What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

***Official***President Donald Trump (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.
adonis said:
Ok, apparently I missed your point.  You were pointing out that calling that person a "trump voter" was an example of generalization.  

Without much context, and without much benefit of the doubt, it initially looked like you were just reversing the generalization to prove a point.
Click to expand...
I would argue that being a Trump voter is not the same as being a Trump supporter. One could vote against Hillary by voting for Trump without supporting Trumps policy positions.

 
butcher boy said:
I've been thinking about the very bad, in fact perhaps seditious behavior of the liberal elite since the election. This follows the very bad behavior of globalist elitist 'pubs through the nomination, even a coup attempt after to take the nomination from Trump.

Both groups are really the same group. I'm not sure how many of their useful idiots get it. We the People are the enemy, always have been. It offends them that we have any power that they can't take away. It's gotten way beyond tolerable.

The good that has come of it is that we can stop talking about the "little folk" who are too uninformed or too dumb to understand what was going on. Both for the nomination and the election, the US population showed that we get it just fine. Trump spoke to people, and people responded. The elite, whether in enternment/media or government/business, continued to talk to each other and only leave their pedestals to tell their for all purposes slaves how to vote.

Those are my thoughts for today. I wonder if there's any era more interesting in history than what we've seen these past two years. And it's still playing out. 
Click to expand...
While all the labels might not be exactly correct, in many ways there's a lot of truth to how Trump supporters felt that is well articulated here.

The truth is a lot of Trump supporters felt ostracized by the "liberals" calling all Trump supporters out on stupidity, bigotry and ignorance. But all the while many of those folks were just saying F U to Barack and Hillary, which I get. I never did get the "therefore, Trump" part of the equation, but this is where we stand.

I also called her out for not having a message based campaign that would reach disenfranchised voters in MI, WI and PA among other places that she was ignoring that would traditionally be Democrat. Union rank and file, for example, she took for granted. I have these posts before the election, I don't have time to re-post them all up and I was called out for Monday morning quarterbacking her strategy. Not true, I called it out during the campaign.

What loathes me is to see the insinuation that we're not all in this together, regardless of the campaign support. It shouldn't be too hard to recall that many, many Hillary voters didn't particularly like her that much. And the Trump voters, same thing. Perhaps we shouldn't get caught up in how much is different, because frankly we all have way more in common than we are used to admitting, myself included.

 
I found this interesting. I know he has walked back a few campaign promises as election season rhetoric, and it's been largely shrugged off by his supporters, but this one must cause a little twinge, no? He did run as an outsider, and this seemed to be one of his main selling points. I can't imagine people that voted for him to blow it all up are too happy with this admission before he even takes office.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/gingrich-says-trump-is-done-with-drain-the-swamp-slogan-173426892.html

 
I've already successfully worked "bigly" into my everyday vernacular.  Next I think I need to start sprinkling in a lot more "greats" than I currently do.

 
rockaction said:
Okay. Thanks for the clarification. That's a grey area, in my opinion. Sounds like a bribe, though I didn't use that exact language. 
Click to expand...
If that's a bribe, then Donald Trump offered to pay people to punch protesters at his rallies when he said he'd cover the legal fees.  I don't think either of those things is true.

 
Henry Ford said:
If that's a bribe, then Donald Trump offered to pay people to punch protesters at his rallies when he said he'd cover the legal fees.  I don't think either of those things is true.
Click to expand...
Well the electors are officials so that sounds more like a bribe than paying a citizen's fine to do something, right? 

I mean, I don't want to get too into the semantics of it with you, because the point of what I did before was something different, but what would you call what Michael Moore offered? 

 
rockaction said:
Well the electors are officials so that sounds more like a bribe than paying a citizen's fine to do something, right? 

I mean, I don't want to get too into the semantics of it with you, because the point of what I did before was something different, but what would you call what Michael Moore offered? 
Click to expand...
The electors would gain nothing personally from having their legal fees covered. Offering to pay fees is just a way of saying that if you believe Trump shouldn't be president, don't let the fear of paying for your legal defense be what stops you. That's a lot different than, "here's a million dollars to vote for Hillary." 

