Octopus Overlords

That is the popular theory being kicked around - that he is manipulating the media to distract everyone. I think that is inaccurate. There is a lot of evidence that shows he can't control his temper but the major media have temperament issues of their own. They are addicted to focusing on those trivialities and gossip. They should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time and contextualize these outbursts while explaining what he is doing big picture. And if he was sent to Hamilton to rabble-rouse and distract then we are in *huge trouble* because there are not any voices out there to cut through it.

LawBeefaroni wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:I honestly cannot believe he is still going off about Hamilton. Ridiculous. Step away from twitter Trump. Most people should honestly tweet very little, I don't understand how they can't see that.

Of course he is. It's bullshit fluff that gets all the press while he's settling lawsuits and hosting the deathmatch for his Cabinet of Destruction.

Pence going to Hamilton was a brilliant move and it scares me that someone in the camp understands this.

Shit like the Hamilton kerfuffle is TMZ level stuff. It should not dominate the news cycle.

So much of this. Trump is using his twitter brilliantly to distract the masses from paying attention to what he is doing. Stage magic and con games at a national level. "Look over there while I install another horrible human being in a powerful position."

malchior wrote:That is the popular theory being kicked around - that he is manipulating the media to distract everyone. I think that is inaccurate. There is a lot of evidence that shows he can't control his temper but the major media have temperament issues of their own. They are addicted to focusing on those trivialities and gossip. They should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time and contextualize these outbursts while explaining what he is doing big picture. And if he was sent to Hamilton to rabble-rouse and distract then we are in *huge trouble* because there are not any voices out there to cut through it.

I agree the media should be better than this but the reality is they are not any better than the next ratings release. Things like the Hamilton "issue" create clicks and drive traffic where headlines regarding cabinet appointments and their backgrounds do not.

Remus West wrote:So much of this. Trump is using his twitter brilliantly to distract the masses from paying attention to what he is doing. Stage magic and con games at a national level. "Look over there while I install another horrible human being in a powerful position."

It's easier to Tweet a protest of Hamilton than to fully grasp what Trump's global business holdings could mean. How is this not a gigantic story:

In August 2015, as Trump’s presidential campaign began to take flight, Trump registered eight separate companies with names such as THC Jeddah Hotel and DT Jeddah Technical Services, financial-disclosure filings show. Their names followed a pattern set by Trump companies connected to hotel deals in foreign cities: in this case, Jiddah, the second-biggest city in Saudi Arabia.

Four of those companies, in which Trump was named president or director, remained active at the time of Trump’s May financial filing. The disclosures do not provide more detail for the companies, and Trump representatives did not respond to requests for comment.

On Aug. 21, the same day Trump created four of the Jiddah companies, he told a rally crowd in Alabama: “Saudi Arabia, I get along with all of them. They buy apartments from me. They spend $40 million, $50 million. Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much.”

He registered 8 different overseas companies while campaigning for President of the United States. He had no intention whatsoever of actually being elected, but I guess he can make the most of it now that he was.

Grifman wrote:

Defiant wrote:Pretty sad that the guy who wants me electrocuted, and wants funerals for abortions, is acting more presidential than Trump.

Neither is really true:

http://www.snopes.com/mike-pence-suppor ... n-therapy/

http://www.snopes.com/pence-law-forcing-fetus-funerals/

Yes, part of what I said was hyperbole (hence why I said electrocuted instead of electro-shock therapy, or that I would be a target instead of someone that is a child or someone that wanted to be "converted").

But Snopes is incorrect - electroshock therapy for conversion therapy didn't end in 1973. It is very much still a part of "conversion therapy".
Example 1, Example 2.

Smoove_B wrote:How is this not a gigantic story

Baffling. It is the headline on the Washington Post but I've got tv news on - not a mention. A fucking wasteland of useless information. SNL did a great job accurately skewering them.

malchior wrote:That is the popular theory being kicked around - that he is manipulating the media to distract everyone. I think that is inaccurate. There is a lot of evidence that shows he can't control his temper but the major media have temperament issues of their own. They are addicted to focusing on those trivialities and gossip. They should be able to walk and chew gum at the same time and contextualize these outbursts while explaining what he is doing big picture. And if he was sent to Hamilton to rabble-rouse and distract then we are in *huge trouble* because there are not any voices out there to cut through it.

He's not manipulating it, he's being allowed to drop his bombast knowing that it will push out relevant reporting. Yes, it's partially on the media but it's also on the fluff fattened public that slurps it up like so much coffee in ice cream cones. Trump is their creation.

Like I said, someone in the Trump camp whose job it is to reign him in knows that it's unnecessary in this case. Let him do his thing and he'll drive the story.

malchior wrote:

Smoove_B wrote:How is this not a gigantic story

Baffling.

Not really. His financial interests have already been "covered" and reruns are boring. New unhinged tweets are exciting.


Patterns of behavior that go back decades are just so...*yawn*.

Apparently this is what it would be like if I was writing for The Atlantic. The Electoral College Was Meant to Stop Men Like Trump From Being President.

Angry Trumpsters are sending nasty tweets and e-mails to Hamilton Theater...in Southern Ontario.

"They've been calling to boycott Hamilton and stage protests but little do they know that they are picking on Hamilton, Ontario's oldest musical theatre company," Leonard said.

"None of them have bothered to actually look at our account to see that they are wrong."

Strong work, doofuses.

Being wrong has never stopped our resident Trumpsters from the OUTRAGE! Not surprised. So predictable and sad.

El Guapo wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:

Grifman wrote:

Defiant wrote:Pretty sad that the guy who wants me electrocuted, and wants funerals for abortions, is acting more presidential than Trump.

Neither is really true:

http://www.snopes.com/mike-pence-suppor ... n-therapy/

http://www.snopes.com/pence-law-forcing-fetus-funerals/

Never let facts get in the way.

The left and the right are increasingly blinded by political memes with no fact checking it seems. Social media effect I guess.

This type of both sider-ism bothers me, though. Yes, per the subsequent discussion, there are more details and caveats. But it is true that Pence supported (supports) gay conversion therapy, and that he signed a law to force women to make a decision about the burial / cremation of post-abortion remains. But responding to this with "the left and the right both do this" sweeps that in with the 1984-esque bald faced lies of Trumpism.

honestly I think it only bothers you because of which side you fall on.

Chrisoc13 wrote:

El Guapo wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:

Grifman wrote:

Defiant wrote:Pretty sad that the guy who wants me electrocuted, and wants funerals for abortions, is acting more presidential than Trump.

Neither is really true:

http://www.snopes.com/mike-pence-suppor ... n-therapy/

http://www.snopes.com/pence-law-forcing-fetus-funerals/

Never let facts get in the way.

The left and the right are increasingly blinded by political memes with no fact checking it seems. Social media effect I guess.

This type of both sider-ism bothers me, though. Yes, per the subsequent discussion, there are more details and caveats. But it is true that Pence supported (supports) gay conversion therapy, and that he signed a law to force women to make a decision about the burial / cremation of post-abortion remains. But responding to this with "the left and the right both do this" sweeps that in with the 1984-esque bald faced lies of Trumpism.

honestly I think it only bothers you because of which side you fall on.

Possible. But do you really think that Trump and (say) mainstream democrats (including but not limited to Clinton) lie / distort about the same amount?

Chrisoc13 wrote:honestly I think it only bothers you because of which side you fall on.

Well yes...that's how most false equivalences work.

RunningMn9 wrote:Apparently this is what it would be like if I was writing for The Atlantic. The Electoral College Was Meant to Stop Men Like Trump From Being President.

Yeah, I mean...as long as we're going to have this archaic electoral system anyway, this seems like the right time to use it, right? I'm wondering whether there is more value in a campaign to sway electors to not vote for Trump than I initially thought. Though I'm sure it would be futile as a practical matter.

RunningMn9 wrote:Apparently this is what it would be like if I was writing for The Atlantic. The Electoral College Was Meant to Stop Men Like Trump From Being President.

The trouble with that article is the author saying this election changed his mind about abolishing the Electoral college but the way things currently stand if there were no electoral college and the vote was purely on popular vote Hillary would be winning. The Electoral college is actually facilitating putting a demagogue in power because he had a fool only the correct number of people in each swing state to capture enough electoral votes. He did not need to convince an actual majority of Americans.

Remus West wrote:The trouble with that article is the author saying this election changed his mind about abolishing the Electoral college but the way things currently stand if there were no electoral college and the vote was purely on popular vote Hillary would be winning. The Electoral college is actually facilitating putting a demagogue in power because he had a fool only the correct number of people in each swing state to capture enough electoral votes. He did not need to convince an actual majority of Americans.

Yes, that's the exact position I was taking, which is why I posted it.

The problem (for me at least) isn't that the Electoral College is archaic. It's that over the years, we've broken the safeguards that the EC put in place to prevent this. The answer (for me at least), is to fix the EC, not abolish it.

At least he's smart enough to not put it the request in an email:

When Argentine President Mauricio Macri called American President-elect Donald Trump to congratulate him on his election, the reality-TV star allegedly asked Macri for help with a real-estate deal in the South American country.

That seems reasonable and I'm sure there are lots of examples of a President-Elect asking for similar favors.Why are we hearing about this now?

The story was not reported in the English press until a report in La Nacion quoted one of Argentina’s most prominent journalists, Jorge Lanata, as saying that “Macri called [Trump]. This still hasn’t emerged but Trump asked for them to authorize a building he’s constructing in Buenos Aires, it wasn’t just a geopolitical chat.” Shortly after the story hit English-speaking media, a Macri representative told a PRI/BBC reporter that “They didn’t talk about the tower at all.” The spokesman added: “It’s absolutely untrue.”

Oh, ok. Settled then.

RunningMn9 wrote: The problem (for me at least) isn't that the Electoral College is archaic. It's that over the years, we've broken the safeguards that the EC put in place to prevent this. The answer (for me at least), is to fix the EC, not abolish it.

This has increasingly become my view.

El Guapo wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:

El Guapo wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:

Grifman wrote:

Defiant wrote:Pretty sad that the guy who wants me electrocuted, and wants funerals for abortions, is acting more presidential than Trump.

Neither is really true:

http://www.snopes.com/mike-pence-suppor ... n-therapy/

http://www.snopes.com/pence-law-forcing-fetus-funerals/

Never let facts get in the way.

The left and the right are increasingly blinded by political memes with no fact checking it seems. Social media effect I guess.

This type of both sider-ism bothers me, though. Yes, per the subsequent discussion, there are more details and caveats. But it is true that Pence supported (supports) gay conversion therapy, and that he signed a law to force women to make a decision about the burial / cremation of post-abortion remains. But responding to this with "the left and the right both do this" sweeps that in with the 1984-esque bald faced lies of Trumpism.

honestly I think it only bothers you because of which side you fall on.

Possible. But do you really think that Trump and (say) mainstream democrats (including but not limited to Clinton) lie / distort about the same amount?

Was I ever considering Trump mainstream Republican? I think Clinton lies as much as mainstream Republicans. And more pertinent to this actual conversation I think that people on the left are just as willing to believe lies, falsehoods, and half truths about their opponents (like those about pence on this very forum even though they have been proven to be incorrect) as people on the right without even bothering to care if they are true or not or to even bother checking the source before simply repeating them. People are people it turns out whether conservative or liberal.

Chrisoc13 wrote:Was I ever considering Trump mainstream Republican? I think Clinton lies as much as mainstream Republicans. And more pertinent to this actual conversation I think that people on the left are just as willing to believe lies, falsehoods, and half truths about their opponents (like those about pence on this very forum even though they have been proven to be incorrect) as people on the right without even bothering to care if they are true or not or to even bother checking the source before simply repeating them. People are people it turns out whether conservative or liberal.

I'm not on the left but are you saying Pence didn't try to allow freedom of religion as a way to skirt civil rights through the Religious Freedom Restoration Act? Cause that's my sticking point. Everything else is background noise.

LordMortis wrote:Everything else is background noise.

Not everything, no.

RunningMn9 wrote:

Remus West wrote:The trouble with that article is the author saying this election changed his mind about abolishing the Electoral college but the way things currently stand if there were no electoral college and the vote was purely on popular vote Hillary would be winning. The Electoral college is actually facilitating putting a demagogue in power because he had a fool only the correct number of people in each swing state to capture enough electoral votes. He did not need to convince an actual majority of Americans.

Yes, that's the exact position I was taking, which is why I posted it.

The problem (for me at least) isn't that the Electoral College is archaic. It's that over the years, we've broken the safeguards that the EC put in place to prevent this. The answer (for me at least), is to fix the EC, not abolish it.

