Fake News Site Owner Identified

[idav]

A few Nazis will support anyone in an election.
Libertarians, Trump, Hillary...all attract some.
But only liberals focus upon the wild fringes, & delude
themselves into believing it's the larger reality.

I must have missed the heil Hillary signs and rhetoric. Neo nazis really going to follow someone who sympathizes with minorities? The discriminatory rhetoric coming from trumps campaign had not been around for a great many years. Last time we elected a racist, the guy nearly got assasinated during his campaign so I do realize violence can come from either side but doesn't change he racist overtones from one particular candidate.

 

[Revoltingest]

I must have missed the heil Hillary signs and rhetoric.

You did.
But let's say you saw some.
Would you then say Hillary represents Nazis?
No?
Sounds like a double standard.

Neo nazis really going to follow someone who sympathizes with minorities? The discriminatory rhetoric coming from trumps campaign had not been around for a great many years. Last time we elected a racist, the guy nearly got assasinated during his campaign so I do realize violence can come from either side but doesn't change he racist overtones from one particular candidate.

Trump said what he said.
He can be criticized severely for that.
There's no need to find some supporter to criticize instead.
But if this is your standard, then Steinem & Albright prove that all her supporters are dim witted sexists.

 

[idav]

You did.
But let's say you saw some.
Would you then say Hillary represents Nazis?
No?
Sounds like a double standard.

Trump said what he said.
He can be criticized severely for that.
There's no need to find some supporter to criticize instead.
But if this is your standard, then Steinem & Albright prove that all her supporters are dim witted sexists.

It isn't a double standard when going by the words coming out of their mouth. The supporters are just going by trumps own words I am not going to fault them for that. If Hillary had spouted all the hateful rhetoric coming from trump I certainly wouldn't have voted for her but I appreciate your assumption Im just saying these things because of partisanship.

 

[Revoltingest]

It isn't a double standard when going by the words coming out of their mouth. The supporters are just going by trumps own words I am not going to fault them for that. If Hillary had spouted all the hateful rhetoric coming from trump I certainly wouldn't have voted for her but I appreciate your assumption Im just saying these things because of partisanship.

I'm going by the words coming out of the mouths of Hillary supporters.
They urged voting for "the woman".
And there's "a special place in Hell" for those who don't.
They shouldn't be swayed by Bernie, who has all the "boys".
Then when the entitled ones lose, they cry & riot.
We've seen it, therefore it characterizes her & supporters....right?

 

[esmith]

That is an invalid and irrational conclusion: Conservatives have been, and are currently trying to undermine LGBT rights.

Want to commit on the agenda of the liberal/progressive agenda as seen in California? They, the liberal/progressive crowd, seem to think that Kalifornia has the right idea.

 

[idav]

I'm going by the words coming out of the mouths of Hillary supporters.
They urged voting for "the woman".
And there's "a special place in Hell" for those who don't.
They shouldn't be swayed by Bernie, who has all the "boys".
Then when the entitled ones lose, they cry & riot.
We've seen it, therefore it characterizes her & supporters....right?

No it doesn't characterize her when your trying to use supporters to put words in their mouth. We don't have to puts words in Trumps mouth. That's also a major difference when followers get violent at campaign rallies, only Trump actually publically condoned such violent behavior. So anyone acting violent in the name of trump are going by trumps suggestions.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Want to commit on the agenda of the liberal/progressive agenda as seen in California? They, the liberal/progressive crowd, seem to think that Kalifornia has the right idea.

Which has what exactly to do with fake news?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

They urged voting for "the woman".
And there's "a special place in Hell" for those who don't.

Those were second-wave Feminist bimbos who have defined womanhood as victimhood. And not many were swayed by it.

 

[Revoltingest]

No it doesn't characterize her when your trying to use supporters to put words in their mouth. We don't have to puts words in Trumps mouth. That's also a major difference when followers get violent at campaign rallies, only Trump actually publically condoned such violent behavior.

This is another Democratic myth.

So anyone acting violent in the name of trump are going by trumps suggestions.

And yet, the predicted Trumpie voter intimidation never materialized.
But Democratic post-election violence occurred instead (without Hillarious comdemnation, bte).

You're trying to paint a picture where Trump is clearly the bad guy,
& Hillary is relatively innocent. But to a great many of us, they're both bad in
their own way. And I say she is worse because of actual consequences.

 

[Revoltingest]

Those were second-wave Feminist bimbos who have defined womanhood as victimhood. And not many were swayed by it.

You're explaining away this embarrassing support by labeling them.
Cannot Trump's embarrassing supporters be explained away similarly?

 

[idav]

This is another Democratic myth.

And yet, the predicted Trumpie voter intimidation never materialized.
But Democratic post-election violence occurred instead (without Hillarious comdemnation, bte).

You're trying to paint a picture where Trump is clearly the bad guy,
& Hillary is relatively innocent. But to a great many of us, they're both bad in
their own way. And I say she is worse because of actual consequences.

That's not a myth, again I heard trumps own words.

Sure plenty of people condemn the violence and your wrong about violence not spewing from the right, despite having won the election.

 

[Revoltingest]

That's not a myth, again I heard trumps own words.

The myth arises from partisan inferences of those words.
Then they get repeated as though they're factual rather than opinion.
It becomes fake news.

Sure plenty of people condemn the violence and your wrong about violence not spewing from the right, despite having won the election.

I see violence purportedly from both sides.
(Some is suspicious....quasi-Poe acts which the SPLC proffers without any skepticism.)
Trump has openly condemned some of it.
Hillary & the DNC.....silence.

 

[Onyx]

Sometimes I wonder if the fake news isn't more accurate than the real news.

 

[Revoltingest]

Sometimes I wonder if the fake news isn't more accurate than the real news.

Dems have called Wikileaks "fake news", & it would appear that it's a
more legit source than many of their "real news" sites, eg, MSNBC, NYT.

 

[esmith]

Well let's look at the entire session

I know you did. I didn't say you can't. I just said it's misplaced because there is a very clear difference between listening to someone who gets news from Liberal-biased sources and someone who gets Conservative-biased sources. Liberals-biased sources occasionally have a ring of distorted facts, while Conservative-bias is occasionally outlandish (such as the incesant cries of "they're coming for our guns!").

Well the liberal/progressive crowd seem to have insistent cries of "they are going to _________ (insert the cry of the day here) to the LGBT community.

But you seem to disagree that that Conservatives are not after the LBGT community by saying

That is an invalid and irrational conclusion: Conservatives have been, and are currently trying to undermine LGBT rights.

You seem to think that the first statement from you is that Conservative bias is outlandish and I asked you if you have looked at what is going on in CA which seems to be the general consensus of the liberal/progressive members of our society. And I counter with your obsession that the Right is after the LBGT community.

It is my opinion that the majority of Republicans really could care less what is going on in the LBGT community yet it seems that the liberal/progressive are all in favor of what is going on in CA.

 

[idav]

Dems have called Wikileaks "fake news", & it would appear that it's a
more legit source than many of their "real news" sites, eg, MSNBC, NYT.

Who called wikileaks fake news?

 

[idav]

The myth arises from partisan inferences of those words.

Ok lol. A lot like my liberal interpretation of the words in the Bible. Potatoe pototoe. Just going by words like I said.

 

[idav]

I see violence purportedly from both sides.
(Some is suspicious....quasi-Poe acts which the SPLC proffers without any skepticism.)
Trump has openly condemned some of it.
Hillary & the DNC.....silence.

It's not true, dems and Hillary have condemned the violence. Trump saying things like punch them in the face and financially covering them is called condoning violence.

 

[Revoltingest]

Who called wikileaks fake news?

Not you (that I've seen).
But I cannot recall which sources have accused them of it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Ok lol. A lot like my liberal interpretation of the words in the Bible. Potatoe pototoe. Just going by words like I said.

The Bible also inspires multiple interpretations driven by personal or sectarian agenda.
But in that case, I can't go to youtube to find out the original words straight from the
horse's mouth. So I don't opine about intentions behind scripture.