TRUMP MUST GO

[SkyDekker 1,121]

3 hours ago, ryoder said:

"I'm not going to read anything that is written like a 12 year-old wrote it."

Funny statement from someone who supports a political leader who talks like a 4 year old.

On top of that, Trump supporters, specially those who claim to be on the fringe of support, say that they like how he "says it like it is", that he doesn't talk like a politician. That Political Correctness is killing the country, and all that nonsense.

Now, when somebody says it like it is, they find it insulting and not befitting commentary of a president. All of a sudden, somebody "saying it like it is" is not a good thing.

[turtlespeed 212]

3 hours ago, olofscience said:

Trump tweets like a toddler, do you read those too?

No. Not unless someone here posts it like they did that headline.

[turtlespeed 212]

2 hours ago, olofscience said:

And the strangest thing about it is that Turtle defended, at length, Trump's statements about disinfectants and UV, which was positively infantile.

It's well known that Trump's language is extremely simple, probably below that of a 12 year old. They actually have a scientific paper about it: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1478929917706844

Maybe I can run that George F Will article through the same analysis, then we can settle the debate. Turtle, as a self-declared centrist, would you like to subject them to a fair and balanced scientific analysis?

I take no issue with that.

[olofscience 420]

Just now, turtlespeed said:

I take no issue with that.

Okay. Since I have other things to do, my preliminary analysis used some automated tools on the text DJL posted, namely the ATOS text analyser:

This means that the article you criticise to be written by a 12-year old, actually has the language level of 11th Grade, which is 16-17 year olds. Trump's language is more like 9-11 year olds.

So...are you still going to stick with your accusation that this conservative, George F Will, is writing like a 12-year old?

[turtlespeed 212]

2 minutes ago, olofscience said:

Okay. Since I have other things to do, my preliminary analysis used some automated tools on the text DJL posted, namely the ATOS text analyser:

This means that the article you criticise to be written by a 12-year old, actually has the language level of 11th Grade, which is 16-17 year olds. Trump's language is more like 9-11 year olds.

So...are you still going to stick with your accusation that this conservative, George F Will, is writing like a 12-year old?

Yes.

And it would be no less if he added a "Nanny Nanny Boo Boo", or a "Neener Neener", or a "Libtard", or "Mango Mussolini", or "Crybaby in Chief" . . . oh wait - 

[olofscience 420]

3 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Yes.

And it would be no less if he added a "Nanny Nanny Boo Boo", or a "Neener Neener", or a "Libtard", or "Mango Mussolini", or "Crybaby in Chief" . . . oh wait - 

So when Trump was throwing out insult after insult during his election campaign, it was okay then?

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

43 minutes ago, olofscience said:

So when Trump was throwing out insult after insult during his election campaign, it was okay then?

Hi science.

Of course.  Don't you know by now that the Trumpettes want it both ways?

Jerry Baumchen

[turtlespeed 212]

1 hour ago, olofscience said:

So when Trump was throwing out insult after insult during his election campaign, it was okay then?

No.  It wasn't.

[olofscience 420]

7 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

No.  It wasn't.

By no means are people who criticise Trump perfect (and no one has claimed that), but I suggest you focus your criticism on where 80% of the childish insults are coming from. (hint: it's not that article)

[jakee 1,254]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

Yes.

And it would be no less if he added a "Nanny Nanny Boo Boo", or a "Neener Neener", or a "Libtard", or "Mango Mussolini", or "Crybaby in Chief" . . . oh wait - 

Even if you're not going to read it, surely the point should be equally well made to you anyway? That Trump's behaviour and policies are so egregious that they pushed a lifelong conservative to write something so critical you thought it must be a far left hit-peice, and a hugely respected journalist and winner of numerous serious awards to resort to playground language to convey his strength of feeling.

That's how bad Trump is.

[turtlespeed 212]

4 minutes ago, olofscience said:

By no means are people who criticise Trump perfect (and no one has claimed that), but I suggest you focus your criticism on where 80% of the childish insults are coming from. (hint: it's not that article)

I'm not focusing on any of it.

The same goes for the posts here that have that kind of language here.  They just get passed over.

I'm just not going to spend my time reading something that starts out that way.

I will also end my reading if it comes up in the middle.

Obviously its too late if its at the end - The credibility is gone at that point though.

 

[turtlespeed 212]

Just now, jakee said:

Even if you're not going to read it, surely the point should be equally well made to you anyway? That Trump's behaviour and policies are so egregious that they pushed a lifelong conservative to write something so critical you thought it must be a far left hit-peice, and a hugely respected journalist and winner of numerous serious awards to resort to playground language to convey his strength of feeling.

That's how bad Trump is.

I see the point.

People turn from their affiliation every day.

Jew to Christian, Christian to Atheist, Left to right, Right to left, and any combination in between . . .  I'll see it as Earth Shattering when the Pope signs up to be a Muslim.

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

2 minutes ago, jakee said:

That's how bad Trump is.

