President Trump Addresses the Joint Session of Congress

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

23 minutes ago, bcking said:

Except that is not what I said. Seriously have you not gone back to actually read it? 

 

I said that people who voted for Trump fall into 2 camps. Those that agree with Trump's treatment of women (those who have poor moral character themselves) and those that disagree with Trump's actions but prioritized other issues over morality. I explicitly stated that people in Group 2 don't necessarily have poor moral character because they recognize the actions were wrong, but they just don't think morality is the most important issue for a President.

 

The same would apply to Bill Clinton. I'm sure there are people out there that think how he treats women is perfectly okay because he's just a "man's man" or whatever. Those people yes do have poor moral character themselves. There are others though that recognize that Clinton did some skeezy things, and he isn't a great guy, but they prioritized other issues over that. 

 

I made no claim as to how many people fall into each group because I have no idea.

Amazing . That is exactly what I said. Maybe I need to use more words for you to get it 

[Teddy B 17,251]

4 minutes ago, OriZ said:

He/she was sent to Ankara as well and probably decided not to come back 

Wonder if he/she ran into Gary.

[bcking 3,157]

3 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Amazing . That is exactly what I said. Maybe I need to use more words for you to get it 

My original post wasn't agreeing or disagreeing with something you had said previously. I wasn't quoting you or speaking directly to you. I was stating my opinion, and then you responded with a misrepresentation of what I stated.

 

I'm glad we agree on this topic. I felt like my original post made it clear what my opinion was but I guess you needed more time.

 

To refresh your memory, your response to me was:

 

"So all the people that voted for Clinton 2x times have low moral character?"

 

Key word is all. I made it very clear (At least I felt, and it seems like everyone else here understood) that I was seperating voters into two groups. One had low moral character. So that, by definition, would mean that I didn't think they ALL did. Only a portion. I didn't comment on the percentage of each group.

Edited March 2, 2017 by bcking

[Teddy B 17,251]

2 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Amazing . That is exactly what I said. Maybe I need to use more words for you to get it 

No, this is what you said.

 

 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 minute ago, bcking said:

My original post wasn't agreeing or disagreeing with something you had said previously. I wasn't quoting you or speaking directly to you. I was stating my opinion, and then you responded with a misrepresentation of what I stated.

 

I'm glad we agree on this topic. I felt like my original post made it clear what my opinion was but I guess you needed more time.

You mean you were not quoting me in your OP or speaking to me directly.. WOW thanks for breaking that down 

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

You mean you were not quoting me in your OP or speaking to me directly.. WOW thanks for breaking that down 

Your welcome. I will try to break things down as much as possible for you in the future. We could have avoided 2 pages of dialogue. 

[Teddy B 17,251]

Just now, bcking said:

Your welcome. I will try to break things down as much as possible for you in the future. We could have avoided 2 pages of dialogue. 

Please keep the dialogue going, I just found the whole series of Go Go Gophers cartoons.

[Ban Hammer 13,098]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

I'm getting on a plane this afternoon for a week in the Amazon with my wife. A week long "ban" would be well timed if it happened today

noted

[spookyturtle 9,465]

9 hours ago, OriZ said:

No no no dude, we have that system in Israel too and it stinks. I don't know, maybe in the UK it works better, but all I have seen from this system is that it creates too many small parties, each pulling in different directions, making different demands, and if you don't give in to them and give them what they want you don't have a government, which usually means one of two things, sometimes both: You either give them what they want and have an incredibly bloated government and spending, or you don't and that causes instability and very frequent elections. I actually prefer the system in the US to a parliamentary system, but I do think there need to be more than 2 parties. 

 

Most of the people here would prefer it to be one party. 

[OriZ 3,157]

27 minutes ago, spookyturtle said:

 

Most of the people here would prefer it to be one party. 

Oh dude.