"He's not hurting the people he needs to be hurting"

[adrina]

linky

Well I guess it's nice to see that the Trump supporters are more concerned with using government to hurt people instead of help or govern.

Interesting approach that. And frankly, barbaric. But hey maybe the nice evangelicals can come around and explain how "turn the other cheek" and "do unto others..." translated into voting for someone because they felt he would hurt their opposition.

And they wonder why we call them deplorables. Not rocket science.

 

[someoneyouknow]

What's really funny is this is coming from Florida where they have sanctuary cities for all those illegal Cubans who keep washing ashore. There are dozens of groups devoted solely to getting illegal Cubans into the country and finding them fake IDs.

Odd how you don't hear the people in the story complaining about those illegals.

 

[Busybody18]

BARRY CADES


remember them?

 

[Bill_Cosplay]

linky

Well I guess it's nice to see that the Trump supporters are more concerned with using government to hurt people instead of help or govern.

Interesting approach that. And frankly, barbaric. But hey maybe the nice evangelicals can come around and explain how "turn the other cheek" and "do unto others..." translated into voting for someone because they felt he would hurt their opposition.

And they wonder why we call them deplorables.

Death threats made against Trump ... some by Democrats:

You're an adult (I think) You should know the transitive property doesn't work that way. By your logic, every Democrat & anti-Trump voter is willing to assassinate the President and kill those you don't agree with. What kind of barbaric and deplorable people are you?

Not rocket science.

It's not rocket science, but you should take some basic math and logic courses. Statements like these are why both sides are fucked up.

 

[adrina]

Death threats made against Trump ... some by Democrats:

You're an adult (I think) You should know the transitive property doesn't work that way. By your logic, every Democrat & anti-Trump voter is willing to assassinate the President. What kind of barbaric and deplorable people are you?



It's not rocket science, but you should take some basic math and logic courses. Statements like these are why both sides are fucked up.

Dude... these were her words. Her exact words. Not embellished, not taken out of context, not altered in any way.

This is what she said - and my bet is that she is not alone. In fact I know she isn't. I've seen it all over the place here, in the media, on social platforms, in my old work place.

So instead of addressing it you went for the personal attack. But you question my maturity?

Perhaps you could actually, ya know, address what she said.

Just because you want to play this false equivalency "both sides" bullshit doesn't mean it's applicable.

(If you want to talk death threats perhaps you should look at Cesar Sayoc. And Infowars? Seriously? Oh christ. Find a source that has less credibility issues and make a real comparison instead of that lazy "both sides" "logic".)

Irony.

 

[bellisarius]

linky

Well I guess it's nice to see that the Trump supporters are more concerned with using government to hurt people instead of help or govern.

Interesting approach that. And frankly, barbaric. But hey maybe the nice evangelicals can come around and explain how "turn the other cheek" and "do unto others..." translated into voting for someone because they felt he would hurt their opposition.

And they wonder why we call them deplorables. Not rocket science.

You're a fucking moron.

 

[Boxlicker101]

linky

Well I guess it's nice to see that the Trump supporters are more concerned with using government to hurt people instead of help or govern.

Interesting approach that. And frankly, barbaric. But hey maybe the nice evangelicals can come around and explain how "turn the other cheek" and "do unto others..." translated into voting for someone because they felt he would hurt their opposition.

And they wonder why we call them deplorables. Not rocket science.

It takes two to make an argument.

 

[adrina]

You're a fucking moron.

It takes two to make an argument.

No defense for her? It's not like you both don't agree with her on some levels.

Your posting history screams it.

At least she has the guts to admit it.

 

[jaF0]

Dude... these were her words. Her exact words.

This is what she said - and my bet is that she is not alone. In fact I know she isn't. address what she said..

Her/she who?

 

[adrina]

Her/she who?

If you don't want to read the linked article... why do I need to quote it for you? Are you incapable? Do you not know how to click a link? Or use google? Or any other acceptable to you search engine?

JaFo... sometimes you really should look to see the answers right under your nose.

 

[jaF0]

No, I don't click random links. That's how people get their devices destroyed. In a discussion thread, I expect to see the content being discussed quoted, not a blind link.

 

[adrina]

No, I don't click random links. That's how people get their devices destroyed. In a discussion thread, I expect to see the content being discussed quoted, not a blind link.

Yes we know because hovering your mouse over a link to see the address is very difficult.

You pull this shit all the time... frankly it makes me wonder why you even stepped in to the conversation? To post the same old complaint you always have? That you can't figure out how to technology?

Like I said, you can address your own curiosity. Or not. Whatever.

 

[Bill_Cosplay]

Dude... these were her words. Her exact words. Not embellished, not taken out of context, not altered in any way.

This is what she said - and my bet is that she is not alone. In fact I know she isn't. I've seen it all over the place here, in the media, on social platforms, in my old work place.

