• 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!

Trump is divisive

T

theLiquidGuy

Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2019
Messages
227
Reaction score
80
You are the ones being divisive and blaming it on Trump.
Click to expand...
I am really confused by this statement, Are you saying that the only thing that separates us is whether or not Trump is to blame?

I am not trying to pick a fight with you. But you need to consider that maybe it is Trump himself who divides us. Take a look at some of the angry divisive rhetoric that came out of his mouth over the years:

"Angry democrats!"
"Crazy democrats!"
"Radical democrats!"
"Invasion!"
"Enemy of the people"
"Fake News!"
"Fine people on both sides!"
"Sh-t hole countries"
“I’d like to punch him in the face, I tell ya.” (2016 rally)
"Lock her up!"
"I think Islam hates us.”
"thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down.”
At the height of the government shut down last year, Trump said people shouldn’t worry about the plight of government employees because they were mostly democrats anyway.
 
theLiquidGuy said:
I am really confused by this statement, Are you saying that the only thing that separates us is whether or not Trump is to blame?

I am not trying to pick a fight with you. But you need to consider that maybe it is Trump himself who divides us. Take a look at some of the angry divisive rhetoric that came out of his mouth over the years:

"Angry democrats!"
"Crazy democrats!"
"Radical democrats!"
"Invasion!"
"Enemy of the people"
"Fake News!"
"Fine people on both sides!"
"Sh-t hole countries"
“I’d like to punch him in the face, I tell ya.” (2016 rally)
"Lock her up!"
"I think Islam hates us.”
"thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down.”
At the height of the government shut down last year, Trump said people shouldn’t worry about the plight of government employees because they were mostly democrats anyway.
Click to expand...

Don't know who you are talking to in your OP, but it is clear that you love your out of context snippets...especially one or two word snippets.

Here...I have a snippet from a Democratic member of the House of Representatives: "Mother****er!!"
 
Mycroft said:
Don't know who you are talking to in your OP, but it is clear that you love your out of context snippets...especially one or two word snippets.

Here...I have a snippet from a Democratic member of the House of Representatives: "Mother****er!!"
Click to expand...

If there are any that you don't recognize i will be happy to contextualize them for you.


I thought that they would be pretty familiar since most of them he has said repeatedly
 
theLiquidGuy said:
If there are any that you don't recognize i will be happy to contextualize them for you.


I thought that they would be pretty familiar since most of them he has said repeatedly
Click to expand...

"Angry democrats!"
"Crazy democrats!"
"Radical democrats!"
"Invasion!" (Refering to imigrants as invaders)
"Enemy of the people" (refering to the press)
"Fake News!"
"Fine people on both sides!" (Refering to neo nazis charllotesville)
"Sh-t hole countries" (refering to african countries)
“I’d like to punch him in the face, I tell ya.” (2016 rally)
"Lock her up!" ( come on! You know)
"I think Islam hates us.”
"thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down.” (911)
At the height of the government shut down last year, Trump said people shouldn’t worry about the plight of government employees because they were mostly democrats anyway.
 
theLiquidGuy said:
I am really confused by this statement, Are you saying that the only thing that separates us is whether or not Trump is to blame?

I am not trying to pick a fight with you. But you need to consider that maybe it is Trump himself who divides us. Take a look at some of the angry divisive rhetoric that came out of his mouth over the years:

"Angry democrats!"
"Crazy democrats!"
"Radical democrats!"
"Invasion!"
"Enemy of the people"
"Fake News!"
"Fine people on both sides!"
"Sh-t hole countries"
“I’d like to punch him in the face, I tell ya.” (2016 rally)
"Lock her up!"
"I think Islam hates us.”
"thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down.”
At the height of the government shut down last year, Trump said people shouldn’t worry about the plight of government employees because they were mostly democrats anyway.
Click to expand...

Well this isnt really news, Trump is easily the most divisive and thin skinned President in my lifetime. Hell Even many of his supporters speak out about this and wish he would talk less and quite is twitter account. :shrug:
 
theLiquidGuy said:
If there are any that you don't recognize i will be happy to contextualize them for you.


I thought that they would be pretty familiar since most of them he has said repeatedly
Click to expand...

Oh, I recognize all of them. They have been splashed by the multimedia echo chamber over and over. Heck, I'm probably more aware of the context of each one than you are. But since you offered, provide the entire context for this one: "Fine people on both sides!"

Be aware that "context" doesn't mean "what he was talking about". It means "what he was talking about and everything he said". You know...putting the snippet in context.

btw, I notice you ignored the snippet I provided to you. Perhaps you don't want to consider (or defend) the disgusting level of divisiveness from your fellow Trump haters?
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
Oh, I recognize all of them. They have been splashed by the multimedia echo chamber over and over. Heck, I'm probably more aware of the context than you are. But since you offered, provide the entire context for this one: "Fine people on both sides!"
Click to expand...

The entire context?? Uhh... I provided more info in parentheses in a secondary post for you. If you want more context than that try google. I am here to point out that this is, by far, the most divisive president ever, not write essays.

btw, I notice you ignored the snippet I provided to you. Perhaps you don't want to consider (or defend) the disgusting level of divisiveness from your fellow Trump haters?
Click to expand...

First, You seem angry. Not sure why. Do you feel anger lends weight to your unsubstantiated claim that people opposed to trump are divisive? Care to back that up?

Second, I didn’t ignore anything. You didn't ask for me to address your snippet. i actually thought you were joking. Fine then, here is my comment on that: Saying “Mother****er” is not a divisive comment.
 
theLiquidGuy said:
The entire context?? Uhh... I provided more info in parentheses in a secondary post for you. If you want more context than that try google. I am here to point out that this is, by far, the most divisive president ever, not write essays.
Click to expand...

Your "more info" does nothing to make the context clear.

You can "point out" whatever your heart desires, but without honest, substantive support your point is useless.

First, You seem angry. Not sure why. Do you feel anger lends weight to your unsubstantiated claim that people opposed to trump are divisive? Care to back that up?

Second, I didn’t ignore anything. You didn't ask for me to address your snippet. i actually thought you were joking. Fine then, here is my comment on that: Saying “Mother****er” is not a divisive comment.
Click to expand...

I'm not angry. Stop imagining things.

I'm not surprised you don't think Tlaib's disgusting rhetoric is divisive. After all, there's nothing wrong with a woman, while talking to her son about our President, calling him a mother****er, right? There's also nothing wrong with her recounting that event with her Trump hating followers, right? Given your outrage at Trump's pronouncements that specific news items are "Fake News", your hypocrisy is not surprising at all.

But be aware that Tlaib's fellow House Dems at least try to disguise their own hypocrisy. Perhaps you should as well.

“Mueller hasn’t even produced his report yet!” said Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis.), referring to special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia probe. “People should cool their jets a little bit, let the prosecutors do their job and finish the investigation.”

“Inappropriate,” added Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.). “As elected officials I think we should be expected to set a high bar… It’s not helpful.”

Even Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), who introduced an impeachment resolution earlier this week, was shocked. His eyes bulged in disbelief when a reporter read him Tlaib’s comments and he was speechless for several seconds.

After he regained his composure, Sherman said that kind of language is detrimental to the cause: “That’s not language I would use … I think the office of the presidency should be treated with respect.”

Party elders also sought to calm talk of impeachment without criticizing Tlaib directly. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the new chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, called Talib’s comments “inappropriate” and said, “We need to be patient.”

Dems livid after Tlaib vows to ‘impeach the motherf—er’ - POLITICO
Click to expand...

Nancy Pelosi...who has a way with weasel words...tried to straddle the fence, but ended up shredding YOUR hypocritical point of view.

Pelosi said while she didn’t agree with the language, she also didn’t think anyone “should make a big deal” about the expletive, noting the president is also known for having a foul mouth sometimes.

“I'm not in the censorship business. I don't like that language, I wouldn't use that language, but I wouldn't establish language standards for my colleagues,” Pelosi said during an MSNBC town hall Friday morning.

She added that impeachment is “very divisive“ and shouldn’t be taken “without the facts.”
Click to expand...


You see...that's the thing about context and also the reason why you and other Trump haters avoid it at all costs: It ends up making you look foolish when you make contentions based on out of context snippets.

