Congrats on Joe Biden! USA's 46th president

[jimboston]

What attack did I make on you?

You’re tiresome.

No, you're just too lazy to back your statements with your supporting evidence. Any answers to my 9 questions?

Dude...

You ask me to point to specific tweets that Trump has sent that are nuts and/or conflict with official White House statements...
and then you call me “lazy”? They have been and are all over the news. Are you saying he’s never sent a crazy Tweet?

I have no time for Trump Deniers.

Are you sure you’re not Nomad under another name?

http://www.trumptwitterarchive.com/

I didn’t even bother reading the rest of your dumb ass questions.
You asked me to point how his Presidency has been damaging.
I did... and now you want me to explain it in minutia, hoping I’ll make an error you can somehow jump on.
I’m not playing your stoopid game.

[Jdsizzleslice]

Dude...

You ask me to point to specific tweets that Trump has sent that are nuts and/or conflict with official White House statements...
and then you call me “lazy”? They have been and are all over the news. Are you saying he’s never sent a crazy Tweet?

I have no time for Trump Deniers.

Are you sure you’re not Nomad under another name?

http://www.trumptwitterarchive.com/

I didn’t even bother reading the rest of your dumb ass questions.
You asked me to point how his Presidency has been damaging.
I did... and now you want me to explain it in minutia, hoping I’ll make an error you can somehow jump on.
I’m not playing your stoopid game.

This is what has just happened, no joke. Follow the logic trail here.

Jim: "Trump Presidency has been damaging."

Jd: "How?"

Jim: *Makes 8 specific statements*

Jd: "Can you back these points up?"

Jim: "Don't you read the news?"

I kid you not. Lol.

I want you to explain so I can understand your position fully, and determine whether or not I agree on it. Anyone can make claims. Not everyone can defend those claims.

[jimboston]

Dude...

You ask me to point to specific tweets that Trump has sent that are nuts and/or conflict with official White House statements...
and then you call me “lazy”? They have been and are all over the news. Are you saying he’s never sent a crazy Tweet?

I have no time for Trump Deniers.

Are you sure you’re not Nomad under another name?

http://www.trumptwitterarchive.com/

I didn’t even bother reading the rest of your dumb ass questions.
You asked me to point how his Presidency has been damaging.
I did... and now you want me to explain it in minutia, hoping I’ll make an error you can somehow jump on.
I’m not playing your stoopid game.

This is what has just happened, no joke. Follow the logic trail here.

Jim: "Trump Presidency has been damaging."

Jd: "How?"

Jim: *Makes 8 specific statements*

Jd: "Can you back these points up?"

Jim: "Don't you read the news?"

I kid you not. Lol.

I want you to explain so I can understand your position fully, and determine whether or not I agree on it. Anyone can make claims. Not everyone can defend those claims.

Read the link. Tell me you can’t find 25 crazy tweet that are damaging to the Presidency of the United States.
It shouldn’t take you more than 5 minutes.

After you’ve looked at the link tell me what you think.

Maybe then I can spend the time answering your questions.

[Jdsizzleslice]

Read the link. Tell me you can’t find 25 crazy tweet that are damaging to the Presidency of the United States.
It shouldn’t take you more than 5 minutes.

After you’ve looked at the link tell me what you think.

Maybe then I can spend the time answering your questions.

The burden is on the accusor to prove why he is right. Specific claims warrant specific backing/evidence. You just can't be bothered to provide your evidence. What If I read all of Trump's tweets and I don't think any of them are crazy? Subjection to claims is not proof. Provide your specific evidence.

[mookiemcgee]

No, I don't think his response was an attack.

OK... if you say so.

I mean, you asked me a question... I answered.

You started your post with 'I don't think you'. which just right out of the gate comes across as accusatory and defensive. I don't think you meant it as "I don't think you JD" but you've certainly left it open to being read that way. Words matter!

Words do matter... and I suppose it’s possible to interpret it that way, unless you read the whole post.
I think if you read the whole thing it’s obvious I’m just commenting and not trying to start a fight.
He;s choosing the most negative way to interpret what I posted.

And you are choosing the most negative way to interpret his... namely by calling it an attack. He asked you alot of follow up question, but none of what he wrote really comes across as an attack (and nothing in your first post came across to me like and attack, but as I pointed out it could have been taken that way). Now that you both feel attacked, it's clear the rest of this thread is going no where fast.

[mookiemcgee]

Read the link. Tell me you can’t find 25 crazy tweet that are damaging to the Presidency of the United States.
It shouldn’t take you more than 5 minutes.

After you’ve looked at the link tell me what you think.

Maybe then I can spend the time answering your questions.

What If I read all of Trump's tweets and I don't think any of them are crazy?

