*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[oskar]

Here's a cute interview with McAfee that's completely unrelated.

https://youtu.be/tfe4Fjf3sds

I hope Adult Swim starts doing politics.

[MadMojoMonkey]

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/10/68366...e-data-tell-us

"When it comes to people in the country without proper documentation, the majority of them didn't cross the Mexican border at all. Most of them came to the United States legally — but then don't leave."

A wall only makes it harder for them to leave, right? This wall is going to cause more illegal immigrants that it stops!!!

[oskar]

I'd love it, but I don't think so. He has already committed to "the wall is already being built." and "finish the wall"

[OngBonga]

There are people out there who think that is serious journalism. Obviously they don't know who Jena Friedman is or what "Adult Swim" means.

I never liked McAfee before now, but he's fucking awesome in this interview.

[oskar]

I didn't know her! She's awesome! I love tall, sarcastic women.

Meanwhile: Trumps approval rating polls are in... They're UP!

rip america lol

[OngBonga]

I've seen her before, but wouldn't have immediately known it was satire if not for the fact it was uploaded by Adult Swim. I know who they are.

They are both brilliant. I initially thought it must be a lookalike. I didn't expect that level of satire from someone I assumed was just a rich asshole.

[Jack Sawyer]

Howard Schultz get a CNN town hall.

No one even mentions Tulsi.

CNN is such a joke. Like a sad joke. One so sad you won't even laugh.

[oskar]

I really want to give them the benefit of doubt and say: it's plausible that they're actually worried that a too-progressive candidate on the left could hand Trump the election, should he be a free man in 2020. But it's really hard to not see their silly little dance around the completely fabricated Omar controversy - what jew would even disagree. It's not a conspiracy that there's a pro-israel lobby influencing american politics. To call that anti-semitism with a straight face... it's hard not to see that as anything as their corporate sponsors talking. I'm sure billionaires across the country wake up in a cold sweat over the prospect of AOC 2024.

idk what their game is with Howard Schultz. That makes no sense to me. Platforming that guy seems like a game with no win condition. Just don't even give him air time.

[Jack Sawyer]

I'm sure billionaires across the country wake up in a cold sweat over the prospect of AOC 2024.

She'll get JFK'd if it gets that far

[oskar]

Speaking of someone being in danger of getting jfk'd:

[boost]

Being born on Somalia, I'm guessing her first language was not English, so she gets some slack, but she didn't do that great of a job there.

[Jack Sawyer]

Being born on Somalia, I'm guessing her first language was not English, so she gets some slack, but she didn't do that great of a job there.

How so not?

She called out this dude's doings to his face.

How is that "not such a great job"?

Trump picked from the bottom of the fucking barrel again (what a surprise), so I guess it's time for someone to remind people who the fuck that asshole is.

[OngBonga]

Did you know that Trump's special representative for Venezuela was defending the US sponsored coup in guatemala that put a dictator into power that later committed mass murder? I didn't know that.

Why don't you despise every leader USA has had during your lifetime? USA has, for a very long time, been supportive of dictators and warmongers, so long as it in in USA's economic interests.

Did you know he supported a coup attempt against Hugo Chavez... the current president of Venezuela

*former
Chavez is dead, if he's still president of Venezuela then fair play to him. Also, it's worth noting that the economic warfare engaged against Venezuela very much predates Trump's time in office.

If you're blaming Trump for Venezuela, you're a bit thick. And if you think a new leader will take a different path, you're even more thick.

That's not to say I'm impressed with Trump in this regard. Had he de-escalated this issue, I'd be hailing him. Sadly that's not the case. I guess USA really needs that oil. Either that, or they really don't want to see an economically successful socialist state.

[oskar]

Why don't you despise every leader USA has had during your lifetime? USA has, for a very long time, been supportive of dictators and warmongers, so long as it in in USA's economic interests.

Who says I'm not? Trump is giving them jobs, Omar is calling them out.

*former
Chavez is dead, if he's still president of Venezuela then fair play to him. Also, it's worth noting that the economic warfare engaged against Venezuela very much predates Trump's time in office.

If you're blaming Trump for Venezuela, you're a bit thick. And if you think a new leader will take a different path, you're even more thick.

