Forums - Politics Discussion - The US Politics |OT|

Runa216 said:
CaptainExplosion said:

I'm surprised he hasn't referred to anyone as the n-word. He's only in it for himself, and the people who blindly support him are too stupid to realize that.

Racism against black folks isn't considered culturally acceptable. If he said that word, even he knows he'd be booted faster than a foot fetishist at an ass kicking convention. No, the 'in' form of racism today is hating muslims and other middle-eastern cultures. it's 'okay' to call those people terrorists, in the eyes of many. 

I have nothing against Muslims or Middle Eastern people in general, but I gladly call for the death of Ali Khamenei. Defending the accidental shooting down of Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752 warrants this. The victims of Flight 752 deserve true justice, especially if it means ripping Khamenei's throat out. He deserves such an end, just like Trump deserves to go to jail for all the awful things he's done while hiding behind his false presidency.

Last edited by CaptainExplosion - on 21 February 2020

Around the Network
CaptainExplosion said:

He complained about Parasite winning Best Picture because it's a South Korean movie, and said Gone With the Wind, a movie from 1939, should've won instead.

Not only does he hate South Koreans, he doesn't know what decade he's in.

Runa216 said:
CaptainExplosion said:

He complained about Parasite winning Best Picture because it's a South Korean movie, and said Gone With the Wind, a movie from 1939, should've won instead.

Not only does he hate South Koreans, he doesn't know what decade he's in.

He knows what decade he wishes he was in, though! 

Seriously, how did someone this bigoted get elected, faulty electoral college or not? I know this just shows how many racist and xenophobic people there are in the US, but there's no way I'm comfortable accepting that there are more outright racist bigots in the US than there is the entire population of Canada. We should know better. We do know better. I guess some people are just super, duper shitty and proud of it. 

Trump's ire for 'Parasite' could be political, not racial.

"We got enough problems with South Korea with trade"



KLAMarine said:

Trump's ire for 'Parasite' could be political, not racial.

"We got enough problems with South Korea with trade"

Yeah, going to call BS on that.  What the hell does trade have to do with an Academy Award?  How does an Academy Award represent "a problem with SK"?

Next question...do you think he (and his base) would have as much ire if a British movie won Best Picture?  Would they even notice?

EDIT: And then he asks to bring back an 80 year old movie to be nominated for Best Picture.  Not sure he gets how an annual award show works.

Last edited by SpokenTruth - on 21 February 2020

Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

EricHiggin said:
Hiku said:

If someone presented/started an idea/argument, then yes. Have them elaborate first instead of only responding to you with another question, or give you homework.

You looked at a video, and then made this observation:
"Didn't realize America relied so heavily on Chinese medical products. Free health care? Hmm."

Some people wanted to know what you were getting at. What exactly the issue is. What your point is, etc.
And in your first reply, you did elaborate.

"Don't think you got the point, which is based on what Tucker points out about China having such leverage if it ever wants to use it. Imagine how much of a problem that would be now, and how much bigger of a problem it would be with free health care for all."

But after that when some people asked you specific questions, your replies started looking like this:

"You either didn't watch the clip or you didn't understand it based on that reply."
"The leverage, based clearly on what is said in the clip, has nothing to do with product volume. You obviously didn't do your homework, again, it seems."
"Where did you get that from? He nor I am under that impression. Maybe you should watch the clip."

Since you were the one who brought up this idea, it's not unreasonable to expect you to explain it.
And not only because you brought up the idea, but also because it's possible that people watch the clip, and still don't understand what you're getting at. There's also the possibility of misunderstandings. I can't tell you how many times someone's given me "homework" like this, and it turns out they misunderstood something, or their logic didn't quite make sense, etc. In which case I just wasted my time for nothing.

So that's why the burden of explaining someone's point should be on the one who made it. Other people can chose to do the homework you present, but it shouldn't be expected of them.
And especially if they consistently keep saying they don't understand, then it's on you to provide a proper explanation for the point you're trying to make.

I listened to the clip as well before making my original post, and I too have questions about what you're getting at exactly.
But I wanted my post to focus on posting etiquette. So I may make a separate post asking you about that later.

