• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Left Loses it's cool

Unitedwestand13 said:
i consider doing nothing to be the worse option, at least ted lieu is making a effort to show what he stands for.
Click to expand...
"Fiddy, it's a choice between Lincoln Chafee and John McAfee."

Most rational people: Why?

"Fiddy, because if we don't elect John, who may be crazy, but he has balls-- we obviously can get no one but Chafee."

Most rational people: Huh?

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Fiddytree said:
"Fiddy, it's a choice between Lincoln Chafee and John McAfee."

Most rational people: Why?

"Fiddy, because if we don't elect John, who may be crazy, but he has balls-- we obviously can get no one but Chafee."

Most rational people: Huh?

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

fiddy, democrats get criticized by their base for giving up too quickly or for having no principles. yet when democrats try to make a stand on a issue and demonstrate their principles, they get accused of starting unnecessary conflicts or for being show boats.

ted lieu is a showboat... in the grand scheme of things why is that a sin?
 
Zyphlin said:
Assuming they didn't violate international law (I believe they did, but lets assume that they did)....

Calling them "Murder Camps" would be an incorrect term, "Death camps" however would be a rather accurate depiction of camps where people were routinely killed.

See, apparently you're having a hard time grasping logic and context so let me help you.....suggesting something is legal or illegal is not the same thing as suggesting something is good or bad. Something can be illegal and yet be found by many to be morally good. Something can be legal and yet be found by many to be morally bad.

HOWEVER, what you've actually done is highlight my point BEAUTIFULLY. Individuals who engage in dishonest debate want to misrepresent things by using terms like this because in their mind they believe that "illegal" = "bad", or at the very least "more bad", and thus they try to misuse the words for their in hyperbolic fashion to try and propagandize.

So relating to this thread, instead of "The Trump administration is separating children from their families" its "The Trump administration is kidnapping kids" because they want to utilize the greater emotional negative tied to the word, regardless of hyperbolic dishonesty, as a means of scoring political points.
Click to expand...

Well, no, let's don't assume they did, because they didn't. Ex post facto law was used to convict the Nazis at Nuremburg, because there was no German law, nor international law that made the concentration camps illegal. "Crimes against humanity" was an invention of the Nuremburg trials used to justify the convictions.

Don't call someone dishonest when you make false assumptions just so you can make yourself right. That is dishonest.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
fiddy, democrats get criticized by their base for giving up too quickly or for having no principles. yet when democrats try to make a stand on a issue and demonstrate their principles, they get accused of starting unnecessary conflicts or for being show boats.
Click to expand...

Because they often do start unnecessary conflicts. Screw the base.

ted lieu is a showboat... in the grand scheme of things why is that a sin?
Click to expand...

Ted Cruz and Donald Trump.



Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
 
Fiddytree said:
Because they often do start unnecessary conflicts. Screw the base.



Ted Cruz and Donald Trump.



Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

i am hearing two simultaneous complaints: on the one hand there is "where are the democrats?" and on the other hand there is "democrats are showboating and starting unnecessary fights"
 
apdst said:
Don't call someone dishonest when you make false assumptions just so you can make yourself right. That is dishonest.
Click to expand...

What? o_O

I wasn't making a false assumption to to make myself right, I was making an assumption because your point was clear and it was easier to just write my post based on how you were presenting the facts as opposed to taking the time to research it and then possibly getting distracted by an argument about said fact as opposed to the actual thing being discussed. It wasn't about being dishonest, it was about accepting your premise as quickly and plainly as possible to get to actually discussing it.

Cool, my guess was wrong. Not surprising, I wasn't really positive about my belief which was the very reason I went ahead and just assumed the way you were presenting it was true rather than taking the time to research it and argue about something of no consequence. So fine, remove the first line, every single word of my post still holds exactly true and still deals with the ACTUAL thing being discussed. But of course, you instead decided to flip out over me actually agreeing to relate my post to your premise without actually addressing the substance of it at all.
 
Zyphlin said:
What? o_O

I wasn't making a false assumption to to make myself right, I was making an assumption because your point was clear and it was easier to just write my post based on how you were presenting the facts as opposed to taking the time to research it and then possibly getting distracted by an argument about said fact as opposed to the actual thing being discussed. It wasn't about being dishonest, it was about accepting your premise as quickly and plainly as possible to get to actually discussing it.