That's not to say I'm impressed with Trump in this regard. Had he de-escalated this issue, I'd be hailing him. Sadly that's not the case. I guess USA really needs that oil. Either that, or they really don't want to see an economically successful socialist state.

I don't blame him for it, but nothing will change under him - if anything he's giving warmongers like Bolton free reign because he's too stupid to delegate.

[oskar]

You call it not a great job, I call it unprecedented. Did you know that Trump's special representative for Venezuela was defending the US sponsored coup in guatemala that put a dictator into power that later committed mass murder? I didn't know that. Did you know he supported a coup attempt against Hugo Chavez... the current president of Venezuela. That seems relevant if you're the "special representative for venezuela."
Who else calls out these people? I have never heard someone in congress call out these war mongers. Certainly not in their first month on the job, after the president just called for their resignation. CNN and MSNBC are calling her an open anti-semite and all of right wing media want her dead. In context, this is not "a great job," this is a ruthless beating. This is domestic violence. If I see a bulldozer rip through a building at 90mph, I don't complain about the accent.

[OngBonga]

Trump's presidency demonstrates to me that the president doesn't control American foreign policy.

You talk about him going to prison and all that bollocks. That will only happen if he doesn't toe the line, if he disobeys his superiors.

USA is all theatre.

[Jack Sawyer]

A symbolic, factually demonstrably useless fence is a national emergency obviously

[boost]

The format isn't great, it lends itself to grand standing and the reduction of nuanced situations into yes or no questions-- but even given that, she didn't get him on anything. She asserted what she thought he thought, then didn't let him answer.

She got everything out of order. It's like she was telling a joke and she lead with the punchline. If he's on the record saying he thought X was good, then ask him if he stands by that. Then bring up the genocide associated with X and ask him if despite the genocide he still stands by his positive assessment of X. This way you've made him pro genocide by his own words. What she did was just say that he's pro genocide.

Jack and Oscar, you guys seem confused about my critique. I'm not knocking her position-- I don't know enough about it. I'm saying that her tactics were rookie as fuck and shit like that doesn't convert anyone and possibly alienates moderates who just see this without the knowledge of the context.

[Jack Sawyer]

The format isn't great, it lends itself to grand standing and the reduction of nuanced situations into yes or no questions-- but even given that, she didn't get him on anything. She asserted what she thought he thought, then didn't let him answer.

Strange. Looking at your reply it would seem like *he* gave *her* an actual chance to make her point uninterrupted.

She got everything out of order. It's like she was telling a joke and she lead with the punchline. If he's on the record saying he thought X was good, then ask him if he stands by that. Then bring up the genocide associated with X and ask him if despite the genocide he still stands by his positive assessment of X. This way you've made him pro genocide by his own words. What she did was just say that he's pro genocide.

Well, she did ask him. He said he was.

Focus on the message, never on the messenger.

Jack and Oscar, you guys seem confused about my critique. I'm not knocking her position-- I don't know enough about it. I'm saying that her tactics were rookie as fuck and shit like that doesn't convert anyone and possibly alienates moderates who just see this without the knowledge of the context.

You are focusing on the trees, missing the forest while you are at it.

This is the dude in question

[boost]

Strange. Looking at your reply it would seem like *he* gave *her* an actual chance to make her point uninterrupted.





Well, she did ask him. He said he was.

Focus on the message, never on the messenger.



You are focusing on the trees, missing the forest while you are at it.

This is the dude in question

You seem to think that being right is synonymous with being effective. I'm not missing the forest for the trees, but you might be. For the sake of making my point, I'll concede that Abrams is literally Satan. Omar still did an awful job in that hearing.

[boost]

As for her being an antisemite according to CNN, at least they're consistent: having anything critical to say about anything Islamic and you're an islamophobe, have anything negative to say about Israel and you're an antisemite.

[OngBonga]

They're not consistent. To be consistent, they would have to say that any kind of critisism, whether justified or not, is hate speech.

[Jack Sawyer]

They're not consistent. To be consistent, they would have to say that any kind of critisism, whether justified or not, is hate speech.

LOL CNN being consistent.