The initial individual's response didn't understand the point, but seemed clear they had watched and understood the clip, yet didn't get where I was taking it. That's why I responded as I did, with a little more detail than how I responded to the next reply by another individual.

I figured as much, but instead of people having to drag the explanation out of you, you should explain it, and then you can question how/why they didn't understand how what was said in the clip correlated to the point you were making.

EricHiggin said:
The second, main individual, based on where your quotes are coming from, just happens to be the one who was recently making demands of me to give them what they wanted if I wanted a response. Why shouldn't I be able to do the same thing, logically, since the entire thing revolved around the clip?

Is this still about the topic you started with your initial China comment after seeing the video? Or are you referring to something that began before you made that comment? If so, you'd have to point me to the relevant posts, because that doesn't sound familiar.

EricHiggin said:
Proper etiquette would have them, at the very least, watch the clip first. Wouldn't they agree?

Do you think it's proper to give them an 11 minute video without a timestamp to search through just to find a few specific seconds?
If you had typed it out, it would take them a few seconds to read, and there would be no confusion about what you were referring to.

Is it "80% of our antibiotics come from China"
Or "China is a top producer of *insert various medical related things*"?

The first is just one medicine. And the second is very vague, as top producer could mean they supply USA with 1% more than the second closest country.
And if someone guesses what you're referring to, chances are you'd reply with "Nope, that's not it. Watch the video again and you'll understand."

And you did. "Where did you get that from? He nor I am under that impression. Maybe you should watch the clip."

You could go on like that the whole time, until someone posts a script of every single word Tucker said that was related to healthcare, and ask you to point it out. And at that point you've wasted their time by an extraordinary amount given how fast this really should have taken.

It's really not too much to ask of people to explain their positions.

EricHiggin said:
After pointing out they didn't watch or understand it, they simply replied with "then enlighten me", etc. After explaining it further, they then ask me to continue to explain, which I do, again.

Because you still haven't told anyone what specifically in that video that you based your comment on.
Everyone understands that you think USA will be in more trouble under Medicare For All if China cut off medical export. What they don't understand is why. And answering the question of "What specifically in that video are you basing this on?" is the first step in understanding this.

So for your next post, please specify the sentence/s from the clip that you based your argument on.

Last edited by Hiku - on 22 February 2020

SpokenTruth said:
KLAMarine said:

Trump's ire for 'Parasite' could be political, not racial.

"We got enough problems with South Korea with trade"

Yeah, going to call BS on that.  What the hell does trade have to do with an Academy Award?  How does an Academy Award represent "a problem with SK"?

Next question...do you think he (and his base) would have as much ire if a British movie won Best Picture?  Would they even notice?

EDIT: And then he asks to bring back an 80 year old movie to be nominated for Best Picture.  Not sure he gets how an annual award show works.

"Yeah, going to call BS on that.  What the hell does trade have to do with an Academy Award?"

>Not much but going by his quote, Trump is going to hold it against Parasite since it's from South Korea which seems to have given him a hard time on trade.

"How does an Academy Award represent "a problem with SK"?"

>Not sure what you're asking here... I think the trade difficulties were the original problem.

"Next question...do you think he (and his base) would have as much ire if a British movie won Best Picture?  Would they even notice?"

>Maybe if Britain gave him a hard time on trade. You ask a hypothetical question, expect a hypothetical answer.

"EDIT: And then he asks to bring back an 80 year old movie to be nominated for Best Picture.  Not sure he gets how an annual award show works."

>Here's my highly-speculative take on that: I think Trump was asking for an American film to win American awards. I remind you: highly speculative.



Around the Network
CaptainExplosion said:
Runa216 said:

Racism against black folks isn't considered culturally acceptable. If he said that word, even he knows he'd be booted faster than a foot fetishist at an ass kicking convention. No, the 'in' form of racism today is hating muslims and other middle-eastern cultures. it's 'okay' to call those people terrorists, in the eyes of many. 

