Go back to previous topic
Forum nameGeneral Discussion
Topic subjectTalk about bending and twisting
Topic URLhttp://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13392026&mesg_id=13392796
13392796, Talk about bending and twisting
Posted by Cold Truth, Fri Jul-10-20 02:06 AM
>It's not a discussion about red herrings. This is a discussion
>about you misleading. Post the reply number where Legs said
>"MAGA playbook" to you.

Everything above this was addressed, and addressed within the posts to which you yourself replied.

Everything below this, to the next point I'll address, is you having a childish meltdown. It's amusing, but you're either too obtuse to understand anytime soon, or just plain too dug in to turn back.

>You waste words talking about the person who is posting, which
>is odd for someone who cried about a "red herring" discussion.

False. I addressed your tact, and the way this discussion has played out with that tact.

>This is where silly becomes insane and you drive to left field
>and off the deep end. Conservative Christians who worship
>Trump are not going to vote for Ye when Trump is running
>against him. They are not going to vote for Kanye even if
>Trump is not in the race. Kanye stans are not and will never
>be conservative Christians who worship Trump.

Cool. I disagree.

>>That base has shown a propensity toward completely ignoring
>>the parts that don't fit, while elevating the parts that do.
>
>Yes they have but they are not going to ignore Kanye saying
>Trump hid in a bunker or anything else Kanye says that goes
>against what they pretend to be,(christian) it works for Trump
>but it does not extend to Kanye.
>>In fact.... that ability is the whole reason they believe
>that
>>bullshit to begin with. But I digress.

>That goes out the window when it's a Blackman no matter how
>much he uses the "God card"

Not when he's a black man who echoes their own views on race.

But then... neither of us know how that would actually play out. I think you're grossly underestimating that element.

But then, you're speaking with extreme certainty. Cool. I'm speculating.

>>>Hillary lost white women.
>>
>>No, Trump TOOK them, because he played to their bigotry and
>>entitlement. Trump played to their fears of socialism,
>>brown-skinned immigrants, and erosion of white people's
>place
>>at the top of America's food chain. And they valued that
>over
>>electing the first woman.
>>
>
>Hillary was hated and had a lot of baggage. They wanted to
>vote against her
>>That election was 100% about the cult of Trump's personality
>>and ability to play to the dregs- ahem: deplorables- of
>>society.
>>
>
>Nah it was about a blacklash because Obama won

Funny, that reads like it fits right in with what I said. Thanks for the incorrection.

>Hillary was a bad candidate

That's where I have to retract one thing, my "100%" comment. Because Hillary did have baggage. Just not enough baggage to overtake hatred of brown people, homosexuals, a women's right to choose, religious freedom, etc as the lion's share of the reasons Trump won.

If that election were a pie chart for what people would do with the money if they won the lottery, "bad candidate" would be the "give it to charity" slice.

>>>SMH CNN and MSNBC is not conservative media and no other
>>>candidate got wall to wall coverage.
>>
>>Wall to wall negative coverage.

>It's positive coverage to the racists who he wanted hyped up
>enough to vote.

LMAO like the vast majority weren't glued to Fox before and during the election.

I'm genuinely open to hard data showing that CNN/MSNBC coverage actually converted people who weren't already on his side of the fence.

>>>Yes the racism helped him
>>>but that doesn't mean Hillary was not a bad candidate

I didn't say Hillary was not a bad candidate, so chalk up another incorrection on your end.

>You giving too much credit to Trump and the people who voted
>for him. They are not uncomfortable with their racism,
>xenophobia and homophobia. The base is already there and
>voting Republican. The hatred was already there.

Sounds a lot like what I've said on the subject, apart from the "too much" part. He played well to the things that were already there, which was particularly important to winning women voters from Hillary.

>>You know what else he played to, quite well?
>>
>>People's base laziness and stupidity. He's extremely rich
>and
>>extremely famous, and a LOT of people thought that- and that
>>alone- made him fit to run our economy.
>>
>
>You're stating the obvious and giving too much credit to
>people who voted for Trump.

Not obvious enough, apparently. We simply disagree on the ratios.

>Lazy and stupid people don't care
>if can run the economy.