They do consistently hide the better presidential candidates you guys have though. Giving all sorts of platforms to the shit ones.

[oskar]

That is honestly a concern. I don't understand their logic. I'm trying not to be too cynical here... I'll put down my tinfoil hat and imagine they are promoting corporate sock-puppet democrats because they think they'll have the funds to win against Trump in 2020. I think they are under the wrong impression that a relevant number of current Trump supporters will cross the aisle if you put up a candidate that's center enough. But I think you'll lose way more voters to non-votes if you put up Klobuchar or Harris than you'll win over trump-servatives.

Majority Report clip

I love Sam "pause it" Seders, but Michael Brooks is my hero. That guy knows his shit. He's like a sane version of Chapo Trap House's Matt Christman.

[OngBonga]

Who the fuck is Jussie Smollett?

...he responded to this skepticism by saying that he believed that, if he had said his attackers were Mexicans, Muslims or black people, "the doubters would have supported me much more... And that says a lot about the place that we are in our country right now."

Spoiler - they were black.

[Jack Sawyer]

LOL CNN being consistent.

They do consistently hide the better presidential candidates you guys have though. Giving all sorts of platforms to the shit ones.

"Billionaires should be able to finance their yachts, and students should be able to pay back their loans"

- Amy Klobuchar, 2019

So far, CNN has had the following town halls:
1. Kamala Harris (literally hours after she announced)
2. Howard Shultz
3. Amy Klobuchar

Next up is probably Kirsten Gillebrand or Corey Booker. Perhaps probably Andrew Yang. Most likely Pete Booty though.

Warren? In April or May maybe. Tulsi? LOL. Papa Bern? Who's that?

[oskar]

I really don't think anyone cares about that outside of The_Donald. The US is closing in on the 50th mass shooting of 2019, and those aren't even newsworthy anymore. Why would some actor nobody has ever heard of, claiming he got an ouchie by some meanies be in any way relevant?

I only know of this story from what T_D is spreading about it and it doesn't add up. Is it really a fact that he paid two giant black guys to play Trump supporters and act out an attack that nobody witnessed? How does that make any sense? But even if that's true, I am aggressively disinterested in this complete non-story.

[OngBonga]

Is it really a fact that he paid two giant black guys to play Trump supporters and act out an attack that nobody witnessed? How does that make any sense?

Nothing makes sense any more. This is what appears to have happened.

Hate crimes happen all the time against Trump supporters as will as Trump haters. The media cherry pick what they want to report on, based on their political agenda. They are absolutely unwilling to present Trump supporters as victims.

The blatant bias of the media is one reason why Trump won. His opponents are not learning from their mistakes. That alone should concern you, even if made up crimes don't.

[oskar]

https://oversight.house.gov/news/pre...use-efforts-to
This seems slightly bigger.

[MadMojoMonkey]

https://oversight.house.gov/news/pre...use-efforts-to
This seems slightly bigger.

IDK anything about this, but Saudi oil will be gone in our lifetimes.
My source is my college roommate, now a Saudi engineer working in the oil fields in East Saudi Arabia.
I don't think he has any reason to make that up, and he'd be in a position to know.
When they run out of oil, they will need another power source.

IDK what kind of nuclear secrets we're talking about. It is like, civilian nuclear power plant secrets?
Or like... little red button nuclear secrets?

[OngBonga]

I really don't think anyone cares about that outside of The_Donald.

You don't care that someone creates a hate crime, and the media jump all over it for political reasons?

Do you really hate Trump that much that you're willing to abandon all sense of morality to see him fall?

[oskar]

You can keep me up to date if any more information comes out. Right now I don't think it's credible that anyone would be dumb enough to hire the two blackest looking black dudes to fake a racially motivated attack against another black guy with no witnesses. Here is where my bias comes in: I think Trump supporters are dumb enough to fabricate that story. I don't think anyone else would be dumb enough to act it out, but in the absence of facts I simply don't care one way or the other.

If this was a msm story, then I agree that this should never have been brought up in absence of facts, but the only way I know about this is because about 1 in 3 T_D submissions was about that case.

[OngBonga]

You can keep me up to date if any more information comes out.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47319044

He's been arrested for filing a false police report.

