Play Nice Random Chat Thread IV

[Mr_Nyah]

No, I don't believe he has denounced white supremacy. I believe he has given whatever answer he thinks will work at the time in order to weasel his way out of being pressured by journalists. Remember, a narcissist is only ever interested in serving himself.

And speaking of which, no, I do not hate him. Or like him. I am glad not to be him, but that's about it. I am sincere when I say that the only thing I feel inside when it comes to Trump the human being, is a giant void. He's not worth feeding anything into. So no, I don't have to "own" anything. And it's fine if you don't "buy" that - I can't make you believe me, and that's okay. But anyone who's ever had to stickhandle a narcissist in their close personal life for any great length of time will understand what I'm talking about. Trump himself isn't worth an emotional response. His rhetoric however, is. That is my position.

I did read your response to TOD. And I'm asking you whether or not you're okay with Trump's rhetoric.

Ok, you're getting into his motives and not taking him at face value. You are answering a different question. The question: "has Trump denounced white supremacy?" has, after watching that video, an obvious answer: yes, he has. If you don't think he's sincere, as I've previously mentioned, I won't argue with you. But he has said the specific words of denouncing white supremacy 20+ times, so really what you're asking is whether I believe he is sincere, is that what you're asking? If so, then I think the answer is mostly yes, with a tinge of no. Yes, in that I don't think Trump is a white supremacist, and I think he probably thinks the white supremacists supporting him are scum. But no in the sense that he is probably happy enough taking their vote.

I think you're using semantics to pretend Trump doesn't bother you. As a person, you say he doesn't bother you, but as a politician and through his actions he does. Isn't that what we're talking about? I don't know Trump personally, I can only comment on what I see through his actions, and as you mention, his rhetoric. So to say Trump doesn't bother you but his rhetoric does, is a little disingenuous and trying to skirt the point.

If you've read my response to TOD then you have my answer. Do you want me to repeat it again? Like you want Trump to repeat for the 21st time that he denounces white supremacy?

 

[koshari]

Royal commissions are circuses.

Murdoch would tip it on its head and come out looking better, just like Packer did before him.

royal commisions are the cream on the cake for all the barrister mates of the pollies, would be a lot more economical for the nation to simply give to departments responsible for specific areas teeth so they can go after the offenders in their areas. prolly only the tax department are the only department with real bite, even the EPA are toothless tigers these days.

IIRC packer faced a senate inquirey rather than a royal commission, which is even more of a farce.

 

[DesertRoo]

If you think trumps a white supremacist.
Q) who are these two people?

Carlin: ‘it’s a big club..’

 

[Sopwiths North]

Ok, you're getting into his motives and not taking him at face value. You are answering a different question. The question: "has Trump denounced white supremacy?" has, after watching that video, an obvious answer: yes, he has. If you don't think he's sincere, as I've previously mentioned, I won't argue with you. But he has said the specific words of denouncing white supremacy 20+ times, so really what you're asking is whether I believe he is sincere, is that what you're asking? If so, then I think the answer is mostly yes, with a tinge of no. Yes, in that I don't think Trump is a white supremacist, and I think he probably thinks the white supremacists supporting him are scum. But no in the sense that he is probably happy enough taking their vote.

I think you're using semantics to pretend Trump doesn't bother you. As a person, you say he doesn't bother you, but as a politician and through his actions he does. Isn't that what we're talking about? I don't know Trump personally, I can only comment on what I see through his actions, and as you mention, his rhetoric. So to say Trump doesn't bother you but his rhetoric does, is a little disingenuous and trying to skirt the point.

If you've read my response to TOD then you have my answer. Do you want me to repeat it again? Like you want Trump to repeat for the 21st time that he denounces white supremacy?

Nah, not being disingenuous, I do know my own feelings. But if you don't believe me, that's okay.

And no, I really couldn't tell from your response to TOD what your overall stance was on Trumps' rhetoric. Are you okay with it?

 

[DesertRoo]

Sound on..

 

[Mr_Nyah]

Nah, not being disingenuous, I do know my own feelings. But if you don't believe me, that's okay.