Either one (fixing or abolishing) is logically defensible. But right now we have the worst of all worlds.

LordMortis wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:Was I ever considering Trump mainstream Republican? I think Clinton lies as much as mainstream Republicans. And more pertinent to this actual conversation I think that people on the left are just as willing to believe lies, falsehoods, and half truths about their opponents (like those about pence on this very forum even though they have been proven to be incorrect) as people on the right without even bothering to care if they are true or not or to even bother checking the source before simply repeating them. People are people it turns out whether conservative or liberal.

I'm not on the left but are you saying Pence didn't try to allow freedom of religion as a way to skirt civil rights through the Religious Freedom Restoration Act? Cause that's my sticking point. Everything else is background noise.

I don't know, an I saying that? Why don't you go back and read everything I wrote and see if I said anything like that.

Hint- I didn't.

My point is that people are so willing to believe lies and half truths as long as it fits their narrative and their agenda. It's unfortunate and it is happening in this very thread.

Chrisoc13 wrote:

El Guapo wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:

El Guapo wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:

Grifman wrote:

Defiant wrote:Pretty sad that the guy who wants me electrocuted, and wants funerals for abortions, is acting more presidential than Trump.

Neither is really true:

http://www.snopes.com/mike-pence-suppor ... n-therapy/

http://www.snopes.com/pence-law-forcing-fetus-funerals/

Never let facts get in the way.

The left and the right are increasingly blinded by political memes with no fact checking it seems. Social media effect I guess.

This type of both sider-ism bothers me, though. Yes, per the subsequent discussion, there are more details and caveats. But it is true that Pence supported (supports) gay conversion therapy, and that he signed a law to force women to make a decision about the burial / cremation of post-abortion remains. But responding to this with "the left and the right both do this" sweeps that in with the 1984-esque bald faced lies of Trumpism.

honestly I think it only bothers you because of which side you fall on.

Possible. But do you really think that Trump and (say) mainstream democrats (including but not limited to Clinton) lie / distort about the same amount?

Was I ever considering Trump mainstream Republican? I think Clinton lies as much as mainstream Republicans. And more pertinent to this actual conversation I think that people on the left are just as willing to believe lies, falsehoods, and half truths about their opponents (like those about pence on this very forum even though they have been proven to be incorrect) as people on the right without even bothering to care if they are true or not or to even bother checking the source before simply repeating them. People are people it turns out whether conservative or liberal.

That's probably correct. Your comment just touched on a personal pet peeve from the campaign, wherein Trump's farcical lies would get grouped in (by the media, and often by various people generally) with Clinton's more conventional political exaggerations and whatnot, and treated as "all politicians lie!"

Chrisoc13 wrote:(like those about pence on this very forum even though they have been proven to be incorrect)

You must know by now what a dim view I have of the American electorate (regardless of ideology), right?

Even in that context, where I generally agree with the premise that there are wide swaths of liberals that will believe any anti-conservative sounding meme without critically evaluating it, I still don't see the equivalence.

Right now, one ideology has made it a personal matter of pride to shun "facts" and "experts", and to focus intently on what they "believe" to be true as opposed to what is actually true.

The partial inaccuracies of the Pence claims don't rise at all to the level of the absolute garbage that I'm seeing believed by conservatives since the election of Obama.

As an example, Pence supported gay conversation in nearly everything but name would be perhaps compared to the right hash-tagging SpiritCooking and the belief that the Clinton clan was head of a Satanic White Slavery ring. Complete with photoshopped images of Chelsea wearing an inverted cross. Totally equivalent.

Chrisoc13 wrote:

El Guapo wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:

Grifman wrote:

Defiant wrote:Pretty sad that the guy who wants me electrocuted, and wants funerals for abortions, is acting more presidential than Trump.

Neither is really true:

http://www.snopes.com/mike-pence-suppor ... n-therapy/

http://www.snopes.com/pence-law-forcing-fetus-funerals/

Never let facts get in the way.

The left and the right are increasingly blinded by political memes with no fact checking it seems. Social media effect I guess.