 
Arsenal of Doom said:
The electors would gain nothing personally from having their legal fees covered. Offering to pay fees is just a way of saying that if you believe Trump shouldn't be president, don't let the fear of paying for your legal defense be what stops you. That's a lot different than, "here's a million dollars to vote for Hillary." 
Click to expand...
They're government officials being offered a monetary inducement to do something. That could be considered a bribe. 

I will grant you it's wildly different than buying electors.  The bolded is true.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Arsenal of Doom said:
The electors would gain nothing personally from having their legal fees covered. Offering to pay fees is just a way of saying that if you believe Trump shouldn't be president, don't let the fear of paying for your legal defense be what stops you. That's a lot different than, "here's a million dollars to vote for Hillary." 
Click to expand...
Well if the costs would affect how they would vote then it's still vote buying.

People should think how Trump would use this in 2020 should he lose a slim EC vote on Election Day. 

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Well if the costs would affect how they would vote then it's still vote buying.

People should think how Trump would use this in 2020 should he lose a slim EC vote on Election Day. 
Click to expand...
The threat of legal action would be affecting the vote as much as the offer to offset those costs in this case. It's all moot anyway so I'll let the lawyer guys pick it up if they want. I work in the commercial ethics world and I can't think of a good comp right now. 

 
I'm most curious about all the conservative folks out there who lined up to oppose trump before his election...what will they do going forward?

 
Carl Ichan to be named a special advisor on regulatory overhaul.

Not an official job, won't be paid.

Would be viewed as a big conflict of interest problem if the President-Elect himself wasn't already so conflicted.

This is not normal.

 
rockaction said:
Well the electors are officials so that sounds more like a bribe than paying a citizen's fine to do something, right? 

I mean, I don't want to get too into the semantics of it with you, because the point of what I did before was something different, but what would you call what Michael Moore offered? 
Click to expand...
An offer to pay someone's fine.  Which is what it was. Frankly, the fines themselves are likely uncollectable under the Supremacy clause - the states probably have no right to regulate Constitutional activity like the EC. So he's saying "hey, if you do get fined, I'll pay it."  

If I tell someone "drive me to the hospital fast! If you get a ticket, I'll pay it!" It isn't a bribe or even paying the person extra.  It's a willingness to take the financial responsibility for an action they're taking.

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
Carl Ichan to be named a special advisor on regulatory overhaul.

Not an official job, won't be paid.

Would be viewed as a big conflict of interest problem if the President-Elect himself wasn't already so conflicted.

This is not normal.
Click to expand...
President Farmer has just appointed Mr. Fox to rule over the Henhouse.  We should all reserve our thoughts on how this is going to end up and give President Farmer a chance to run the farm his way.

 
President Elect Trump is a genius.  He ran on a platform about corruption and how government was out of touch with the people, and how money was too influential in Washington.  He was going to change that.

Little did we know that his plan was to bypass the need for lobbying and corruption at all - he's just gonna give the political appointments to the rich and let them set the rules that way.  

There you go American people - Trump has solved the political corruption problem by just cutting out the middle-man: the politician.

 
adonis said:
This still lives on?  Man, people sure buy in hard to a lot of bull#### they hear.

A liberal mindset is one where you don't do much of anything in America totally on your own.  You owe your successes, at least in part, to the work and sacrifices and contributions of others.  It's really not a controversial view, if one looks beyond the ridiculous soundbites and tries to understand what folks are saying.

Society makes a ton of success possible for folks, and in return society should receive a portion of the rewards - is more the liberal mindset.  Like a silent partner who fronts you the money to start your own business when you don't have it yourself, society fronts you roads, infrastructure, court system, police, a military, IP protection, educated workforce,  education system, housing, utilities, and generations of folks working to make products and systems better.  So when someone starts their own business, they're using all of these resources society puts at their disposal.  In return, society asks to also benefit from the successes of the company, so as to continue to "pay it forward" to others so they can also build and succeed.