Cool, my guess was wrong. Not surprising, I wasn't really positive about my belief which was the very reason I went ahead and just assumed the way you were presenting it was true rather than taking the time to research it and argue about something of no consequence. So fine, remove the first line, every single word of my post still holds exactly true and still deals with the ACTUAL thing being discussed. But of course, you instead decided to flip out over me actually agreeing to relate my post to your premise without actually addressing the substance of it at all.
Click to expand...

You said "I think they do, so let's assume they did". That's a false assumption, because they didn't violate international law, nor German law.

You should have just said, "yeah ok, I see your point".
 
Spartacus FPV said:
Wishful thinking, said by the guy who said (11/4/16, Place Your Bets thread):


Spare us your predictions, your crystal ball has a terrible track record.
Click to expand...

I didn't know then what I know now. The **** is going to hit the fan in the next few weeks. You'll see.
 
apdst said:
You said "I think they do, so let's assume they did". That's a false assumption, because they didn't violate international law, nor German law.

You should have just said, "yeah ok, I see your point".
Click to expand...

Ah, I see the confusion.

That was a mistype. If you'll notice, the sentence JUST before that stated "Assuming they didn't violate international law "

And if you actually read my post, it's clear contextually that I was talking as if it didn't violate international law. Thus why I said:

"Calling them 'Murder Camps' would be an incorrect term"

It would be incorrect, because my post was assuming that it didn't violate international law and thus it was not illegal killing.

Hell, even in terms of basic sentence struct, it should be clear it was a typo. You don't say "I assume I'm right, BUT i'm going to act like I'm right"; you would say "I assume I'm right, SO i'm going to act like I'm right". The presence of the "but" is an indication that despite what I stated in the first part of the sentence (My [incorrect] belief that there were such laws), I would be acting in a different fashion.

You were so incredibly eager to play "gotcha" that you saw something and immediately pounced rather than actually bothering to read the post, in which case it would've been clear the likely answer as that it was a typo as opposed to a legit thought. The sentence RIGHT BEFORE it said I'd be assuming it DIDN'T violate international law. The sentence DIRECTLY after it contextually is one assuming it DIDN'T violate international law. Yet instead of asking if it was a typo, or assuming it was, or even just questioning it, you decided to ignore all the rest and just pounce.

So there you go apdst. I made a typo. I forgot to add on the "n't" to the end of it like I did in the sentence just before that one. My entire post was based around assuming it DIDN'T break any form of international laws at the time. So as I said previously, every part of my post after the first line is still absolutely correct in terms of the point I was making on the actual substance of the discussion.
 
Last edited:
NeverTrumpGOP said:
The left continues to scream while not having a plan to win 2020. This just emboldens the new wave of conservatives whom the defining principle of conservatism is battling liberals on the internet. I continue to believe that the left will not win this battle. They have no major candidates running yet or w/a political machine in place. Bernie's burn has faded. Maxine Waters has emboldened this new wave of attacks herself, and Swampy loves it all! liberals have mixed feelings about Biden and Swampy would love Warren to run. Yet the double standard remains. Why can Swampy and his people do all this, but the so-called evil liburals can't???



Politicio | The left loses its cool
Click to expand...

They have a plan, and it’s called Maxine’s Plan:

1. Impeach/Remove Trump at all costs.

2. Raise Taxes. Not one D supported the tax cuts. Pelosi, Schumer were openly hostile to them.

3. Open Borders.

Americans know it. Democrats know it.

Oh... this is going to be another ass kicking for Democrats come November.
 
Zyphlin said:
Ah, I see the confusion.

That was a mistype. If you'll notice, the sentence JUST before that stated "Assuming they didn't violate international law "

And if you actually read my post, it's clear contextually that I was talking as if it didn't violate international law. Thus why I said:

"Calling them 'Murder Camps' would be an incorrect term"

It would be incorrect, because my post was assuming that it didn't violate international law and thus it was not illegal killing.

Hell, even in terms of basic sentence struct, it should be clear it was a typo. You don't say "I assume I'm right, BUT i'm going to act like I'm right"; you would say "I assume I'm right, SO i'm going to act like I'm right". The presence of the "but" is an indication that despite what I stated in the first part of the sentence (My [incorrect] belief that there were such laws), I would be acting in a different fashion.

You were so incredibly eager to play "gotcha" that you saw something and immediately pounced rather than actually bothering to read the post, in which case it would've been clear the likely answer as that it was a typo as opposed to a legit thought. The sentence RIGHT BEFORE it said I'd be assuming it DIDN'T violate international law. The sentence DIRECTLY after it contextually is one assuming it DIDN'T violate international law. Yet instead of asking if it was a typo, or assuming it was, or even just questioning it, you decided to ignore all the rest and just pounce.

