Banned Tosspot
Well-Known Member
Who said I like and admire him?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Donald Trump
- Thread starter RichardDunneOwnGoal
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Banned Tosspot
Well-Known Member
Has this been proven?
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
Not up to date with the news are you. Pfft, call yourself a fan boy!
The comeback is that she's not a victim, merely a complainant.
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 89,069
That he mocked her? Yes.Has this been proven?
SWP's back
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 89,069
Of course, but ****s will be ****s.The comeback is that she's not a victim, merely a complainant.
Trevor Morley's Tache
Well-Known Member
He did mock her testimony, but I assume you are alluding to the sexual assault?Has this been proven?
The honest answer is no, but then the FBI investigation was seriously hampered by the White House, for reasons we can only speculate.
Having said that, House Republicans said in open session that there is no doubt that she was sexually assaulted, but no proof it was Kavenaugh (despite his lies and obfuscation under questioning).
MillionMilesAway
Well-Known Member
Of course, but ****s will be ****s.
Too many options for who the **** could stand for!
west didsblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 32,374
MeWho said I like and admire him?
Self confessed troll. Got it.
Sad muppet.
Yeah extremist views which presuppose an opinion are sad as fuck hey?
For a long time I've defended the way you think, though not always what you think. Now I see you are just arguing for argument's sake. You are a dog chasing your tail. You are a waste of time. I perceive you are so desperate to "win" an argument that you have to even argue that even after hundreds of lies I am somehow a deficient human if I don't stop and re-evaluate each statement and action of his fresh as if there was no history. Not only is this impractical and completely lacking in common sense, but it's utterly laughable that somehow you feel your ability to do same (suuuuurrrrrreeeeee) makes you somehow superior to everyone else.
The reason this is so fucking stupid is that I GET ONE VOTE, NOT HUNDREDS. That one vote isn't based on one action, or the last thing he said, not if I am doing my job as a citizen, but all of his words and actions on balance. I've already made my decision once; maybe something will change that, but he has a hill to climb with me. A hill like Olympus Mons.
And arguing with you feels like the same climb. So long.
Because the WAY that you're doing it is wrong. I'm not saying don't use your own opinion of the man, I'm saying don't make it your starting point.
It's like Hitler. Hitler said loads of agreeable things that most people in the world would agree with. But if you dismiss literally everything he ever said or did because Hitler said it then you're not considering things properly.
You should be looking at a policy, looking at the statements and justifications about it in good faith, looking at the counter argument in good faith then deciding where you land. THEN add in your opinion of the personalities involved and their truth factor.
When you start with the personalities then you firstly lose access to around half of the ideas in society, and secondly your starting point shapes the end result.
That's not critical thinking.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.