This type of both sider-ism bothers me, though. Yes, per the subsequent discussion, there are more details and caveats. But it is true that Pence supported (supports) gay conversion therapy, and that he signed a law to force women to make a decision about the burial / cremation of post-abortion remains. But responding to this with "the left and the right both do this" sweeps that in with the 1984-esque bald faced lies of Trumpism.

honestly I think it only bothers you because of which side you fall on.

No, this bothers me because we are even DISCUSSING this, the fact that a white born-again evangelical Christian has pushed his absurdly backward policies on a whole state, and now he and his ilk will be pushing it on the entire country, and all people like you can come up with is, "well, there are two sides on the story, and mainstream media lies, blah blah blah". And don't fucking tell me that I'm "blinded", I actually READ Indiana's HB 1337 (and yes, the headlines oversimplified a couple of major points from it, that doesn't make any less sickening).

Let the group think continue. Don't let me interrupt.

Wouldn't want different opinions or political discussion to occur here with people who think differently. Let the bubble be placed firmly back on oo and the pile-on will continue.

Enjoy.

Chrisoc13 wrote:Let the group think continue. Don't let me interrupt.

Wouldn't want different opinions or political discussion to occur here with people who think differently. Let the bubble be placed firmly back on oo and the pile-on will continue.

Enjoy.

Shrug. It's a center-left forum, politically. But people respond to facts, data, and arguments. Honestly, though, you seem to come in looking for a grievance as opposed to a discussion on any particular issue.

El Guapo wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:Let the group think continue. Don't let me interrupt.

Wouldn't want different opinions or political discussion to occur here with people who think differently. Let the bubble be placed firmly back on oo and the pile-on will continue.

Enjoy.

Shrug. It's a center-left forum, politically. But people respond to facts, data, and arguments. Honestly, though, you seem to come in looking for a grievance as opposed to a discussion on any particular issue.

Yeah except when it's facts they don't agree with right? I get it. People want confirmation. I'm clearly an instigator. Just like anyone conservative right? You clearly know my posting history well.

Chrisoc13 wrote:

El Guapo wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:Let the group think continue. Don't let me interrupt.

Wouldn't want different opinions or political discussion to occur here with people who think differently. Let the bubble be placed firmly back on oo and the pile-on will continue.

Enjoy.

Shrug. It's a center-left forum, politically. But people respond to facts, data, and arguments. Honestly, though, you seem to come in looking for a grievance as opposed to a discussion on any particular issue.

Yeah except when it's facts they don't agree with right? I get it. People want confirmation. I'm clearly an instigator. Just like anyone conservative right? You clearly know my posting history well.

Sure, everyone (on this forum and otherwise) wants confirmation, and tends to believe facts that fit with what they want to believe. But people here still argue and debate on the merits of particular issues (mostly from a left-leaning perspective, of course).

Is there any particular issue that you want to discuss? It just seems like you're mainly interested in arguing about people here being left-leaning (which is true!), and less about any particular issue.

Truth is people here do what they do everywhere, respond to arguments they agree with. Anyone coming in and pointing that out is just looking for a fight, labeled as a problem and an instigator. Some may be, some may honestly just be pointing out some of the absurdity.

Only people you agree with are looking for discussion. And the pile on issue is a real issue. You can either stop and think what kind of a forum and discussion do you want here or you can keep having the increasingly homogenous discussions with arguments only being variants of the same thought.

Chrisoc13 wrote:Truth is people here do what they do everywhere, respond to arguments they agree with. Anyone coming in and pointing that out is just looking for a fight, labeled as a problem and an instigator. Some may be, some may honestly just be pointing out some of the absurdity.

Only people you agree with are looking for discussion. And the pile on issue is a real issue. You can either stop and think what kind of a forum and discussion do you want here or you can keep having the increasingly homogenous discussions with arguments only being variants of the same thought.

I know pile on is an issue. Liberals outnumber conservatives by a significant margin here so a conservative leaning post may well draw 3 - 5 replies (say) pushing back, whereas the converse won't be true. That does create a pile on effect, even if the intent of posters is not to say "get 'em!" or anything like that (though I imagine it feels that way to conservatives here).

I just think the reason you often get the responses that you get is that you're attacking people for "group think" and whatnot rather than discussing any particular issue. Your tone, at least as it comes across in text, is of someone looking for a fight as opposed to a discussion.