[OngBonga]

I think Trump supporters are dumb enough to fabricate that story.

This is a serious flaw in your thinking. You have this crazy idea that Trump supporters = dumb, Trump haters = not dumb. The obvious truth is that there will be a wide spectrum of people on both sides of the political divide. There are dumbasses on both sides, there are geniuses on both sides.

You can't just assume that everyone who votes Trump is dumb. If you actually think that, well sorry to be blunt, but it's you who comes across as dumb.

[Poopadoop]

You can't just assume that everyone who votes Trump is dumb.

True, but you don't have to assume that. You only have to assume that nearly everyone who is dumb votes Trump. And, given the dumbest people will generally come up with the dumbest fabrications, that seems to explain a lot of these kinds of stories.

[oskar]

The big story about the nuclear thing is that this is supposed to go through congress. The Trump administration tried to circumvent congress and ignored ethics advisors. This is yet another huge deal that only Trumps closest circle and a hostile foreign power know about.

This is a serious flaw in your thinking. You have this crazy idea that Trump supporters = dumb

I don't think the facts on your side: Qanon, mail order bricks, Iraqi Dinar scam, border wall GoFundMe, border wall, Trump, zombi RBG conspiracy...
If you listen to Trump and you're capable of the tought "that sounds coherent and reasonable!" - you're an idiot.

[Jack Sawyer]

I don't think the facts on your side. Qanon, mailorder bricks, Iraqi Dinar scam, border wall GoFundMe, border wall, Trump, zombi RBG conspiracy...
If you listen to Trump and you're capable of the tought "that sounds coherent and reasonable!" - you're an idiot.

LOL I had to look up everything but the border wall

LOLOL Iraqi Dinars? WTF

[Jack Sawyer]

Paging Admiral Ackbar

[Jack Sawyer]

Paging Admiral Ackbar

I knew it was a trap

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...tic-operatives

^^^ you know it's fubar'd when even fox news of all places lists your fuckups

CNN is really truly a joke

[Poopadoop]

Qanon, mail order bricks, Iraqi Dinar scam, border wall GoFundMe, border wall, Trump, zombi RBG conspiracy...
If you listen to Trump and you're capable of the tought "that sounds coherent and reasonable!" - you're an idiot.

...and of course pretty much any subforum of T_D

[Poopadoop]

lol people are still giving money to this

https://uk.gofundme.com/TheTrumpWall

Based on their last update about six weeks ago, it seems the plan (if you can call it that) has morphed into building the wall without the involvement of the government. So lmfao what, they're gonna just show up on some rancher's land one day with a construction crew, some hammer and nails, and a truckload of plywood?

[Poopadoop]

I honestly can't stop laughing.

Attachment 1091

They're gonna get there, $20 at a time... and it'll only take about fifty years!!

[OngBonga]

IDK what kind of nuclear secrets we're talking about. It is like, civilian nuclear power plant secrets?Or like... little red button nuclear secrets?

The two are hardly mutually exclusive. If you have nuclear energy, you have the potential to make nuclear weapons.

[MadMojoMonkey]

The two are hardly mutually exclusive. If you have nuclear energy, you have the potential to make nuclear weapons.

Not really, no. The differences in concentration of fissile material are significant... like years significant... like you need totally different levels and scales of nuclear enrichment that is going to be visible by satellite. Like you are not going from power plant to nuclear bomb in less than a decade, and there's going to be some really easy to notice nuclear blast testing going on during those final years.

provided someone got you up to speed on civil nuclear tech, but would not share any info at all beyond that.

It's like saying if I sell you a lawnmower, you have the potential to build a Formula 1 car. I guess you're a little closer than you were, but it's not like a slippery slope.

[OngBonga]

Well I'm hardly a nuclear expert, but I was under the impression that you could at least make a dirty bomb if you have nuclear waste. Perhaps not a sophisticated thermonuclear device, but still a nuclear weapon.

[OngBonga]

You only have to assume that nearly everyone who is dumb votes Trump.

This assumption is dumb.

[Poopadoop]

This assumption is dumb.

I would bet it's pretty close to the truth.

[oskar]

I think they announced a town hall with Bernie. Both CNN and NBC were surprisingly supportive of the Bernie nomination. Calling him a front runner - which... d'uh, but for MSM that's a startling concession.

[Jack Sawyer]

I think they announced a town hall with Bernie. Both CNN and NBC were surprisingly supportive of the Bernie nomination. Calling him a front runner - which... d'uh, but for MSM that's a startling concession.

Links or it didn't happen

I literally can't believe this LOL

[Jack Sawyer]

Papa Bern is in the race.

In first 4 hours since his announcement, with only individual donations, manages to outraise every other candidate who was already running.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-...-than-4-hours/

If MONEY = SPEECH, apparently the people are speaking quite loudly


A Papa Bern/Tulsi ticket would crush anything the GOP can cook up.

[oskar]

The big story about the nuclear thing is that this is supposed to go through congress. The Trump administration tried to circumvent congress and ignored ethics advisors. This is also yet another huge deal that only Trumps closest circle and a hostile foreign power know about.

Ong, I think the facts are not on your side. Qanon, mailorder bricks, Iraqi Dinar scam, border wall GoFundMe, border wall, Trump, zombi RBG conspiracy...
If you listen to Trump and you're capable of the tought "that sounds coherent and reasonable!" - you're an idiot.

[oskar]

ItsHappening.gif!

[oskar]

At least some people got educated on how much different a billion is from a million. In a country where you have to financially ruin yourself to get a higher education, that's worth something.

[boost]

It's kinda obvious that stuff like this would start to pop up. There's a cost to the adoption of the "believe every victim" meme. It incentivizes false accusations and fabrications.

[OngBonga]

It's kinda obvious that stuff like this would start to pop up. There's a cost to the adoption of the "believe every victim" meme. It incentivizes false accusations and fabrications.

This isn't the start. I remember at least a year ago some woman faking an email and claiming it as hate speech. It's a consequence of the left's obsession with labelling everyone as either a victim or an oppressor.

The fake claims aren't the bigger problem. What is much more serious is the media and the social media celebrities supporting such "victims" unconditionally because it suits their political agenda, while paying no attention to anyone on the right who claims to be a victim of political oppression.

The decent people on the left should be even more concerned than those on the right, since it is highly damaging to the credibility of the left.

There's a reason I abandoned the left many years ago.

[Poopadoop]

It's kinda obvious that stuff like this would start to pop up. There's a cost to the adoption of the "believe every victim" meme. It incentivizes false accusations and fabrications.

I don't think there is such a thing as a 'believe every victim' meme. If there were,anyone could accuse you of anything and you'd go straight to jail to await a trial. I think what's happened is it's become apparent that simply dismissing victims' reports when it suits your needs doesn't work anyone.

Most people who report crimes are being honest. It's newsworthy when someone makes a false report. So there's a certain rationale for leaning towards believing people who claim to be victims. This is much better than the alternative of not believing anyone when it doesn't suit your needs.

[boost]

I don't think there is such a thing as a 'believe every victim' meme. If there were,anyone could accuse you of anything and you'd go straight to jail to await a trial. I think what's happened is it's become apparent that simply dismissing victims' reports when it suits your needs doesn't work anyone.

Most people who report crimes are being honest. It's newsworthy when someone makes a false report. So there's a certain rationale for leaning towards believing people who claim to be victims. This is much better than the alternative of not believing anyone when it doesn't suit your needs.

My point is that when you swing in the direction of giving more credence to accusers it's not without costs. I am not even saying that we've over corrected. The status quo did seem to be intolerable, and I'm not sure where the balance point is. When being a "survivor" is accompanied by social credits, you will incentivize people to both fabricate assaults and stretch the definition of assault.

The paradox is that the more you incentivize false victimhood, the more fake victims you get, the more skeptical people will be of all victims.

[Poopadoop]

The paradox is that the more you incentivize false victimhood, the more fake victims you get, the more skeptical people will be of all victims.

I agree there's scope for unscrupulous people to abuse others' trust, and that there's always going to be a balancing act between accepting some number of false positives and wrongly rejecting some number of true positives.

