The Former Trump Presidency Thread

[RunningMn9]

Honestly this forum is not a place that is safe for real discussion outside of the forums accepted "correct" positions.

What does this mean? What would it mean to be safe?

I am engaged (I think) in "real" discussions with LawBeefaroni in the Trump Healthcare thread and we are disagreeing, and I'm not advocating the "correct" position. I don't feel unsafe.

I assume that if I say something wrong, it will be identified and addressed immediately. That's how it's been for me for a very long time here. In my earlier days, I was significantly more conservative, and at no point did I feel that it wasn't safe for real discussion.

I didn't respond to you to pile on. I didn't respond to you to attack you as some sort of traitor that doesn't adhere to "correct" positions. I responded to you because while I share a poor view of the current electorate, I still think that you made a false equivalency.

I don't even need you to agree with me on that. But what is the point of the forum if I can't point out what I think you've done, for fear of you feeling like this isn't a safe space?

[malchior]

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.

Why not point out where you think the group think is wrong? At this point all we have is that you think there is group think but no real idea what you disagree with. Unless it is everything. But I don't think that is the case.

[Smutly]

There are absolutely some topics I don't even consider bringing up because of the liberal group think and predictable onslaught that would ensue. Positions that you guys take for granted are not so in my world. Sometimes I am able to stop myself from throwing up in my mouth reading some of the things said, but sometimes not. And it's not just coincidental pile on due to political demographics -- it's active and purposeful.

All of the self-deceit in your responses to Chrisoc13 have me laughing out loud. Your world view of conservatives, rural Americans, etc. makes you ill-suited to have a conversation to advance common understanding. You are too busy ridiculing to have a discussion. If you think you're not, then again, you're fooling yourself. You act like you want data for a basis of discussion, but you really don't. Hell, even when I lost my shit with Max ( ) and told him to fuck off I was accused of being unruly...when a simple forum search would show that it was the first and only time I ever told anyone here to fuck off while many of you have done so repeatedly (usually to Rip). So, moderators and members alike, good luck keeping it real.

[Smoove_B]

There are absolutely some topics I don't even consider bringing up because of the liberal group think and predictable onslaught that would ensue. Positions that you guys take for granted are not so in my world. Sometimes I am able to stop myself from throwing up in my mouth reading some of the things said, but sometimes not. And it's not just coincidental pile on due to political demographics -- it's active and purposeful.

When I was like 12 years old, my best friend had a little sister (I think she was like 8 or 9) that would hang around while we were doing whatever it was that 12 year old boys get into (it's all a blur now). Anyway, invariably we'd do or say something (that in fairness was likely abrasive) to her and every time it happened she'd put her hands on her hips and declare with righteous indignation "Well, I was going to share [ice cream, toys, firecrackers, secrets] with you, but now I'm not" and then storm off in a huff. Either post stuff or don't, but don't suggest people here are incapable of having an intelligent discussion about any number of topics. That's ludicrous.

Hell, even when I lost my shit with Max ( ) and told him to fuck off I was accused of being unruly...when a simple forum search would show that it was the first and only time I ever told anyone here to fuck off

I just made an observation that yes, you were acting unruly and your tone, at times, leaves much to be desired. As hard as this might be for you to believe, the two are connected.

while many of you have done so repeatedly (usually to Rip).

If you give me a few minutes, I think I can whip up a coupon in Adobe that would allow you to print out something and submit it for "One Free Accusation of Unruly Behavior" here on OO. Would that help?

[Smutly]

Hey, Smoove_B. Thanks for all that, but you didn't address any of my points and made up a bunch of shit I didn't say. Can you figure out what you made up and what you didn't address? I can. It's called reading comprehension and honesty in response. So, you can now take it down a notch or continue not addressing the issue at hand. Way to prove my points, though. 'ppreciate you.

[Smoove_B]

Hey, Smoove_B. Thanks for all that,

You're welcome.

but you didn't address any of my points

I would disagree, though I fully admit I'm not sure what all of your points are then.

and made up a bunch of shit I didn't say.

I like quotes.

Can you figure out what you made up

It's all true

and what you didn't address?

I can't possibly speak for everyone here, nor can I address all elements. I was simply responding to your post in a manner that I felt was both constructive and polite. We apparently disagree on this.

I can.

Ok

It's called reading comprehension and honesty in response.

I can assure you I read, comprehended and provided an honest response.

So, you can now take it down a notch

Taking it down a notch would bring me to the point where I don't reply to anything at all. I'm currently at a 1 on the giveafuck meter.

or continue not addressing the issue at hand.

I'm still not sure what the issue at hand is but there are currently two individuals in this thread indicating that OO, for lack of a better term, is not a "safe space" for their thoughts and written feelings. This confuses me (and others apparently) greatly.

Way to prove my points, though.

I don't think you need my help here.

'ppreciate you.

Anytime.

[Smutly]

We'll go slowly. Do me a favor and re-read my post. Is the quote below still your position? This is the reading comprehension part.

but don't suggest people here are incapable of having an intelligent discussion about any number of topics. That's ludicrous.

[Defiant]

Trump has a honeymoon as his ratings soar

Forty-six percent of voters now have a very favorable or somewhat favorable opinion of the president-elect. Twelve percent have a somewhat unfavorable opinion and 34 percent have a very unfavorable opinion of him.

[geezer]

There are absolutely some topics I don't even consider bringing up because of the liberal group think and predictable onslaught that would ensue. Positions that you guys take for granted are not so in my world. Sometimes I am able to stop myself from throwing up in my mouth reading some of the things said, but sometimes not. And it's not just coincidental pile on due to political demographics -- it's active and purposeful.

All of the self-deceit in your responses to Chrisoc13 have me laughing out loud. Your world view of conservatives, rural Americans, etc. makes you ill-suited to have a conversation to advance common understanding. You are too busy ridiculing to have a discussion. If you think you're not, then again, you're fooling yourself. You act like you want data for a basis of discussion, but you really don't. Hell, even when I lost my shit with Max ( ) and told him to fuck off I was accused of being unruly...when a simple forum search would show that it was the first and only time I ever told anyone here to fuck off while many of you have done so repeatedly (usually to Rip). So, moderators and members alike, good luck keeping it real.

What positions taken for granted are not so in your world? What "world view" of rural Americans and conservatives make people here incapable of having a discussion with a rural or conservative American?

Truly, I'm not sure why Chrisoc feels put upon in this specific case. Some people are debating the extent to which laws Pence approves of endorse discrimination or conversion therapy. Others in this thread have acknowledged that Pence didn't actually demand funerals in the event of miscarriages or abortions. In another thread Chrisoc said he supported McMullen. Did anyone jump on hm for that?

In any case, we should be able to agree, as RM9 suggested, that accusations of witchcraft are of a different level than debating the intent of actual legislation, right?

[RunningMn9]

Here's the problem - I can't tell if you won't bring yourself to say something because you are wrong and don't like having that pointed out, or if it's because we are wrong and are just too dumbly leftist that we can't see it.

That's the difference between you and me. In my more conservative days, if I had something to say, I'd say it. If someone disagreed, we argued it out. If someone else had something to said, they said it. And if I disagreed, we argued it out.

Somehow this all worked without anyone having to bitch about how unsettling thoughts make us throw up in our mouths, or everyone is just mean to us because we say things and people say we are wrong. Christ on a cracker.

Also, Smoove, solid use of The Treatment(tm).

[Smutly]

Here's the problem - I can't tell if you won't bring yourself to say something because you are wrong and don't like having that pointed out, or if it's because we are wrong and are just too dumbly leftist that we can't see it.

That's the difference between you and me. In my more conservative days, if I had something to say, I'd say it. If someone disagreed, we argued it out. If someone else had something to said, they said it. And if I disagreed, we argued it out.

Somehow this all worked without anyone having to bitch about how unsettling thoughts make us throw up in our mouths, or everyone is just mean to us because we say things and people say we are wrong. Christ on a cracker.

Also, Smoove, solid use of The Treatment(tm).

The board is not the same as it was when you were more conservative.

I was emphasizing Chrisoc13's point that he would love to post some topics for discussion but that, in his opinion (which I agree with), it's not worth it and is essentially pointless due to the group think.

Forget the throwing up in my mouth -- I was joking. The point is that I disagree with what some of you take as The Truth(tm).

I'm glad Smoove gave me The Treatment(tm), but I'll be more happy if he responds to my last question.

[Smoove_B]

We'll go slowly. Do me a favor and re-read my post. Is the quote below still your position? This is the reading comprehension part.

but don't suggest people here are incapable of having an intelligent discussion about any number of topics. That's ludicrous.

There are absolutely some topics I don't even consider bringing up because of the liberal group think and predictable onslaught that would ensue. Positions that you guys take for granted are not so in my world. Sometimes I am able to stop myself from throwing up in my mouth reading some of the things said, but sometimes not. And it's not just coincidental pile on due to political demographics -- it's active and purposeful.

It is my position. You've quite clearly indicated that you don't bring up topics on this forum because collectively we are apparently incapable of engaging in intelligent debate. Instead, we all subscribe to some type of "liberal groupthink" which requires us to sit around and agree with whomever posts the first liberal lib that ever libbed, actively targeting and marginalizing those that don't agree.

As others have pointed out, this is absolutely a left-leaning group of people, however there is seemingly a full range of positions on things like taxes, businesses, the role of government and insurance. But if I may be so bold as to comment on the group that hangs out here, I do think we are are rather liberal with our views on social issues and when a pile-on occurs it's usually over social issues and people staking out untenable positions. I mean, maybe there have been pile-ons related to taxes or whether or not corporations are people (my friend), I just can't recall them.

I believe in you Smutly. I believe.

I'm glad Smoove gave me The Treatment(tm), but I'll be more happy if he responds to my last question.

Sorry, I had to log in to the RM9 account, respond, and then log back in to this one.

[Smutly]

We'll go slowly. Do me a favor and re-read my post. Is the quote below still your position? This is the reading comprehension part.

but don't suggest people here are incapable of having an intelligent discussion about any number of topics. That's ludicrous.

There are absolutely some topics I don't even consider bringing up because of the liberal group think and predictable onslaught that would ensue. Positions that you guys take for granted are not so in my world. Sometimes I am able to stop myself from throwing up in my mouth reading some of the things said, but sometimes not. And it's not just coincidental pile on due to political demographics -- it's active and purposeful.

It is my position. You've quite clearly indicated that you don't bring up topics on this forum because collectively we are apparently incapable of engaging in intelligent debate. Instead, we all subscribe to some type of "liberal groupthink" which requires us to sit around and agree with whomever posts the first liberal lib that ever libbed, actively targeting and marginalizing those that don't agree.

As others have pointed out, this is absolutely a left-leaning group of people, however there is seemingly a full range of positions on things like taxes, businesses, the role of government and insurance. But if I may be so bold as to comment on the group that hangs out here, I do think we are are rather liberal with our views on social issues and when a pile-on occurs it's usually over social issues and people staking out untenable positions. I mean, maybe there have been pile-ons related to taxes or whether or not corporations are people (my friend), I just can't recall them.

I believe in you Smutly. I believe.

Then your reading comprehension is not where it needs to be. Of course I believe the people here are intelligent and can discuss topics. The problem is not your intelligence. The problem is how you react to others with opinions that differ from your own -- and you how react in force. That was almost the entire point of my post, but you turned it into me calling you stupid.

I would just say "you're stupid" if I truly felt that way.

[LordMortis]

It is my position. You've quite clearly indicated that you don't bring up topics on this forum because collectively we are apparently incapable of engaging in intelligent debate. Instead, we all subscribe to some type of "liberal groupthink" which requires us to sit around and agree with whomever posts the first liberal lib that ever libbed, actively targeting and marginalizing those that don't agree.

I have no idea what Smutly was indicating but I believe this to be true. Probably not as you intended though.

I think intelligent debate is drown by ranters and distractions and too many voices going in too many directions. And I think the mass of posts going in different directions are part of "liberal groupthink" so by the nature of the demographics it's "liberal groupthink" doing the drowning. If the mass of posters here were conservative then it would be conservative noise.

But I have no problem with this. I'm redirecting right now. Of course, I'm not about debate. And I find enough meaningful nuggets in the many different kinds of liberal stream to keep on sifting through.

And there are more than one or two posters here who demean those who are in disagreement and it's easy to mix the judgements of a few as indicative of the whole. I do have a problem with more than a few posters here but I do my best to remember that I have a problem with them and keep them mentally (or in extreme cases) physically on my <plonk> list. Sometimes I fail.

[hepcat]

Some folks would rather whine, bitch and call people names than admit they've failed miserably in their attempt to change everyone else's mind.

[RunningMn9]

The board is not the same as it was when you were more conservative.

In what way? From my perspective, the difference isn't in the ability to say something, the difference is in the ability to defend what that person says.

I was emphasizing Chrisoc13's point that he would love to post some topics for discussion but that, in his opinion (which I agree with), it's not worth it and is essentially pointless due to the group think.

Is this a contest to see how many times someone can say group think?

Maybe the problem for Chrisoc13 is that he's wrong? Maybe you're problem is that you're wrong? I don't know that you are since you won't talk about it. But I'm not convinced either of you has accepted that as a possibility. You seem to want to blame it on group think, without even trying.

To me, that's telling. That doesn't make me right, but I've found that being correct wins out a lot more than you think. And if you struggle to get something out, the reason generally isn't other people.

Forget the throwing up in my mouth -- I was joking. The point is that I disagree with what some of you take as The Truth(tm).

And that's fine. I'm not always right, but neither are you. Some of the things that I think are true, aren't. Some of the things that I think aren't true, are. I'll bet my next mortgage payment that this applies to you as well.

And so we have an issue. I smugly think that some things are true, and you know that they aren't and think that I'm an asshole. You smugly think that some things are false, and I know that they are true and think that you're an asshole.

We're both assholes. But I'll let you in on a little secret, that I've demonstrated here many times over. I'm not interest in winning, nor am I interested in being right. I'm interested in be correct.

If you find it difficult to convince me of something, it's not because I am clinging to my beliefs, since I don't cling to them. It's just because you haven't convinced me that you're correct. And that's your fault.

[RunningMn9]

And while you are maligning SmooveB's reading comprehension skills, that's a good example. When someone posts something and there's crosstalk, the recipient's comprehension skills are only one part of the equation.

The other part of the equation is the writer's skill in conveying the thoughts they want to convey.

Maybe Smoove_B is a dummy head that can't comprehend your written thoughts? Maybe the natural intepretation of your words isn't in line with your thoughts, and you're not the clear and concise writer you think you are?

I've been on both sides, and it's helpful to understand that there's more than one reason for the confusion.

[Smutly]

I'm done here.

[RunningMn9]

Well, it's not hard to interpret that.

[Smoove_B]

Then your reading comprehension is not where it needs to be. Of course I believe the people here are intelligent and can discuss topics. The problem is not your intelligence. The problem is how you react to others with opinions that differ from your own -- and you how react in force.

I like to read between lines - that I'll absolutely admit to doing. If I was incorrect here with my interpretation of what you wrote, may I be so humble as to suggest reiterating your point and clarifying your position in a way that isn't an passive/aggressive swipe at my faculties? Listen, I have a black-belt in passive/aggressive communications and I can confirm it works great in person. In a written discussion? Not so much. I'll additionally note that I'm a middle-aged chubby white guy. In the words of Louis CK - you can't even hurt my feelings. The idea that someone wouldn't post something here for discussion is kind of blowing my mind.

I would just say "you're stupid" if I truly felt that way.

Yes, that much is now clear.

[geezer]

Well, this is one of the more bizarre altercations I've seen here.

[Smoove_B]

Protecting Donald Trump is costing NYC $1 million a day. I was reading somewhere that there's a theory he's doing this on purpose as payback for forcing him to make the lobby of Trump Towers a public place in exchange for giving him permission to build it taller than would have been permitted.

[Zarathud]

Chrissoc, you're wrong about Pence. Please don't choose this hill to die on.

My wife knows one of the Democrats who was running against Pence, and he really is an extreme religious Republican social conservative. You may be more ok with that outcome than some on OO, but that doesn't mean the minor political mischaracterizations are wrong.

Not being 100% correct or using political slogans doesn't mean a political statement is wrong -- or equivalent. It's pretty standard, part of the territory.

[RunningMn9]

Yeah, I don't get it. Back in my day, I had to deal with tony72/Unbreakable. Stop bitching and defend your position for crying out loud.

These are like the millennials of conservative posters. Too many participation trophies when they were growing up. Sad.

[Defiant]

Protecting Donald Trump is costing NYC $1 million a day. I was reading somewhere that there's a theory he's doing this on purpose as payback for forcing him to make the lobby of Trump Towers a public place in exchange for giving him permission to build it taller than would have been permitted.

Here I was thinking it was because the White House wasn't white enough for him.

[Isgrimnur]

I'm done here.

[gbasden]

I'll certainly admit that there are some topics that get shouted down. If you want to post here in favor of rolling back gay rights or being happy about voter suppression you are probably going to get a lot of people telling you that they vehemently disagree. There are areas such as racism where we have differences of opinion on things.

I'll give that the two points on Pence were overstated. The result, though, is not that Pence isn't repugnant. Whether or not conversion therapy uses electroshock doesn't change the fact that Pence supports it, and believes that gay people should be told they are unworthy if they can't be heterosexual. I'm sorry if calling out his awfulness offends you, but the issue of gay rights is important enough to me that I'm not going to sugar coat his awfulness. Others here feel the same way about gun rights and they are equally as vehement.

If you have insights as to why you think Pence is fantastic, lay them out. When it comes down to it, your venn diagram of acceptability may be very different than mine. If I think your views are morally indefensible, I'll say so, and you are welcome to tell me the same.

[malchior]

Yeah, I don't get it. Back in my day, I had to deal with tony72/Unbreakable. Stop bitching and defend your position for crying out loud.

These are like the millennials of conservative posters. Too many participation trophies when they were growing up. Sad.

This nails my feeling. I'd go further and say it is rich to complain about group think when many "Conservatives" post what amounts to Internet group think/junk food news from the right and then vanishes via ninja smoke bomb as soon as anyone pushes back with actual facts.

[RunningMn9]

This nails my feeling. I'd go further and say it is rich to complain about group think when many "Conservatives" post what amounts to Internet group think/junk food news from the right and then vanishes via ninja smoke bomb as soon as anyone pushes back with actual facts.

I know what you mean, but I would stress that I do NOT put Chrisoc13 in that bucket.

[Captain Caveman]

Um, is he just outright stating his intentions to use the presidency to enrich himself? Or at the very least, saying you knew I was a con-man during the campaign so... too late!

Edit: this is in response to a NYT article out tonight about him recently conversing with a Farange in the U.K. about preventing wind farms from ruining the view at his golf course. Trump spokespeople denied it happened until confronted with an eye-witness claiming it did, at which point they went MIA.

[Holman]

"Listen, America, I have interests bigger than yours. The Donald comes first."

[hepcat]

Good Lord, he's about to make Hillary look like a freakin' saint by comparison. Welcome to the age of the new Robber Barons.

[malchior]

This nails my feeling. I'd go further and say it is rich to complain about group think when many "Conservatives" post what amounts to Internet group think/junk food news from the right and then vanishes via ninja smoke bomb as soon as anyone pushes back with actual facts.

I know what you mean, but I would stress that I do NOT put Chrisoc13 in that bucket.

Not at all. It is more a piece of the pile on puzzle. I believe the pile on behavior at times is (in?)directly tied to fatigue with those sort of interactions. It may color some people's interactions with *all conservatives*. Even with those cons who don't practice it.

[malchior]

Meanwhile on the other side of Hazard County -

.

And this story was courtesy of Trump's people promptly leaking it.

[tgb]

Um, is he just outright stating his intentions to use the presidency to enrich himself? Or at the very least, saying you knew I was a con-man during the campaign so... too late!

Edit: this is in response to a NYT article out tonight about him recently conversing with a Farange in the U.K. about preventing wind farms from ruining the view at his golf course. Trump spokespeople denied it happened until confronted with an eye-witness claiming it did, at which point they went MIA.

Is it too early to start the countdown to impeachment?

[Kraken]

Trump has a honeymoon as his ratings soar

Forty-six percent of voters now have a very favorable or somewhat favorable opinion of the president-elect. Twelve percent have a somewhat unfavorable opinion and 34 percent have a very unfavorable opinion of him.

He won 48 or 49% of the popular vote so a 46% approval sounds slightly worse than one would expect. I choose to infer that 2-3% of his voters have changed their minds.

[Defiant]

Trump has a honeymoon as his ratings soar

Forty-six percent of voters now have a very favorable or somewhat favorable opinion of the president-elect. Twelve percent have a somewhat unfavorable opinion and 34 percent have a very unfavorable opinion of him.

He won 48 or 49% of the popular vote so a 46% approval sounds slightly worse than one would expect. I choose to infer that 2-3% of his voters have changed their minds.

He won ~46.55% at the latest count, and given that it seems that much of the remaining vote is likely to go to Clinton (IIRC, the suggestions was 2-1 based on the states it's coming from) that might go down some.

I'm more surprised by that his unfavorability rating has dropped down to 46%.

[Defiant]

Trump lit out after Zucker, criticizing his former business partner (Zucker was head of NBC during Trump's Apprentice franchise on the network) for CNN. He turned then to NBC, saying it was the worst, criticizing its reporters, and saying it could not even come up with a flattering picture to broadcast. His complaint: the network's photographs showed him with multiple chins. NBC President Deborah Turness replied that wasn't true - NBC right now is using a photograph that shows Trump in very flattering way, she said

link

[milo]

I know, right?

[Zaxxon]

This thread has gone twilight zone on us. The conservatives need safe spaces, and RM9 is posting single short paragraphs.

Also, Isg wins the thread.