I almost added “and would have been true in 2016 as well” to my post but decided against it.
But I certainly agree!
From what I’ve heard, all the problems started in 1619.
Sure it was extreme.
The primaries are what failed us. November election was a choice between not great candidates.
I think complaining about Bidens lies in light of the last 4 years is just… not sure what to say. I guess make extreme points.
The actual debate over spending - a completely legit discussion. Sleepy Joe doesn’t add to that.
So the new standard now is that a president can go and do anything they want, and their excuse is “But go look at what Trump did”? Pathetic.
I think your overestimating small business owners. I know a junkyard owner, butcher/deli owner, car restoration shop owner, furniture store owner, and hardware store owner. All of them are engaged in some sort of tax fraud that relies on the cash part of their business where they can keep it off the record. Things like paying people in cash, not booking cash sales, buying non-cash things with cash that store value for retirement, etc.
2 Likes
A tree fell down in the woods, which the Native Americans here probably put to use for various things but no one that was a white European was around to hear it.
I think all politicians stretch the truth to favor their position. Yes we should call that out and examine the real facts, and hold politicians accountable.
Does Bidens plan pay for itself? I might be skeptical as well, but when someone comes in with names like lying Biden in light of 4 years of trumps disregard for facts that they ignored, are they showing up for a good faith discussion? Probably not.
2 Likes
I don’t think anyone will say that there’s a problem with expressing this sentiment. But to then extend it to an unfounded statement about why another thinks things have “gone wrong” (which is what you did do) is where civil discourse begins to break down and everybody loses in the discussion.
I don’t think I’ve seen Ranger say that “Biden lyin’ was the bane of US politics” . . . If you think this is the case, the better approach would be to ask him if that is what he’s saying and let him confirm or clarify.
I think that there is a fundamental problem with it. It implies we’ve lowered the bar so far that any non-fact-based statement can be justified by saying “But look at what that guy did”. I think that’s opening a can of worms no one should want to open, and could used to justify things that deserve no justification.
I’ve gotten lost in the cross posting. When I follow the thread back one or two posts, I think the relevant post was
Trump might have gotten fewer votes than Sleepy Joe, Crazy Uncle Joe, Lying Biden, Xiden, (pick your favorite nickname, there are plenty), but the USA was the real loser in the 2020 POTUS election.
That post clearly says we’d be better off with four more years of Trump. So, yes, for the purpose of replying to that particular post, “But go look at what Trump did” is right on point.
And, also, if Ranger thinks “Lying Biden” is legit in the context of which 2020 candidate is better for the country, then Trump’s endless lies are certainly relevant.
If Ranger had said “I think Biden’s economic plan has too much spending”, then replying that Trump would be doing worse isn’t very informative.
1 Like
I think it just implies that there was no good option in 2020. (I, personally, think 2016 was much worse in terms of options presented) Who cares about the nicknames?
Probably one of the things that bugs me the most about this board is that people will simply not let Trump go. I don’t interpret the quoted statement as any sign of Trump support. The sooner we all accept that he’s gone and it’s time to move on from him, the better we’ll be. I think the Congressmen that still cling to him will be viewed as more and more extremist as time passes. It’s a losing strategy for Republicans to cling to him.
Ranger is using some of the same nicknames that Trump used. I don’t think people typically mimic behaviors of those they disagreed with, hence the assumption that Ranger preferred Trump over Biden which leads to the next thoughts that Indy stated nicely.
1 Like
Using “same nicknames” isn’t exactly “mimicing behaviors”.
And it’s not clear that Ranger got the nickname from Trump. There are lots of media outlets that use these same nicknames. And for all we know, Trump could’ve gotten some of those “nicknames” from the media outlets.
I read it differently. He started with “Trump may have gotten fewer votes, but …” I read that as a claim that Trump was the better candidate and we’d be better off if he had been elected.
Maybe Ranger will tell us what he meant and we won’t have to speculate.
2 Likes
As far as I can tell, just like almost every single other person on this board, Ranger didn’t like Trump. I haven’t even seen evidence he’s too far right of center; if anything, I think he might be like me and is frustrated with this board being overrun by leftists with very few even in the middle.
Aren’t a lot of people basing their assessment of lyin biden on more like 50 years of him being a lyin politician?
Depends on what you mean by lying. An evolved point of view does not equate to lying. Most of us would disagree with our past selves.
1 Like
He was disqualified as a candidate for POTUS once upon a time for a plagiarism scandal. Not sure how that gets justified as evolving a point of view.
What tone is being set when you introduce and article with using one? That’s really where all this started.
“Here is an article about racist Trump” isn’t the best start to having an open conversation.
Yeah, I assume that this is the origin of the nickname. I also think that predates Trump entering politics. Certainly the public’s awareness of the scandal does anyway… less sure about the nickname as I don’t pay a lot of attention to that sort of thing.