Taking Snopes description as accurate, I' d call conversion therapy claim true in spirit and the fetal funeral one false in spirit.

PLW wrote:Taking Snopes description as accurate, I' d call conversion therapy claim true in spirit and the fetal funeral one false in spirit.

From what I read on both these bills, I think this is a pretty good way of describing it.

El Guapo wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:Truth is people here do what they do everywhere, respond to arguments they agree with. Anyone coming in and pointing that out is just looking for a fight, labeled as a problem and an instigator. Some may be, some may honestly just be pointing out some of the absurdity.

Only people you agree with are looking for discussion. And the pile on issue is a real issue. You can either stop and think what kind of a forum and discussion do you want here or you can keep having the increasingly homogenous discussions with arguments only being variants of the same thought.

I know pile on is an issue. Liberals outnumber conservatives by a significant margin here so a conservative leaning post may well draw 3 - 5 replies (say) pushing back, whereas the converse won't be true. That does create a pile on effect, even if the intent of posters is not to say "get 'em!" or anything like that (though I imagine it feels that way to conservatives here).

I just think the reason you often get the responses that you get is that you're attacking people for "group think" and whatnot rather than discussing any particular issue. Your tone, at least as it comes across in text, is of someone looking for a fight as opposed to a discussion.

Honestly this forum is not a place that is safe for real discussion outside of the forums accepted "correct" positions. It's just not. I have plenty of issues I would love to talk about which I used to be able to more but before that could happen this forum would need an adjustment in terms of response and attitude towards people not fitting the think tank mold here.

So yes often times I read the forum and just get fed up with what it has become and feel like pointing out some of the absurdity of the group think that occurs. And then the pole on ensues and I think "why do I even bother checking anything but the board game threads here anymore?" But hey if it makes you feel better I'm a member of another form that tends to be very conservative and the group think there drives me just as crazy there and it also isn't a place for real discussion. I just hoped most people here would want a place for real discussion instead of confirmation.

Chrisoc13 wrote:Truth is people here do what they do everywhere, respond to arguments they agree with. Anyone coming in and pointing that out is just looking for a fight, labeled as a problem and an instigator.

But that's not what I did. Not at all. I started out with what I felt was common ground between us, and then explained why I thought that this situation and your characterization were off.

Chrisoc13 wrote:

El Guapo wrote:

Chrisoc13 wrote:Truth is people here do what they do everywhere, respond to arguments they agree with. Anyone coming in and pointing that out is just looking for a fight, labeled as a problem and an instigator. Some may be, some may honestly just be pointing out some of the absurdity.

Only people you agree with are looking for discussion. And the pile on issue is a real issue. You can either stop and think what kind of a forum and discussion do you want here or you can keep having the increasingly homogenous discussions with arguments only being variants of the same thought.

I know pile on is an issue. Liberals outnumber conservatives by a significant margin here so a conservative leaning post may well draw 3 - 5 replies (say) pushing back, whereas the converse won't be true. That does create a pile on effect, even if the intent of posters is not to say "get 'em!" or anything like that (though I imagine it feels that way to conservatives here).

I just think the reason you often get the responses that you get is that you're attacking people for "group think" and whatnot rather than discussing any particular issue. Your tone, at least as it comes across in text, is of someone looking for a fight as opposed to a discussion.

Honestly this forum is not a place that is safe for real discussion outside of the forums accepted "correct" positions. It's just not. I have plenty of issues I would love to talk about which I used to be able to more but before that could happen this forum would need an adjustment in terms of response and attitude towards people not fitting the think tank mold here.

So yes often times I read the forum and just get fed up with what it has become and feel like pointing out some of the absurdity of the group think that occurs. And then the pole on ensues and I think "why do I even bother checking anything but the board game threads here anymore?" But hey if it makes you feel better I'm a member of another form that tends to be very conservative and the group think there drives me just as crazy there and it also isn't a place for real discussion. I just hoped most people here would want a place for real discussion instead of confirmation.

I mean, I mostly disagree, but then "it's just not" is not something one can really respond to. Seriously though, I would be happy to discuss any particular issues, on the forum or via PM or what have you.

Also, if there is anything in particular that the forum could do to encourage more diverse discussion in your view, I think a meta thread on that could potentially be productive. I don't think that anyone is intentionally driving out opposing views, for what it's worth.