Anyway, you are new here...welcome to the forum...but you've clearly shown, right out the gate, that you are adept at presenting dishonesty and hypocrisy. Unfortunately for you, I'm not interested is that.

You are dismissed. (see my sig)
 
Mycroft said:
Your "more info" does nothing to make the context clear.
Click to expand...
Again, sorry that wasn’t enough for you. uhh…’google’.


You can "point out" whatever your heart desires, but without honest, substantive support your point is useless.
Click to expand...
My point is quite valid. Trump is divisive. If you honestly didn’t already realize that before, and if you still can’t see that after I listed more than a dozen examples, maybe you can at least acknowledge that your opinion is a minority view: see poll

If you still deny that he is divisive after all that, then maybe you just have a different definition of the word than most people. Or maybe your defense of him is just a reflex.


I'm not angry. Stop imagining things.
Click to expand...
You said:

" Perhaps you don't want to consider (or defend) the disgusting level of divisiveness from your fellow Trump haters?"

You called me a “trump hater” and in a round about way “disgusting” even though you don’t even know me. Seems pretty angry, or at least rude. Have I gone personal on you?


I'm not surprised you don't think Tlaib's disgusting rhetoric is divisive. After all, there's nothing wrong with a woman, while talking to her son about our President, calling him a mother****er, right? There's also nothing wrong with her recounting that event with her Trump hating followers, right? Given your outrage at Trump's pronouncements that specific news items are "Fake News", your hypocrisy is not surprising at all.
Click to expand...
Slow down! Please go look at your post again. All you did was claim the following was divisive:

“Mother****er”

This is your fault. There has been a lot of 4-letter words flying around politicians these days. How was I supposed to know that was Tliab? You should have quoted “We’re gonna impeach the Mother****er”. But you didn’t. (Here’s your oppotunity to imply I am stupid for not figuring it out. Will you take it?)

I don't pay much attention to the squad. (FoxNews way over exaggerates their significance). As for what she said: It could be considered divisive if she was trying to “other-ize” a group of people. But it seems she was directing that at the president, not any community. And as I recall that was supposed to be a closed gathering of supporters not meant for public consumption. And one last thing: She is just a freshman member of congress. She is not the leader of this country, or our roll-model-in-chief. She is not the president.

Also, Trump doesn’t just point to “specific news items” as Fake News. He points to the non-conservative media in general. You ought to know that without me providing examples.


But be aware that Tlaib's fellow House Dems at least try to disguise their own hypocrisy. Perhaps you should as well.
Click to expand...
I do not know what you are talking about here.
My hypocrisy? I have been entirely consistent. You got an example?


Nancy Pelosi...who has a way with weasel words...tried to straddle the fence, but ended up shredding YOUR hypocritical point of view.
Click to expand...
You have not demonstrated any hypocrisy on my part. I challenge you to do so. If you want me to take you seriously, you will.


You see...that's the thing about context and also the reason why you and other Trump haters avoid it at all costs: It ends up making you look foolish when you make contentions based on out of context snippets.
Click to expand...
You are welcome to provide context. Why haven’t you?
I think that it is republicans who more often argue in bad faith (on TV. I am still undecided about on forums though). But I get that you think the other side does too. It’s natural when someone is as passionate as you seemingly are.


Anyway, you are new here...welcome to the forum...but you've clearly shown, right out the gate, that you are adept at presenting dishonesty and hypocrisy. Unfortunately for you, I'm not interested is that.
Click to expand...
Again, you have not demonstrated dishonesty or hypocrisy (at least, not on MY part)


You are dismissed. (see my sig)
Click to expand...
Whoaa, what an honor!
 
theLiquidGuy said:
I am really confused by this statement, Are you saying that the only thing that separates us is whether or not Trump is to blame?

I am not trying to pick a fight with you. But you need to consider that maybe it is Trump himself who divides us. Take a look at some of the angry divisive rhetoric that came out of his mouth over the years:

"Angry democrats!"
"Crazy democrats!"
"Radical democrats!"
"Invasion!"
"Enemy of the people"
"Fake News!"
"Fine people on both sides!"
"Sh-t hole countries"
“I’d like to punch him in the face, I tell ya.” (2016 rally)
"Lock her up!"
"I think Islam hates us.”
"thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down.”
At the height of the government shut down last year, Trump said people shouldn’t worry about the plight of government employees because they were mostly democrats anyway.
Click to expand...
Trump is combative, bombastic and does not capitulate. All new to Democrats who are divisive; who expect a easy surrender by Republicans.

