What's new
By:

Trump Dictatorship and All Things Politics

Bucknutz said:
View attachment 17628
You implying that she is not qualified or experienced by saying “Sucks to be right again”?

Again you don’t think she is qualified or experienced because you don’t like her past?


So you say she is not twice, then you say she is experienced? I’m honestly confused…

Why would you just say you think she is corrupt and make that the post, and not the opening paragraph about how right you are about inexperienced and unqualified.

Why is it such a big deal for a few of you in here that Trump can pick who he wants and if they are loyal to him. You just skipped over Pete and his position; you don’t think he is loyal to Biden?
Click to expand...
Do you really expect fish to thoughtfully defend or expound on an opinion he obviously copied and pasted off the internet with no sources and tried to pass off as his own? lol
 
Bucknutz said:
View attachment 17628
You implying that she is not qualified or experienced by saying “Sucks to be right again”?

Again you don’t think she is qualified or experienced because you don’t like her past?


So you say she is not twice, then you say she is experienced? I’m honestly confused…

Why would you just say you think she is corrupt and make that the post, and not the opening paragraph about how right you are about inexperienced and unqualified.

Why is it such a big deal for a few of you in here that Trump can pick who he wants and if they are loyal to him. You just skipped over Pete and his position; you don’t think he is loyal to Biden?
Click to expand...
You are confused by my statement and I see why. I said I wish he would simply (simply being the key word showing that there is more to the pick than being experience and qualified. It's not that simple like I would prefer to be.) pick someone who is qualified and experienced. You take that statement to mean that I am saying he didn't pick someone who is qualified and experienced. I can see how it appears that way.
What that statement meant to say is that I wish he would simply pick someone who is qualified and experienced. Period. Without all the other crap.
Instead of picking someone who is qualified and experienced AND ALSO has all the baggage and bias and appearance of corruption.
I figured my final sentence where I said "Im not saying she isn't experienced and qualified but it would be nice if she was experienced and qualified and also not so obviously compromised and bias" would clear that up.

So now I'm hoping that you finally understand that I was never trying to say that this choice was an unqualified and inexperienced choice and you can move past that and either discuss what I was being critical about or just move on.

As for Pete maybe you have some evidence that he was super loyal to Biden and Biden had paid Pete money when Pete's firm was looking to investigating Biden and then Pete's firm dropped the investigation right after getting the payment. Maybe Pete represented Biden in an impeachment. Maybe Pete went to Biden rallies and is involved in Democrat PACs etc.

So far, I haven't seen you provide any of that info though.

Anywho, if you want to criticize the choice of Pete for that position then I won't begrudge you. Be my guest.
 
Last edited:
fishonjazz said:
Wait, where did I say she isn't qualified or experienced? What I actually said is I wished he would simply choose candidates who were qualified and experienced. Instead of qualified and experienced BUT ALSO corrupt and biased and worked for him and a rally attendee etc.
In fact if you look at the last sentence of my post it says "Im not saying she isn't experienced and qualified but it would be nice if she was experienced and qualified and also not so obviously compromised and bias."
I literally put that sentence in there because I knew the post you made was coming lol.
Click to expand...
He cherry-picked the first sentence of your post and took that as the whole.

fishonjazz said:
I was hoping (again) that I would be wrong about trump and he would simply choose candidates who were qualified and experienced. Sucks to be right again.
Click to expand...
 
LogGrad98 said:
He cherry-picked the first sentence of your post and took that as the whole.
Click to expand...
To be fair I can see why he thought I was saying she isn't qualified or experienced. I worded it poorly. I have explained myself like 3 times now though so hopefully that is enough to make him understand my actual stance on her being qualified and experienced. That was never intended to be the criticism I was making of the choice. The other 90% of my post was the criticism that was being made but unfortunately was not as obvious as I thought it was.
 
