The remaining (less than?) 35% of ppl still conned by Trump in 'A Bridge Too Far'

[The Frankish Reich]

10 hours ago, Andy1 said:

Trump is incapable of articulating a reason for why people should vote for him. He only knows how to ridicule and attack people. This weekend, he was ridiculing over weight people talking about Chris Christie as a “fat pig” and mocking Tester for the size of his belly.
 

What an idiot! I bet there were plenty of over weight people at his own rally along with millions across the country. He is oblivious to the ramifications of his speech because he is a narcissistic psychopath with no empathy for others. He says whatever makes himself feel good to boost his fragile psyche. 

Have you looked at his crowds? Have you noticed that a couple of morbidly obese people died while rioting on January 6?

But like most Americans, including Trump, the label “fat” somehow doesn’t apply to them. 

[Starr-Bills]

11 hours ago, Tommy Callahan said:

Anything to demonize tens of millions of Americans that have a different opinion on politics.  

 

 

If by different opinion you mean people who have been brainwashed into taking away others rights, defending billionaires and sticking their heads in the sand about the ramifications of climate change, calling people, actual humans, “illegal” and mass camps and deportations Sounds like demonization is what the people holding these “different political opinions” are doing. I.e. apt characterization. YMMV. 

11 hours ago, Tommy Callahan said:

 

Your loved ones need to get you some help. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

2 hours ago, Andy1 said:

Well, a logical sane person would think - “If I want to attract voters to me, maybe I shouldn’t call an over weight person a Fat Pig because millions of potential voters and their family members struggle with weight issues.” The logical ramifications of such language may be needlessly offending others.
 

Any idiot in any position of leadership knows that their words matter. Only a mentally ill person speaks like that. Lehnerd, would you tolerate working for a supervisor who called you a fat pig? For some strange reason, other Republicans tolerate it all and say, “insult me some more sir!”
 

It’s just one little example of what a miserable human he is. 

Please, call me Leh-n.  Only my mother calls me….wait, that’s not right. Never mind. 
 

To answer your question, no, I wouldn’t tolerate that at my place of employment.  I’d think a derogatory comment on that level results in HR involvement and punitive action, a supervisory rebuke, or in some cases a punch in the face.  
 

However, the national American political arena is completely different than most workplaces, with different rules of conduct and vastly different outcomes for participants.  You might as well ask me if I’d tolerate a co-worker launching himself at me like Terry Tate, office linebacker, you know, like the NFL workplace.  
 

Andy, in your workplace, would you tolerate an individual referring to you and members of your family as “irredeemable” or your mother or sister as “deplorable” because they had different points of view than your co-worker?   Would you tolerate an individual in your workplace ruminating on claims you were involved in sexual assaults as a high school senior?   What about the co-worker who suggests you are a threat to democracy?  Or, that if you get promoted, you’ll put certain people back in chains?   That sort of political hostility will get you canned and referred to a therapist to work out the ugliness in you these days.  
 

Politics isn’t real life as far as you and I are concerned….and sure as ****, you’ll be wondering how “Republicans…tolerate” as you enter the ballot booth to cast your vote for the pristine souls that exist only in your mind. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tiberius]

10 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Please, call me Leh-n.  Only my mother calls me….wait, that’s not right. Never mind. 
 

To answer your question, no, I wouldn’t tolerate that at my place of employment.  I’d think a derogatory comment on that level results in HR involvement and punitive action, a supervisory rebuke, or in some cases a punch in the face.  
 

However, the national American political arena is completely different than most workplaces, with different rules of conduct and vastly different outcomes for participants.  You might as well ask me if I’d tolerate a co-worker launching himself at me like Terry Tate, office linebacker, you know, like the NFL workplace.  
 

Andy, in your workplace, would you tolerate an individual referring to you and members of your family as “irredeemable” or your mother or sister as “deplorable” because they had different points of view than your co-worker?   Would you tolerate an individual in your workplace ruminating on claims you were involved in sexual assaults as a high school senior?   What about the co-worker who suggests you are a threat to democracy?  Or, that if you get promoted, you’ll put certain people back in chains?   That sort of political hostility will get you canned and referred to a therapist to work out the ugliness in you these days.  
 

Politics isn’t real life as far as you and I are concerned….and sure as ****, you’ll be wondering how “Republicans…tolerate” as you enter the ballot booth to cast your vote for the pristine souls that exist only in your mind. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You miss the point. You are making Andy's point for him. You don't realize it, but you are supporting the argument you are against. You bring up "deplorables.' Hillary lost. Trump is insulting people, and he lost last time and will probably lose this time. You are trying to play whataboutism, but you are literally supporting the argument you are against. 

 

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

You miss the point. You are making Andy's point for him. You don't realize it, but you are supporting the argument you are against. You bring up "deplorables.' Hillary lost. Trump is insulting people, and he lost last time and will probably lose this time. You are trying to play whataboutism, but you are literally supporting the argument you are against. 