Winning doesn't get old


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
Mycroft said:
Oh, I recognize all of them. They have been splashed by the multimedia echo chamber over and over. Heck, I'm probably more aware of the context of each one than you are. But since you offered, provide the entire context for this one: "Fine people on both sides!"

Be aware that "context" doesn't mean "what he was talking about". It means "what he was talking about and everything he said". You know...putting the snippet in context.

btw, I notice you ignored the snippet I provided to you. Perhaps you don't want to consider (or defend) the disgusting level of divisiveness from your fellow Trump haters?
Click to expand...

I’m sure in private Trump has used that against people he doesn’t like.
 
theLiquidGuy said:
I am really confused by this statement, Are you saying that the only thing that separates us is whether or not Trump is to blame?

I am not trying to pick a fight with you. But you need to consider that maybe it is Trump himself who divides us. Take a look at some of the angry divisive rhetoric that came out of his mouth over the years:

"Angry democrats!"
"Crazy democrats!"
"Radical democrats!"
"Invasion!"
"Enemy of the people"
"Fake News!"
"Fine people on both sides!"
"Sh-t hole countries"
“I’d like to punch him in the face, I tell ya.” (2016 rally)
"Lock her up!"
"I think Islam hates us.”
"thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down.”
At the height of the government shut down last year, Trump said people shouldn’t worry about the plight of government employees because they were mostly democrats anyway.
Click to expand...
It's easy to figure out exactly who the catalyst of "divisive" actually is.

But you must be honest in your search for and acceptance of the truth.

So put on your Fact-Hat and prepare to be shocked if you discover reality and willing to accept it.

1st) decide; "if you were under constant attack by a specific group, might you be resentful"?

2nd) use the answer from #1 to figure out; "what came first, the chicken or the egg"?

And the truth will set you free.....but it must be the absolute truth!
 
Empirica said:
It's easy to figure out exactly who the catalyst of "divisive" actually is.
Click to expand...
Stop. This is exactly as easy to figure out as is: What came first? The chicken or the egg? Who started the fight? The Dems or Trump? We can trace the instigator all the way back to the beginning of time. I promise you: On this, there is no answer.

There is an answer to a different question though: Who did not stop it? It’s fair to ask.

I have always looked up to people who could remain calm in the face of acrimony. They just shelf their emotions and work with a so-called “enemy.” I used to struggle to find common cause with adversarial types. I still struggle. That’s why it’s so frustrating when I see our leader foment the same behavior in others that i seek to control. Those demons are more easily risen when a leader says its ok. Donald needs to rise above the persisting acrimony. He needs to encourage others to do so. This is a true super power. Its a skill that a leader must seek to perfect.

Why? Because he is a US President! He is The President of 360 million people. He is the leader of the free world but his action ripple through the entire world. And so the entire world watches him. The whole world scrutinizes him, his demeanour, his every gesture. They try to anticipate his mood, his priorities, his next move. They are desperate to know if he will smile upon their sector or their community. They seek to influence him. And so they seek to judge him, every second of every day. And the judgement will never stop. Not after he leaves office. Not after he is dead. There are too many judges. 7.6 billion judges. And only one Donald J. Trump.

He has not seen this. I know this because once you do, there is really only one path: To rise above the acrimony, to break the cycle. To be silent. Just like other presidents have wisely done before him.
 
theLiquidGuy said:
Stop. This is exactly as easy to figure out as is: What came first? The chicken or the egg? Who started the fight? The Dems or Trump? We can trace the instigator all the way back to the beginning of time. I promise you: On this, there is no answer.

There is an answer to a different question though: Who did not stop it? It’s fair to ask.

I have always looked up to people who could remain calm in the face of acrimony. They just shelf their emotions and work with a so-called “enemy.” I used to struggle to find common cause with adversarial types. I still struggle. That’s why it’s so frustrating when I see our leader foment the same behavior in others that i seek to control. Those demons are more easily risen when a leader says its ok. Donald needs to rise above the persisting acrimony. He needs to encourage others to do so. This is a true super power. Its a skill that a leader must seek to perfect.

