Why Attacks on Trump Don't Work

[anon50325502]

@pushharder

…but those high in analytical ability decide to accept the inevitable and deal with it…

I’m sure glad this wasn’t the prevailing attitude 240 years ago…

[Sloth]

@pushharder

@Sloth

By the way, Zeb’s entire defense of Trump is that he’s conning his supporters with all the stuff I’ve mentioned. So he musn’t think too highly of their analytical abilities either.

But does that make him low in analytical ability or just that he is accepting the inevitable and dealing with it?

Accepting the inevitable is simply accepting the inevitable. It says nothing of actually SUPPORTING Trump in the election.

Now, if one whines about how Hillary treated the women in Bill’s controversies while continuously failing to admit that Trump did the exact same thing. Even, in fact, calling Bill the victim (because the girls weren’t good-looking enough for Trump)…

[Sloth]

@pushharder

@Sloth

Then the country failed. Failed to keep a nut-job away from the role of Commander in Chief.

If the country fails to keep a nut-job away from the role of Commander in Chief but those high in analytical ability decide to accept the inevitable and deal with it does their analytical ability slide from high to low somehow?

Conspiracy whack job who wants to not only water-board, but expand our methods of torture. Conspiracy whack job who insists our soldiers WILL carry out his criminal orders to target non-combatants. Nobody supporting Trump is using whatever analytical powers they may have.

[Sloth]

@zeb1

@Sloth

The Democrat, even if it is Hillary.

I see, well we do have a bet that Hillary will never become President. But, I do think if she is indicted before she gets the nomination Trump can be stopped by a different democrat…but certainly not Bernie.

Bernie would mop the floor with him.

[Sloth]

Trump was the Republican nominee to pick if you wanted a disliked Democrat, or a self proclaimed Socialist, to become President.

[MaximusB]

The Socialist vote is a loser, mostly coming from millennials and aging hippies, who do not make up a large enough segment of the voting population. The moment Trump brings up taxing the middle class to pay for his unicorn policies, the Leftist erection goes limp faster than Rosanne Barr walking into the room.

[Sloth]

@pushharder

There’s some low ability analyzing goin’ on 'round here.

Me:
“Conspiracy whack job who wants to not only water-board, but expand our methods of torture. Conspiracy whack job who insists our soldiers WILL carry out his criminal orders to target non-combatants. Nobody supporting Trump is using whatever analytical powers they may have.”

What was inaccurate? Conspiracy theorist? You’ve already admitted he was pretty damn kooky. Expansion of torture and targeting of non-combatants? On the record, and even defended under questioning during a televised debate. Facts.

[Aragorn]

@pushharder

There has been a steady drumbeat on this board about the “utter stupidity of Trump supporters” from a few. In fact, according to some posters whose screen names begin with S and T, all Trump supporters are dumber than a sack of rocks. But this cannot be the case. [/quote]

I never said that all Trump supporters were dumber than a sack of rocks. Why are you holding ME to someone else’s position? That’s improper and you know it. You tell others that all the time.

[quote] It simply, regardless of the vitriol, regardless of the flamboyant Trump stunts, cannot be the case because some really savvy folks from sea to shining sea have indeed become Trump supporters. Many of them may even have done it reluctantly but by golly they have done it.

So when you come along and fail to add what I believe to be an entirely appropriate, contextual caveat it appears you are piling on top of the Trump supporters and assisting the S’s and the T’s who are already pummeling the living hell out of all Trump supporters

I was answering a posited question by another poster. I fail to see why what someone else said should be my responsibility. It shouldn’t, and you know that man.

[Sloth]

@MaximusB

The Socialist vote is a loser, mostly coming from millennials and aging hippies, who do not make up a large enough segment of the voting population. The moment Trump brings up taxing the middle class to pay for his unicorn policies, the Leftist erection goes limp faster than Rosanne Barr walking into the room.

False. Even Trump understands how tempting the nanny state is. Hence, he’s rebranding the GoP as the entitlement protecting party who can even admire universal health-care.

[Aragorn]

@pushharder

When it comes to their Con-man nominee, they are. They’re either oblivious to his record, or subconsciously block it. Trump supporters are suckers.

Maybe they consciously block it?

Probably true for a lot of them. Still suckers though. Of course, being a sucker doesn’t entail you have to be dumb. But you still got suckered. Frankly I’d say that makes them worse suckers if the consciously block it instead of dealing with it head-on.

[anon50325502]

@MaximusB

The Socialist vote is a loser, mostly coming from millennials

Millennials overtake Baby Boomers as America’s largest generation

Oh and @pushharder you may want to re-consider your analysis:

Sick Of Political Parties, Unaffiliated Voters Are Changing Politics

[Aragorn]

@pushharder

OK.

What I saw, and maybe somehow I was in error, was more piling on.

I quoted Mufasa’s post in my reply. It was obvious that I was replying to his question on the thread. How could you think it was an unrelated rant?

EDIT–Well, I had quoted it. Apparently it didn’t show up in my post. I still had the “Reply to” icon pointing directly at Mufasa’s profile picture.

[anon50325502]

@pushharder

@anon50325502

Oh and @pushharder you may want to re-consider your analysis:

My analysis here has been that all Trump supporters can’t possibly be very low in analytical ability. Your cited article has nothing to do with that.

You said to me:

@pushharder

Maybe others low in analytical ability honestly think pulling together and voting for a third party is a recipe for success in Nov?

So I pointed out that more voters consider themselves independent rather than affiliated with a specific party. Point being, it is entirely possible for a 3rd party candidate to win the election under the right circumstances. Those circumstance mainly being; 1) not voting for am abhorrent individual that is also a criminal and 2) not voting for a self centered swindler who is more than likely also a criminal.

[Drew1411]

@anon50325502

Or they could just pull together and vote for a 3rd party…

I’m all in… but for who? Everybody who has looked at this prospect has turned it down I’m assuming on the basis that it is not a winning proposition.

Write-in or libertarian is a protest vote, I don’t see either changing the election at this point… but with an indictment things could become less of a lock for the Democratic candidate.

[zeb1]

@Sloth

Bernie would mop the floor with him.

Oh good glad you said that. Let’s bet on that as well–K?

[Sloth]

@zeb1

@Sloth

Bernie would mop the floor with him.

Oh good glad you said that. Let’s bet on that as well–K?

I will never post here again if Bernie loses in a head-to-head with the conspiracy nut.