 

 

No Tibs, I get the point.  
 

As you have pointed out, HRC won the popular vote and absent the Electoral College, would have been President.  Rumor is people on the left were outraged OUTRAGED I tell you, and calls for abolishing our electoral system followed.  
 

She was mad popular. 
 

That’s one example.  Biden threatened to take DJT behind the library like the old days, and only two things happen behind the library, most assume he was threatening with physical violence, not the other thing.  It was Biden who suggested certain the Rs  were going to enslave people, and that non-believers are a threat to democracy.  Harris is all about derisive and divisive language, as previously pointed out. 
 

As for whataboutisms, I answered Andy’s inquiry and offered context based on his question to me.  
 

Mean-spirited and harsh rhetoric is a part of life as inconvenient as it may be for you here.  
 

Prayers for enlightenment. 
 

 

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

No Tibs, I get the point.  
 

As you have pointed out, HRC won the popular vote and absent the Electoral College, would have been President.  Rumor is people on the left were outraged OUTRAGED I tell you, and calls for abolishing our electoral system followed.  
 

She was mad popular. 
 

That’s one example.  Biden threatened to take DJT behind the library like the old days, and only two things happen behind the library, most assume he was threatening with physical violence, not the other thing.  It was Biden who suggested certain the Rs  were going to enslave people, and that non-believers are a threat to democracy.  Harris is all about derisive and divisive language, as previously pointed out. 
 

As for whataboutisms, I answered Andy’s inquiry and offered context based on his question to me.  
 

Mean-spirited and harsh rhetoric is a part of life as inconvenient as it may be for you here.  
 

Prayers for enlightenment. 
 

 

No, you supported the point you are against. Kind of funny. You defended Trump's turning off voters by offering a whataboutism, which was Andy's EXACT point. 

 

Keep up the good work! 

[Andy1]

On 8/13/2024 at 9:52 AM, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

No Tibs, I get the point.  
 

As you have pointed out, HRC won the popular vote and absent the Electoral College, would have been President.  Rumor is people on the left were outraged OUTRAGED I tell you, and calls for abolishing our electoral system followed.  
 

She was mad popular. 
 

That’s one example.  Biden threatened to take DJT behind the library like the old days, and only two things happen behind the library, most assume he was threatening with physical violence, not the other thing.  It was Biden who suggested certain the Rs  were going to enslave people, and that non-believers are a threat to democracy.  Harris is all about derisive and divisive language, as previously pointed out. 
 

As for whataboutisms, I answered Andy’s inquiry and offered context based on his question to me.  
 

Mean-spirited and harsh rhetoric is a part of life as inconvenient as it may be for you here.  
 

Prayers for enlightenment. 
 

 

Personally, I hope the moron keeps right on the same path of insulting everyone. More insults about over weight people are a great way for him to build his base. More insults directed towards disabled people. More insults to women and minorities. Maybe some day brain washed republicans will realize that he could care less about them unless they are very rich white guys he can suck cash from and play golf with. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

3 minutes ago, Andy1 said:

Personally, I hope the moron keeps right on the same path of insulting everyone. More insults about over weight people are a great way for him to build his base. More insults directed towards disabled people. More insults to women and minorities. Maybe some day brain washed republicans will realize that he could care less about them unless they are very rich white guys he can suck cash from and play golf with. 

I’m disappointed, but your answer was about as I expected.  You don’t want to deal with the nasty and ugly rhetoric from your side, so, you pretend it doesn’t exist.

 

That’s ok Andy, your indignation is noted. 

[Andy1]

58 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I’m disappointed, but your answer was about as I expected.  You don’t want to deal with the nasty and ugly rhetoric from your side, so, you pretend it doesn’t exist.

 

That’s ok Andy, your indignation is noted. 

When it comes to insulting others and using language to attack others, Trump is on his own planet, which I’m sure he is happy about. 

[L Ron Burgundy]

On 8/12/2024 at 7:14 PM, Wacka said:

You must have had a great bedside manner, Quack.

You don't like it when he does it but you lap it up when Trump does the same.  Pathetic.  Seriously. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

9 hours ago, Andy1 said:

When it comes to insulting others and using language to attack others, Trump is on his own planet, which I’m sure he is happy about. 

It’s interesting that you posed questions to me—and really Andy, you sounded sincere in seeking answers to hypothetical scenarios that might occur in my workplace.

 

 I responded, returned the favor and asked the same question, and you have nothing to offer.  I can only assume that you would be comfortable with the rhetoric in your workplace, with comments being made to your friends and coworkers as long as there was something in it for you.  That makes you an outlier of sorts. 
 

Trump will come and go, this is really about you and your support of ugly rhetoric in certain scenarios yet finding yourself completely outraged in others.  Imo you’re not that far off from a faith-preaching evangelical with a side hustle, Andrew. 
 

Now, someday when you find your way and really want to talk it out, I’d agree 100% that the political rhetoric is out of control and destructive.  I’d gladly support moving toward civility, but until that time arrives on both sides, we might as well be honest and civil about the reality of what we face. 

