Tenhigh

Seriously, why don't you personally pay a little extra in taxes? It'll help sustain those less fortunate, and there is nothing preventing you from doing so. The rich are paying plenty.

Dude, you literally "promote hate online" all day long, right here on this very site.

To be clear, you can't just admit I am right about social security, so you try a little whataboutism on taxes? If you want to argue fairness of taxes, let's start a new thread. You may not love the results, but I am always happy to have rational discussions, sometimes even when I am the only one being rational.

Yes, that's why I asked. Now why are LIBERALS SO AFRAID to answer that question?!?!?! Sorry, but in my defense you kind of set me up for that one...

Actual dialog, nice! Do you think that your solution is fair to the high income earners? Pay more in than everyone and be rewarded by getting less?

Do you get that the fund is running out of money? How do you propose to fix it?

You understand that there is a cap on benefits, right?

Show me where she did. Are you being wilfully ignorant?

Is your point that scumbag politicians trick us into to treating each other poorly? Then we wholly agree. The way people treat each other here on PPP is terrible, and that goes both ways. See this thread for example: Can we point out the rise in hate crimes against Asians? What side Is that coming from? It's the same crap. My simple point is that GC said that the holocaust was able to happen because first the government sanctioned the hatred of one group, and she is implying they dems are doing it to reps. My reply to her would be that both sides of the government are sanctioning the hatred of the other's voters.

Can you actually read what I wrote and reply to that? Nobody, especially her, claimed that republicans were gassed. That is a silly strawman, but ai think you already know that.

That linked to a post about knitted dongs for small girls to wear, was that the intent? Why not just reply to the content of what she actually put on twitter?

Read her exact quote above, not what you read that someone else wrote about her quote. Does this change your stance at all?

Why can't you converse like a reasonable person? What do you get out of being horrible? But since you refused to back up your point, I googled it. What I assume that you sde referring to is when she posted what looked to be a meme that said: "Because history is edited, most people today don’t realize that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews,”“ That doesn't sound like a Nazi to me. What it does sound like is someone concerned that their government is telling on part of the country to hate the part with different politics. And if one side gets all of the power it could lead to a slippery slope. Do you worry that if Trump wins, he will demonize liberals and progressives, saying that they represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic?

You can't throw the Nazi word around without anything to back it up. Otherwise people are gonna think you are the boy who cried wolf.

Show me what made her a Nazi exactly.

I am not surprised he is helping someone he feels got screwed. How exactly is she a Nazi?

I actually think he is a POS human, but that doesn’t mean he sexual assaulted this woman. I believe you're right that they found him liable because of who he is, which isn’t how its supposed to work.

@Ron Burgundy what is there to eye roll here? You don't think the email exchange raises ANY questions? And the fact that she didn't even know the year the rape supposedly happened? Or the fact that she knew it would increase her book sales? You can still dislike Trump AND believe that this case is as thin as one ply.

So in Tennessee it is still the same outcome? I think you are way off the mark of you believe that.

This seems like it should have ended it right there on the spot. https://www.businessinsider.com/e-jean-carroll-rape-corroborator-addresses-anti-trump-views-2023-5 The email Martin sent Carroll in September 2017 included a link to a humorous New Yorker column mocking Trump, who Martin called "orange crush." "This has to stop," Martin wrote at the time. "As soon as we're both well enough to scheme, we must do our patriotic duty again." "TOTALLY!!!" Carroll responded. "I have something special for you when we meet."

Would you agree that the venue affected the outcome?

Dude, have you totally given up on talking to people without insulting them?

Do you honestly think he think he deserved to lose based on this evidence? Seems eerily similar to Clinton and several of the allegations against him.

They probably thought they didn't need to. I'm not sure I blame them.Thanks for the write up though. Why do you think they only went with sexual assault vs rape? I think Trump is a POS, and think it's possible he could have sexually assaulted someone. But what seems fishy and sticks out most to me is the fact she can't remember even the year (seems a pretty monumental event in anyones life), the timing of coming out due to the book sales and the complete diary omission. And the scheme email. How do you get yourself ok with that beyond your feelings about Trump?

But what was the evidence was it based on? Did she really not remember even what year it occurred? How do you know he actually did it? She also claimed he raped her, why wasn't that included in rhe verdict?