The correct approach to evaluating any claim should be evidence based. Using sexual assault as an example, I think a bigger problem is that when the evidence is not sufficient to convict an alleged perpetrator, the assumption is often that the victim must have been lying. And, because it's so hard to get convictions on SA cases (it's usually a he-said she-said type of thing), it discourages victims from coming forward.

Using Blasey-Ford as an example, she gave by all professional accounts a much more credible testimony than Kavanaugh did, but not a court in the world would have ever convicted him of sexual assault on the basis of her 30 year old memories (nor should they imo). Even the senate couldn't find sufficient reason to bounce him although i suspect privately most of them probably believed her story over his. This leads to the problem I mentioned in that now she is open to being called a liar and a shill for the Ds, and had to go through not only the embarrassment of the hearing itself, but had to change her job and move address because of the notoriety she gained through something she really should be getting a courage badge for.

The whole metoo thing is a net positive for society because it removes some of the stigma from the real survivors, although I agree it does have the negative side effect of encouraging shitty types of people to just make things up to get some kind of revenge or fame or whatever.

[oskar]

It's kinda obvious that stuff like this would start to pop up. There's a cost to the adoption of the "believe every victim" meme. It incentivizes false accusations and fabrications.

This story wasn't even seriously picked up until the story was about the possibility that it was faked. This was only made into big national news by social media. To claim that "the left" tried to play this up is extremely disingenuous.

[boost]

This story wasn't even seriously picked up until the story was about the possibility that it was faked. This was only made into big national news by social media. To claim that "the left" tried to play this up is extremely disingenuous.

It was in my newsfeed.

[oskar]

It was in my newsfeed.

What site? Can you find it? What credible news source reported on this as anything other than "actor claims." Every single pro-trump outlet is presenting this as if it was a major story. Maybe you can show me otherwise. I really don't think it was a major story at all up until claims surfaced that he faked it.

[boost]

re: peoples reaction of skepticism about a story that /T_D latches onto:

This is a terrible way to operate. "your side" will make mistakes, and "the other side" will latch onto these. Sometimes "the other side" will fabricate or exaggerate negative stories about "your side", and vice versa-- but to just outright disbelieve a story because it works to the advantage of those you disagree, and therefore is promoted by them, is going to leave you in a truthless bubble built of confirmation bias.

[oskar]

re: peoples reaction of skepticism about a story that /T_D latches onto:

This is a terrible way to operate. "your side" will make mistakes, and "the other side" will latch onto these. Sometimes "the other side" will fabricate or exaggerate negative stories about "your side", and vice versa-- but to just outright disbelieve a story because it works to the advantage of those you disagree, and therefore is promoted by them, is going to leave you in a truthless bubble built of confirmation bias.

Go on T_D for a second and then tell me that I should have given credence to a story that these two guys were hired to impersonate Trump supporters:


This fucking retard... This is the single best thing that has happened to Trump, possibly since he got into office. Certainly this year. Nobody knows the name Christopher Hasson. Everybody knows about Jessie Smollett now. You're not going to have a conversation with a trump supporter for the rest of time where they don't bring up the Jessie Smollett thing.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...15818512941057

[Jack Sawyer]

Go on T_D for a second and then tell me that I should have given credence to a story that these two guys were hired to impersonate Trump supporters:


This fucking retard... This is the single best thing that has happened to Trump, possibly since he got into office. Certainly this year. Nobody knows the name Christopher Hasson. Everybody knows about Jessie Smollett now. You're not going to have a conversation with a trump supporter for the rest of time where they don't bring up the Jessie Smollett thing.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...15818512941057

Agreed. What a fucking idiot.

[Poopadoop]

re: peoples reaction of skepticism about a story that /T_D latches onto:

This is a terrible way to operate. "your side" will make mistakes, and "the other side" will latch onto these. Sometimes "the other side" will fabricate or exaggerate negative stories about "your side", and vice versa-- but to just outright disbelieve a story because it works to the advantage of those you disagree, and therefore is promoted by them, is going to leave you in a truthless bubble built of confirmation bias.

I disagree. If the other side is routinely coming up with dumb shit, at some point it's better to just close your mind to it than to keep thinking 'oh really? So and so runs a child porn ring out of a pizza joint?'

