I think everyone should read the very first post in this thread, and realise that this thread has proved that post perfectly.
:2 cents:
:2 cents:
Suddenly, a political argument...
- Thread starter lurkingdirk
- Start date
bobjustbob
Proud member of FreeOnes Hall Of Fame. Retired to
Clear as day. Dirk and Harley Spencer are liberal trouble makers looking to change our good world with their anti-family values and socialist propaganda shit. You 2 make me sick.
xfire
New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
Word. Those fuckers start shit then castigate everyone who replies, obvious liberal trolling.
vodkazvictim
Why save the world, when you can rule it?
I blame the blacks.
At least for once noone is blaming the Germans...... 
bobjustbob
Proud member of FreeOnes Hall Of Fame. Retired to
Normally I would too but not on this thread.
vodkazvictim
Why save the world, when you can rule it?
Specifically I blame the German blacks.At least for once noone is blaming the Germans......
:scream: Klaus! :scream:
Yeah! All five of them!
And why Klaus? Why do Americans think all Germans are named Klaus or Dietrich. I don't know anyone named Klaus or Dietrich...wait, strike that, I know one person named Klaus...
Rattrap
Doesn't feed trolls and would appreciate it if you
Since I moved here, I've discovered everybody is actually called Tobias. All of my German friends are called Tobias. Even the girls.Yeah! All five of them!
And why Klaus? Why do Americans think all Germans are named Klaus or Dietrich. I don't know anyone named Klaus or Dietrich...wait, strike that, I know one person named Klaus...
Yeah, some names boomed incredibly in the last 20 or so years. Tobias being one of them....and Marie, Anna/Anne, Stefi/Stefani, Jan, Christian.... while some of the good old German names like Heinz, Alois, Elisabeth, Hans, Helga, Walter, Günt(h)er are slowly dying out. What's especially disturbing is that notably the "lower class" is giving their children names like Kevin, Chantalle, Beyonce, Mandy, Jarome, Wendy etc. This has grown so out of control, that there's even a scientific term for this phenomenon ("Chantalismus"). I've even seen/heard names like Danny Rambo, Leon-Wayne and Ayengelin. While names like Kevin or Mandy don't seem to be that bad to Americans, when you heard some German white trash mom yelling one of those names in the supermarket, you know why this phenomenon is quite disturbing to German ears.
democrips and rebloodlicans SMH
Re: All OCSMs need to read this....
Thing is, until very, very recently the Republican Party has disagreed with you. In fact, it wasn't until after they surmised their "autopsy" of the last election that they even recognized that this might be an error in strategy. According to the heads of the party itself, their exclusionary methods are one of the reasons they lost the last election.
See, now here's the problem; you're a moron.
No, no really. Stick with me here...
Your problem is that you suggest that you're simply referring to a specific group. The problem is; so is everyone else. But you refuse to see that because, well, you're a moron. You need to try and cherry pick an argument because you can't win one otherwise because, well, you're a moron. You get so up in arms about using "all" as an absolute, but no one did that. Not really.
If you look back what you'll find is that the quote you initially responded to, while broad, didn't use the word "all". No, no it didn't. It generalized Republicans, yes, but not all Republicans. The first use of the word "all" was by you.
And if you read that statement, it's actually ambiguous. Or didn't you notice that? While you could be limiting the selection of Democrats, you could also be applying a set of parameters to all Democrats through that sentence. That all Democrats voted for Obama because of your suggested reasoning. That is, in fact, a valid interpretation of what you put forward. If someone were to misinterpret your statement that way it wouldn't be their fault, it would be yours for making an ambiguous statement. Basic rules of communication say you're a fuck up.
Second, if you look at the follow up response to which you ALSO took issue, the one where you took issue with the use of the word "all" (AFTER fucking up it's use yourself)...
What you'll notice there Philbert, is that she QUALIFIED IT BEFORE SHE SAID ALL. Thus the "you all" would, logically, apply to the aforementioned qualified party (most Republicans, not all Republicans) despite you getting a bug up your ass about it being used as an "absolute" which it wasn't (except perhaps, arguably, in an interpretation of your first use of it... though even then it's use would be limited since it would apply only to Democrats).
So, as you can clearly see... you Philbert, are a moron.
Wild guess, despite having this clearly spelled out for you, you still won't concede? I'd wager it because, well, you're a moron.
Thing is, until very, very recently the Republican Party has disagreed with you. In fact, it wasn't until after they surmised their "autopsy" of the last election that they even recognized that this might be an error in strategy. According to the heads of the party itself, their exclusionary methods are one of the reasons they lost the last election.
“We don’t have time to divide our party. We’ve got to go back to welcoming anyone who walks through that door. We don’t need to be labeling people, ‘You’re a bad Republican’… Reagan said someone who is 80 percent my friend is not 20 percent my enemy. I want to build this party.”
- Reince Priebus, Chairman of the Republican National Committee
- Reince Priebus, Chairman of the Republican National Committee
See, now here's the problem; you're a moron.
No, no really. Stick with me here...
Your problem is that you suggest that you're simply referring to a specific group. The problem is; so is everyone else. But you refuse to see that because, well, you're a moron. You need to try and cherry pick an argument because you can't win one otherwise because, well, you're a moron. You get so up in arms about using "all" as an absolute, but no one did that. Not really.
If you look back what you'll find is that the quote you initially responded to, while broad, didn't use the word "all". No, no it didn't. It generalized Republicans, yes, but not all Republicans. The first use of the word "all" was by you.
Philbert said:
And if you read that statement, it's actually ambiguous. Or didn't you notice that? While you could be limiting the selection of Democrats, you could also be applying a set of parameters to all Democrats through that sentence. That all Democrats voted for Obama because of your suggested reasoning. That is, in fact, a valid interpretation of what you put forward. If someone were to misinterpret your statement that way it wouldn't be their fault, it would be yours for making an ambiguous statement. Basic rules of communication say you're a fuck up.
Second, if you look at the follow up response to which you ALSO took issue, the one where you took issue with the use of the word "all" (AFTER fucking up it's use yourself)...
Harley Spencer said:
What you'll notice there Philbert, is that she QUALIFIED IT BEFORE SHE SAID ALL. Thus the "you all" would, logically, apply to the aforementioned qualified party (most Republicans, not all Republicans) despite you getting a bug up your ass about it being used as an "absolute" which it wasn't (except perhaps, arguably, in an interpretation of your first use of it... though even then it's use would be limited since it would apply only to Democrats).
So, as you can clearly see... you Philbert, are a moron.
Wild guess, despite having this clearly spelled out for you, you still won't concede? I'd wager it because, well, you're a moron.
bobjustbob
Proud member of FreeOnes Hall Of Fame. Retired to
From my view it wasn't so much an exclusionary thing as a bad strategy. It was more of a by-product of not having clear policies and being able to get the messages across to the people as a mass. Mc Cain and his reach across the aisle thing was going nowhere. His maverick thing would have done better in the last election. Mitt was an empty suit even in the primaries. He had no ideas. Never told us what he was going to do. Only told us what was wrong.
Similar threads