So there you go apdst. I made a typo. I forgot to add on the "n't" to the end of it like I did in the sentence just before that one. My entire post was based around assuming it DIDN'T break any form of international laws at the time. So as I said previously, every part of my post after the first line is still absolutely correct in terms of the point I was making on the actual substance of the discussion.
Click to expand...

A typo? You're just wrong. You're claiming that taxation can't be theft, because taxation is legal. I pointed out that the Nazis didn't break the law. My point being, even though they didn't break the law, what they did was still murder. Hence, taxation can be theft, although it's legal.
 
apdst said:
A typo?
Click to expand...

Yes, a typo. As I then clearly explained, despite it seeming that you didn't bother to read. Which shouldn't be surprising to me, since the fact it was a typo would've been evident had you bothered to read the first post, which its becoming clear you haven't since you refuse to actually deal with the substance of it.

You're just wrong.
Click to expand...

Relative to what you're talking about, I can't possibly be wrong. You're saying I didn't make a typo? You can't point to anything in my post to suggest that is the reasonable argument.

You're claiming that taxation can't be theft, because taxation is legal.
Click to expand...

Correct. It can't be illegal taking of ones money because they legally are allowed to take your money.

I pointed out that the Nazis didn't break the law.
Click to expand...

Right, which means at the time you couldn't accurately describe what the nazi's were doing in the concentration camp as "murder". You could describe it as killing or genocide.

My point being, even though they didn't break the law, what they did was still murder.
Click to expand...

Your points wrong, and you've not shown that in the least. Until such point that the law was rewritten and applied in an ex posta facto fashion, what the Nazi's engaged in was not murder but rather killing. Just because you FEEL like it was murder doesn't make it so.

Just like people FEELING like what Trump is doing is "kidnapping" doesn't make it so.
 
Zyphlin said:
No, they absolutely are absolute equivalences.

Theft is taking something illegally; taxation is perfectly legal.

Murder is killing someone illegaly; abortion is perfectly legal.

Kidnapping is taking a child illegally; these child separations by the Trump administration are perfectly legal.

In all cases it's an attempt to misuse a term either to confuse and mislead, or to dishonestly misrepresent to make a point, or because the individual is simply ignorant to reality and believes their feelings about something make it fact.

As far as my biases, you're correct; my bias against flippant hyperbole to demonize your opposition and to make a factually questionable "point" is indeed well on display.
Click to expand...

Sorry pal, just because a government decides its so doesnt necessarily make it so. Murder is still murder even if a government defines it differently. Over taxation is still theft even if the government says its not.

Rationationalization is not solely performed at the individual level.

As to your biases, your own flippant hyperbole in attempt to make your point is, indeed, clearly on display.
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
The left continues to scream while not having a plan to win 2020. This just emboldens the new wave of conservatives whom the defining principle of conservatism is battling liberals on the internet. I continue to believe that the left will not win this battle. They have no major candidates running yet or w/a political machine in place. Bernie's burn has faded. Maxine Waters has emboldened this new wave of attacks herself, and Swampy loves it all! liberals have mixed feelings about Biden and Swampy would love Warren to run. Yet the double standard remains. Why can Swampy and his people do all this, but the so-called evil liburals can't???
Click to expand...

Remember when their single strategy was "We're not Bush?" Well, that's their strategy now. "We're not Trump."

What's your plan for immigration?
We're not Trump.

What's your plan for taxes?
We're not Trump.

What's your plan for health care?
We're not Trump.

What's the capitol of Florida?
Uh...We're not Trump.
 
cuban smokes said:
I have said this this before & I will say it again: America is void of any real political leadership & ideas that will address the issues we face.

Two of the most pressing issues we face IMO are
(1) greed is our God & this has created a society that is short sighted & shallow
(2) our global policies revolve around our ability to attempt to solve issues with force/military power

I have heard people for a very long time say, "just because you can do something doesn't mean you should" but then more often than not those are the very people that never look in a mirror & that are honest with themselves

this is not a 'left' nor a 'right' thing; it is a human thing. Humans are typically greedy, which goes to point one above.
Click to expand...

Promoting personal greed, thinking that it could be then harnessed for good with little concern for the quality of what is lusted ofter, was one of the biggest mistakes of the Enlightenment.

Nice post.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom