What one has the ability to do and what Thriller does are different things. There is no way he reads what I write. He doesn't even pay attention to people like Red and LogGrad as evidence by his reposting the Eric Greitens RINO hunting advertisement and asking if anyone had seen it. Thriller's world of information consists of the hottest takes on Twitter about Op/Eds biased hard enough to gain traction in a saturated market. What he thinks is reality is a filter of a filter of a filter. He may be a nice person and I certainly wish him no ill will but he is miles from being the type of person who would go to the lengths you say are available to him.
Maybe. I can only relay what I see in my circle, and as for being "white" I don't even know what the word refers to any longer. No one where I live is breaking out skin color charts and neighbors are neighbors. If anything, where a person lives now is far more judged than ethnicity.
Yeah, once the Italians were let in the "white" club it was basically no holds barred.
www.theatlantic.com
As I mentioned to you privately, I have a highly intelligent, majored in philosophy, (gotta like the world of the mind to major in philosophy, my kind of guy), close friend, who apparently has been ensnared by the Trump cult of personality.
I wasn’t thinking so much of Italians as much as those of Middle Eastern ancestry. For a long time most Arabs, Persians, etc. been classified as white in the US but lately there is a movement in the community to be classified as something separate to gain minority status. The whole thing is imaginary lines people draw wherever they want to.
I see The Thriller differently than you, and I'm not interested in discussing why.
I won’t say that it has no effect but my opinions are what they are. I believe that when taken too far, “accepting” can be harmful. The single stance that likely caused me to land on the greatest number of block lists is my stance in the transgender debate.
How do you know what landed you on any particular block list?
I will continue to oppose your egregious misuse of statistics to defend your position.
It is admittedly imperfect but temporal deduction gets me in the ballpark.
Deny the data all you want but it doesn't make it any less real.
I am unsurprised that you don't seem to understand the difference between "misuse of statistics" and "deny the data".
I most likely misspoke, as he is really not likely to hate me any more than I am ever likely to hate him. The more likely outcome is he will not speak to me for awhile. This happened just one other time, just before the 2016 election. We stayed out of each other’s hair for awhile, and when time had passed, we share too many associations and hobbies for the breach to last forever, he apologized for what he had said to me, I accepted his apology, and we entered into an unspoken agreement not to bring up politics again.
The secret is that every person on earth is misguided, uninformed, and frankly, deceived. That is what it is to be a human. If you believe those things to be exclusive to people who voted for the presidential candidate you didn’t choose, then I’d say you are being very human. Omniscience isn't in the cards for any one of us.
For me what landed him on my ignore list was a build up that culminated in his cavalier attitude in regards to jan 6th. His stance was/is basically who care what the protesters did as long as the final result was biden sworn into office? Like what if the protesters killed 100 people but biden was still sworn into office? Would the fact that 100 people were killed not matter at all?
True, but also there are degrees of each of them. Some people are ore misguided, less informed, and/or more deceived than others.
I also agree, and while I acknowledge people that I often agree with, I try to avoid having personal heroes.
Being POTUS/running for POTUS means having an impact. AFAICT, Trump is the most influential member of one of the two dominant political parties, which again means he has an impact.
To be clear, that was never a thing I said.
If 100 people had died, then I’d still want to see the perpetrators tried in a courtroom with a judge, lawyers, etc. I believe that even the obviously guilty deserve a fair trial. Crazy me. I do not think our justice system should be a legislative branch committee putting on a show with the cast of Hamilton and a former ABC News executive working as a producer to package it for a prime time audience where they say at the outset they don’t plan on referring anyone to the DOJ.
You’d think that this would cause some introspection on his part. But it doesn’t. Sad