Mongoose said:
You mean the only sentence that fish actually wrote? Haha! The rest of it was copied from I assume some msnbc hack.
Click to expand...
That's it. Cry more. You will feel better.
 
fishonjazz said:
To be fair I can see why he thought I was saying she isn't qualified or experienced. I worded it poorly. I have explained myself like 3 times now though so hopefully that is enough to make him understand my actual stance on her being qualified and experienced. That was never intended to be the criticism I was making of the choice. The other 90% of my post was the criticism that was being made but unfortunately was not as obvious as I thought it was.
Click to expand...
You clarified just fine in the original post. It is willful misrepresentation.
 
Mongoose said:
You mean the only sentence that fish actually wrote? Haha! The rest of it was copied from I assume some msnbc hack.
Click to expand...
I was almost going to say the same thing. I’m fine with him copying and pasting, I know he adds the links, which I do appreciate.

How I read what he wrote, she wasn’t experienced or qualified and he was proved right. That was his opening paragraph, nothing about corruption or loyalty.


The left is fine being loyal, only if you’re left. Youre not a dictator then. But if someone is loyal to Trump then that is a sign of a Dictator.

Total fake outrage. I’ll wait till Triller or Log is happy with a nomination. I mean they are not even happy with Doge, because it’s going to be run by a scary billionaire. It’s only dictatorship this and authoritarian that, see how we are Nazi 2.0. They complained about how some posters posted the same stuff over and over again and called them trolls. They are now the trolls, which don’t bring any value. They are pissed their Tribe didn’t win, and now they are going to act like Eeyor and complain about every little thing.
 
fishonjazz said:
That's it. Cry more. You will feel better.
Click to expand...
All those awards you display for contributing to this site are stolen valor. You’re a liar and a hypocrite. You don’t give credit where it is due. You steal from others hard work and research and pass it off as your own opinion. You’re dishonest and instead of trying to be better you call people names and try to silence them or call them trolls. You’re a plagiarist a thief an hypocrite and worst of all a liar.
 
Bucknutz said:
I was almost going to say the same thing. I’m fine with him copying and pasting, I know he adds the links, which I do appreciate.

How I read what he wrote, she wasn’t experienced or qualified and he was proved right. That was his opening paragraph, nothing about corruption or loyalty.


The left is fine being loyal, only if you’re left. Youre not a dictator then. But if someone is loyal to Trump then that is a sign of a Dictator.

Total fake outrage. I’ll wait till Triller or Log is happy with a nomination. I mean they are not even happy with Doge, because it’s going to be run by a scary billionaire. It’s only dictatorship this and authoritarian that, see how we are Nazi 2.0. They complained about how some posters posted the same stuff over and over again and called them trolls. They are now the trolls, which don’t bring any value. They are pissed their Tribe didn’t win, and now they are going to act like Eeyor and complain about every little thing.
Click to expand...
Provide some people who were chosen by Democrats for cabinet positions that you have a problem with and the reasons why and we can discuss them.

If mayor Pete was investigating Biden and then Biden paid Pete a large amount of money and Pete stopped investigating him and then Biden choose Pete for AG then I promise you I would be critical of that choice by Biden.
 
Mongoose said:
All those awards you display for contributing to this site are stolen valor. You’re a liar and a hypocrite. You don’t give credit where it is due. You steal from others hard work and research and pass it off as your own opinion. You’re dishonest and instead of trying to be better you call people names and try to silence them or call them trolls. You’re a plagiarist a thief an hypocrite and worst of all a liar.
Click to expand...
I hope you can someday get through this tough time in your life.
Thoughts and prayers
 
fishonjazz said:
Provide some people who were chosen by Democrats for cabinet positions that you have a problem with and the reasons why and we can discuss them.

If mayor Pete was investigating Biden and then Biden paid Pete a large amount of money and Pete stopped investigating him and then Biden choose Pete for AG then I promise you I would be critical of that choice by Biden.
Click to expand...
Show me being critical of any one other than Kamala and Newsome on the left.

I told you one already and you just ignored it in this post as well. What made Pete qualified for his position?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top