 

 

  

Edited August 15 by leh-nerd skin-erd

[All_Pro_Bills]

23 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

It’s interesting that you posed questions to me—and really Andy, you sounded sincere in seeking answers to hypothetical scenarios that might occur in my workplace.

 

 I responded, returned the favor and asked the same question, and you have nothing to offer.  I can only assume that you would be comfortable with the rhetoric in your workplace, with comments being made to your friends and coworkers as long as there was something in it for you.  That s
 

Trump will come and go, this is really about you and your support of ugly rhetoric in certain scenarios yet finding yourself completely outraged in others.  Imo you’re not that far off from a faith-preaching evangelical with a side hustle, Andrew. 
 

Now, someday when you find your way and really want to talk it out, I’d agree 100% that the political rhetoric is out of control and destructive.  I’d gladly support moving toward civility, but until that time arrives on both sides, we might as well be honest and civil about the reality of what we face. 

 

 

  

Seems like the sensitive crybabies prefer the Democrats offering of polite authoritarians and gentle fascists.

[Andy1]

51 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

It’s interesting that you posed questions to me—and really Andy, you sounded sincere in seeking answers to hypothetical scenarios that might occur in my workplace.

 

 I responded, returned the favor and asked the same question, and you have nothing to offer.  I can only assume that you would be comfortable with the rhetoric in your workplace, with comments being made to your friends and coworkers as long as there was something in it for you.  That s
 

Trump will come and go, this is really about you and your support of ugly rhetoric in certain scenarios yet finding yourself completely outraged in others.  Imo you’re not that far off from a faith-preaching evangelical with a side hustle, Andrew. 
 

Now, someday when you find your way and really want to talk it out, I’d agree 100% that the political rhetoric is out of control and destructive.  I’d gladly support moving toward civility, but until that time arrives on both sides, we might as well be honest and civil about the reality of what we face. 

 

 

  

Ok Leh-n, my sincere response to your questions above is no, I wouldn’t do or tolerate any of it. Plenty of dems have said stupid or done insulting things to broad categories of people. The smarter ones learn from their missteps and use restraint.  In many cases, dem voters force them out of office. In contrast, Republicans have unlimited support and tolerance for Trumps actions and words. 
 

I’ve long been a proponent of civility in our politics and on this forum. I am hopeful that when Trump does go, that the Republican Party can offer something better in the future. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, Andy1 said:

Ok Leh-n, my sincere response to your questions above is no, I wouldn’t do or tolerate any of it. Plenty of dems have said stupid or done insulting things to broad categories of people. The smarter ones learn from their missteps and use restraint.  In many cases, dem voters force them out of office. In contrast, Republicans have unlimited support and tolerance for Trumps actions and words. 
 

I’ve long been a proponent of civility in our politics and on this forum. I am hopeful that when Trump does go, that the Republican Party can offer something better in the future. 

Thanks for the response, and before I go on, I think you're a thoughtful poster and probably a decent guy.  That doesn't matter really one way or the other on the board, but it points to one of the biggest challenges we have in the country today. 

 

Of course, you wouldn't tolerate it.  However, using the office analogy one more time, based on your rationalization of divisive rhetoric on one side only--and the thought that introspective democrats are the true heroes because they grow and learn from earlier transgressions--it seems you might be comfortable with a supervisor trashing the guy/his family etc in the next cubicle over because he gave you an extra bonus last week, or allowed you to park in the employee of the month spot.   You support one, refer to the other side as 'brain washed'.

 

As for dem voters casting the occasional liberal heathen (the one who doesn't evolve spiritually and emotionally) out, that's complete hogwarsh.   Joe Biden is career bare knuckles politician, has made incendiary racial remarks, has acknowledged inappropriately touching women, threatened to beat a guy up behind the library, tough talks constituents and so much more...and he got 81,000,000 votes.   In spite of his obvious flaws, he was THE guy for you.   He's also the guy that declared Republicans wanted to enslave people, but most liberals believe he meant it in the nicest way I suppose.  

 

Hillary Clinton...same.  Refers to citizens of the other party as deplorable and irreedeemble (but only 30,000,000 or so to be fair) and so, rages 30 years ago about a 'vast right wing conspiracy' and so, so much more...is chosen as the heir apparent post-Obama and gets nearly 66,000,000 votes.  

 

Kamala Harris...spearheads the attack on Kavanaugh, and so, so much more...and you're going to line up and vote for her.

 

Oh, and of course the litany of dems referring to the election of Trump as 'illegitimate', implying or stating treason was afoot, and questioning the integrity of our elections for several years.  Yeah, that's civil. 

 

I don't think you want civility, I think you want to win.  There's no shame in that, but pretending you are perched on some high ground is silly. 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 15 by leh-nerd skin-erd

[4th&long]

As the ticket shows the stock market going up over 550 points today.

[4th&long]

L