It’s unfortunate that Trump felt that he needed to utter that sentiment about a rally that was literally organized and attended by a white supremacist/neonazi group.
How did he expect the phrase ‘both sides’ to be interpreted?
drumdude wrote:I've noticed a shift in Republicans lately, they're complaining that the left is lying. This coming from a party who has elected by far the least honest President of the United States that has ever sat in the oval office
Anyone the least bit honest knows and accepts that Trump does little else than lie. It's not something the left is making up. It's obvious. And, there is no shortage of people on his own side who have been willing to point it out, including his own running mate, JD Vance. And including Ted Cruz. The list just goes on. People who claim to be Christian in the normal sense, not the over-the-top Christian Nationalist Dominionist sense, lose all credibility as Christians when they, with a straight face, support Donald Trump as an honest and trustworthy man. I can understand people who are so scared of the left that they feel they need to vote Trump simply because they believe he's the only one who can get the votes to win, but for those who support him on his merits as a fine man fit for the office of president, they have zero credibility as Christians.
Social distancing has likely already begun to flatten the curve...Continue to research good antivirals and vaccine candidates. Make everyone wear masks. -- J.D. Vance
. People who claim to be Christian in the normal sense, not the over-the-top Christian Nationalist Dominionist sense, lose all credibility as Christians when they, with a straight face, support Donald Trump as an honest and trustworthy man.
Christians, as a rather large group of individual people, come in many flavors. While I am fairly sure that there are some that "support Trump as an honest and trustworthy man", I have never met one. Christians cast their vote (like any other group) for a variety of reasons. Many, will be casting their vote for Harris for a variety of reasons.
In addition to what I have said above, most Christians that I know aren't very concerned by how other people weigh their credibility regarding politics. As a matter of fact, most Christians I know cast their vote based largely on policy and not the personality of a candidate.
- I was thinking about constant politically motivated rhetoric (by design and it's working) concerning things like "threat to democracy", "Hitler", 'Nazi", "blood bath", "dictator", "white supremacist", "KGB agent", etc, etc, etc, that is being spewed daily.
When you do your ‘both sides’ thing, why is it that you point to the left with your examples? For example you could’ve said the Right is also guilty of using these terms:
Woke Mob
Snowflakes
Cultural Marxists
Radical Left
Groomers
Commies
Leftist Elites
Social Justice Warriors
Libs
Antifa
Crybullies
Fake News Media
Coastal Elites
Bleeding Hearts
Libtards
Big Government Socialists
Globalists
Deep State
Clown World
Green New Deal Extremists
Eco-Fascists
Safe Space Seekers
Virtue Signalers
Cancel Culture
Triggered Leftists
PC Police
Academic Radicals
Thought Police
Baby Killers
Media Manipulators
America Haters
Lawless Left
Anti-Patriots
Race-Baiters
Identity Politics Pushers
Open Borders Crowd
Gun Grabbers
Godless Left
Soy Boys
Transgender Ideologues
Mainstream Media (mainstream media) Puppets
Radical Feminists
Tax-and-Spend Liberals
Big Tech Censors
Defund the Police
BLM Marxists
Free Speech Suppressors
Progressive Puritans
Totalitarian Left
America Last Politicians
This is why your criticisms of the Left are hollow. A little introspection would be good.
- I was thinking about constant politically motivated rhetoric (by design and it's working) concerning things like "threat to democracy", "Hitler", 'Nazi", "blood bath", "dictator", "white supremacist", "KGB agent", etc, etc, etc, that is being spewed daily.
When you do your ‘both sides’ thing, why is it that you point to the left with your examples?
I was replying to a post, specifically and directly, about something that someone posted to me, suggesting the liberal side was school lunches. I was telling this person what I had in mind about the left was not school lunches (I wasn't talking about the right - because that wasn't what was being discussed)
Try to keep up.
The "both sides" thing is about a completely separate discussion (the repeated and repeated and repeated falsehood surrounding what Trump supposedly said).
Again - Try to keep.
This is why your criticisms of the Left are hollow. A little introspection would be good.
When you do your ‘both sides’ thing, why is it that you point to the left with your examples?
I was replying to a post, specifically and directly, about something that someone posted to me, suggesting the liberal side was school lunches. I was telling this person what I had in mind about the left was not school lunches (I wasn't talking about the right - because that wasn't what was being discussed)
Try to keep up.