Why? Because he is a US President! He is The President of 360 million people. He is the leader of the free world but his action ripple through the entire world. And so the entire world watches him. The whole world scrutinizes him, his demeanour, his every gesture. They try to anticipate his mood, his priorities, his next move. They are desperate to know if he will smile upon their sector or their community. They seek to influence him. And so they seek to judge him, every second of every day. And the judgement will never stop. Not after he leaves office. Not after he is dead. There are too many judges. 7.6 billion judges. And only one Donald J. Trump.

He has not seen this. I know this because once you do, there is really only one path: To rise above the acrimony, to break the cycle. To be silent. Just like other presidents have wisely done before him.
Click to expand...
"Divisive" has long been a major political weapon in the Democrat Party Arsenal; right up there with those beautiful promises of Free Stuff and the Main Stream Media.

But the absolute most effective Master of Divisive was Obama; who managed to set back race relations in the US by 50 years...Compared to Obama; Trump is a rank amateur.

Everything dividing this nation for the last 3 years was created by the Democrat Party and MSM with help from the seeds of hate and mistrust planted by 8 years of Obama.

I have bad news for you HATERS; after Nov/2020; the House, the Senate and OVAL OFFICE will all be RED-RED-RED.

And I have some good news for the MAGA's; Trump is not going anywhere and this insanity will soon begin to fade away.

And absolutely nothing short of an Act of God can stop it!
 
Empirica said:
"Divisive" has long been a major political weapon in the Democrat Party Arsenal; right up there with those beautiful promises of Free Stuff and the Main Stream Media.

But the absolute most effective Master of Divisive was Obama; who managed to set back race relations in the US by 50 years...Compared to Obama; Trump is a rank amateur.

Everything dividing this nation for the last 3 years was created by the Democrat Party and MSM with help from the seeds of hate and mistrust planted by 8 years of Obama.

I have bad news for you HATERS; after Nov/2020; the House, the Senate and OVAL OFFICE will all be RED-RED-RED.

And I have some good news for the MAGA's; Trump is not going anywhere and this insanity will soon begin to fade away.

And absolutely nothing short of an Act of God can stop it!
Click to expand...
Holy triggered unhinged dishonest meltdown batman!! :lamo:lamo

theres no more solid proof than this that you are not from the US or you are severely and monumentally uneducated about its politics, history and society . . man that was hilarious . . . like something from the onion! That made my day.
 
Empirica said:
"Divisive" has long been a major political weapon in the Democrat Party Arsenal; right up there with those beautiful promises of Free Stuff and the Main Stream Media.

But the absolute most effective Master of Divisive was Obama; who managed to set back race relations in the US by 50 years...Compared to Obama; Trump is a rank amateur.
Click to expand...

What examples/evidence do you have that Obama was divisive? Anything at all?

Everything dividing this nation for the last 3 years was created by the Democrat Party and MSM with help from the seeds of hate and mistrust planted by 8 years of Obama.
Click to expand...

If you want anyone to take this seriously you need to back it up.

I have bad news for you HATERS; after Nov/2020;
Click to expand...
I am not a hater.

Dems are not haters. This is what conservative media keeps telling you.

Actually, you are the one who sounds pretty angry. When you said “you haters”, you were being divisive. Can you see that?


Are you gonna ignore my response to you?
 
Nap said:
Listen to pretty much any speech by Warren or Sanders.
Click to expand...

Thats a cop out.

Please list a few specific phrases, like I did. 2 or 3 would be good.

But I don't think you can. I think you are just sayings things without basis.

So far no one has. Divisiveness is a Republican thing.
 
theLiquidGuy said:
Thats a cop out.

Please list a few specific phrases, like I did. 2 or 3 would be good.

But I don't think you can. I think you are just sayings things without basis.

So far no one has. Divisiveness is a Republican thing.
Click to expand...

It is simply truth, do they not continually try to create hostility towards the 1% from the 99%?
 
Nap said:
It is simply truth, do they not continually try to create hostility towards the 1% from the 99%?
Click to expand...

No.

No one is advocating persecution of the rich. List any divisive statements. You cannot.