Sure my side will do some dumb shit and some shit that's corrupt, and they'll get caught. That doesn't mean I should listen to tinfoil hatters who come up with implausible fantasies.

[boost]

I disagree. If the other side is routinely coming up with dumb shit, at some point it's better to just close your mind to it than to keep thinking 'oh really? So and so runs a child porn ring out of a pizza joint?'

Sure my side will do some dumb shit and some shit that's corrupt, and they'll get caught. That doesn't mean I should listen to tinfoil hatters who come up with implausible fantasies.

You're strawmanning me here.

I did not say that you should consider what T_D has to say as credible, I said that you should not dismiss things because T_D supports them.

I'm not even saying it's crazy to be a little more skeptical of things that fringe nutsos peddle, but it's a dangerous habit because it forces you into a reactionary mode in which you reject the truth should a nutso happen to espouse it. When you do this, you're allowing fringe nutso's to control your world view. That can't be a good look.

[Poopadoop]

I did not say that you should consider what T_D has to say as credible, I said that you should not dismiss things because T_D supports them.

And I think you should until someone credible confirms the story.

I wouldn't listen to some radical SJW lefty website either, if that helps.

I'm not even saying it's crazy to be a little more skeptical of things that fringe nutsos peddle, but it's a dangerous habit because it forces you into a reactionary mode in which you reject the truth should a nutso happen to espouse it. When you do this, you're allowing fringe nutso's to control your world view. That can't be a good look.

This would only make sense if I automatically believed the exact opposite of whatever a nutso was saying. I don't. I withold jugdment until there's more evidence, and at least some of it is credible, and even then I'm never 100% convinced.

[boost]

And I think you should until someone credible confirms the story.

I wouldn't listen to some radical SJW lefty website either, if that helps.




This would only make sense if I automatically believed the exact opposite of whatever a nutso was saying. I don't. I withold jugdment until there's more evidence, and at least some of it is credible, and even then I'm never 100% convinced.

Fair enough. I don't read T_D and I was seeing stories about the alleged assault, and then the possibility it was faked, and then today his arrest over the past few weeks from the AP. Maybe you just weren't seeing these stories in credible outlets, but they were there.

[OngBonga]

Go on T_D for a second and then tell me that I should have given credence to a story that these two guys were hired to impersonate Trump supporters:

Are you suggesting that black people by default oppose Trump? Because there's another flaw in your thinking.

At least you seem to recognise how bad this is for the left.

[oskar]

Are you suggesting that black people by default oppose Trump? Because there's another flaw in your thinking.

At least you seem to recognise how bad this is for the left.

YES!
He's at like 5% approval rating. You have to be fucking retarded or a billionaire to be a black trump supporter. Go knock yourself out and find waldo: https://www.google.com/search?q=trum...w=1536&bih=736

[OngBonga]

YES!
He's at like 5% approval rating. You have to be fucking retarded or a billionaire to be a black trump supporter. Go knock yourself out and find waldo: https://www.google.com/search?q=trum...w=1536&bih=736

When you start a post with "he's at 5% approval rating" you demonstrate that you simply absorb what biased media says without actually thinking how ridiculous it is.

Do you really think he has a 5% approval rating? Really? Think about that. Go figure out how much of his own vote base would need to disapprove, assuming 100% of his opponents disapprove.

Well done for calling all black Trump supporters retards. You either assume literally all Trump supporters are retards, or you're racist. I know you'll say the former, and it might be true.

[Poopadoop]

Do you really think he has a 5% approval rating? Really?

Pretty sure he meant among blacks. Truth might be closer to 15%. Don't think he ever cracked 20%.

[OngBonga]

Pretty sure he meant among blacks. Truth might be closer to 15%. Don't think he ever cracked 20%.

Amongst blacks, I wouldn't expect him to fare well. He opposes immigration, many black people feel threatened by such a stance. I get that.

But many black people also do not like being politically manipulated, and the Dems are very adept at doing just that.

[Poopadoop]

At least you seem to recognise how bad this is for the left.

You mean that one person might have faked a police report? Or am I missing some grander conspiracy here?

[OngBonga]

You mean that one person might have faked a police report? Or am I missing some grander conspiracy here?

You missed the bit where I explain the fake report isn't the bigger problem.