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

Forums - Politics - Is David Hogg just a bully now? Uses followers to go on personal vendetta.

 

David Hoggs personal vendetta is...

Justified. I support it. 44 57.89%
 
Unjustified. I don't support it. 26 34.21%
 
I'm unsure. 1 1.32%
 
Other, comments... 5 6.58%
 
Total:76
AngryLittleAlchemist on 02 April 2018
Aura7541 said:
AngryLittleAlchemist said:

:thinking:

If he makes videos about how bad bias is, his message is that bias in media is bad, and he then chooses to go on a completely biased platform and spread other messages ... coincidentally not bringing up their bias. How is that not thinking about his actual message? I'll wait for your mental gymnastics on that one. 

However, the credibility of one's argument is independent from the reputation of the platform where the argument came from. To discredit someone's point because it comes from a platform that you consider to be biased or is objectively biased is ad hominem. You're not attacking the argument at that point; you're just attacking the person making the argument. This also applies to the notion that because a person has made biased statements in the past that this statement that he just made is also biased. You can definitely argue that because of Ben's history, when he makes an argument, it is likely that it is very biased. However, it does not guarantee that the argument is biased because there's a chance that he makes a good point. That is why we should always judge arguments in a case-by-case basis, not on a reputation basis.

If you want to continue this discussion, I'm happy to do it on PM because I already made myself clear that the thread is going off topic and the topic of the discussion should stick to David Hogg and Laura Ingraham.

That is true. I was trying to make a nice pot shot so that I could rest a case without getting too detailed. Truthfully, I have many issues with his stances - although I don't think he is dumb at all, he is obviously somewhat intelligent. I could write an entire thread about nearly every issue he covers though, so I found it most convenient to post a single argument that was convenient in expressing one of many ways the man is not as praise-worthy as seems. Saying that it is an ad hominem attack is true, then again the post I was replying to was a justification and praise of Ben Shapiro - pretty much the same thing I did, only positive. 

Anyways yeah, this is not the place to discuss this. 



Around the Network
WhatATimeToBeAlive on 02 April 2018

No matter how many mass shootings will happen in the USA, the "gun fanatics" will never let go of the guns and the money associated with them. "More guns is the answer". Its clearly not, which is evident in Europe and many other countries that have tighter gun laws.

And what's even worse than gun fanatics are these "overly" religious gun fanatics. It's weird that they don't seem to "live as they breach". Like this lady. How is it Christian to insult a person, who has survived a mass shooting, like that? They seem more like "fake Christians" to me. But one thing that I associate gun lobbyist with, is greed. Looks like that was also the case with this one.



"The rumours of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

- Single-player Game

o_O.Q on 02 April 2018
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
o_O.Q said:

so... your focus is on the platform that he distributes his message on over his actual message?... well ok then

:thinking:

If he makes videos about how bad bias is, his message is that bias in media is bad, and he then chooses to go on a completely biased platform and spread other messages ... coincidentally not bringing up their bias. How is that not thinking about his actual message? I'll wait for your mental gymnastics on that one. 

"he then chooses to go on a completely biased platform "

this is a subjective judgement, anyone could just as easily claim that CNN is biased towards the left

 

"How is that not thinking about his actual message?"

in the linked video is he discussing fox news or david hogg?

if your answer is david hoggs, then what is his message?

Last edited by o_O.Q - on 02 April 2018

o_O.Q on 02 April 2018
WhatATimeToBeAlive said:
No matter how many mass shootings will happen in the USA, the "gun fanatics" will never let go of the guns and the money associated with them. "More guns is the answer". Its clearly not, which is evident in Europe and many other countries that have tighter gun laws.