I'm not here to say Trump tweets = he's crazy, but it would be really hard to read all the trump tweets and not think he is a vile mean-spirited person, with plenty of other criticisms coming to mind. Now you as an individual, you can believe whatever you want JD... but as far as 'the country at large' or the majority of the population... I think the majority would not elect Donald Trump is all they had to judge him by was his twitter account.

"Lightweight Senator @RandPaul should focus on trying to get elected in Kentucky--- a great state which is embarrassed by him."

[Jdsizzleslice]

Read the link. Tell me you can’t find 25 crazy tweet that are damaging to the Presidency of the United States.
It shouldn’t take you more than 5 minutes.

After you’ve looked at the link tell me what you think.

Maybe then I can spend the time answering your questions.

What If I read all of Trump's tweets and I don't think any of them are crazy?

I'm not here to say Trump tweets = he's crazy, but it would be really hard to read all the trump tweets and not think he is a vile mean-spirited person, with plenty of other criticisms coming to mind. Now you as an individual, you can believe whatever you want JD... but as far as 'the country at large' or the majority of the population... I think the majority would not elect Donald Trump is all they had to judge him by was his twitter account.

My statement was a hypothetical, touching on the more subjective nature of the "just look at the Tweets and you'll see" narrative. My personal opinion? I think he should Tweet less, but I understand the reasoning why he does. I think Trump goes to Twitter to broadcast some decisions because he feels he is unfairly treated in the MSM, and that is one of the only avenues he has to connect with the public in an un-filtered and un-biased way. I would like to see him not make as many personal attacks but I can understand why he makes some Tweets based on how he is treated in the media.

However, I do understand the point you're trying to make about Trump's character. I personally wouldn't make these statements, and they come across as very brash. I really see only 4/7 that are insulting, the other three are just opinions. But making an argument attacking his character based off his social media posts is definitely an argument worth discussing. Not sure either candidate have a clean record when it comes to saying things, though. Trump occasionally gets into drama, and Biden occasionally has gaffs.

I would say that if we elected people solely based off their Twitter account then I would not want to live in that country. LOL. Twitter is the CANCER of the internet. And I am being 100% literal when I use that terminology. Twitter could instantly be gone tomorrow and I would feel absolutely nothing.

Side note: All of those tweets were before Trump was elected, so it doesn't really touch on the point Jim made about contradiction with his Staff. Not sure if you were trying to make that connection, or not.

[betiko]

So basically.... a president that is acting as a freaking CC OT troll worldwide is treated unfairly by the media?
A guy that denies any acusation, no matter how obvious needs to be treated as fox and friends do?
Did you ever see how he treats journalists during press conferences? You really are a lost cause jd, it's really pointless to have a conversation with you, and you can t blame Jim for feeling too lazy to answer your dumb questions.

[jimboston]

Read the link. Tell me you can’t find 25 crazy tweet that are damaging to the Presidency of the United States.
It shouldn’t take you more than 5 minutes.

After you’ve looked at the link tell me what you think.

Maybe then I can spend the time answering your questions.

The burden is on the accusor to prove why he is right. Specific claims warrant specific backing/evidence. You just can't be bothered to provide your evidence. What If I read all of Trump's tweets and I don't think any of them are crazy? Subjection to claims is not proof. Provide your specific evidence.

So you can’t be bothered to click on the link.

OK... so why then should I bother to answer your queens fall into your dumb trap.

Click the link...

[jimboston]

No, I don't think his response was an attack.

OK... if you say so.

I mean, you asked me a question... I answered.

I understand.

I disagree, but I’m not arguing that this is your interpretation.

You started your post with 'I don't think you'. which just right out of the gate comes across as accusatory and defensive. I don't think you meant it as "I don't think you JD" but you've certainly left it open to being read that way. Words matter!

Words do matter... and I suppose it’s possible to interpret it that way, unless you read the whole post.
I think if you read the whole thing it’s obvious I’m just commenting and not trying to start a fight.
He;s choosing the most negative way to interpret what I posted.

And you are choosing the most negative way to interpret his... namely by calling it an attack. He asked you alot of follow up question, but none of what he wrote really comes across as an attack (and nothing in your first post came across to me like and attack, but as I pointed out it could have been taken that way). Now that you both feel attacked, it's clear the rest of this thread is going no where fast.

His questions aren’t real questions.

This is Standard Operating Procedure for Trolls in this Forum, though his execution is not as good as mrswdk or Nomad.

His questions are meant to derail and distract. When I provide evidence for most but make an error on one, he’ll ignore the evidence for the 5 I get right and focus on the one typo or subjective point... using that to ‘prove’ I’m wrong.

I’m willing to engage one point at a time, but he won’t even look at Trump’s posts!

I’ve been down this road before with other close-minded Trolls.

[Jdsizzleslice]

So basically.... a president that is acting as a freaking CC OT troll worldwide is treated unfairly by the media?
A guy that denies any acusation, no matter how obvious needs to be treated as fox and friends do?
Did you ever see how he treats journalists during press conferences? You really are a lost cause jd, it's really pointless to have a conversation with you, and you can t blame Jim for feeling too lazy to answer your dumb questions.

Uh-huh. "You're opinion is wrong, so f-you, you're not worth talking to." My eyes have now been opened.

So you can’t be bothered to click on the link. OK... so why then should I bother to answer your queens fall into your dumb trap. Click the link...

I did click the link. You haven't specified which post I am supposed to look for. Merely stating "just click the link, look at the Tweets, and you'll see" doesn't provide any evidence to back your claim. Also, what trap am I trying to set by asking you questions to further quantify your stance?

His questions aren’t real questions.

How are my previous 9 questions (which still have yet to be answered) not "real" questions?

This is Standard Operating Procedure for Trolls in this Forum, though his execution is not as good as mrswdk or Nomad.

There could be one reason as to why my "trollish execution" isn't very good: because I'm not a troll.

His questions are meant to derail and distract. When I provide evidence for most but make an error on one, he’ll ignore the evidence for the 5 I get right and focus on the one typo or subjective point... using that to ‘prove’ I’m wrong.

You do realize the only person that has provided any substance of evidence thusfar in any political conversation I have had is mookie. He went and found specific Tweets to back the claim he was making. And then, surprise surprise, I actually gave my opinion on the stance he brought forth (which was then deemed by you and betiko as worthless, even when I said he had a valid argument into Trump's character). If you address each point with evidence, then I will respond to each point, with reasoning why I agree or disagree with your viewpoint, also with evidence.

Also, you are assuming that I will deflect. Have I done this to you previously? Do you know what assuming does? I apologized to you when I assumed something you didn't mean, will you apologize to me for doing the same?

I’m willing to engage one point at a time, but he won’t even look at Trump’s posts!

Which post by Trump do you want me to look at? All of them? Every single one? Point me to a specific one to prove your point like mookie did.

I’ve been down this road before with other close-minded Trolls.

Close-minded people often call others "close-minded" to whom they disagree.

[jimboston]

How are my previous 9 questions (which still have yet to be answered) not "real" questions?

In the same manner that this one isn’t.

I’ve trying to be happier (just started a new podcast about happiness),
One way to be happier is to disengage from negative people.

I’m not saying I’ll never engage Trolls on here... but I won’t get sucked into extended curricular or one-way conversations either.

I can’t change the world, and if I could the place to launch my crusade wouldn’t be Conquer Club Forums.
I can however be happier by limiting contact to people like you.

[Jdsizzleslice]

How are my previous 9 questions (which still have yet to be answered) not "real" questions?

In the same manner that this one isn’t.

You have yet to explain in what manner my questions aren't "real" questions.

I’ve trying to be happier (just started a new podcast about happiness),
One way to be happier is to disengage from negative people.

I’m not saying I’ll never engage Trolls on here... but I won’t get sucked into extended curricular or one-way conversations either.

I can’t change the world, and if I could the place to launch my crusade wouldn’t be Conquer Club Forums.
I can however be happier by limiting contact to people like you.

You're free to foe me or not respond to my posts. I certainly welcome your freedom to choose to whom you discuss.

But don't kid yourself. You never answered any of my questions. All I was trying to do was understand your position better, since you didn't really prove your stances. Note how mookie and I have different political viewpoints but we are able to have a civil dialogue because we state our points and back them up, without insulting each other.

But ultimately, I think that you are unwilling to have your positions challenged, and that's why you don't really respond with anything besides empty claims. I'm here whenever you want to discuss viewpoints and back them up.

[saxitoxin]

TRUMP NASCAR to Debut!

“With an estimated 75 million NASCAR fans out there, I was surprised that about 15 million of those fans are not registered voters,” said driver Corey LaJoie.

“I will give my best effort to get NASCAR fans registered to vote, through our team efforts on and off the track. When they see the car, hopefully it makes them race to the polls in November.”

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-moto ... 432WI?il=0

[saxitoxin]

I'm not here to say Trump tweets = he's crazy, but it would be really hard to read all the trump tweets and not think he is a vile mean-spirited person, with plenty of other criticisms coming to mind. Now you as an individual, you can believe whatever you want JD... but as far as 'the country at large' or the majority of the population... I think the majority would not elect Donald Trump is all they had to judge him by was his twitter account.

[mookiemcgee]

I'm not here to say Trump tweets = he's crazy, but it would be really hard to read all the trump tweets and not think he is a vile mean-spirited person, with plenty of other criticisms coming to mind. Now you as an individual, you can believe whatever you want JD... but as far as 'the country at large' or the majority of the population... I think the majority would not elect Donald Trump is all they had to judge him by was his twitter account.

