By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - A vote for Trump is indefensible

Valdath on 13 October 2016
SuaveSocialist said:
LivingMetal said:

So do you think that "A vote for Clinton is defendable?" after all those emails and then some?

REPOST: "With Trump objectively worse by a substantial margin, a vote for Hillary has strategic value even though she's a lousy candidate herself.  A vote for Trump (the worst Presidential candidate out of the current four and probably the worst Presidential candidate in American history) cannot even claim this--with three better options to cast a ballot, one for Trump is indefensible."

REPOST from OP: "Whatever minutiae had convinced you to entertain even the possibility of casting a ballot for Trump is objectively overshadowed by mountains of documented reasons to cast one for somebody else.  Even if you cannot bring yourself to vote for one of the alternatives, or even two, there is still a third.  Trump is up against Hillary Clinton, Jill Stein and Gary Johnson--there's more to the race than two people. 

Now you know it as I know it.  It may hurt.  You may experience grief, and the first stage of grief is denial.  You may try to put on a tinfoil hat and/or conjure up some rationalization out of an irrational aether to justify voting for him, but it won't work.  It'll rely too heavily on False Equivalence Fallcies, Strawmen, Red Herrings and attempts to Move the Goalposts.  A vote for Trump is indefensible."

So why would a bunch of hot opinions and the wrong use of the word "objectively" change anyone's mind?

How's that proof Trump is "objectively" worse?

 

USA isn't a socialist hole where people starve to death and the govt has all the power, so your opinions aren't facts.



Around the Network
SuaveSocialist on 13 October 2016
LivingMetal said:
SuaveSocialist said:

REPOST: "With Trump objectively worse by a substantial margin, a vote for Hillary has strategic value even though she's a lousy candidate herself.  A vote for Trump (the worst Presidential candidate out of the current four and probably the worst Presidential candidate in American history) cannot even claim this--with three better options to cast a ballot, one for Trump is indefensible."

REPOST from OP: "Whatever minutiae had convinced you to entertain even the possibility of casting a ballot for Trump is objectively overshadowed by mountains of documented reasons to cast one for somebody else.  Even if you cannot bring yourself to vote for one of the alternatives, or even two, there is still a third.  Trump is up against Hillary Clinton, Jill Stein and Gary Johnson--there's more to the race than two people. 

Now you know it as I know it.  It may hurt.  You may experience grief, and the first stage of grief is denial.  You may try to put on a tinfoil hat and/or conjure up some rationalization out of an irrational aether to justify voting for him, but it won't work.  It'll rely too heavily on False Equivalence Fallcies, Strawmen, Red Herrings and attempts to Move the Goalposts.  A vote for Trump is indefensible."

You making this accusation is all you.  This is coming from you and you alone.  You're the one wearing a tinfoil hat by accusing me of wearing one.  I didn't judge you, but you took that route, not I.  See.  Your preconception leads to false assumptions thus discrediting your reasoning.

Fixed with bold.  I have not accused anyone of putting on a tinfoil hat--I merely indicated the possibility.  By attacking a position I do not have (for I have not accused you of anything), you are building a Strawman argument and using it as a Red Herring.  Do note that I predicted (with italics) the very Fallacies you have used.

You asked a question and you were provided an answer from the content I have already posted.  What you do with that is entirely up to you. 



Valdath on 13 October 2016
Wildcard36qs said:
People will vote for Trump (and not care for him one bit) the same way people will vote for Hillary (and not care for her one bit) - it is about the party and Left v. Right and the Supreme Court, etc. People are willing to ignore the terrible candidate for the supposedly greater good of their party.

It's not even about left vs right, both are conservatives.

 

This election is globalism vs nationalism.



LivingMetal on 13 October 2016
SuaveSocialist said:
LivingMetal said:

You making this accusation is all you.  This is coming from you and you alone.  You're the one wearing a tinfoil hat by accusing me of wearing one.  I didn't judge you, but you took that route, not I.  See.  Your preconception leads to false assumptions thus discrediting your reasoning.

Fixed with bold.  I have not accused anyone of putting on a tinfoil hat--I merely indicated the possibility.  By attacking a position I do not have (for I have not accused you of anything), you are building a Strawman argument and using it as a Red Herring.  You asked a question and you were provided an answer from the content I have already posted.  What you do with that is entirely up to you.