And no, I really couldn't tell from your response to TOD what your overall stance was on Trumps' rhetoric. Are you okay with it?

You tell me:

"Many of the reasons you state I agree with, and are some of the reasons I can't stand the guy. His Covid response has been a nightmare, he uses deliberately inflammatory language, and his immediate response to the BLM protests was one of the most disgracefully bad displays of "leadership" I've ever witnessed."

 

[Snake_Baker]

royal commisions are the cream on the cake for all the barrister mates of the pollies, would be a lot more economical for the nation to simply give to departments responsible for specific areas teeth so they can go after the offenders in their areas. prolly only the tax department are the only department with real bite, even the EPA are toothless tigers these days.

IIRC packer faced a senate inquirey rather than a royal commission, which is even more of a farce.

They are shows to make the public believe that it isn't all just one big racket.

 

[koshari]

They are shows to make the public believe that it isn't all just one big racket.

they are about as believable as a caro headline.

 

[Snake_Baker]

they are about as believable as a caro headline.

They exist for 2 purposes.

1) Advertise to the public about the righteousness of a politician.
2) Cover up the wrongdoings of politicians under the fallacious guise of a respectable legal investigation.

 

[Sopwiths North]

You tell me:

"Many of the reasons you state I agree with, and are some of the reasons I can't stand the guy. His Covid response has been a nightmare, he uses deliberately inflammatory language, and his immediate response to the BLM protests was one of the most disgracefully bad displays of "leadership" I've ever witnessed."

Why do you keep wanting me to tell you? I'm asking you. That's generally how this question and answer thing works. I'm not sure why you can't just answer the question instead of continually insisting on me telling you what the answer is.

What you've bolded tells me you don't like him. We've established that. Also, yes, he does use inflammatory language. I agree. So overall, are you okay with his rhetoric?

 

[Val Keating]

I wasn't aware that he's condemned white supremacists a bunch of times. Can you post some links to these?

It doesn’t matter how many times he’s asked, the answer should always be “yes I condemn white supremacy”. Simple.

 

[Mr_Nyah]

Why do you keep wanting me to tell you? I'm asking you. That's generally how this question and answer thing works. I'm not sure why you can't just answer the question instead of continually insisting on me telling you what the answer is.

What you've bolded tells me you don't like him. We've established that. Also, yes, he does use inflammatory language. I agree. So overall, are you okay with his rhetoric?

The reason I keep trying to get you to say it, is because I can see straight through the veiled accusations you're making. The statement is right there in the quote, and you're still asking me to confirm it. I literally went and found the exact quote where I said how bad his inflammatory rhetoric is, and yet you still asked me again whether I am ok with it. I couldn't have been more clear about the fact that I can't stand Trump, and that his inflammatory rhetoric is dangerous. And yet you can't acknowledge that and keep implying that I somehow support the guy that I've just spent 15 post s***ing on.

 

[see see]

royal commisions are the cream on the cake for all the barrister mates of the pollies, would be a lot more economical for the nation to simply give to departments responsible for specific areas teeth so they can go after the offenders in their areas. prolly only the tax department are the only department with real bite, even the EPA are toothless tigers these days.

IIRC packer faced a senate inquirey rather than a royal commission, which is even more of a farce.

Barristers f***ing love RCs.

As a senior silk once told me, "They're not a licence to print money, they're a licence to print the licences to print money".

He was well placed to make such an observation as he'd just pocketed a seven figure sum for about four months work as a counsel assisting.

 

[Mr_Nyah]

It doesn’t matter how many times he’s asked, the answer should always be “yes I condemn white supremacy”. Simple.

How many times is enough? Sure, the answer should be obvious and he should say it every single time the question is asked. But if it's been asked 15 times and he has answered 15 times that he condemns it, why should it be asked a 16th time?

 

[DesertRoo]

How many times is enough? Sure, the answer should be obvious and he should say it every single time the question is asked. But if it's been asked 15 times and he has answered 15 times that he condemns it, why should it be asked a 16th time?