So instead of addressing it you went for the personal attack. But you question my maturity?

I addressed the point you tried to make with ONE person's words. If you take that as an attack: then it's an attack. You should know better.

You used ONE person's quote to attack an entire contingent of people. It was childish.

Perhaps you could actually, ya know, address what she said.

Just because you want to play this false equivalency "both sides" bullshit doesn't mean it's applicable.

Your comprehension is lacking if you think I'm making a "Well this side did this argument, so it's okay."

(If you want to talk death threats perhaps you should look at Cesar Sayoc. And Infowars? Seriously? Oh christ. Find a source that has less credibility issues and make a real comparison instead of that lazy "both sides" "logic".)

Irony.

There is no irony. I pointed out the absurdity of your claim.

I pointed out that your argument and insults and the point you tried to make were fallacious.

 

[jaF0]

Yes we know because hovering your mouse over a link to see the address is very difficult.

Like I said, you can address your own curiosity. Or not. Whatever.

URLs in links can be spoofed.

Threads for discussion should include quoted material within site policy and copyright laws.

 

[Kirkrapine]

If you read the article, the woman's point is that Trump isn't hurting the elite.

 

[adrina]

I addressed the point you tried to make with ONE person's words. If you take that as an attack: then it's an attack. You should know better.

You used ONE person's quote to attack an entire contingent of people. It was childish.

Bullshit.

I used one person's quote to demonstrate the very real problem with so many of the Trump supporters very convenient double standards. You have a recognition problem.

Perhaps you can join BBoy in the ascription game?

Your comprehension is lacking if you think I'm making a "Well this side did this argument, so it's okay."

Actually that's exactly what you did. Linking to an infowars article (still, really WTF??) and trying to compare twitter threats with actual real actions of death threats and bombs. But please, keep trying to peddle that.

There is no irony. I pointed out the absurdity of your claim.

I pointed out that your argument and insults and the point you tried to make were fallacious.

Nope. All you tried to do was the both sides bullshit while not recognizing that this women is not an outlier.

If you cannot recognize that very simple reality, it speaks to your perception issues. See Infowars.

 

[RoryN]

https://i.imgur.com/2tSDfso.gif

 

[adrina]

URLs in links can be spoofed.

Threads for discussion should include quoted material within site policy and copyright laws.

Go google. Or whatever search engine you approve of. This gets tiring.

If you want me to post in a certain way to appease you, think twice. Frankly you've been too rude to me over time for me to really care if you can't figure this out.

Not my problem you can't technology.

Last post to you - either search or not. If you don't like how I post... don't read them. Easy as.

 

[jaF0]

The proper way to post a topic for discussion is to quote the subject matter with a link to the source and not an obscured link either.

'Go fish' is not the proper way.

 

[RoryN]

URLs in links can be spoofed.

That has nothing to do with her posting a "blind" link, though.

 

[von_Bismarck]

You're a fucking moron.

Do the world a favor and shut the fuck up.

 

[Bill_Cosplay]

linky

Well I guess it's nice to see that the Trump supporters are more concerned with using government to hurt people instead of help or govern.

Interesting approach that. And frankly, barbaric. But hey maybe the nice evangelicals can come around and explain how "turn the other cheek" and "do unto others..." translated into voting for someone because they felt he would hurt their opposition.

And they wonder why we call them deplorables. Not rocket science.

Nope. All you tried to do was the both sides bullshit while not recognizing that this women is not an outlier.

If you had only said [sic] this women as you changed your wording to, I would have no problem with your post. But you didn't, did you?

Don't you guys give Trump shit for describing all illegals as rapists, murders, and criminals. (Which is not what he does.)

What gets me is your hypocrisy, but it's telling that you back peddled from they & supporters to this thiswoman.

Now that you recognized your mistake, I'll let you be.

 

[Kirkrapine]

If you read the article, the woman's point is that Trump isn't hurting the elite.

This is really what we should be discussing.

 

[adrina]

If you had only said [sic] this women as you changed your wording to, I would have no problem with your post. But you didn't, did you?

Don't you guys give Trump shit for describing all illegals as rapists, murders, and criminals. (Which is not what he does.)

What gets me is your hypocrisy, but it's telling that you back peddled from they & supporters to this thiswoman.

Now that you recognized your mistake, I'll let you be.

You know what though? The shoe fits. Do I need to point out the few percentage points just to appease you?

Go back to infowars.

You've got no credibility.

 

[RoryN]

Don't you guys give Trump shit for describing all illegals as rapists, murders, and criminals. (Which is not what he does.)

What gets me is your hypocrisy

Oh fuck off. If Obama had said, "And some [group you like] I assume are good people", you'd be saying the same thing, and everyone knows it.