The mindset is nowhere near as controversial as your talking points up there.  It's a pretty reasonable view of how people can achieve success.  

If a person can't achieve the same level of success in a tribal region in Africa as they can in America, you have to admit that in part the success is due to the society in which they live and the benefits derived from living in it.  

So in large part, "you didn't build that" by yourself...you benefitted from all this other stuff in order to succeed.  What's wrong with this mindset?
Click to expand...
Everything. 

This reasonable argument is you have a debt to society from the day you are born that must be repaid which makes you nothing more than a slave to the kings, presidents, senators, representatives, governors, mayor's, city councils, chiefs, warlords of the day that control your society whether it be in America or the tribal regions of Africa. 

 
Dr Oadi said:
adonis said:
This still lives on?  Man, people sure buy in hard to a lot of bull#### they hear.

A liberal mindset is one where you don't do much of anything in America totally on your own.  You owe your successes, at least in part, to the work and sacrifices and contributions of others.  It's really not a controversial view, if one looks beyond the ridiculous soundbites and tries to understand what folks are saying.

Society makes a ton of success possible for folks, and in return society should receive a portion of the rewards - is more the liberal mindset.  Like a silent partner who fronts you the money to start your own business when you don't have it yourself, society fronts you roads, infrastructure, court system, police, a military, IP protection, educated workforce,  education system, housing, utilities, and generations of folks working to make products and systems better.  So when someone starts their own business, they're using all of these resources society puts at their disposal.  In return, society asks to also benefit from the successes of the company, so as to continue to "pay it forward" to others so they can also build and succeed.

The mindset is nowhere near as controversial as your talking points up there.  It's a pretty reasonable view of how people can achieve success.  

If a person can't achieve the same level of success in a tribal region in Africa as they can in America, you have to admit that in part the success is due to the society in which they live and the benefits derived from living in it.  

So in large part, "you didn't build that" by yourself...you benefitted from all this other stuff in order to succeed.  What's wrong with this mindset?
Click to expand...
Everything. 

This reasonable argument is you have a debt to society from the day you are born that must be repaid which makes you nothing more than a slave to the kings, presidents, senators, representatives, governors, mayor's, city councils, chiefs, warlords of the day that control your society whether it be in America or the tribal regions of Africa. 
Click to expand...
We don't live in a country that taxes us at 100%, so no, not "everything".

This country values personal initiative and risk taking.  But if you completely fail, and are destitute, the good thing in this society is that at least your basic needs will STILL be taken care of, and there can be more opportunities to pick yourself up, dust yourself off and try again.  You have an indescribable number of resources out there that you can pull from for education, for help along the way, for financing...all provided to you by a society that encourages you to take risks, to make lots of money, but in return, give back to society a portion of it so that it can pay it forward to others.

In my opinion, it's part of the social contract that a lot of folks who say they pull themselves up by their bootstraps fail to acknowledge.

 
Dr Oadi said:
Everything. 

This reasonable argument is you have a debt to society from the day you are born that must be repaid which makes you nothing more than a slave to the kings, presidents, senators, representatives, governors, mayor's, city councils, chiefs, warlords of the day that control your society whether it be in America or the tribal regions of Africa. 
Click to expand...
Just so I know that we're on the same page, is your assumption that we have no obligations to a society as a whole? Because any obligation formed by the social contract is going to fit into this hyperbolic argument.

 
http://wreg.com/2016/12/21/mississippi-authorities-make-arrest-in-burning-of-african-american-church-spray-painted-with-vote-trump/


Arrest made in ‘Vote Trump’ burning of Mississippi black church


POSTED 2:46 PM, DECEMBER 21, 2016, BY AP

  •  




 
GREENVILLE, Miss. — Mississippi authorities have made an arrest in the burning of an African-American church spray-painted with the words, “Vote Trump.”