I’m pretty sure there a cielo article which might help here.
15 ways you can tell if someone’s gaslighting you..

 

[Val Keating]

How many times is enough? Sure, the answer should be obvious and he should say it every single time the question is asked. But if it's been asked 15 times and he has answered 15 times that he condemns it, why should it be asked a 16th time?

Every single time. Same goes for any hate group. If he’s asked 100 times the answer should be the same. He’s the president ffs. There’s a reason they keep asking him.

 

[DesertRoo]

Every single time. Same goes for any hate group. If he’s asked 100 times the answer should be the same. He’s the president ffs. There’s a reason they keep asking him.

It’s a tactic used to discredit him by linking him to something that’s nonsense.
The media sucks...

 

[Val Keating]

 

[Val Keating]

It’s a tactic to discredit him by linking him to something that’s nonsense.
The media sucks...

It’s also because they know he doesn’t want to lose a part of his base by calling them scumbags or whatever. He’s the first president that isn’t afraid to say demeaning things about people so it’s not hard for him to go after them, but he doesn’t.

 

[Mr_Nyah]

Every single time. Same goes for any hate group. If he’s asked 100 times the answer should be the same. He’s the president ffs. There’s a reason they keep asking him.

I agree. Did you watch the video I posted the link to? It consolidated 20+ times he had answered the question and condemned white supremacy. Nonetheless, his answer should be the same every time: "I condemn white supremacy and I don't want them to vote for me. They can p*** off."

 

[Sopwiths North]

The reason I keep trying to get you to say it, is because I can see straight through the veiled accusations you're making. The statement is right there in the quote, and you're still asking me to confirm it. I literally went and found the exact quote where I said how bad his inflammatory rhetoric is, and yet you still asked me again whether I am ok with it. I couldn't have been more clear about the fact that I can't stand Trump, and that his inflammatory rhetoric is dangerous. And yet you can't acknowledge that and keep implying that I somehow support the guy that I've just spent 15 post s***ing on.

To be fair, the part you bolded to me just said that he uses inflammatory language, not how you felt about that. And there's no veiled accusations here, I'm just asking a pretty straightforward question. A simple yes or no, instead of demanding that I tell you what your answer is could have saved you a few posts.

 

[Mr_Nyah]

To be fair, the part you bolded to me just said that he uses inflammatory language, not how you felt about that. And there's no veiled accusations here, I'm just asking a pretty straightforward question. A simple yes or no, instead of demanding that I tell you what your answer is could have saved you a few posts.

Maybe just a misunderstanding then. I thought it was made abundantly clear in my posts what I thought about Trump and everything his politics entails. I thought I had made it very clear in the response to TOD. Anyway, all good, let's carry on.

 

[Val Keating]

I agree. Did you watch the video I posted the link to? It consolidated 20+ times he had answered the question and condemned white supremacy. Nonetheless, his answer should be the same every time: "I condemn white supremacy and I don't want them to vote for me. They can p*** off."

Exactly. Every time. Not Retweeting their memes wouldn’t hurt either

 

[Val Keating]

Trump is an old man from a family where his dad was balls deep in eugenics, he was raised with those principles. He’s been done for not letting black families buy into his apartment buildings. There is no doubt he’s racist. It’s been exposed through his history. He’s tied to the mafia through building in NY in the 80’s, he had to be. He is what he is. The other lot are just as bad. Biden is an awful person who’s losing his mind. Harris was in bed with a terrorist in the 70’s. They’re all crooked.

 

[DesertRoo]

It’s also because they know he doesn’t want to lose a part of his base by calling them scumbags or whatever. He’s the first president that isn’t afraid to say demeaning things about people so it’s not hard for him to go after them, but he doesn’t.

but this is his base

people who get wrapped up in the pantomime..

Vladislav Surkov created a similar thing in Russia, it doesn’t matter what trump believes or doesn’t, he just feeds the lie or illusion, so much so that truth doesn’t exist anymore.

People will believe what they are emotionally attached to now, nothing to do with facts, you can present them to people, yet they’ll stand there till there blue in the face telling you the sky is purple.