Majority of Americans More Concerned about 'Socialist Left' Than 'MAGA Republicans': POLL

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  vic-eldred  •  one week ago  •  125 comments

By:   Donald Trump (YahooNews)

Majority of Americans More Concerned about 'Socialist Left' Than 'MAGA Republicans': POLL
Fifty-five percent of Americans are more concerned about the "Socialist Left" than they are about "MAGA Republicans," according to a new Harvard-CAPS Harris poll.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



Fifty-five percent of Americans are more concerned about the "Socialist Left" than they are about "MAGA Republicans," according to a new Harvard-CAPS Harris poll.

The poll asked respondents: "Are you more concerned about the Socialist left in America and the power they are gaining or more afraid of MAGA Republicans and the power they are getting?"

Just 45 percent of respondents said they are more concerned with "MAGA Republicans."

The poll also asked voters: "Do you think there are tens of millions of dangerous MAGA Republicans backing violence and trying to overthrow the constitution or is that a gross exaggeration and distortion?"

Most voters (54 percent) believe the number of "dangerous MAGA Republicans" is "grossly exaggerated." Forty-six percent said there are tens of millions of dangerous MAGA Republicans, including 73 percent of Democrats, 20 percent of Republicans and 42 percent of independents.

The poll was conducted September 7 and 8, one week after President Biden gave a speech in Philadelphia saying former president Donald Trump and the 'MAGA Republicans' represent "an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic."

"Now I want to be very clear up front not every Republican, not even the majority of Republicans are MAGA Republicans," Biden said in his remarks, which were touted as a "soul of the nation" address.

He added: "Not every Republican embraces their extreme ideology. I know because I've been able to work with these mainstream Republicans. But there's no question that the Republican Party today is dominated, driven, and intimidated by Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans and that is a threat to this country."

Fifty-six percent of voters opposed the speech Biden gave, the Harvard-CAPS Harris poll found. Sixty-percent called the speech divisive, while just 40 percent said the speech helps unite the country and move it forward.

Fifty-four percent said the speech was just fear-mongering and 46 percent said the fears are justified.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1  seeder  Vic Eldred    one week ago

To the surprise of nobody, most people are concerned with the radical left now in power.


 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
1.1  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    one week ago

So says Doanld Trump the king of liars.

 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Principal
1.1.1  Nerm_L  replied to  cjcold @1.1    one week ago
So says Doanld Trump the king of liars.

256

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
1.1.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  cjcold @1.1    one week ago

Actually it was the Harvard-CAPS Harris poll results that said it, loud & clear.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
Professor Principal
2  Nerm_L    one week ago

Not too surprising with the number of domestic and foreign migrants fleeing places where the Socialist left is in control.  It's gotten so bad that California is banning the most affordable and reliable means of escape.  California only sells oil to outsiders.

Democratic Socialists don't seem to believe in democracy, after all.  So, people are voting with their feet.  And that's a poll that really matters.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3  Sparty On    one week ago

Radical Dems are trying to gaslight their way out of a record loss of seats this midterm.    It won’t work.    You reap what you sow kiddies.    

Remember that when your chronic butthurt increases significantly on November 9th.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @3    one week ago

November 8th!  What a night it will be.

I'll bring the Rum & Coke if you bring the Wise chips.

 
 
 
afrayedknot
Freshman Quiet
3.1.1  afrayedknot  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    one week ago

“November 8th!”

…and nothing will change. The dysfunction will continue, the dystrophy will only fester, and the discussions will only be more muted in the delirium. 

Have a party as you will, celebrating celibacy, as nothing will be consummated, much less grow. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  afrayedknot @3.1.1    one week ago

All are invited. We can watch the results come in together.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.3  Sparty On  replied to  afrayedknot @3.1.1    one week ago

They won’t really be showing their butthurt until the next day.

Thats when the excuses and sky-screaming really kick in.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.4  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    one week ago

Bring Mexican Coke and Sailor Jerry and you are on.    I’ll bring the Padrons and limes

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
3.1.5  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Sparty On @3.1.4    one week ago

Deal!

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
3.1.6  cjcold  replied to  Sparty On @3.1.4    one week ago

What is Padrones?

Another democrat run pizza place without a basement to keep kidnapped sex slaves?

Could you have been thinking of Patron Tequila?

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.1.7  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @3.1.6    one week ago
What is Padrones?

A premium brand of handcrafted, aged Nicaraguan blended cigars, although not the brand that Clinton favored as a sex toy.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
3.1.8  cjcold  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @3.1.7    one week ago

Looked that up myself. Never actually cared for cigars myself.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
3.1.9  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @3.1.8    one week ago
Never actually cared for cigars myself.

To smoke or as a sex toy?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.10  Sparty On  replied to  cjcold @3.1.8    one week ago

That’s nice ....

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.11  Sparty On  replied to  cjcold @3.1.6    one week ago

No, I was thinking Padron.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4  JohnRussell    one week ago

The questions are much too murky to draw conclusions from.  The "socialist left' could mean almost anything, or nothing.  I would add that most Americans simply dont know what socialism is. Conservatives tend to describe anything they dont like about the country as "socialism". 

As for the MAGA, a question about "tens of millions" of "dangerous" MAGA, it is not a surprise that a majority doesnt agree with this. The description is an exaggeration. Although most MAGA's are deluded and incredibly misinformed, and many are racist,  I dont know if I would describe "tens of millions" of them as "dangerous". 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
4.1  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JohnRussell @4    one week ago
“I would add that most Americans simply dont know what socialism is.”

Exactly, most Americans are to stupid, that’s why they need elites to tell them what’s what.

Although most MAGA's are deluded and incredibly misinformed,

So no different than “most Americans”?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.1  Sparty On  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @4.1    one week ago
Exactly, most Americans are to stupid, that’s why they need elites to tell them what’s what.

I don’t need elites to tell me what to think.     I come to NT to be told what to think.    There are some really smart leftists and progressives here.

Try it, you won’t be sorry .....

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
4.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @4.1    one week ago
Exactly, most Americans are to stupid, that’s why they need elites to tell them what’s what.

Why would someone need "elites" to tell them what socialism is?  Anyone with an 8th grade and up mentality can understand it. 

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
4.1.3  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.2    one week ago
Why would someone need "elites" to tell them what socialism is? 

Well, you said, " I would add that most Americans simply dont know what socialism is".

Anyone with an 8th grade and up mentality can understand it. 

I assume you were bemoaning our public education.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
4.1.4  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.1    one week ago
Try it, you won’t be sorry .....

That's what keeps me here.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
4.1.5  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.2    one week ago
Anyone with an 8th grade and up mentality can understand it. 

Yet we are constantly getting long detailed treatise of what Socialism is, right here on NT.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
4.1.6  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @4.1.5    one week ago

Because, sadly, many fail to take the time to learn what the word 'socialism' means and simply use it as a catch-all for state actions which they dislike.

People worry about socialism in the USA when there is zero chance that our economic system will migrate from capitalism to socialism in our lifetimes.   Maybe in a century or more; maybe never.   It is an emotional, unwarranted and irrational fear of something they do not even understand.

What people should worry about is an increase of social democracy in the USA.    Our system is already a social democracy, albeit mild by European standards, but a social democracy nonetheless.   We have a very real chance of increasing the potency of our social democracy and an even better chance of screwing it up if we try.   Focus on that instead of the boogeyman 'socialism' (demos control over the productive resources of the economy rather than control by the state or transnational capitalists) which is simply NOT even a mild threat of coming into existence.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
4.1.7  Ozzwald  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @4.1    one week ago
Exactly, most Americans are to stupid, that’s why they need elites to tell them what’s what.

You mean "too" stupid?

Sorry, normally wouldn't point it out, but in context of your sentence I figured you'd need someone to tell you what's what in regards to proper vocabulary.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
4.1.8  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Ozzwald @4.1.7    one week ago
You mean "too" stupid?

Exactly, I'm Exhibit A in the accomplishments of a public school education.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
4.1.9  cjcold  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @4.1    one week ago

the fact that you use "to 'instead of too}" defines you.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
4.1.10  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @4.1.9    one week ago

You got that right, I'm To Too, Drinker of the Wry.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
4.1.11  cjcold  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @4.1    one week ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
4.1.12  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @4.1.11    one week ago

Now you’ve done blown my cover.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.1.13  Sparty On  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @4.1.8    one week ago

A public school education isn’t what it used to be but it is always nice to have NT as a resource.    

So we all can continue to be educated by the highly educated internet geniuses who live here .... 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
4.2  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @4    one week ago
Although most MAGA's are deluded and incredibly misinformed, and many are racist

This just more MAGADS ...... nothing more.

 
 
 
Waykwabu
Freshman Quiet
5  Waykwabu    one week ago

Could someone please inform a non American reader :   What is a "MAGA" Republican ??

Just curious !

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1  TᵢG  replied to  Waykwabu @5    one week ago

Right now, it is one who blindly follows Trump.   

When Trump is eventually out of the picture, a MAGA Republican will be one who supports:

  • Controlled immigration
  • Physical border security (a wall)
  • Limited government
  • Nationalism
  • Isolationism
  • Fossil fuel usage (to maintain status quo and to not negatively impact the economy)
  • Disregard for the environment (short term, selfish thinking)
  • No abortion
  • Misogynistic views of women
  • Heavy support of religions
  • Belief in USA exceptionalism
  • Strong military
  • Bearing arms
  • White supremacy
  • Lower taxes (but increasing debt is okay)
  • Belief that what is good for businesses is always good for the people
  • Survival of the fittest (personal responsibility taken to an extreme)
  • Immediate, short-term gratification; unconcerned about the impact on future generations

There is more, but this is a good profile.

 
 
 
Gsquared
Senior Expert
5.1.1  Gsquared  replied to  TᵢG @5.1    one week ago

"Christian nationalism" and permanent right-wing reactionary extremist domination of all 3 branches of the government.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.2  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @5.1    one week ago
a MAGA Republican will be one who supports:

Correction:   A MAGA Republican will be one who supports:

National Sovereignty
Physical border security (a wall)
Limited Government
Nationalism
Protectionism
Fossil fuel usage (because believe it or not: we still need fossil fuel)
Demand that China & India start contributing to the protection of the environment
Abortion with restrictions (preferably up to 15 weeks)
Women treated as equals
Religious freedom guaranteed under the Constitution
A return to USA exceptionalism (which most of the third world recognizes)
Strong Military
The right to bear arms with restrictions
Equality (no special groups)
Lower taxes and reduced domestic spending
Belief in Free Enterprise, which is responsible for the nation's wealth
Limiting the nanny state (The US has more than enough social safety nets in place)
A rejection of decadence

That's the rational profile

Now here is the profile of the radical leftist alternative which we now are living under:

Wide open borders (an obvious attempt to change the voters as well as the demographics of the country)
Secretly relocating illegal migrants throughout the country
A one-party, elite ruling class government
Globalism
An unrealistic energy policy, that forces suffering on the population in the name of green energy, which we are a long, long way from having
International climate deals in which the US contributes money and the rest of the world contributes vague promises
Abortion unrestricted, right up to the moment of birth
Women, to be pandered to, used strictly as a voting bloc, never truly as equals
Religion mocked and discouraged (except for the religion of Islam)
The application of Social Justice in place of American Justice
The emasculation of local police
The emasculation of the Military
The indoctrination of young children into CRT and Gender Identity programs
Intimidating American parents via a politicized FBI
The prosecution of political enemies via a politicized FBI
The hiring of 87,000 IRS agents to bring in more revenue (especially from small business)
More job protections for an already politicized federal bureaucracy
The division of the nation along racial lines (the elevation of special groups)
The rights of the homeless to loiter on city streets
Allowing criminals to quickly return to the streets
Trivializing the Federal debt and excessive social spending programs (causing inflation & ruining savings & pensions)
Stacking the Supreme Court
Changing state voting rules to make both voting & fraud easier
A firm belief in Socialism ( which we are always told has never been tried)



 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
5.1.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.2    one week ago
Now here is the profile of the radical leftist alternative which we now are living under:
Wide open borders (an obvious attempt to change the voters as well as the demographics of the country)

As so long as those crossing the borders don't end up in their cities and states.

Women, to be pandered to, used strictly as a voting bloc, never truly as equals

Reality is they will pander to whoever and whatever the shiny object of the day is.  Once that thing or group of people are no longer of use they are tossed away without a second thought.

The application of Social Justice in place of American Justice

Because hurt feelings are more important than anything else.

The emasculation of the Military

As they send the military all over the world to be the global police force nobody ask for.

The rights of the homeless to loiter on city streets

All the while they won't do anything to assist them.  

Allowing criminals to quickly return to the streets

And complain about higher crime rates in their shithole cities.

A firm belief in Socialism ( which we are always told has never been tried)

 World history is not their strong suit.  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.2    one week ago

No, see 5.1

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.5  Sparty On  replied to  Tessylo @5.1.4    one week ago

Then read 5.1.2 for the unvarnished truth.

5.1 is nothing more than a partisan gaslight special.

 
 
 
gooseisback
Sophomore Silent
5.1.6  gooseisback  replied to  TᵢG @5.1    one week ago
a MAGA Republican will be one who supports

You have managed to repeat all the talking points the media feeds the clapping seals. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.7  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.2    one week ago

The net difference between my list and yours is this:

  • you changed:  isolationism to protectionism.   Your term is more accurate so I accept that.
  • you addedDemand that China & India start contributing to the protection of the environment.   Fine, I can accept that but it looks like the MAGA supporter wants to make demands on China and India and not willing to take measures themselves.   Not smart.
  • you rephrased my "(to maintain status quo and to not negatively impact the economy)" to your "(because believe it or not: we still need fossil fuel)" yet there is no fundamental difference in meaning.   My parenthetical qualification was about the existing infrastructure based on fossil fuel and the economic impact of changing from that.
  • you changed "no abortion" to "Abortion with restrictions (preferably up to 15 weeks)".   Let's see if that holds true; I am not convinced.
  • you changed "Misogynistic views of women " to "Women treated as equals".   Your leader is the poster child for misogyny.
  • you rephrased "heavy support of religions" to "Religious freedom guaranteed under the Constitution".   That does not contradict my item.
  • you rephrased "belief in USA exceptionalism" to "A return to USA exceptionalism (which most of the third world recognizes)" which is a gratuitous change of wording with no change in meaning
  • you rephrased "bearing arms" to "The right to bear arms with restrictions" which is again a change with no change in meaning
  • you changed "White supremacy" to "Equality (no special groups)".    Yet the demographics of MAGA defy you.
  • you changed "Lower taxes (but increasing debt is okay)" to "Lower taxes and reduced domestic spending" and deny the fact that Trump, in a single term, increased the national debt by 39%.
  • you added "Belief in Free Enterprise, which is responsible for the nation's wealth" seemingly to replace "Belief that what is good for businesses is always good for the people".   I accept your new item but it does not replace my item.  
  • you rephrased "Survival of the fittest (personal responsibility taken to an extreme)" to "limiting the nanny state (The US has more than enough social safety nets in place)" which is simply a rewording with no change in meaning.
  • you deleted "Immediate, short-term gratification; unconcerned about the impact on future generations" and apparently disregard the desire to embrace coal and other fossil fuels and reject smarter alternatives.   This also is a rejection of the desire to continue to borrow from future generations for current desires.   (That is, it would be different if the borrowing were building infrastructure that would actually improve the lives for future generations.)
  • you added "a rejection of decadence" which is an ironic end for your list given Trump is the founder and leader of MAGA

In short, you added a few items:

  • Demand that China & India start contributing to the protection of the environment. 
  • Belief in Free Enterprise, which is responsible for the nation's wealth
  • a rejection of decadence

I accept the first two and find the last one amusingly ironic

You deleted a few items:

  • Immediate, short-term gratification; unconcerned about the impact on future generations
  • Belief that what is good for businesses is always good for the people

I disagree with both deletions.   They both are core MAGA.

And you rephrased the rest with little to no difference in meaning.   The exception being "protectionism" vs "isolationism" which I accept as more precise.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.8  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.5    one week ago
5.1 is nothing more than a partisan gaslight special.

This is yet another example of trolling.   Vic put forth an effort to provide a thoughtful reply.   You just wave your hand and label the items partisan gaslighting.   You dismiss (even though the lists agree more than disagree) and I suspect you did not even read the list @5.1.

Identify what in 5.1 is partisan and why you think it is not part of the MAGA philosophy.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.9  TᵢG  replied to  gooseisback @5.1.6    one week ago
You have managed to repeat all the talking points the media feeds the clapping seals. 

Bullshit.   Your response shows no thoughtful analysis.   I doubt you even read the list.   Make an argument on why the list is wrong.   Identify line items and make a point.   That is, attempt to put forth some level of effort like Vic did instead of simply posting 'nuh'uh'.

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
5.1.10  evilgenius  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.7    one week ago

While the list might be accurate of what the right stands for, I can't for the life of me understand why they don't see the contradictions and outright unworkable some of it is. For example -

A rejection of decadence

A rejection of decadence is a rejection of trickle down Reganomics. It's the whole foundation of the Republican party's lower taxes for "job creators". 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.11  TᵢG  replied to  evilgenius @5.1.10    one week ago

I find it amusing that people can make claims about what MAGA means while disregarding the claims that are contradicted by the founder and leader of MAGA.

If Trump is not a symbol of decadence in the USA, who is?    Further, Trump's philosophy is to take advantage of anyone 'weak/gullible' enough for him to do so.  He has shown this in his career in real estate (e.g. refusing to pay contractors, attorneys, ...).   He illustrated this in spades in his Big Lie con-job where he was content causing harm to the nation just to spare his ego.   So it is just nutty for hard working people (average MAGA supporter) to idolize a manipulative exploiter like Trump.    Makes me sick to see such gullibility in our society.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.12  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.8    one week ago

No problem, I do feel like giving you at least one long winded, wordy answer that you appear to like so much.

  • you changed:  isolationism to protectionism.   Your term is more accurate so I accept that.

By you own admission, an attempt to misrepresent the truth or gaslight.

  • you addedDemand that China & India start contributing to the protection of the environment.   Fine, I can accept that but it looks like the MAGA supporter wants to make demands on China and India and not willing to take measures themselves.   Not smart.

“Not willing to take measures themselves” is gaslighting.    MAGA supporters simple want the process done in a controlled, thoughtful manner.    Dipshits running the “green” revolution are clueless to the realities of the situation but don’t take my word for it.    Wait for the increases in rolling blackouts and brown outs throughout the country if they get their way.    It’s already happening.    

  • you rephrased my "(to maintain status quo and to not negatively impact the economy)" to your "(because believe it or not: we still need fossil fuel)" yet there is no fundamental difference in meaning.   My parenthetical qualification was about the existing infrastructure based on fossil fuel and the economic impact of changing from that.

See above.    Negatively affecting the economy?    Damn broad statement.    We simply don’t want our energy costs to double, triple, even quadruple because of poorly planned energy policy.    You comment was misleading at best and gaslighting at worst.

  • you changed "no abortion" to "Abortion with restrictions (preferably up to 15 weeks)".   Let's see if that holds true; I am not convinced.

And yet you said no abortion.    More gaslighting.

  • you changed "Misogynistic views of women " to "Women treated as equals".   Your leader is the poster child for misogyny.

As opposed to the creepy hair sniffer?

  • you rephrased "heavy support of religions" to "Religious freedom guaranteed under the Constitution".   That does not contradict my item.

A perfect example of gaslighting.    MAGA is for religious freedom, anti MAGA is not and actually leans anti religious freedom in many cases.    More gaslighting.

  • you rephrased "belief in USA exceptionalism" to "A return to USA exceptionalism (which most of the third world recognizes)" which is a gratuitous change of wording with no change in meaning

As opposed to the USA dropping our pants for everyone.    NATO is a great example.   Trump pushed other countries like Germany to start paying their fair “agreed upon” share.   Obama and Biden, no so much.

  • you rephrased "bearing arms" to "The right to bear arms with restrictions" which is again a change with no change in meaning

We don’t have a law abiding citizen gun problem.    We have an illegal gun ownership problem.    Enforce existing laws, close the revolving justice door liberals have opened.    MAGA wants to leave law abiding gun owners alone.    The left only pays that lip service.    More gaslighting.

  • you changed "White supremacy" to "Equality (no special groups)".    Yet the demographics of MAGA defy you.

More gaslighting bullshit.    MAGA does not equate to white supremacy.    That is at best a small single digit group of people in MAGA.

  • you changed "Lower taxes (but increasing debt is okay)" to "Lower taxes and reduced domestic spending" and deny the fact that Trump, in a single term, increased the national debt by 39%.

Unlike many here I don’t judge bad fiscal policy by political group.    I didn’t agree with all of Trumps moves in that regard.    That does not exclude one from remaining MAGA.    Equating MAGA,with Trump only, is another gaslighting mistake.    Now Biden on the other hand will be setting new records in that regard.    So I assume if you think it was bad that Trump did it, then you agree that what Biden is doing now is bad as well.

  • you added "Belief in Free Enterprise, which is responsible for the nation's wealth" seemingly to replace "Belief that what is good for businesses is always good for the people".   I accept your new item but it does not replace my item.  
  • you rephrased "Survival of the fittest (personal responsibility taken to an extreme)" to "limiting the nanny state (The US has more than enough social safety nets in place)" which is simply a rewording with no change in meaning.

See above.    EG, forgiving student debt, along with free college are two of stupidest, poor fiscal policy ideas I’ve ever heard.

Thats enough .....

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.13  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.12    one week ago
By you own admission, an attempt to misrepresent the truth or gaslight.

I accepted Vic's term as more precise and you deem that as proof that I was trying to misrepresent the truth or gaslight.   You know, Sparty, I could have used the (unfortunately) common tactic of deflecting or obfuscating rather than admit (twice) that I think Vic's term is more precise.  I could have just ignored it too.   I did not.   But you jump all over this and translate it into 'proof' that I was trying to misrepresent the truth.   Don't even pretend that you are trying to engage in thoughtful discourse;  this is pure trolling.

“Not willing to take measures themselves” is gaslighting.    MAGA supporters simple want the process done in a controlled, thoughtful manner.    Dipshits running the “green” revolution are clueless to the realities of the situation but don’t take my word for it.    Wait for the increases in rolling blackouts and brown outs throughout the country if they get their way.    It’s already happening.    

Promoting the use (and increase of) fossil fuels and fighting cleaner energy is the exact wrong position to hold if one is demanding that China and India take measures to control their use of fossil fuels.   Your claim of MAGA supporters does not match reality.   

Negatively affecting the economy?    Damn broad statement.  

You complain about " (to maintain status quo and to not negatively impact the economy )"???    The main MAGA argument against renewables is that movement to same negatively impacts the economy .   Your complaint is both wrong and petty.

And yet you said no abortion.  

Yes I stated no abortion.   I think that is (sadly) predominantly correct.   We shall see how this evolves in our nation.   There are states already where abortion is banned: 

Were you not aware of this?

A perfect example of gaslighting.    MAGA is for religious freedom, anti MAGA is not and actually leans anti religious freedom in many cases.    More gaslighting.

The phrase " heavy support of religions" means (obviously) 'pro religious freedom'.   But it goes further and brings in the idea of legislation based on religious views (e.g. attempts to teach religious concepts such as creationism in public schools).   It is a fact.

As opposed to the USA dropping our pants for everyone.

Are you suggesting that MAGA does not believe in USA exceptionalism?   

 MAGA wants to leave law abiding gun owners alone.    The left only pays that lip service.    More gaslighting.

"Bearing arms" is indeed part of the MAGA philosophy.   The right to bear arms; objection to attempts to control the bearing of arms.    Again, you insert absurd 'interpretations' for clear phrases and argue against them.   

MAGA does not equate to white supremacy. 

I did not write that it equates with white supremacy.   I stated it was part of what comprises MAGA.    This is the only point thus far in your 'rebuttal' that has any merit, but it is demonstrably wrong for you to imply that MAGA rejects white supremacy.   The current home for white supremacists is MAGA, there is no denying that.

Equating MAGA,with Trump only, is another gaslighting mistake. 

I wrote "Lower taxes (but increasing debt is okay)" because MAGA support lower taxes and offer not a single word against the 39% increase in national debt under Trump who is the founder and leader of MAGA.    Your attempt to deny Trump's relationship with MAGA is amusing.


Bottom line, you label all I wrote as gaslighting.   Apparently you have no clue what gaslighting is or are simply tossing out a label for emotional effect (which, by the way, is part of gaslighting).

Throughout, you have taken my items and almost every time inserted your own, ridiculous meaning and then argued against that.

In short, you just issued a list of strawman arguments.   That is intellectually dishonest and pathetic.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
5.1.14  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.12    one week ago
MAGA wants to leave law abiding gun owners alone.  

Quite a few mass shooters were law abiding gun owners up to the moment they pulled the trigger.  Its like saying "Im in favor of letting 10 year olds drive cars as long as theyve never had an accident."

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
5.1.15  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.14    one week ago
Quite a few mass shooters were law abiding gun owners up to the moment they pulled the trigger. 

Isn't that true of all criminals, they were law abiding up until the time they weren't?  Are you for Stop and Frisk?  

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.16  Tessylo  replied to  evilgenius @5.1.10    one week ago

WTF is a 'rejection of decadence'?jrSmiley_80_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
5.1.17  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  Tessylo @5.1.16    one week ago
WTF is a 'rejection of decadence'?

Rejection: the dismissing or refusing of a proposal, idea

Decadence: moral or cultural decline as characterized by excessive indulgence in pleasure or lux

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.18  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.14    one week ago
Quite a few mass shooters were law abiding gun owners up to the moment they pulled the trigger.

And many weren’t.    That and a huge majority of legal gun owners will never become mass shooters.

Mass shooters account for a small percentage of people killed with guns in this country.    Dig deeper .....

Its like saying "Im in favor of letting 10 year olds drive cars as long as theyve never had an accident."

It’s closer to rationalizing that no one should be able to drive cars because some folks are shitty drivers, legal or otherwise,  that kill people while driving.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.19  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.13    one week ago

Lol, I should know better by now ..... SOSDD ..... So I won’t bother with you anymore.

Your opinions are worthless and weak.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.20  TᵢG  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.19    one week ago

Your 'rebuttals', as I illustrated, were based on producing a contrived and stupid interpretation and then arguing against same.    Note the difference between yours and Vic's responses.   Vic refrained from dreaming up ridiculous, extreme interpretations of my line items when he made his rebuttal.  In turn, I spent time to carefully respond to the semantic nuances with thoughtful commentary.   Your responses were almost entirely based on ridiculous, extreme interpretations — strawmen arguments.

And, yet again, you resort to making things personal in lieu of a cogent argument focused on the content.

 
 
 
gooseisback
Sophomore Silent
5.1.21  gooseisback  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.9    one week ago
Your response shows no thoughtful analysis. 

Don't give me that shit, you're not a Conservative or a Republican so for you to tell me what we support is total bullshit. It would be similar if I said, Democrats are the Party of Criminals, Party of the Pedophiles, the groomer party, the Socialist Party, no borders party, anti gun party, the high tax party, the baby killer party, the live off the government party, the racists party just to name a few.     

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.22  TᵢG  replied to  gooseisback @5.1.21    one week ago
Don't give me that shit, you're not a Conservative or a Republican so for you to tell me what we support is total bullshit.

Oh, so then Vic (who is not radical left) has no right to provide his list of what he thinks the 'radical left' supports @5.1.2 (a post you voted up)?

Give that some thought and try again.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.23  TᵢG  replied to  gooseisback @5.1.21    one week ago
It would be similar if I said, Democrats are the Party of Criminals, Party of the Pedophiles, the groomer party, the Socialist Party, no borders party, anti gun party, the high tax party, the baby killer party, the live off the government party, the racists party just to name a few.     

My list was NOT a series of exaggerations and gratuitous negative aspersions.  I  sought to provide an objective, sensible answer to the question asked by waykwabu @5.   Yours is clearly emotive, cynical hyperbole.   Do you see the difference?

 
 
 
gooseisback
Sophomore Silent
5.1.24  gooseisback  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.23    one week ago
My list was NOT a series of exaggerations

Neither was mine!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.25  TᵢG  replied to  gooseisback @5.1.24    one week ago

It is a real shame that you do not comprehend the exaggerations and gratuitous negative aspersions of your comment:

Democrats are the ...
  • Party of Criminals
  • Party of the Pedophiles
  • the groomer party
  • the Socialist Party
  • no borders party 
  • anti gun party
  • the baby killer party
  • the live off the government party
  • the racists party

The 'no borders', 'anti gun', and 'live off the government' items have kernels of truth, but still net exaggeration.   As for the rest, how can you NOT recognize your emotive hyperbole?


Are you going to weigh in on how Vic, per your reasoning, had no right to opine on the 'radical left' or have you realized your mistake?

 
 
 
gooseisback
Sophomore Silent
5.1.26  gooseisback  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.25    one week ago
  • Party of Criminals

DA's who institute no bail, refuse to prosecute, want to defund the police.

  • Party of the Pedophiles

California’s Democrat Governor Gavin Newsome recently signed into law SB 145, which exempts a person convicted of non-forcible sodomy with a minor, oral copulation with a minor, or sexual penetration with a minor, as specified, from having to automatically register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registry Act if the person was not more than 10 years older than the minor at the time of the offense, and the conviction is the only one requiring the person to register. Democrat Embrace Of Pedophilia No Longer A Myth (conservativehq.org)

  • the groomer party

You have unqualified teaches and school administrators wanting introduce sexuality to kids as young as 1st grade, WHY!!!!

  • the Socialist Party

AOC and Bernie, off the top of my head

  • the baby killer party

I can't help that you want to live in this fantasy land that its just a clump of cells, let's be real it's not a goldfish, it's not a tennis ball, its a baby. 

  • the racists party

Democrats are constantly putting minorities in positions because of their race.  Which says to everyone that's the only reason why they got the job.

   emotive hyperbole?

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.1.27  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.20    one week ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.28  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.7    one week ago

I'm glad we found common ground.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.29  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.1.3    one week ago

Very well done Jeremy.

Shall we call it a final score of:  Logic 2 Critical thinking 0 ?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.30  TᵢG  replied to  gooseisback @5.1.26    one week ago
emotive hyperbole?

Yes.   You extrapolate individual instances to the entire party.   It is like deeming the Republican party the insurrection party simply because the insurrectionists were all Rs.

You get this, right?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.31  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.28    one week ago

Yeah well explain that to your cohorts who cannot resist recasting what they read into outrageous meanings.   Why is it that the only conservative who thoughtfully responded to my original post was you?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.32  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.29    one week ago
Shall we call it a final score of:  Logic 2 Critical thinking 0 ?

He was replying to you regarding your assessment of the "radical left".   (I did not opine on that portion of your post.)   So are you representing logic or critical thinking; and then who represents the contra position?

Further, logic is fundamental to critical thinking.   I have never seen one put logic at odds with critical thinking.   Bizarre.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.1.33  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.2    one week ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
5.1.34  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @5.1.33    one week ago

WOW, that is a real hoot.

They aren't supposed to be wasting time here, they are supposed to be planning the next coup attempt.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.1.35  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.2    one week ago

[deleted]

Most of your points have nothing to do with reality.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.1.36  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.32    one week ago
He was replying to you regarding your assessment of the "radical left". 

Yes, he was.


 So are you representing logic or critical thinking; and then who represents the contra position?

As you say logic is fundamental to critical thinking. That bad joke of mine was intended to get you to respond as you just did. Critical thinking and logic begin with getting the facts straight, correct?  I just want to point out a problem that I see here all the time. You did it with some of your bullet points. I'll give you only one example. Your 8th bullet point as to the belief of MAGA Republicans was this:

  • No abortion

    That is not quite true. The democrats and their media allies have elevated he abortion issue as a voting issue via a false narrative. First of all, if you look at polling, most people in this country are in favor of abortion with restrictions. All the Court did was leave it up to the states to vote on. (I don't want to argue Roe again). Many democrats point to Sen Lindsey Graham's Bill to allow abortion up to 15 weeks of a pregnancy, as a prohibition on abortion. Though Graham denounced Trump, that Bill is supported by many MAGA Republicans as well as the general public. I believe I described it properly and as you can see, it is anything but "No abortion."
 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.37  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.36    one week ago
First of all, if you look at polling, most people in this country are in favor of abortion with restrictions.

We are not talking about most people, we are talking about MAGA Republicans.

All the Court did was leave it up to the states to vote on.

Did you miss the links I provided on the states @5.1.13 ?:

Yes I stated no abortion.   I think that is (sadly) predominantly correct.   We shall see how this evolves in our nation.   There are states already where abortion is banned: 

And these are just the states and states are 'diluted' MAGA.   Amazing how many state legislatures were chomping at the bit to stop abortions.

We do not have a poll on "MAGA Republicans" but I predict that we will find that it is predominantly 'no abortion' (as I summarized).  I doubt that your position (and I think it is simply your personal position) of abortion up to the first 15 weeks is representative of MAGA Republicans.   I expect MAGA Republicans are predominantly closer to the "life begins at conception" notion which I summarized as "no abortion".    Of course, that will all change if Trump weighs in because the MAGA Republicans would predominantly change to believe whatever Trump tells them to believe.   Based on his appointments and policies, Trump governed as an anti-abortion PotUS.

Your logic vs critical thinking 'joke' makes no sense.   Your argument is that you disagree with my assessment of MAGA Republicans being in the "life begins at conception" crowd (and holding non-nuanced views).   Critical thinking is reasoning based on logic and facts (vs. emotion).  Even if you disagree on a fact (or premise), that does not change the analysis method from critical thinking.   And I still am curious what you were thinking when you put logic and critical thinking at odds.

 
 
 
gooseisback
Sophomore Silent
5.1.38  gooseisback  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.30    one week ago
You extrapolate individual instances to the entire party.

What in the fuck do you think you did with your list??????????????

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.39  TᵢG  replied to  gooseisback @5.1.38    one week ago

My list is a profile of MAGA Republicans in general, not an extrapolation of an individual.   

See?

It is a fallacy to pick an individual and then apply those personal factors to a group in which the member belongs.

 
 
 
gooseisback
Sophomore Silent
5.1.40  gooseisback  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.39    one week ago
fallacy to pick an individual and then apply those personal factors to a group in which the member belongs.

I didn't, my comments are about the democrat party not an individual event. Please correct my assessment to show me the party  has come out against anything I have listed!

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.1.41  TᵢG  replied to  gooseisback @5.1.40    6 days ago
I didn't, my comments are about the democrat party not an individual event. 

You need to reread what you wrote.

Please correct my assessment to show me the party  has come out against anything I have listed!

You need me to show you that the D party is not in support of pedophilia (for example)?   

 
 
 
gooseisback
Sophomore Silent
5.1.42  gooseisback  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.41    6 days ago
You need me to show you that the D party is not in support of pedophilia

Correct, 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.2  devangelical  replied to  Waykwabu @5    one week ago

... a kinder, gentler, god fearing fascist.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
5.2.1  Ronin2  replied to  devangelical @5.2    one week ago

The only fascists in this country are Democrats.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.2.2  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @5.2.1    one week ago

Perpetual projection.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.2.3  cjcold  replied to  Ronin2 @5.2.1    one week ago

By your definition, liberals aren't fascists. Please do the research [Deleted]

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
5.2.4  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @5.2.3    one week ago
liberals aren't fascists.

Didn't Mussolini and FDR have a mutual admiration for each other prior to the start of the war?

Please do the research redneck.

Is your neck pasty white?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
5.3  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Waykwabu @5    one week ago

See Post 5.1.2

Better to get it straight from a MAGA Republican

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.3.1  TᵢG  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.3    one week ago
Better to get it straight from a MAGA Republican

Being a MAGA Republican does not mean that everything you state is correct.   

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.3.2  Tessylo  replied to  TᵢG @5.3.1    one week ago

It doesn't mean that anything he states is correct.

 
 
 
Ronin2
Professor Quiet
5.3.3  Ronin2  replied to  TᵢG @5.3.1    one week ago

Not being a MAGA Republican doesn't make you an expert on them by any means.

MAGA Republicans are as diverse as Democrats. 

Many consider me a MAGA Republican- even though I don't hold views on abortion, foreign policy, or economics (I am a true fiscal conservative- you don't spend money you don't have. Both sides are guilty of increasing the debt; but Brandon is making Trump look like a piker. The left love to bitch about Trump- so where is the blasting Brandon so richly deserves?), most social issues, or religion (atheist) that most Republicans, conservatives, or  MAGA have.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.3.4  Tessylo  replied to  Ronin2 @5.3.3    one week ago

Is projection all you have?

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.3.5  TᵢG  replied to  Ronin2 @5.3.3    one week ago
Not being a MAGA Republican doesn't make you an expert on them by any means.

Brilliant.  256

MAGA Republicans are as diverse as Democrats. 

Not bloody likely.   It is true, of course, that the individuals under the general category of 'MAGA Republicans' vary.   But that is true of any group.  What is not true, demonstrably, is that MAGA Republicans are as diverse as the members of the D party (which includes everything from the extreme left to moderate conservative).   Indeed, it would be tough to even argue that Republicans as a whole are as diverse as Democrats.   And I am not suggesting that diversity is necessarily a good thing in a political party.   Your declaration is not persuasive.

Many consider me a MAGA Republican

Are you a MAGA Republican?   

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.3.6  cjcold  replied to  Ronin2 @5.3.3    one week ago

Fuck you and all far-right wing fascists who call the president brandon

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
5.3.7  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @5.3.6    one week ago
Fuck you and all far-right wing fascists who call the president brandon

Do you really want to fuck Ronin?  Do you fantasize about those that call the President Brandon?

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.3.8  cjcold  replied to  Ronin2 @5.3.3    one week ago

The problem being is that it has always been the republicans that spent the money and not the democrats!

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
5.3.9  MrFrost  replied to  cjcold @5.3.6    one week ago
who call the president brandon

They're just made that trump lost. 

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.3.10  cjcold  replied to  Drinker of the Wry @5.3.7    one week ago

I fanticize about far right wingers and justice.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.3.11  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @5.3.8    one week ago
The problem being is that it has always been the republicans that spent the money and not the democrats!

Pretending that Democrats don't spend money is laughable nonsense.

Doubtful if a soul here will agree with your statement.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.3.12  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @5.3.8    one week ago
The problem being is that it has always been the republicans that spent the money and not the democrats!

Maybe the WH can walk back your claim for you; I have heard they are getting lots of practice lately.

 
 
 
Drinker of the Wry
Freshman Principal
5.3.13  Drinker of the Wry  replied to  cjcold @5.3.10    one week ago

What ever gets you off,

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
5.4  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Waykwabu @5    one week ago

It's a label given to anybody who opposes the moronic ideology of the left.

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.4.1  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.4    one week ago

That is dead wrong and absurdly simplistic.   There are plenty of Rs, Ds, and Is who oppose many ideas of the left who are not MAGA Republicans. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
5.4.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @5.4.1    one week ago
That is dead wrong and absurdly simplistic.

Yeah, because the evidence you provided put me in my place. /s

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.4.3  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.4.2    one week ago

You need 'evidence' to understand that there are Rs who are not MAGA Rs who oppose what might be considered "moronic ideology of the left"?    Do you think that all Rs are MAGA?   Really?

You need 'evidence' to understand that the Ds are not all 'far left'?    You do not already know this?   Do you understand that there are conservative Ds, moderate Ds, religious Ds, etc.?    Is this truly unknown to you?

And finally, you need 'evidence' that many (likely most) of the Is (independents) who clearly are not MAGA R's would not favor extreme leftist ideas?

Buy a vowel.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
5.4.4  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @5.4.3    one week ago
You need 'evidence' to understand that there are Rs who are not MAGA Rs

Careful.  You'll loose your batshit crazy liberal membership card talking like that.  Now, did you provide anything to prove me wrong?  No.  Just the normal lip service.  Not that I expected anything more from you.

 
 
 
Ender
Professor Principal
5.4.5  Ender  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.4.4    one week ago

Feelings ,,, whoa whoa whoa feelings.....

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
5.4.6  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Ender @5.4.5    one week ago

Fuck them.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.4.7  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.4.4    one week ago
Now, did you provide anything to prove me wrong? 

One must be blind to not recognize that you have been shown to be wrong.

Resorting to trollish, personal attacks does not shore up your claims.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
5.4.8  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @5.4.7    one week ago

I ask you a question.  It's a simple "yes" or "no".  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.4.9  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.4.8    one week ago

The answer is yes, Jeremy, you have been shown to be dead wrong.   

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
5.4.10  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  TᵢG @5.4.9    one week ago

That's odd.  Looking back through this thread, I don't see a goddamn thing proving me wrong.  What I do see is you giving the normal lip service and moronic claims.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.4.11  TᵢG  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.4.10    one week ago

Have you ever recognized being shown to be wrong?    

 
 
 
JBB
Professor Principal
5.4.12  JBB  replied to  TᵢG @5.4.11    one week ago

Dozens of times I have provided Jeremy with documented evidence Trump and Company had over one hundred clandestine meetings with agents of Vlad Putin's Russian State Intelligence Services in the lead up to the 2016 Presidential election. Never once has he ever acknowledged actually reading any of it. All I ever get is a, "Nuh-Uh" or "All lies"...

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.4.13  Kavika   replied to  Ender @5.4.5    one week ago

It's good when liberals, dems, and independents have feelings. To not have feelings is one of the signs of a mental illness. 

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
5.4.14  evilgenius  replied to  Kavika @5.4.13    one week ago
To not have feelings is one of the signs of a mental illness. 

Either Sociopath OR Psychopath depending on other traits. This is fascinating field of study. 

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
5.4.15  Kavika   replied to  evilgenius @5.4.14    one week ago
This is fascinating field of study. 

It sure is and you don't even have to leave NT to see examples of if.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.4.16  cjcold  replied to  TᵢG @5.4.3    one week ago
would not favor extreme leftist ideas?

Still trying to figure out exactly what "extreme leftist ideas" are.

Could it be equal rights?

Could it be science over superstition?

Could it be compassion over fascism?

Could it be knowledge over ignorance?

Could it be that I just don't give a fuck for those whose IQ points are sub 80 but still think that they should rule the world? (Fox viewers).

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
5.4.17  TᵢG  replied to  cjcold @5.4.16    one week ago

I did not respond to Vic's definition of "radical leftist" @5.1.2 because he is free to define that phrase anyway he wishes.   By the same token, every individual has the freedom to define 'leftist', 'radical left', 'rightie', 'radical right', etc. as they wish.

A person defining a vague terms is only valuable if they intend to make an argument regarding the term.  Otherwise it does not matter ... define away.

So to some, an extreme leftist idea would be something like Medicare.   To others, it would be something like free college education for all.    To others it would be a national command economy (like the former USSR).   It does not matter.

Everyone is free to choose their own vantage point and the choice of point will make somethings far left or far right.   Who cares? 

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
5.4.18  cjcold  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.4.2    one week ago

I'll eventually figure out where you are.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.4.19  Texan1211  replied to  cjcold @5.4.18    one week ago
I'll eventually figure out where you are.

That's pretty optimistic based on history.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
5.4.20  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  cjcold @5.4.18    one week ago

Not quite sure I follow.

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
5.4.21  Texan1211  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.4.20    6 days ago
Not quite sure I follow.

Sounded something like a threat to me, but rest assured, no action will be taken from mommy's basement.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
PhD Guide
5.4.22  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Texan1211 @5.4.21    6 days ago

I was thinking the same thing.  I was wondering if he were dumb enough to make the same mistake again.  

It's not like I've hidden where I live.  

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.4.23  Sparty On  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @5.4.22    6 days ago

He better pack a lunch ...

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
6  Buzz of the Orient    one week ago

SOCIALISM???  God forbid!!!  Bring these guys back before America is destroyed by Socialism.

?url=https:%2F%2Fmedia.npr.org%2Fassets%2Fimg%2F2018%2F08%2F21%2Fgettyimages-514675558-a4df8f4a8df9eb2baf63f78fe4b97c3696cb6ae6.jpg

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
Professor Principal
6.1  seeder  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @6    one week ago

The one on the right has already been replaced by the much more dangerous versions of Andrew Weissmann and Marc Elias.

They put Cohn to shame.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1    one week ago

Cohn?  The mobster lawyer including being a real good friend of one of the biggest thugs of our time - #45

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
6.1.2  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1    one week ago

[Deleted]

 
 

Who is online



shona1
pat wilson


35 visitors