Mississippi Department of Public Safety spokesman Warren Strain says Andrew McClinton of Leland, Mississippi, who is African-American, is charged with first-degree arson of a place of worship.

McClinton was arrested Wednesday. Hopewell Missionary Baptist Church in Greenville, Mississippi, was burned and vandalized Nov. 1, a week before the presidential election.

It was not immediately clear whether McClinton is represented by an attorney.

Greenville is a Mississippi River port city of about 32,100 people, and about 78 percent of its residents are African-American.

After the fire, Hopewell congregants began worshipping in a chapel at predominantly white First Baptist Church of Greenville.

Fire Chief Ruben Brown told The Associated Press the sanctuary of Hopewell M.B Church sustained heavy damage in the fire, while the kitchen and pastor’s office received water and smoke damage.

The words “Vote Trump” were also spray-painted on an outside wall of the church.



 
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford said:
If I may interject myself somewhere I'm not wanted...

I voted for Hillary Clinton.  I am most definitely not a Clinton supporter.  I just found the idea of Trump as president so monumentally distasteful that I was willing to vote for someone there's no way I would ever vote for otherwise.  I know some people who feel similarly about Trump.  I don't agree with them.  I think their priorities are messed up.  I think they made a very bad decision.  But I wouldn't call them Trump supporters.  

Don't get me wrong, they will still be responsible when Ragnarok begins, but they weren't supporters per se.
Click to expand...
I like your reference there, Loki.

 
JIslander said:
My opinion, which won't be popular, is, right now its more fun bashing liberals and telling them I told you so about the disenfranchised blah blah blah...
Click to expand...
Given what happened pre-election, isn't turnabout fair play though?

 
Dickies said:
Help me understand this.  What makes liberals elite or elitists?  I hear this all the time from conservatives, but it doesn't make sense to me.  Am I elite because I'm liberal?  Is it a college education that makes someone an elitist?  The bulk of liberals are just normal middle-class people that I would hardly consider to be society's elites.
Click to expand...
Dickies you seem like a decent guy. I just can't see anyone with an orangutan as an avatar an elitist. So no, you're not one.

 
adonis said:
I'm most curious about all the conservative folks out there who lined up to oppose trump before his election...what will they do going forward?
Click to expand...
Whatever they can to stay in power

 
sho nuff said:
adonis said:
I'm most curious about all the conservative folks out there who lined up to oppose trump before his election...what will they do going forward?
Click to expand...
Whatever they can to stay in power
Click to expand...
Heck, Romney wouldn't apologize to Trump in order to have a shot at SOS.  I appreciate that at least.  Haven't seen much from McCain.  Glen Beck? Those national review conservatives against Trump?  

 
adonis said:
Heck, Romney wouldn't apologize to Trump in order to have a shot at SOS.  I appreciate that at least.  Haven't seen much from McCain.  Glen Beck? Those national review conservatives against Trump?  
Click to expand...
McCain was on the group that says we should investigate Russian hacking

just think few won't actually kiss the ring a bit to keep what they have

 
Last edited by a moderator:
adonis said:
I'm most curious about all the conservative folks out there who lined up to oppose trump before his election...what will they do going forward?
Click to expand...
Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

 
sho nuff said:
Turnabout implies it was all one sided 
Click to expand...
Seems to me that a lot of libs were gloating over driving Trump supporters out of their own thread. From the POV of someone who couldn't vote for either flawed candidate, I see it as mostly one-sided, yes. So turnabout applies.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Kiddnets
How did you become a fan of your favorite team(s)?
2 3
Replies
108
Views
2K
ConstruxBoy
ConstruxBoy
Caveman33
No One's Making Fun of Scooter Kids Anymore
Replies
2
Views
128
Major
Major
fatness
FBI finds largest cache of "finished explosive devices" in FBI history
Replies
18
Views
1K
Snoopy
Snoopy

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top