Sure they do. They just don't care enough to educate themselves on the subject. You don't think stupid or lazy people care if they have money, or the ability to get money?

Further, I'm speaking from an intellectual standpoint, which is clear based the example I gave.

>>Because, again, he marketed directly to their worse, baser
>>sensibilities. He turned everything into a catch phrase.
>>
>>Lock Her Up! Fake News! MAGA! Build The Wall!
>>
>
>That's sop for Republican candidates.

You're looking at what he did.
I'm looking at how well he did it.

That's a distinction with a difference. Politics is marketing. How well he hit those critical points, is the difference. By that logic, any and every repub would have won.

>>You remember that old white lady that said Obama was a
>>terrorist, and McCain corrected her?
>>
>
>Which proves they are not uncomfortable with racism.

>>Not only did Trump NOT correct those people, HE IS those
>>people.
>>
>
>Yes he is, but he's not uncomfortable with racism and they are
>not.

You're implying that that comfort level, of being this publicly, visibly, overt and brazen, didn't increase significantly during and after his campaign.

I don't think that's the case. I think he galvanized them. I think they became significantly more emboldened. MAGA hats may as well be gang attire. It IS gang attire.

>>He IS the antivax flat Earth conspiracy theorist, who thinks
>>the blogs and YouTube videos he consumes at 2 am trumps
>>decades of collective study and expertise.
>>
>>He fucking normalized Alex Jones, of all people.
>>
>>He became the patron saint of those people, because he IS
>>those people.

>He always has been. It didn't start when he came down the
>escalator. He was on Fox doing the birther racism.

I don't think I said that that's when it started. Or inferred it.

It's funny, you keep arguing stances I haven't taken, instead of the stances I have taken. There's a reason for that.

>Nah you are giving too much credit to the voters and Trump.
>They have been putting Republicans in office for years. You
>don't have to normalize something that is already normal.
>Nobody is uncomfortable with racism when they are already
>voting for racists.



>>Except it's not about "one win".
>>Because it's not about Trump.
>>It's about the mentality of the type of people who voted for
>>him.

>Same people who they were already.

Yep. And if that were the case, and there were no fire to stoke with them, McCain would have won, or at least Romney.

But they didn't, because it's not as simple as you're trying to make it. Because Trump made them more comfortable being more overt and open. If it were as simple as you're trying to frame it, Obama never would have won.


>More of the same from you. Escape pod to save your weak
>argument.

Nope. Sorry. I've pointed out several places where you've argued against stances I never took, and this is no different. It's not an "escape pod" for me. It's just me pointing out that you're grossly overstating and misrepresenting my stance.

Which is what you need to do in order to make your fervent, uh, counter not look more ridiculous than you think Ye's chances are.

>Yeah that does not work. You can apply that to another white
>batshit yet charismatic celebrity but not a Blackman. Obama
>had to bend over backwards and appear as non-threatening as
>possible to get the white votes he got.

Do you think I think he's likely to get the white votes Obama got?

Trump's act is not
>going to work for a Black man running for President.

I didn't say Trump's act. In fact, I've been clear in that, despite certain basic similarities, I think he'd take a different tact.

>You are talking about it's safe

Huh?

>and Kanye had a possibility
>when it should be dismissed.

I don't think it should be dismissed. You do.

We disagree. Oh no. But you really, really, really, really, really need to hammer home just how much you disagree. I'm nowhere near as passionate in my belief that he *could* *possibly*- not definite or probably, which are different things :) - as you are that there's no chance in hell.

>>I've been pretty clear that this is hypothetical, and I
>merely
>>see the possibility. But, yet again, you're doggedly trying
>to
>>attack an imagined argument for probability.
>>
>
>Kanye winning is the assumption even if you call it a
>possibility,

No, those are definitively two different things. This is another example of your consistent need to reframe my stance in order to make your zealous takedown not look like way, way too much, over far too little.

>you are suggesting that he would get enough
>electoral votes to become President.

Would?

How many times are you going to so blatantly rephrase my words? It's embarrassing. But again, it's easier to argue this down from a position I haven't taken, as opposed to the position I have.