And what's even worse than gun fanatics are these "overly" religious gun fanatics. It's weird that they don't seem to "live as they breach". Like this lady. How is it Christian to insult a person, who has survived a mass shooting, like that? They seem more like "fake Christians" to me. But one thing that I associate gun lobbyist with, is greed. Looks like that was also the case with this one.

those knife fanatic chinese, when oh when will they ever learn that they have to ban knives to keep people safe

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/33-dead-130-injured-china-knife-wielding-spree-n41966

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/05/10/china-knife-attack-18-injured-in-mass-stabbing-suspect-shot-and-arrested.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-crime/woman-killed-12-injured-in-beijing-mall-knife-attack-idUSKBN1FV08E

 

why oh why didn't they ban the guns in nazi germany and soviet russia to keep the people safe?

http://www.independent.org/store/book.asp?id=106

https://www.rbth.com/history/326865-guns-rifles-russia-revolution

oh wait hang on... they did... well shit

 

" Its clearly not, which is evident in Europe and many other countries that have tighter gun laws."

really?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jan/25/knife-and-gun-rises-sharply-in-england-and-wales

why am i not hearing about this shit on CNN?

Last edited by o_O.Q - on 02 April 2018

Teeqoz on 02 April 2018

She attempts a personal attack due to presumably political reasons. She faces consequences because enough people don't think that's acceptable.

Nope, seems fair to me.



Around the Network
contestgamer on 02 April 2018
John2290 said:
Puppyroach said:

Looking through matters from a historic perspective is important (and no, they did not believe in a literal god except maybe Charles Darwin), and regarding Neil Degrasse Tyson... yeah, you are way, way of on that one =).

I didn't say it was the traditional God, it's still a belief in God. This is a silly argument anyhow, Believing in God should and does not invalidate someones ability to think critically or in anyway lessen their view points.

Dude none of them believe in organized religion. Ben Shepiro does. Big difference. Ben Shepiro makes good arguments on some issues, but it's hard to take someone seriously that basis a lot of their morality and political opinions (such as abortion) on religious arguments.



Teeqoz on 02 April 2018
John2290 said:
SpokenTruth said:

You might want to go look up their views on God. 

I don't need to, they had the near the exact same view of God as I have.

Stephen Hawking has explicitly stated that he's an atheist. I mean, not that it matters to the overall discussion, but on that, you are simply wrong.



Teeqoz on 02 April 2018
NightlyPoe said:
Teeqoz said:
She attempts a personal attack due to presumably political reasons. She faces consequences because enough people don't think that's acceptable.

Nope, seems fair to me.

As it is fair to think that an overreacting teen bully and his enablers who are backing his maladjusted behavior for their own political purposes are the ones that are truly despicable.

Like I said before, trying to hurt someone because they had to the gall to say you're "whining" is the mark of being a terrible person.


I hardly see what makes him a bully, but both sides have some fair points. So all in all, it's fair game. Of course it sucks to be on the losing side (as Ingraham is in this case), but that's reality for you. I'm sure if a large group of people contacted those advertisers in support of Ingraham, that could change the outcome, but that wasn't the case.



o_O.Q on 02 April 2018
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Aura7541 said:

However, the credibility of one's argument is independent from the reputation of the platform where the argument came from. To discredit someone's point because it comes from a platform that you consider to be biased or is objectively biased is ad hominem. You're not attacking the argument at that point; you're just attacking the person making the argument. This also applies to the notion that because a person has made biased statements in the past that this statement that he just made is also biased. You can definitely argue that because of Ben's history, when he makes an argument, it is likely that it is very biased. However, it does not guarantee that the argument is biased because there's a chance that he makes a good point. That is why we should always judge arguments in a case-by-case basis, not on a reputation basis.

If you want to continue this discussion, I'm happy to do it on PM because I already made myself clear that the thread is going off topic and the topic of the discussion should stick to David Hogg and Laura Ingraham.

That is true. I was trying to make a nice pot shot so that I could rest a case without getting too detailed. Truthfully, I have many issues with his stances - although I don't think he is dumb at all, he is obviously somewhat intelligent. I could write an entire thread about nearly every issue he covers though, so I found it most convenient to post a single argument that was convenient in expressing one of many ways the man is not as praise-worthy as seems. Saying that it is an ad hominem attack is true, then again the post I was replying to was a justification and praise of Ben Shapiro - pretty much the same thing I did, only positive. 

Anyways yeah, this is not the place to discuss this. 

" although I don't think he is dumb at all, he is obviously somewhat intelligent."

that's putting it mildly, the man eats the regressive left for breakfast and that's a fact



Lespaul on 02 April 2018

David Hogg is just a punk that needs his legs broken