• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Please Not Again!

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Why do you think this? Don't you like here ideas and values?
She's an activist. Emotionally drivin.

Not a political expert with capabilities to institute policy along with the proper foresight to foresee what impact a policy will cause.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
I don't understand why Trump is bothering to run in another election. He doesn't accept legitimate elections anyway, so he should just bypass something he won't accept when he loses again and just march right into the White House and declare himself the King. Why bother with the democratic process at all?

I can think of a few reasons:

  • To get more attention for himself
  • To make more money by fleecing his followers
  • To get a measure of protection against some of his legal troubles
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Definitely, but she's much more destructive than the others with her ditzy mindedness.
She's an activist. Emotionally drivin.

Not a political expert with capabilities to institute policy along with the proper foresight to foresee what impact a policy will cause.
Which ideas are ditzy? She speaks from historical example, and her ideas are reasonable. It's the conservatives who lead with emotion and consider conventionalism reasonable.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Which ideas are ditzy?
Her end of the world prediction.

Currently, we have 2458 days before we all die.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Her end of the world prediction.

Currently, we have 2458 days before we all die.
Ah -- I see your point. "World ending" was rather hyperbolic, but I think she's just reflecting the views of many climate scientists and the looming threat of unrecoverable tipping points being triggered.

People go into denial in the face of massive threats. They feel helpless and dismiss them. Cassandras and their discomfiting facts are ignored or laughed at.
Just as it did with Dems who dissed Palin as ditzy.
Palin was ditzy. She was a reactionary. pandering to nativists. She led with emotionalism rather than facts or analysis.
 
Last edited:

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Ah -- I see your point. "World ending" was rather hyperbolic, but I think she's just reflecting the views of many climate scientists and the looming threat of unrecoverable tipping points being triggered.

People go into denial in the face of massive threats. They feel helpless and dismiss them. Cassandras and their discomfiting facts are ignored or laughed at.

Palin was ditzy. She was a reactionary. pandering to nativists. She led with emotionalism rather than facts or analysis.
The closest I could come to Sarah in male Democrats was Al Gore. Not all that bright. right far more often than Sarah, but terrible at getting his message out and he seemed like Sarah grossly overestimate his intelligence. In college he performed worse than George Bush. He had a fair amount of hoof in mouth disease due to his arrogance at times. He was essentially right about AGW but so badly overstated when the problems would occur and how serious that they would be that people are still fighting his exaggerations today. The real thing is bad enough. There was no need to turn it up to 11.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Ah -- I see your point. "World ending" was rather hyperbolic, but I think she's just reflecting the views of many climate scientists and the looming threat of unrecoverable tipping points being triggered.

People go into denial in the face of massive threats. They feel helpless and dismiss them. Cassandras and their discomfiting facts are ignored or laughed at.

Palin was ditzy. She was a reactionary. pandering to nativists. She led with emotionalism rather than facts or analysis.
That's some very partisan rationalization
to make those 2 sound very different.
 

Sand Dancer

Currently catless
I predict Trump will not be the republican candidate for president. It would be fun if he were, because the nation needs to see just how insane and totally FUBAR the republican party has become. And he would surely lose even bigger, again, if he did run. And that would be a good thing for us all to see and acknowledge. But national republicans are already seeing him as a liability both to the party and to their own political careers. And even at the state level where the MAGA insanity is strongest he is losing ground due to the completely idiotic and incompetent behavior of his political toadies in office.

The whole right wing Christo-fascist extremist era of American politics is coming to an end. Thank the gods! It'll take a while to purge the poison from the halls of government. But it's already begun, and it will continue.
Who is better? DeSantis? Trump pandered to Christo-fascists but was not one. DeSantis is! Pence is, Haley is, Scott is, etc. The current crop of GOP folks are theocrats. Who is left?
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
Just as it did with Dems who dissed Palin as ditzy.
Sure, if one were to pretend there wasn't a mountain of legitimate criticisms.


In AOC's case, her crimes are being liberal, outspoken, and female.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Sure, if one were to pretend there wasn't a mountain of legitimate criticisms.

In AOC's case, her crimes are being liberal, outspoken, and female.
That's how it always goes....fervent partisans
see the worst in their foes, & only saints in
their own. It's hypocrisy.
 

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
That's how it always goes....fervent partisans
see the worst in their foes, & only saints in
their own. It's hypocrisy.
I never suggested anything of the sort. It's silly to suggest that one side is wholly good while the other is wholly bad, but it's also silly to suggest that each side is equally proportionate in goodness/badness.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I never suggested anything of the sort.
No, you dint suggest.
Your post exhibited it.
It's sexist to make fun of AOC for being ditzy,
but it's The Truth to make fun of Palin for her ditz.

It's silly to suggest that one side is wholly good while the other is wholly bad, but it's also silly to suggest that each side is equally proportionate in goodness/badness.
Straw man.
You said "equally" to win an argument I dint make.
 

Exaltist Ethan

Bridging the Gap Between Believers and Skeptics
1682897639230.png
 
Top