The "both sides" thing is about a completely separate discussion (the repeated and repeated and repeated falsehood surrounding what Trump supposedly said).
Again - Try to keep.
This is why your criticisms of the Left are hollow. A little introspection would be good.
Lol
Right, but you used specific examples like "threat to democracy", "Hitler", 'Nazi", "blood bath", "dictator", "white supremacist", and "KGB agent" that are used by the Left toward the Right. While you have complained not infrequently of late about “constant politically motivated rhetoric,” your observations of said rhetoric is almost wholly reserved for the Left.
Again. A little introspection would serve you well.
I was replying to a post, specifically and directly, about something that someone posted to me, suggesting the liberal side was school lunches. I was telling this person what I had in mind about the left was not school lunches (I wasn't talking about the right - because that wasn't what was being discussed)
Try to keep up.
The "both sides" thing is about a completely separate discussion (the repeated and repeated and repeated falsehood surrounding what Trump supposedly said).
Again - Try to keep.
Lol
Right, but you used specific examples like "threat to democracy", "Hitler", 'Nazi", "blood bath", "dictator", "white supremacist", and "KGB agent" that are used by the Left toward the Right.
I'm not sure what the confusion is? I will try, one more time, to add clarity (clarity is needed?)
I was replying to the below quote by someone that posted directly to me.
"Yes, as Trump eloquently pointed out "there are good people on both sides." The white nationalists shouting "Jews will not replace us" are identical to the liberals pushing for universal school lunch."
Do you see the suggested identical comparison between the two? The suggested comparison between Trump (white supremacist Nazi) compared to the liberals (school lunches for kids)
Do you see it?
I responded by saying that school lunches was not what I had in mind - I then expressed what I had in mind.
While you have complained not infrequently of late about “constant politically motivated rhetoric,” your observations of said rhetoric is almost wholly reserved for the Left.
Are you moving the goal posts? My recent board observations (no matter what they are) have nothing to do with a specific discussion I was having in this thread - and that you responded to.
Again. A little introspection would serve you well.
Yes, I understand what you said. When drumdude facetiously said, “… white nationalists shouting "Jews will not replace us" are identical to the liberals pushing for universal school lunch.” He said it to you facetiously stating, “We all should feel fortunate that this idea of whipping people into fear frenzies is only found on one side of the political divide.”
You apparently missed his facetiousness because you responded with, “I wasn't thinking about universal school lunch - I was thinking about constant politically motivated rhetoric (by design and it's working) concerning things like "threat to democracy", "Hitler", 'Nazi", "blood bath", "dictator", "white supremacist", "KGB agent", etc, etc, etc, that is being spewed daily.”
That’s when I stepped in and said, “ When you do your ‘both sides’ thing, why is it that you point to the left with your examples? For example you could’ve said the Right is also guilty of using these terms:
Woke Mob
Snowflakes
Cultural Marxists
Radical Left
Groomers
Commies
Leftist Elites
Social Justice Warriors
Libs
Antifa
Crybullies
Fake News Media
Coastal Elites
Bleeding Hearts
Libtards
Big Government Socialists
Globalists
Deep State
Clown World
Green New Deal Extremists
Eco-Fascists
Safe Space Seekers
Virtue Signalers
Cancel Culture
Triggered Leftists
PC Police
Academic Radicals
Thought Police
Baby Killers
Media Manipulators
America Haters
Lawless Left
Anti-Patriots
Race-Baiters
Identity Politics Pushers
Open Borders Crowd
Gun Grabbers
Godless Left
Soy Boys
Transgender Ideologues
Mainstream Media (mainstream media) Puppets
Radical Feminists
Tax-and-Spend Liberals
Big Tech Censors
Defund the Police
BLM Marxists
Free Speech Suppressors
Progressive Puritans
Totalitarian Left
America Last Politicians
This is why your criticisms of the Left are hollow. A little introspection would be good.”
That was because you seem to be wholly focused on Leftist rhetoric when trotting out the whole ‘both sides are ramping up rhetoric’. Virtually all your complaints about political rhetoric is aimed at Leftists.
Again, a little introspection would serve you well.
I would go a bit further and suggest that a little introspection would serve all of us well.
I agree. We don’t do each other any favors when we put each other into boxes. I think you’ve got more nuance in your positions than one (including me) would initially think, and you appreciate the nuance that others express. I respect that a lot.