Nope.  You were accusing me.  Now, you're trying to build a strawman.  Putting typeface in "bold" doesn't change its meaning.



LivingMetal on 13 October 2016
CGI-Quality said:
LivingMetal said:

But what if you do feel that a statement/person is being closed-minded and/or intolerant?  In my case it was pointed out because those who judge need to judge themselves first before passing judgement.  It's to point out hypocricy/irony.  Sometime this is part of the debate/discussion when one throws the first stone.  Otherwise, when it's not allowed is as effective as "shutting" down one's view point.

Find another way of communicating the disagreement. At no point can you just suddenly start Flaming because you feel justified to do so.

Given the intend, I do not believe this would be flaming.  You might disagree, but I will (and I hope others as well) can present the issue more tactfully.



Around the Network
Zod95 on 13 October 2016
Stefan.De.Machtige said:
A vote for Trump is for fire. To burn it all. I wish i could vote for him :).

After World War I, when Germany was being squeezed by the other european countries through unpayable debts that forced the country into hyperinflation (what could be worse?), I'm sure many germans also thought the same as you: "let's vote for Hitler to burn it all". Well, the shot was a bit off the mark...



Prediction made in 14/01/2014 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 100M      XOne: 70M      WiiU: 25M

Prediction made in 01/04/2016 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 100M      XOne: 50M      WiiU: 18M

Prediction made in 15/04/2017 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 90M      XOne: 40M      WiiU: 15M      Switch: 20M

Prediction made in 24/03/2018 for 31/12/2020:      PS4: 110M      XOne: 50M      WiiU: 14M      Switch: 65M

naruball on 13 October 2016
LivingMetal said:
naruball said:
It's funny how people who accuse Hilary do so by stating things as if they were facts with no actual (primary) sources to back them up.

Then you have Trump who says something crazy and utterly stupid every time he opens his mouth. You don't need any media to twist his words. He does all their work on his own.

It's sad how some people will take things for face value alone and wouldn't think for themselves by reading between the lines.  If you have to become so reliant by being spoon fed, you'll believe anything as long as it fits your personal agenda.

Sure, buddy. If you say so. It's clearly because I have been spoon fed, not because I have heard the man utter some of the most deplorable sentences I have ever heard. A man who can't debate to save his life. Who can't follow a simple rule as to allow the other person to speak without interrupting them. If this was any other situation, the moderator who have disqualified him from the debate.

But sure, keep reading between the lines, because if you have my point of you, surely you're not reading between the lines. Give me a break.



DarkD on 13 October 2016

I'm quite happy with Trump, not as a president, but as the leader of the republican party. He is single-handedly destroying the entire republican party on every level. On a year they pretty much had a win in the basket and every level of government was at their beck and call.

To think that a single person could be so incompetent that he destroys such a powerhouse as the republican party. There are incompetent business men, and then there's Donald Trump. It's not even news that he's a horrible business man. This is the guy who brought down America's second football league (Yes the states used to have TWO football leagues until Trump.) Trump didn't even own it, he just owned a team, but convinced all the investors that they should compete directly with the other football league....

It's simply amazing what this man is capable of... Republicans, you need to keep supporting this man, no matter how many elections is costs you. He's the chosen one that will lead you all to whatever glorious fates you think await you in the end. :D C'mon, clearly you only lost because of Paul Ryan that no good backstabber. Oust the man and put Trump in his place!!!



Lrdfancypants on 13 October 2016

I'm writing myself in and I invite all to vote for me for:
"the mark of a true leader is in the pants he wears." - Albert Einstein.



l <---- Do you mean this glitch Gribble?  If not, I'll keep looking.  

 

 

 

 

I am on the other side of my sig....am I warm or cold?  

Marco....

AsGryffynn on 13 October 2016
Zod95 said:
Stefan.De.Machtige said:
A vote for Trump is for fire. To burn it all. I wish i could vote for him :).

After World War I, when Germany was being squeezed by the other european countries through unpayable debts that forced the country into hyperinflation (what could be worse?), I'm sure many germans also thought the same as you: "let's vote for Hitler to burn it all". Well, the shot was a bit off the mark...

Can we now accept the we were to blame for Hitler as well? If people choose a tyrant because of stuff we did to them (Putin, Chavez, Trump) then it's solely our fault...