 Location: United States Posts: 17,984	Originally Posted by Ziggurat These questions aren't being asked in a vacuum. I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. Quote: And they probably aren't being treated as purely hypothetical. No, they're not being treated as hypothetical. The woman was asked a direct and specific question and she answered with a direct and specific answer. Quote: For example, if Trump opened a hellmouth and summoned Satan to earth, she might not vote for him. But that's not going to happen. There's likely an implicit "what could Trump do that you think he actually would do" qualifier in her interpretation to the question. Now you're making assumptions for what the woman might do or not do according to her interpretation. I'm going on what she said. Quote: Furthermore, people frequently don't do what they say they will do. A bunch of people said they'd move to Canada if Trump was elected, and promptly failed to do so when he was. I bet that a bunch of people who said that there was nothing Trump could do to lose their support actually would stop supporting him if he did something like murder someone in cold blood. But since there's essentially no risk of that happening (and the people who said they'd move to Canada probably thought there's no risk of Trump being elected), their answer is basically just a way to voice support for their chosen candidate in the face of criticism of him. The people who said they'd move to Canada weren't serious either, it was just a way of voicing opposition to him. It's a mistake to read more than that into it. And I think it's a mistake to read less into it considering the amount of people who voted for and still support Trump despite the things he's actually said and done. If any other candidate had behaved they way he has and said the disgusting things he has, s/he would have lost most people. But not Trump. There's something about him that induces a cult like following. He's the Jim Jones of politics.

7th December 2019, 06:16 PM	#38
cullennz Suspended Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: NZ Posts: 19,832	Originally Posted by Stacyhs This is no Rorschach question. This same woman was asked immediately before the "shoot someone" question "Is there anything he could do or anything that could happen that would make you not vote for him?" Her answer: No. She did not qualify it with an "It depends on why he did it." It was a flat out 'no'. She was demonstrating exactly what Trump was pointing out: it doesn't matter what he does, his base is loyal to him. It has nothing to do with shooting someone. He could have said anything and she would have found some way to justify her support of him. Well then maybe the person posting the stupid seconds long twitter video on repeat should have posted the whole interview with them, rather than just the stupid question? We don't even know if the women knew about Trump's quote on it.