Dude, you back the party that is anti drag shows, anti trans, anti LGBTQ, anti women's rights and anti DEI.
That's like a supporter of rape, fraud, felony, apartheid and genocide claiming that they back the law.
Trump may just have committed another serious crime
- Thread starter Zoot Allures
- Start date
That's like a supporter of rape, fraud, felony, apartheid and genocide claiming that they back the law.
So someone who wrote a book years ago may have different views today despite their beliefs at the time?
Nice try at disttraction.
Fact is I caught you spreading misinformation which you are saying you didn't.
You did.
I caught you.
You are denying it.
You're lying...again.
ps it's funny watching you fall on your face when caught and trying to distract. It's not working Mr. Misinformation.
Just because you use a homophobe as your "source of truth" by re-sharing his posts many times doesn't mean you have to try and distract from your true colours when called out.
Just admit you support homophobes because you help them spread their messages by resharing their posts knowing full well they are confirmed homophobes.
Repeating misinformation doesn't make your misinformation true, skoob.
Your opinion is worthless.
If you want to make a point about misinformation or hypocrisy its done like this:
1) start with an allegation you can prove.
For instance, you posted that you must accept court rulings.
Then 2) back it up with a linked quote.
A judge found rump guilty of 34 counts of felony.
3 other judges adjudicated that rump committed rape and that he has to pay $100 million in settlement.
Do you accept verdicts when they don't jive with your narrative?
So the fact that you back a rapist, convicted felon, apartheid and genocide means that you are totally untrustworthy on all issues.
You back someone convicted of fraud, so therefore everything you post is likely fraudulent.
That's the way your logic works, right?
It's funny how he thinks that people take him seriously.
By us talking about him negatively means that we support genocide and apartheid and killing 10 million babies.
p.s. I just read the post where said exactly that. So predictable, that Geno is.
p.p.s. LOL. And again just a few posts later.
p.p.p.s. He did it 3 times in 15 posts. I think he created some quick keys for "genocide" and "apartheid".
p.p.p.p.s. 4 times in 16. I think I heard someone say that every accusation is a confession. I don't think he knows how that works. LOL.
OK. Now it's 5 times in 21.
Last edited:
That's you, Geno
That's you, Geno
That's you, Geno
That's definitely not you.
Oh! That is you 110%, Geno
You did an amazing job of accusing someone else of every single sleazy thing that you do, Geno. You are so introspective. LOL.
In another thread you just posted a video by an Islamaphobe.
That's all you've posted as a source, a youtube debate.
You're making skoob look like a serious researcher in comparison, Shazi.
So you're saying you never apologized (ie confessed) that you shared misinformation you obtained from a Xitter post?
It's a yes or no answer.
Yes. When we learn, gather more info, opinions should change in response to data. That's how an educated population works. For example, fats were the bad guy, but research data kept pointing out certain findings until it seems now sugar is more of a problem. And the sugar companies were instrumental in trying to push the narrative away from them and towards fat.
We used to believe only bad people do bad things. But psychology has shown that under the right circumstances you can get otherwise good people to do bad things. Scientists have studied extensively how otherwise decent and educated Germans fell for Nazism.
What Klaas and Snyder and Ben Guriat and Shirer and Milgram and Appelbaum etc etc keep showing is all strongman, be they Nazi, third world, African, Latin American, Commies, Fascists, all follow a similar pattern in upending democracy. And these are historians of all sorts of political leanings.
That's my point. There are clear distinct patterns.
Difference is I don't share posts from known homophobes, felons, rapists, terrorists, etc etc...you do.
So when you say someone "backs" someone else, you are actually the one who is doing that by virtue of sharing their direct posts.
But keep distracting if it makes you feel better...it's not working but it gives you something to do while working out your hypocrisy issues to hide your true colours.
Is that the same when you support terrorists? you share the same value as them?
There's also a theory that says correlation does not imply causation.
Science is different. It can be proven. It does not rely on speculation, opinion and correlation to conclude anything.
True. Correlation does not imply causation. But things that are causal are correlational. It's one of the conditions required to infer a causal relationship.
But sometimes folks will say correlation does not imply causation use it to imply there is no possibility of a causal effect. Also not true. It could be. But it could not be.
Some things in life you can never prove. According to basic scientific methods, we cannot prove smoking causes lung cancer. In order to do so, we must have a double blind experiment where we randomly assign subjects to conditions. And there has never been an experiment that has randomly assigned a group of subjects to be smokers. It would be unethical to say the least. There are finer statistical methods that approach, like logistic regressions etc, that try to extract causation from correlation, but at the end of the day we cannot run a true experiment on this topic.
Thus, we try to look at as many examples as we can, code or chunk up the data in as honest a way as we can, and report it and the patterns uncovered with as much clarity as possible so as to allow anyone to see exactly what one did, and how they did it. No analysis is perfect, but eventually the preponderance of the evidence lands in a certain direction if in fact there is a pattern.
An admission that you were describing yourself and that Murray's points are all valid. All you have are insults, lies and anti-Semitic hatred.
By that measure, Trump was President for 1 term. He did not become a Nazi or invoke the same beliefs and ideals. He did not become or attempt to become a dictator during his term and followed the government's democratic laws while also accomplishing many good things.
That in itself is more proof than simply referring to Democrat propaganda and cognitive bias that is fueled by it.
That is my point.
But he fomented an insurrection (and did not lift a finger to stop it) based upon a lie. He had legal recourse to challenge the election and he exhausted it then resorted to extra legal remedies. Thus he tried to cheat. He had people breaking the law with the fake electors. He's attacked the press and any other source of fact to delegitimize the election. He's softening the ground for violence. He softened the ground for claiming fraud by calling it all rigged before the election. No previous major candidate in USA history did any of this, but this very same pattern of behavior appears in all dictatorships. The way it often works in Africa is the strong man delegitimize the election ahead of time, and if you lose, you amp it up then fight for power in the streets. So, Trump is the only major candidate to do this.
In his first go, he was prevented often by the courts and his advisors from doing more. Remembering he was going to appoint a low level lackey to head the DOJ who was willing to do his bidding and get him to write to the Georgia legislators to not certify falsely claiming evidence of fraud. Only the threatened resignation of the entire upper echelon of the DOJ stopped him. He begged his VP to throw out the votes during certification despite the VP only having ministerial powers (thus asking Pence to break the law), hoping to throw the vote into the house. Then he sat back as the crowd threatened him. Of course now he's threatening to throw everyone who followed the law which brought him indictments and convictions into gaol.
He's learned to avoid appointing the people with any standards outside of blind loyalty now. He's claiming he wants to be a dictator. His project 2025 is to replace the people in government who know what they're doing with political loyalists, which is what every dictatorship does. No democracy does this. This is why the Russians/Commies could never compete with the west, as your rise in Soviet times was based on loyalty and connections only. Prior to the Civil Service act in the USA, the USA government was all political appointees and it was thoroughly corrupt.
These patterns, clear in history, appearing in the USA for the first time, is what has Democrats and many Republicans realy concerned. And it's based on his actions and words.
Remember he has a number of criminal trials ahead, so grand juries belive he broke the law.
I get what you're saying. He didn't go full Maduro. True. But he went farther than any USA by far, and along the well worn grooves.
I guarantee if he loses again he'll scream even more about fraud and will do whatever he can to overturn the election. The stability of the usa means nothing to him.
Last edited:
