Nazi bund 'pro american' rally at madison square garderns 2.0

[shack]

Case & point: Someone else says something and it's brushed aside (or "stepped aside as in Biden's case) because the mere thought of one of his opponents saying something derogatory (or stupid) is completely impossible right?

No. It's obviously not impossible.

However, I think that it's hypocritical to criticize one example of Biden a gaffe (and he's not even running) being glossed over as "he really meant to say" yet never criticize the exact same type of defence for the dozens of ridiculous things trump has said. In this case it's a matter of quantity over quality since the quality is equal on both sides.

 

[shack]

Funny...I thought it was enough that people would jump on Trump for what he says...now they're blaming him for what a comedian says.

In this case, absolutely. The trump team was in complete control of everything that would be said. They knew the comic was going to make that joke. It's undeniable that the trump team, who arranges things on his behalf including his image, shares the bulk of the blame. trump is their boss. He directly hired some of those people. trump shares the blame. As the leader, the buck stops with him.

 

[shack]

I don’t want to be persnickety but you’re actually wrong here RIP. It’s a common error to believe using ‘I’ over ‘me’ is universally correct, so no judgement on my end. Look it up!

When the first person is the subject in a sentence, "I" is universally correct. Example: I like him. He likes me. In the first, the first person is the subject. That's why it is "I". In the latter, the first person is the object, hence "me".

In a sentence:

• The subject is the thing that performs the action of a verb.
• The object is the person, thing, or place that is impacted by, or involved in, the action12345.

Alternatively, you can dismiss what I say because I’m purportedly some shit-for-brains human who thinks Trump is a reasonable person, on the assumption I’ve got no education (lol).

I had no such intention. Your post was non-accusatory or an attack. I treat posters with respect when they post respectfully, as you did.

Btw, just because a person misspells something doesn’t necessarily make what they say untrue or unworthy of consideration. Anyone who cannot see why this is true requires an education. I say this as a person who does not misspell things.

He has a history of mangling the English language. It's not a one-off.

 

[kittykellykat]

When the first person is the subject in a sentence, "I" is universally correct. Example: I like him. He likes me. In the first, the first person is the subject. That's why it is "I". In the latter, the first person is the object, hence "me".

In a sentence:

• The subject is the thing that performs the action of a verb.
• The object is the person, thing, or place that is impacted by, or involved in, the action12345.

I had no such intention. Your post was non-accusatory or an attack. I treat posters with respect when they post respectfully, as you did.

He has a history of mangling the English language. It's not a one-off.

Everyone but shack please scroll past this post. Lol.

90% of people do not write as meticulously as I do. If I were to get angered or critical about it every time I encountered such people, I would be the most insufferable person on the planet. I would never learn anything from anyone. That would be an impoverished life.

Sorry to derail the thread with this everyone, but I just got so itchy to say this:

Re. the grammar lesson above, it’s based on somewhat archaic English rules about not using ‘me’ as a subject. It’s true that two subjects are being compared. The problem is if you used these rules by the book, you’d be a very bad or at the very least, eccentric writer.

If you wanted to use this rule in a non-archaic and complete way, you’d say “He is smarter than I am.” Just as we don’t exclaim “It is I!” every time someone asks“who dis?” when you call them, you wouldn’t (well, shouldn’t) say it the OG way.

Using ‘me’ isn’t wrong, even if seen as an object in this case. It’s not “doing” anything in the sentence “He is smarter than me,” so to speak. Think of it as being “acted upon” by the comparison being made. That is why it doesn’t sound funny in contemporary English to say this at all. It’s a bit more casual, to be sure, but I would not call that butchering the English language in any way whatsoever. It is fully appropriate in most contexts except very formal writing.

Proper English (TM) has many implicit rules of usage, and most linguists will say these count for correctness and fluency too. That’s why non-native speakers always sound very formal and stiff. English is a strange mutty language wrt rules in particular.

Anyway I didn’t mean to get autistic about it, but yeah. He definitely wasn’t wrong.

Hope that makes sense!

 

[Skoob]

No. It's obviously not impossible.

However, I think that it's hypocritical to criticize one example of Biden a gaffe (and he's not even running) being glossed over as "he really meant to say" yet never criticize the exact same type of defence for the dozens of ridiculous things trump has said. In this case it's a matter of quantity over quality since the quality is equal on both sides.

Trump is not a silver-tongued career politician.
He uses metaphors, humour and exaggeration to make his points. It's his style. Some interpret that in different ways. Supporters know what he means. Non-supporters only look at the words and then lose their shit.
We should judge him on his policies in office not hang on every word he says.

For example, what specific Trump policies did you support vs not support while he was in office?

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

He uses metaphors, humour and exaggeration to make his points. It's his style. Some interpret that in different ways.

Well, if that wasn't a glib understatement and untruth lol.
Trump users abuse, lies, vitriol, hate and for sure exaggeration to make his points.
He leaves no reason for interpretation.
For example: "They are eating the dogs! They are eating the cats! They are eating the pets!", needs no interpretation.
There are no metaphors in that quote.
There is no humour.
There are however lies and hate.

 

[Skoob]

Well, if that wasn't a glib understatement and untruth lol.
Trump users abuse, lies, vitriol, hate and for sure exaggeration to make his points.
He leaves no reason for interpretation.
For example: "They are eating the dogs! They are eating the cats! They are eating the pets!", needs no interpretation.
There are no metaphors in that quote.
There is no humour.
There are however lies and hate.

Right no metaphors because he was referencing a claim made by a constituent:



Where do the claims come from?

They seemingly originated from a local resident who complained about Haitian immigrants at a Springfield city commission meeting on 27 August.

The man, who said he was a social media influencer, urged the government to "do something", making unsubstantiated claims about supposed crimes they were committing.

He said they were capturing ducks in a local park, slaughtering them and eating them.

Facebook posts on local crime-watch groups started making similar claims, with one supposed resident whose post went viral saying their "daughter's friend" had seen Haitians eating her cat and that local authorities had said they were doing the same with ducks and geese.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Right no metaphors because he was referencing a claim made by a constituent:

He made a statement.
He was not referencing a claim.
He made a statement and when pressed said he saw it on TV.
Even if he was referencing a claim it would fall under the category of lies and hate.
And then there is a thing called common sense.
A person of average intelligence or a person who has some goodness in them would have ignored such claims and not repeated them.

 

[Skoob]

He made a statement.
He was not referencing a claim.
He made a statement and when pressed said he saw it on TV.
Even if he was referencing a claim it would fall under the category of lies and hate.

You think he just made that up without ever hearing about it?
That's what the media implied.

At least he referenced an actual claim made by a constituent.
How do explain Biden saying he was at ground zero the next day but wasn't?
Or Walz being in Tiananmen Square during the riots but he wasn't?

Those are pure lies that have deceptive intentions behind them.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

You think he just made that up without ever hearing about it?
That's what the media implied.

I said that even if it is true that he was just referenced a claim, a person of average intelligence or one with some goodness in him, wouldn't have.

 

[Skoob]

I said that even if it is true that he was just referenced a claim, a person of average intelligence or one with some goodness in him, wouldn't have.

Nice pivot.
You implied he was lying. Now you pivot to "he shouldn't have said that even if it were true". That's funny.

It underscores the bigger issue that the US is facing with illegal immigrants and that's why he said that. Point is he wasn't lying and just making that up as the media portrayed.

The US has a serious problem with immigration. Canada does as well but not as bad as the US.

I think most people are done with the pleasantries of trying to paint a rosier picture than reality.

Trump is trying to protect people. That's the goodness you overlook.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Nice pivot.
You implied he was lying. Now you pivot to "he shouldn't have said that even if it were true". That's funny.

I did not imply he was lying.
I said he was.
Because he was lying.
He made a statement and doubled down on it as fact.
When pressed he said I heard it on TV.
If he had said "I heard on TV that these Haitians were eating pets", that would be repeating someone else's lie.
But he said "They are eating the dogs! They are eating the cats! They are eating the pets!".
That is a lie.
I said that even the example that I gave (which did not happen) is something, a person of average intelligence and someone with an ounce of good in them, wouldn't resort to.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

It underscores the bigger issue that the US is facing with illegal immigrants and that's why he said that. Point is he wasn't lying and just making that up as the media portrayed.

They were not illegal immigrants.
That is another lie.

Immigration FAQs | City of Springfield Ohio Official Website

The City of Springfield has experienced a surge in our population over the last several years, primarily due to an influx of legal immigrants choosing Sprin ...

springfieldohio.gov

Q: Are the immigrants here legally and how did they qualify?
A: YES, Haitian immigrants are here legally, under the Immigration Parole Program. Once here, immigrants are then eligible to apply for Temporary Protected Status (TPS). Haiti is designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security for TPS. Current TPS is granted through February 3, 2026.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

Trump is trying to protect people. That's the goodness you overlook.

Who is he trying to protect?
How?
By demonizing people?

 

[Skoob]

I did not imply he was lying.
I said he was.
Because he was lying.
He made a statement and doubled down on it as fact.
When pressed he said I heard it on TV.
If he had said "I heard on TV that these Haitians were eating pets", that would be repeating someone else's lie.
But he said "They are eating the dogs! They are eating the cats! They are eating the pets!".
That is a lie.
I said that even the example that I gave (which did not happen) is something, a person of average intelligence and someone with an ounce of good in them, wouldn't resort to.

So you think it was just coincidence that he said that before hearing about the person who claimed it was happening?
The probability of that happening would be incredible.

Wow being picky about the delivery of words...remember when I said Trump-haters just hang on every word with bully-level scrutiny? Well that proves my point.

 

[Skoob]

They were not illegal immigrants.
That is another lie.

Immigration FAQs | City of Springfield Ohio Official Website

The City of Springfield has experienced a surge in our population over the last several years, primarily due to an influx of legal immigrants choosing Sprin ...

springfieldohio.gov

Q: Are the immigrants here legally and how did they qualify?
A: YES, Haitian immigrants are here legally, under the Immigration Parole Program. Once here, immigrants are then eligible to apply for Temporary Protected Status (TPS). Haiti is designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security for TPS. Current TPS is granted through February 3, 2026.

He based his comments on a claim made by a constituent.
Considering there have been people who have been murdered by illegal immigrants, is that not a viable assumption?

Again, you are focusing on the minutia without acknowledging the actual bigger issue that is real.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

So you think it was just coincidence that he said that before hearing about the person who claimed it was happening?
The probability of that happening would be incredible.

Wow being picky about the delivery of words...remember when I said Trump-haters just hang on every word with bully-level scrutiny? Well that proves my point.

He says he heard it on TV. May be that is true, may be it is not.
Either way it is a lie to to make a statement, and then double down when fact checked live.

 

[Skoob]

Who is he trying to protect?
How?
By demonizing people?

He's trying to protect citizens and legal immigrants by dealing with something the Dems have practically ignored for 4 years until they couldn't any longer. Similar to how they hid Biden's mental state for so long until they couldn't. It's what they do.

Nothing wrong with demonizing illegal immigrants who are contributing to crimes. If you're looking for a pretty & colourful explanation of that, using pretty and kind words, you are fooling yourself.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

He based his comments on a claim made by a constituent.
Considering there have been people who have been murdered by illegal immigrants, is that not a viable assumption?

Again, you are focusing on the minutia without acknowledging the actual bigger issue that is real.

These Haitians did not murder anybody.
Murder was not even discussed. So it is not a viable assumption.
Yes, it is still a lie to call them illegal immigrants.
His comments need to be based on facts. Not lies.

 

[Shaquille Oatmeal]

He's trying to protect citizens and legal immigrants by dealing with something the Dems have practically ignored for 4 years until they couldn't any longer. Similar to how they hid Biden's mental state for so long until they couldn't. It's what they do.

Nothing wrong with demonizing illegal immigrants who are contributing to crimes. If you're looking for a pretty & colourful explanation of that, using pretty and kind words, you are fooling yourself.

Citizens, legal immigrants and illegal immigrants commit crimes.
Picking only illegal immigrants as a group to target, is malicious.
They are the most vulnerable group amongst the 3, and Trump is demonizing them due to their ethnicity.
He is therefore hurting people. Not protecting them.