>>You
>>>really believe Kanye could pull christian MAGA's away from
>>>Trump in a race that Trump was a choice they could make.
>Did
>>>you read what you wrote ?
>>
>>How many do you think I think he could realistically pull?
>>
>
>You answer a question with a question. Ok did you say this
>
>"it's not a stretch to say that he could wind up pulling
>enough votes from both Biden and Trump to actually win."

try the entirety of the comment for a change:

"And, absent the filing issues that seem to make it logistically impossible for him to win, it's not a stretch to say that he could wind up pulling enough votes from both Biden and Trump to actually win.

He'd play well with the folks whose entire political, philosophical, and scientific (ahem: pseudo) world view is shaped by memes and social media influencers.

Further, people vote third party, even when those third parties don't appear to have a chance in hell.

Ye's not remotely viable to rational people. Question is, are there enough irrational people who may have voted Biden? We've been stuck with a cartoon for three and a half years.

I'm too cynical to believe that there aren't enough irrational people or people who don't take this seriously for him to pose a potential threat."

>>Moreover, do you think there's a difference between what i
>>think he could realistically pull, right now, and what I
>think
>>is hypothetically possible?

>and it continues more of the escape pod/lifeboat to save the
>sinking argument. We are safe from a hypothetical possibility
>because of deadlines ?

No. Deadlines make

>>Or do you still think there's no distinction there?
>>
>>>It is ridiculous, pathetic, sad and desperate to write
>>>
>>>"I think we're safe, due to the number of missed deadlines"
>>>when discussing Kanye's Presidential walk. Have you read
>>that
>>>interview?
>>
>>Desperate? Desperate for... what? What am I desperate for
>>here?
>>
>
>Desperate to hold on to the stance Kanye, founder of the
>Birthday party should not be dismissed.

LMAO, Yes, I'm desperate to hold on to the stance that he should not be dismissed. As though I haven't been consistent in this being about the types of people that could vote, and why, and definitively not promoting him as a candidate anyone should vote for.

>>I did read that interview.
>>
>>Have you spoken to conservative Christians? Do you know the
>>things they believe, and how easy it is to play to those
>>sensibilities?

>You are giving them way too much credit.

Credit? I may be overestimating whether or not they could be swayed by Ye. I told Reeq I may well be wrong about all of this. Going back to your "desperate" remark, it's downright hilarious that you think I'm "desperate" to hold on to a stance that I've literally said I could be wrong about, quite early in the post.

>>Have you read comments sections of articles and videos?
>>
>Is that a reliable source ?

Of the mindset of people that are out there?

Yes

>>Do you think those people are just names and words on a
>>screen, unattached to an actual person with actual voting
>>rights, and are all just written for lulz and don't ever
>>reflect the things the actually think?
>>
>
>So you believe what they tell you and what they write even
>when it's obvious they are full of shit. If they say they are
>Christian and they vote for Trump and support Trump you
>swallow that ?

OH SHIT LMAO here we go.

"believe what they write when it's obvious they are full of shit"

Could you be any more vague?

Generally speaking, I take people at their word when they say they support trump and worship fictional characters, or say racist, homophobic, and misogynist things.

Sure, I operate under the assumption that there are trolls and agitators that exist. But generally, they seem to come *from* the right, in attempts to vilify everyone and anyone who isn't the right.

I don't see nearly as much going the other way, which is the way I'm reading your statement. If that's not what you're getting at, let me know.

>>But then... none of that matters, because you don't see a
>>distinction between "yeah I can see this happening, and
>don't
>>dismiss the possibility" and "YEAH OMG THIS IS DEFINITELY A
>>THREAT RIGHT TODAY THE SKY IS FALLING".
>
>This all makes sense, you are buying into the lies and
>excuses. That's why you think it's a possibility Kanye could
>pull conservative Christians who worship Trump. You believe
>Trump has charisma and that's what convinced people to vote
>for him. You are falling for the lies and going along with it.

LMAO you sound EXACTLY like a motherfucking Trump supporter.

First, that's a complete non-reply to what I said.

Just a generic assed

"You are buying into the Lies and fake news of The Media!"

Also, I didn't say "people voted for Trump because he has charisma", and I in fact pointed out plenty of reasons- reasons which you agreed with. So no, I don't think it's just as simple as charisma.