I have nothing against Muslims or Middle Eastern people in general, but I gladly call for the death of Ali Khamenei. Defending the accidental shooting down of Ukraine International Airlines Flight 752 warrants this. The victims of Flight 752 deserve true justice, especially if it means ripping Khamenei's throat out. He deserves such an end, just like Trump deserves to go to jail for all the awful things he's done while hiding behind his false presidency.

Oh captain i had i more extreme comment ready for you but it is to no use and seeing these kinda comments does scare me a bit,bless your soul.



Hiku said:
EricHiggin said:

The initial individual's response didn't understand the point, but seemed clear they had watched and understood the clip, yet didn't get where I was taking it. That's why I responded as I did, with a little more detail than how I responded to the next reply by another individual.

I figured as much, but instead of people having to drag the explanation out of you, you should explain it, and then you can question how/why they didn't understand how what was said in the clip correlated to the point you were making.

EricHiggin said:
The second, main individual, based on where your quotes are coming from, just happens to be the one who was recently making demands of me to give them what they wanted if I wanted a response. Why shouldn't I be able to do the same thing, logically, since the entire thing revolved around the clip?

Is this still about the topic you started with your initial China comment after seeing the video? Or are you referring to something that began before you made that comment? If so, you'd have to point me to the relevant posts, because that doesn't sound familiar.

EricHiggin said:
Proper etiquette would have them, at the very least, watch the clip first. Wouldn't they agree?

Do you think it's proper to give them an 11 minute video without a timestamp to search through just to find a few specific seconds?
If you had typed it out, it would take them a few seconds to read, and there would be no confusion about what you were referring to.

Is it "80% of our antibiotics come from China"
Or "China is a top producer of *insert various medical related things*"?

The first is just one medicine. And the second is very vague, as top producer could mean they supply USA with 1% more than the second closest country.
And if someone guesses what you're referring to, chances are you'd reply with "Nope, that's not it. Watch the video again and you'll understand."

And you did. "Where did you get that from? He nor I am under that impression. Maybe you should watch the clip."

You could go on like that the whole time, until someone posts a script of every single word Tucker said that was related to healthcare, and ask you to point it out. And at that point you've wasted their time by an extraordinary amount given how fast this really should have taken.

It's really not too much to ask of people to explain their positions.

EricHiggin said:
After pointing out they didn't watch or understand it, they simply replied with "then enlighten me", etc. After explaining it further, they then ask me to continue to explain, which I do, again.

Because you still haven't told anyone what specifically in that video that you based your comment on.
Everyone understands that you think USA will be in more trouble under Medicare For All if China cut off medical export. What they don't understand is why. And answering the question of "What specifically in that video are you basing this on?" is the first step in understanding this.

So for your next post, please specify the sentence/s from the clip that you based your argument on.

-That could be said about quite a few points made in posts in general, and while I don't entirely disagree, just because I take the time to explain it in my own words, still doesn't guarantee that someone else will fully understand it. If they have to ask anyway, which does happen, then you've spent a bunch of time initially explaining in detail for nothing, and will now have to try and explain it in another way, because refusing to would be unacceptable, correct?

-It was part of the prior conversation. Starts on pg 348 and beyond 351 where it leads to reposts, and ends at 354 I believe. There's more of what you were talking about in there that was coming from others, that's being pointed out to me to be an issue. I really don't care myself, as I just dealt with it at the time, but if you're going to point these things out, it should be done so, to at least everyone applicable. Nobodies perfect though, which is why I wasn't bothered earlier and didn't make a fuss.

-You left out my China is the best quote, which is only partially referring to the first quote you have. I was referring to more than just one specific thing. Someone else trying to argue with me about just one specific thing in this circumstance really doesn't work. If you look at what I was responding to initially, you'll see it's based on general China talk from the clip. Understanding where the anchor was coming from based on their talking points in the clip gives context into where I'm coming from.

-Guessing at how I would respond? That is really reaching, no? It's one thing if you're concerned about something I've said, but being concerned about how I could have or may converse in the future? I'm not going to try and change how people converse with me by guessing how they would likely react to me in the future or another timeline if it's not in a manner that would benefit me. They can say whatever they want to me as long as the mods don't have a problem with it, and if there's a problem, I would hope it applies equally to everyone.