Hi jakee,

But, the Trumpettes will NEVER admit it.

I am very sure that you have noticed, as I have, how silent some of them, on here, are now.

Jerry Baumchen

[olofscience 420]

6 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I'm just not going to spend my time reading something that starts out that way.

And yet most of your posts are criticising people who are criticising Trump.

You don't apply any mathematics or science to your so-called "critical" thinking, which really just appears to be making excuses for Trump.

11 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

The credibility is gone at that point

Yep, yours too as a so-called "centrist". I should have stopped when you defended his disinfectant comments.

[SkyDekker 1,121]

14 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I'm not focusing on any of it.

The same goes for the posts here that have that kind of language here.  They just get passed over.

I'm just not going to spend my time reading something that starts out that way.

I will also end my reading if it comes up in the middle.

Obviously its too late if its at the end - The credibility is gone at that point though.

 

Bullshit. You constantly give credibility to people who have used language like that. The only reason you refuse to read it is that it doesn't square with what you already have determined.

[JerryBaumchen 1,047]

Hi folks,

Could there be just the slightest crack in the dam:  'Mitt Romney said former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis' extraordinary critique of President Donald Trump was “very powerful.” Lisa Murkowski said she’s “struggling” with whether to support Trump's reelection and even suggested Mattis’ comments could cause the dam to break in the GOP.'

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/04/jim-mattis-drives-wedge-between-trump-and-republicans-301082

Jerry Baumchen

PS)  Almost all political movements start out very small.

[jakee 1,254]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

I see the point.

People turn from their affiliation every day.

Ha! Of course, he's suddenly pivoted to the far left all and that's why he's insulting Trump. Sure, that's far more likely than him still being what he always was, a conservative with the backbone to call out people and policies on his side that he disagrees with.

Must really bug you that he's walking your talk.

[billvon 2,384]

21 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

I'm not going to read anything that is written like a 12 year-old wrote it.

George Will - one of the most well-spoken and erudite authors the right wing has - becomes "like a 12 year old" when you disagree with his position.

Up next - Turtle thinks the Constitution is "juvenile and ignorant" because of the emoluments clause.

[kallend 1,621]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

I see the point.

People turn from their affiliation every day.

Jew to Christian, Christian to Atheist, Left to right, Right to left, and any combination in between . . .  I'll see it as Earth Shattering when the Pope signs up to be a Muslim.

Apparently it is a surprise to you that it is possible to hold conservative views while at the same time recognizing that Trump is a lying cheating scumbag** who is sowing divisiveness and hatred in the country he is supposed to lead.  There even seem to be a few GOP senators coming around to that view.

** among many other negative attributes too numerous to type. 

[turtlespeed 212]

1 minute ago, billvon said:

George Will - one of the most well-spoken and erudite authors the right wing has - becomes "like a 12 year old" when you disagree with his position.

Up next - Turtle thinks the Constitution is "juvenile and ignorant" because of the emoluments clause.

I read your posts.  If you started your posts with "The Crybaby in chief", Cheeto In Chief, Libtard, or the like, they would be ignored and skimmed over.

 

[turtlespeed 212]

23 minutes ago, kallend said:

Apparently it is a surprise to you that it is possible to hold conservative views while at the same time recognizing that Trump is a lying cheating scumbag** who is sowing divisiveness and hatred in the country he is supposed to lead.  There even seem to be a few GOP senators coming around to that view.

** among many other negative attributes too numerous to type. 

Not at all.

I harbor some of of those views.

There is a lot to be desired from Trump.

[SkyDekker 1,121]

20 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I read your posts.  If you started your posts with "The Crybaby in chief", Cheeto In Chief, Libtard, or the like, they would be ignored and skimmed over.

 

Then you miss a lot. When somebody's tone significantly changes form their normal, it is generally a decent time to try and figure out why that might be.

[yoink 321]

9 hours ago, jakee said:

Even if you're not going to read it, surely the point should be equally well made to you anyway? That Trump's behaviour and policies are so egregious that they pushed a lifelong conservative to write something so critical you thought it must be a far left hit-peice, and a hugely respected journalist and winner of numerous serious awards to resort to playground language to convey his strength of feeling.

That's how bad Trump is.

But he didn't read it - that's the point. After the first sentence he gets to ignore everything that comes after because it's a 'deliberate far left hit job'. And he ALSO get to have an opinion on it, DESPITE not reading it.

Magic.

[mistercwood 287]

Even I forced myself to at least skim the talking points in the latest Candace Owens video. She's a total grifter, but I at least wanted to know what she was saying in order to refute it.

[yobnoc 142]

I have Turtle on "ignore," but occasionally click the button to see some of his...sage-like...input.  Perhaps there are words in other languages besides English that describe the glee of watching him get utterly dragged throughout this thread - every bit of scorn richly deserved.  

And it could've been as simple as "My bad.  I was wrong."

Edited June 5, 2020 by yobnoc