A perfect example of what presidents in the past who had respect for the office wouldn't do.

[2dimes]

TRUMP NASCAR to Debut!

“With an estimated 75 million NASCAR fans out there, I was surprised that about 15 million of those fans are not registered voters,” said driver Corey LaJoie.

“I will give my best effort to get NASCAR fans registered to vote, through our team efforts on and off the track. When they see the car, hopefully it makes them race to the polls in November.”

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-moto ... 432WI?il=0

[riskllama]

LOL, wp...

[saxitoxin]

I'm not here to say Trump tweets = he's crazy, but it would be really hard to read all the trump tweets and not think he is a vile mean-spirited person, with plenty of other criticisms coming to mind. Now you as an individual, you can believe whatever you want JD... but as far as 'the country at large' or the majority of the population... I think the majority would not elect Donald Trump is all they had to judge him by was his twitter account.

A perfect example of what presidents in the past who had respect for the office wouldn't do.

Then don't harass him.

USA is a BULLY FREE ZONE

[mookiemcgee]

I'm not here to say Trump tweets = he's crazy, but it would be really hard to read all the trump tweets and not think he is a vile mean-spirited person, with plenty of other criticisms coming to mind. Now you as an individual, you can believe whatever you want JD... but as far as 'the country at large' or the majority of the population... I think the majority would not elect Donald Trump is all they had to judge him by was his twitter account.

A perfect example of what presidents in the past who had respect for the office wouldn't do.

Then don't harass him.

USA is a BULLY FREE ZONE

Can't say I'm surprised Saxi wants to hold me to a higher standard than he does the leader of the free world

[saxitoxin]

I'm not here to say Trump tweets = he's crazy, but it would be really hard to read all the trump tweets and not think he is a vile mean-spirited person, with plenty of other criticisms coming to mind. Now you as an individual, you can believe whatever you want JD... but as far as 'the country at large' or the majority of the population... I think the majority would not elect Donald Trump is all they had to judge him by was his twitter account.

A perfect example of what presidents in the past who had respect for the office wouldn't do.

Then don't harass him.

USA is a BULLY FREE ZONE

Can't say I'm surprised Saxi wants to hold me to a higher standard than he does the leader of the free world

[riskllama]

[betiko]

So basically.... a president that is acting as a freaking CC OT troll worldwide is treated unfairly by the media?
A guy that denies any acusation, no matter how obvious needs to be treated as fox and friends do?
Did you ever see how he treats journalists during press conferences? You really are a lost cause jd, it's really pointless to have a conversation with you, and you can t blame Jim for feeling too lazy to answer your dumb questions.

Uh-huh. "You're opinion is wrong, so f-you, you're not worth talking to." My eyes have now been opened.

So you can’t be bothered to click on the link. OK... so why then should I bother to answer your queens fall into your dumb trap. Click the link...

I did click the link. You haven't specified which post I am supposed to look for. Merely stating "just click the link, look at the Tweets, and you'll see" doesn't provide any evidence to back your claim. Also, what trap am I trying to set by asking you questions to further quantify your stance?

His questions aren’t real questions.

How are my previous 9 questions (which still have yet to be answered) not "real" questions?

This is Standard Operating Procedure for Trolls in this Forum, though his execution is not as good as mrswdk or Nomad.

There could be one reason as to why my "trollish execution" isn't very good: because I'm not a troll.

His questions are meant to derail and distract. When I provide evidence for most but make an error on one, he’ll ignore the evidence for the 5 I get right and focus on the one typo or subjective point... using that to ‘prove’ I’m wrong.

You do realize the only person that has provided any substance of evidence thusfar in any political conversation I have had is mookie. He went and found specific Tweets to back the claim he was making. And then, surprise surprise, I actually gave my opinion on the stance he brought forth (which was then deemed by you and betiko as worthless, even when I said he had a valid argument into Trump's character). If you address each point with evidence, then I will respond to each point, with reasoning why I agree or disagree with your viewpoint, also with evidence.

Also, you are assuming that I will deflect. Have I done this to you previously? Do you know what assuming does? I apologized to you when I assumed something you didn't mean, will you apologize to me for doing the same?

I’m willing to engage one point at a time, but he won’t even look at Trump’s posts!

Which post by Trump do you want me to look at? All of them? Every single one? Point me to a specific one to prove your point like mookie did.

I’ve been down this road before with other close-minded Trolls.

Close-minded people often call others "close-minded" to whom they disagree.

lol, I don't have the ability to make someone in denial see the obvious. I mean, maybe you're made of a totally different wood, and the way your parents have educated you makes you totally unable to understand what is inapropriate and what is not.
But my guess is that it's just a clear example of team A vs team B... you just left your brain out of the room... you are just a die hard republican and no one can say anything about a republican representative, even if it's donald trump