Archie Moses
Well-Known Member
I haven't read any of them. LolEvery post by Framer here?
I haven't read any of them. LolEvery post by Framer here?
Perhaps the take away shouldn't be that I'm obsessed with Rogan, but that the only thing that makes you memorable is leaning on an argument made by him/his show?
Perhaps the take away shouldn't be that I'm obsessed with Rogan, but that the only thing that makes you memorable is leaning on an argument made by him/his show?Um, it's literally the exact opposite of this. You brought up Rogan to knock on him and his listeners for gawd knows why and I have made no argument leaning on Rogan in this thread or for a month or so.
Are you dumb?
When said in context, yes I think most voters would easily catch that "nuance" given that it wasn't actually all that nuanced at all. It was pretty straightforward and easy to understand.
“Romney wants to let the — he said in the first hundred days, he’s going to let the big banks once again write their own rules, unchain Wall Street,” Mr. Biden said. “They’re going to put you all back in chains.”
Also, this wasn't said solely to black parishioners, it was a mixed raced crowd at a research institute. So again, it's not clear and obvious that it was intended to have any racial connotations at all.
All that said, I don't think if I was a candidate that's a line I would go with, but to pretend that line is some sort of evidence that the kind of criticism Trump gets these days is just the latest example of liberals making **** up to smear the right is just ridiculous.
Truth.LOL, this thread is a ****-show hahaha
I'm not comparing Romney to Trump. But they definitely had plenty of out of context sound bites in the media on Romney. The chains one was one I remember the first headline I saw regarding that was something basically with just that piece leaving out the rest. Same with the whole "binders full of women". Yeah he said that wrong, but in the context it wasn't anywhere near as bad as they made it out to be as a sound bite.When said in context, yes I think most voters would easily catch that "nuance" given that it wasn't actually all that nuanced at all. It was pretty straightforward and easy to understand.
“Romney wants to let the — he said in the first hundred days, he’s going to let the big banks once again write their own rules, unchain Wall Street,” Mr. Biden said. “They’re going to put you all back in chains.”
Also, this wasn't said solely to black parishioners, it was a mixed raced crowd at a research institute. So again, it's not clear and obvious that it was intended to have any racial connotations at all.
All that said, I don't think if I was a candidate that's a line I would go with, but to pretend that line is some sort of evidence that the kind of criticism Trump gets these days is just the latest example of liberals making **** up to smear the right is just ridiculous.
And it never got the traction because it wasn't based on as much substance as the very legitimate criticisms of Trump. You didn't have many conservatives expressing concern over Romney's character the way that you absolutely do in regard to Trump.I'm not comparing Romney to Trump. But they definitely had plenty of out of context sound bites in the media on Romney. The chains one was one I remember the first headline I saw regarding that was something basically with just that piece leaving out the rest. Same with the whole "binders full of women". Yeah he said that wrong, but in the context it wasn't anywhere near as bad as they made it out to be as a sound bite.
This.And it never got the traction because it wasn't based on as much substance as the very legitimate criticisms of Trump. You didn't have many conservatives expressing concern over Romney's character the way that you absolutely do in regard to Trump.
So while the media is/was the media, the reaction to it is based at least in part on the reality, and the reality is that Trump is uniquely despicable and unqualified.
On that I totally agree, it made for a funny soundbite so it got a lot of traction (although apparently not as much as I thought given other responses in this thread).I'm not comparing Romney to Trump. But they definitely had plenty of out of context sound bites in the media on Romney. The chains one was one I remember the first headline I saw regarding that was something basically with just that piece leaving out the rest. Same with the whole "binders full of women". Yeah he said that wrong, but in the context it wasn't anywhere near as bad as they made it out to be as a sound bite.
It was destined for this fate from the first post.LOL, this thread is a ****-show hahaha
Perhaps the take away shouldn't be that I'm obsessed with Rogan, but that the only thing that makes you memorable is leaning on an argument made by him/his show?
Lol as if quality of ones life is the only possible reason to not like trump.
I didn't like Trump when he was getting joy out of saying "you're fired" on TV.
My life isn't crappy. You are a fool if you think everyone who hates Trump has a crappy life or everyone who hated Obama had a crappy life at the time.
What a foolish thing to believe.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
You are aware the GD forum isn't for sports right? A lot of people have similar interests about a variety of things around here and enjoy talking about them. That doesn't mean they are generally unhappy, at all.You do not create a political thread talking about stuff you hate almost every day on a non-political sports board. You can dislike things and not have it dominate your life. People who let things they hate dominate their life are pretty much uniformly unhappy.
If you come to a Jazz board and spend 90% of your posts talking about any damn political figure, you are not well.
You do not create a political thread talking about stuff you hate almost every day on a non-political sports board. You can dislike things and not have it dominate your life. People who let things they hate dominate their life are pretty much uniformly unhappy.
If you come to a Jazz board and spend 90% of your posts talking about any damn political figure, you are not well.
An entire thread dedicated to one poster?
Neat. Glad you're not obsessed or anything.
And, wait, you know that @The Thriller has you blocked? Seriously, dude, this is next level creepy.
Hey stoked, are you not entertained!?Glad you think so. Feel free to move on.
Hey stoked, are you not entertained!?
This thread didn't turn out how you thought it would....... Actually, it probably turned out exactly like you thought it would lol
Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
I applaud you for calling out people on both sides of the political spectrum when you feel that they are being hateful or unreasonable, and you absolutely do.Basically he’s hateful, the board is mostly ok with it and where I went wrong was a bad comparison to Heathme/Dutch.
Point conceded on Heathme. To me it’s not ok and I think it speaks poorly of those that are.
Yes, I got mostly what I thought. Per the norm I read @One Brow posts twice. I greatly enjoy his posts.
I applaud you for calling out people on both sides of the political spectrum when you feel that they are being hateful or unreasonable, and you absolutely do.
I don't see Thriller being focused on individual posters much and being hateful towards them in personal ways. He's a huge Democratic Party fanboy and has his homer glasses on too tight a lot of the time, but I see him going after political ideas and not people. Maybe I'm wrong and I gloss over him making hateful personal attacks, but that's my impression of him.