*** The Official MAGAposting thread ***

[boost]

I realise this. But there is a huge difference between the kinds of protest we have seen in the last year. You guys were cheerleading the looting of shops because you agreed with their ideology. But when a group of people who protest an election result on the basis of perceived fraud storm an actual government building, for some reason this isn't cool.

Setting shops on fire... cool. Storming the Capitol... not cool.

Like I say, funny. You're blind to your own hypocrisy.

Let's just make one thing clear... from my pov, it doesn't matter if fraud was committed, what matters is if the people who are protesting believe fraud to have happened. Let's give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they do genuinely think so. In that event, they have every right to protest. And I would say, in my humble opinion, that storming Capitol is a better form of protest that looting and setting fire to peoples' businesses.

You're an idiot.

MMM, ban me, wag your finger, or whatever, that's your prerogative, but this isn't ad hominem, Ong is trolling or is in fact an idiot.

[oskar]

You're an idiot.

MMM, ban me, wag your finger, or whatever, that's your prerogative, but this isn't ad hominem, Ong is trolling or is in fact an idiot.

I appreciate that he doesn't run from conflict as most people with his ideology do. Ong is not stupid in the sense that he can reason just fine, but he reasons strictly around his ideology like religious people do. Every information coming in has to be made to fit his image of the world. That results in him being perfectly capable of discussing things that are unimpeded by his ideology, but if the subject clashes with his ideology he ends up sounding like a total mong.

I remember I called Trump's last days almost beat by beat. I said he wouldn't accept losing the election, and his supporters will stand by him and go crazy. Ong called me a maniac for believing that iirc.
Now that it's happening, it can't be happening because it doesn't fit his model of the world. So it has to be justifiable, but since it's so unjustifiable, his reasoning can't make sense. He says [you said BLM burning down buildings wasn't bad] (strawman) but now you say [destroying the WH and trying to overthrow government is bad] - therefore the latter is not bad.

That is nonsense, but you go ahead and try to rationalize the events of Jan 6 if you have to categorically believe them to be good or at least ok, and see what comes out.

You see the same thing all over right wing media. They either say: those are peaceful protestors, you are crazy for saying they tried to harm anyone... If they do recognize that a coup d'etat is bad, they immediately rationalize it by saying: It was Antifa doing it!

[OngBonga]

The word being banded about at the moment is "insurrection". I'll be honest, I had to look that word up.

an act or instance of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government.

Does anyone here think this should be a crime?

[CoccoBill]

The word being banded about at the moment is "insurrection". I'll be honest, I had to look that word up.



Does anyone here think this should be a crime?

_o/

Voicing your opinion is fine, forcing others to succumb to it is not.

[MadMojoMonkey]

You're an idiot.

MMM, ban me, wag your finger, or whatever, that's your prerogative, but this isn't ad hominem, Ong is trolling or is in fact an idiot.