-I only suggested they should watch the clip after numerous explanations. At first I pointed out that it didn't seem like they had watched the clip, but I didn't tell them they had to watch it initially and only ended up suggesting it later. I made an effort to start, and it didn't seem to be paying off. By getting them to watch it, it instantly was able to get us on track. I don't see the problem with that.

-Pg 358 I finalize my explanation since we're finally on the same page for the most part, which isn't questioned by them. I can only assume that means they are content as every other time my reply didn't suffice, they made sure to point that out. I didn't specify to begin with because I didn't see the need to, based on where I was going with what I initially said. If someone else expected something different, that's their problem, not mine. Next time I will make an attempt to be more clear, but pleasing the mob seems futile more often than not. Don't break my fingers Fat Tony!

Last edited by EricHiggin - on 22 February 2020

The Canadian National Anthem According To Justin Trudeau

 

Oh planet Earth! The home of native lands, 
True social law, in all of us demand.
With cattle farts, we view sea rise,
Our North sinking slowly.
From far and snide, oh planet Earth, 
Our healthcare is yours free!
Science save our land, harnessing the breeze,
Oh planet Earth, smoke weed and ferment yeast.
Oh planet Earth, ell gee bee queue and tee.

KLAMarine said:
CaptainExplosion said:

He complained about Parasite winning Best Picture because it's a South Korean movie, and said Gone With the Wind, a movie from 1939, should've won instead.

Not only does he hate South Koreans, he doesn't know what decade he's in.

Runa216 said:

He knows what decade he wishes he was in, though! 

Seriously, how did someone this bigoted get elected, faulty electoral college or not? I know this just shows how many racist and xenophobic people there are in the US, but there's no way I'm comfortable accepting that there are more outright racist bigots in the US than there is the entire population of Canada. We should know better. We do know better. I guess some people are just super, duper shitty and proud of it. 

Trump's ire for 'Parasite' could be political, not racial.

"We got enough problems with South Korea with trade"

Yeah, I'm also going to call BS on that. If that's what he wanted to say, that's what he was going to say. He speaks his mind, even if what's on his mind is a blubbering aural vomit of random bullshit. I love how his followers tend to completely make up their interpretations of what he says to justify him, it's very telling.



I got it all, baby! 

PS4, Switch, WiiU, XBO, PC
Vita, 3DS, Android

Top 6 this generation: 
Bloodborne, Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, God of War, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Dark Souls III, Red Dead Redemption II

EricHiggin said:
Hiku said:

I figured as much, but instead of people having to drag the explanation out of you, you should explain it, and then you can question how/why they didn't understand how what was said in the clip correlated to the point you were making.

EricHiggin said:
The second, main individual, based on where your quotes are coming from, just happens to be the one who was recently making demands of me to give them what they wanted if I wanted a response. Why shouldn't I be able to do the same thing, logically, since the entire thing revolved around the clip?

Is this still about the topic you started with your initial China comment after seeing the video? Or are you referring to something that began before you made that comment? If so, you'd have to point me to the relevant posts, because that doesn't sound familiar.

EricHiggin said:
Proper etiquette would have them, at the very least, watch the clip first. Wouldn't they agree?

Do you think it's proper to give them an 11 minute video without a timestamp to search through just to find a few specific seconds?
If you had typed it out, it would take them a few seconds to read, and there would be no confusion about what you were referring to.

Is it "80% of our antibiotics come from China"
Or "China is a top producer of *insert various medical related things*"?

The first is just one medicine. And the second is very vague, as top producer could mean they supply USA with 1% more than the second closest country.
And if someone guesses what you're referring to, chances are you'd reply with "Nope, that's not it. Watch the video again and you'll understand."

And you did. "Where did you get that from? He nor I am under that impression. Maybe you should watch the clip."

You could go on like that the whole time, until someone posts a script of every single word Tucker said that was related to healthcare, and ask you to point it out. And at that point you've wasted their time by an extraordinary amount given how fast this really should have taken.

It's really not too much to ask of people to explain their positions.

EricHiggin said:
After pointing out they didn't watch or understand it, they simply replied with "then enlighten me", etc. After explaining it further, they then ask me to continue to explain, which I do, again.

Because you still haven't told anyone what specifically in that video that you based your comment on.
Everyone understands that you think USA will be in more trouble under Medicare For All if China cut off medical export. What they don't understand is why. And answering the question of "What specifically in that video are you basing this on?" is the first step in understanding this.

So for your next post, please specify the sentence/s from the clip that you based your argument on.

-That could be said about quite a few points made in posts in general, and while I don't entirely disagree, just because I take the time to explain it in my own words, still doesn't guarantee that someone else will fully understand it. If they have to ask anyway, which does happen, then you've spent a bunch of time initially explaining in detail for nothing, and will now have to try and explain it in another way, because refusing to would be unacceptable, correct?

-It was part of the prior conversation. Starts on pg 348 and beyond 351 where it leads to reposts, and ends at 354 I believe. There's more of what you were talking about in there that was coming from others, that's being pointed out to me to be an issue. I really don't care myself, as I just dealt with it at the time, but if you're going to point these things out, it should be done so, to at least everyone applicable. Nobodies perfect though, which is why I wasn't bothered earlier and didn't make a fuss.

-You left out my China is the best quote, which is only partially referring to the first quote you have. I was referring to more than just one specific thing. Someone else trying to argue with me about just one specific thing in this circumstance really doesn't work. If you look at what I was responding to initially, you'll see it's based on general China talk from the clip. Understanding where the anchor was coming from based on their talking points in the clip gives context into where I'm coming from.

-Guessing at how I would respond? That is really reaching, no? It's one thing if you're concerned about something I've said, but being concerned about how I could have or may converse in the future? I'm not going to try and change how people converse with me by guessing how they would likely react to me in the future or another timeline if it's not in a manner that would benefit me. They can say whatever they want to me as long as the mods don't have a problem with it, and if there's a problem, I would hope it applies equally to everyone.

-I only suggested they should watch the clip after numerous explanations. At first I pointed out that it didn't seem like they had watched the clip, but I didn't tell them they had to watch it initially and only ended up suggesting it later. I made an effort to start, and it didn't seem to be paying off. By getting them to watch it, it instantly was able to get us on track. I don't see the problem with that.

-Pg 358 I finalize my explanation since we're finally on the same page for the most part, which isn't questioned by them. I can only assume that means they are content as every other time my reply didn't suffice, they made sure to point that out. I didn't specify to begin with because I didn't see the need to, based on where I was going with what I initially said. If someone else expected something different, that's their problem, not mine. Next time I will make an attempt to be more clear, but pleasing the mob seems futile more often than not. Don't break my fingers Fat Tony!

You've written so, so, SO much, yet I don't think you've said a single thing. Impressive! you remind me of someone.



I got it all, baby! 

PS4, Switch, WiiU, XBO, PC
Vita, 3DS, Android

Top 6 this generation: 
Bloodborne, Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, God of War, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Dark Souls III, Red Dead Redemption II

Runa216 said:
KLAMarine said:

Trump's ire for 'Parasite' could be political, not racial.

"We got enough problems with South Korea with trade"

Yeah, I'm also going to call BS on that. If that's what he wanted to say, that's what he was going to say. He speaks his mind, even if what's on his mind is a blubbering aural vomit of random bullshit. I love how his followers tend to completely make up their interpretations of what he says to justify him, it's very telling.

"Yeah, I'm also going to call BS on that. If that's what he wanted to say, that's what he was going to say."

>...What?

"He speaks his mind, even if what's on his mind is a blubbering aural vomit of random bullshit."

>Yeah, he said "we got enough problems with South Korea with trade". Doesn't sound like Trump is fond of the trade situation with SK.

"I love how his followers tend to completely make up their interpretations of what he says to justify him, it's very telling."

>His detractors do the same thing to demonize him.