They are saying that the rich absorb too much wealth. Wealth that might have been used to pay for infrastructure, for example.

What else you got?
 
theLiquidGuy said:
No.

No one is advocating persecution of the rich. List any divisive statements. You cannot.

They are saying that the rich absorb too much wealth. Wealth that might have been used to pay for infrastructure, for example.

What else you got?
Click to expand...

"At the end of the day, the one percent may have enormous wealth and power, but they are just the one percent. When the 99 percent stand together, we can transform society" - Bernie Sanders

They are literally seeking to divide this nation based on wealth/class and inciting hostility among the populace by playing on their jealousy of the rich.
 
Nap said:
"At the end of the day, the one percent may have enormous wealth and power, but they are just the one percent. When the 99 percent stand together, we can transform society" - Bernie Sanders

They are literally seeking to divide this nation based on wealth/class and inciting hostility among the populace by playing on their jealousy of the rich.
Click to expand...

I know what he is saying.

They are not trying to divide the nation based on class. You are stretching. alot.

And hostility had NOTHING to do with it. There wasn't a single hostile word in there.

From his first day in politics Bernie has called for an the end to the rule of money in politics. It should not shock you that billionaires like Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg were able to buy themselves into contention for the democratic nomination with little or support from the 99%. Bernie was saying that it is necessary for the 99% to stand together, in other words, vote together to overcome the political advantage that money has.

So let me get this straight you view a 99/1 split as divisive?
If this country had a 99% agreement on ANYTHING, it would be the most unifying issue in the history of mankind. I bet you couldn't get 99% to agree that the earth is a round.

There is the issue of the minority rights of the 1%. Bernie does not state or imply that they should be denied any rights, or otherwise persecuted.
 
theLiquidGuy said:
I know what he is saying.

They are not trying to divide the nation based on class. You are stretching. alot.

And hostility had NOTHING to do with it. There wasn't a single hostile word in there.

From his first day in politics Bernie has called for an the end to the rule of money in politics. It should not shock you that billionaires like Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg were able to buy themselves into contention for the democratic nomination with little or support from the 99%. Bernie was saying that it is necessary for the 99% to stand together, in other words, vote together to overcome the political advantage that money has.

So let me get this straight you view a 99/1 split as divisive?
If this country had a 99% agreement on ANYTHING, it would be the most unifying issue in the history of mankind. I bet you couldn't get 99% to agree that the earth is a round.

There is the issue of the minority rights of the 1%. Bernie does not state or imply that they should be denied any rights, or otherwise persecuted.
Click to expand...

Lol, it isn't a stretch at all. He clearly called for the 99% to stand up against the 1%, this is literally Bernie's entire spiel. Take away class division and Bernie has absolutely zero appeal as he wouldn't have anything to run on. He needs the wealthy to be setup as a boogey man to incite his base and get them to the voting booths no differently than Trump uses illegals to do the same for his base.
 
Nap said:
Lol, it isn't a stretch at all. He clearly called for the 99% to stand up against the 1%, this is literally Bernie's entire spiel. Take away class division and Bernie has absolutely zero appeal as he wouldn't have anything to run on. He needs the wealthy to be setup as a boogey man to incite his base and get them to the voting booths no differently than Trump uses illegals to do the same for his base.
Click to expand...
It’s almost as though you didn’t even read my previous response. Almost everything you said was incorrect.


this is literally Bernie's entire spiel. Take away class division and Bernie has absolutely zero appeal as he wouldn't have anything to run on.
Click to expand...
Bernie has a great deal to run on. Medicare for all and Climate change immediately come to mind.


He clearly called for the 99% to stand up against the 1%
Click to expand...
Bernie did not say “stand up against”. You did. Bernie said “stand together”. You are twisting his words because you have a weak case. You really ought to abandon this line of argument and pick something else. You are going to lose.

But in case you insist...I hope we can both agree that it is unfair that money has so much power to change the outcome of elections. So, what does “stand together” mean? Does it mean punch the 1% in the face? Or does it mean vote money out of politics and give the power back to actual people. This is about money. Not groups of people.

I layed out more than a dozen examples of Trump --just one man-- Being divisive. You can’t even come up with one solid example from ANY democrats?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom