TDS still going strong! - Donald Trump Discussion

[–] tom8 (3119) 3 years ago

6 years..... 6 fucking years

libs are true retards, amazing really.

Trump lives rent free in their minds, no matter how much shit Biden does, they will only talk about Trump! truly insane!

reply

[–] Bubbathegut (18147) 2 years ago

7 years now. It has been reported that TDS might last over 100 years.

reply

[–] SamNoyoun (5933) 3 years ago

Yet it seems to be mostly his supporters randomly commenting on ancient posts that keeps him trending these days...

To wit: https://moviechat.org/nm0874339/Donald-Trump/5b56b594c527f500141dc82f/Best-President-in-the-past-30-years

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

What does TDS even mean? Trump Derangement Syndrome? Does it means those morons who believe in Trump? Or something else?

reply

[–] Bubbathegut (18147) 2 years ago

You cant stop or cure TDS.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

What do you mean by Trump Derangement Syndrome?
That sad MAGAts are obsessed with Trump?
Or that normal people keep going on about him?
Or both?

reply

[–] Destinata (3525) 2 years ago

You DO know you're just announcing that you must live in an echo chamber.

There's this thing called the Internet where people can look up terms they're unsure of. Since you don't even know what TDS is, chances are you don't even know that you're currently ON the Internet. Really. For colloquial terms the best place to go before you start broadcasting your complete know-nothingness is the Urban Dictionary.

I hope you've heard of Google. If you haven't, that at least explains some things.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

Wikipedia is my site of choice for such stupid terms.

reply

[–] Destinata (3525) 2 years ago

I give you an opportunity to learn something and you turn it down. That speaks volumes.

Since you didn't learn what you needed at Wikipedia in four months and had to repeat the question here, you might want to expand your sources just a bit. Clearly Wikipedia alone isn't doing the job.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

What am I supposed to learn, exactly? Trump is an idiot, America is an idiot for electing him, and I'm continuing to point out what a sad loser of an idiot he is on his own page. If I'd be better off ignoring him, I can't do that. I cannot allow his stupidity to contaminate others.

reply

[–] Destinata (3525) 2 years ago

Wow. You even forgot the question. Dang.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

Stop pestering me.

reply

[–] Destinata (3525) 2 years ago

Can you not even figure out how the "block" feature works???

BTW, we get it. You hate Trump. You have no cogent arguments for it. You're an NPC. That's why you can't properly defend your argument. You're just a 🦜 for liberal talking points. You say things like, "Trump is an idiot, America is an idiot for electing him, and I'm continuing to point out what a sad loser of an idiot he is on his own page." Which doesn't actually say anything more than you hate Trump, you think he's an idiot. NPC. TDS. 🦜

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

Why do you like Trump? I've never understood how any sane, intelligent individual can like him.

reply

[–] Destinata (3525) 2 years ago

That isn’t the question you asked to begin with but seem to have no interest in answering. Now you’re deflecting.

But since you insist, no, I don’t like Trump. The final straw was when he said there were conditions where he believed it made sense to ignore the Constitution. Presidents swear to uphold and defend the Constitution, not that many of either party seem committed to that. But a fellow who says he’ll ignore it in plain English has forfeited his right to hold the office.

He’s since tried to walk that back, but you’ll excuse me if I go with the “excited utterance.”

Don’t assume. Just because I say it’s wrong to be a parrot or ignore the good someone has done because your “side” tells you to mindlessly hate them doesn’t mean I’d vote for the guy.

And if you knew anything about politics, you’d be cheering him on. He’s going to tear the GOP apart and make way for another Trojan Horse candidate from the Democrats. People who understand politics and have been around awhile can see that.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

Sorry for assuming you like Trump. I'm not really one for political discussions, it's all baffling to me.

reply

[–] Bubbathegut (18147) 2 years ago

You cant cure TDS.

reply

[–] Miyagido (2944) a year ago

What does MAGAt even mean? Does it mean the person using it is a dumb FAGAt? Why yes it does!

reply

[–] [deleted] a year ago

It's a play on "maggot", which is a disgusting creature at best.

reply

[–] ahmad12 (2) 2 years ago

The communist Democrats are devoid of any plans or solutions for the problems the American people are experiencing. They are career politicians whose main goals are to win re-election and strengthen the party's hold on power. For more you can contact me on https://contadorpalabras.org/

reply

[–] xanthas (3215) 2 years ago

The number one tactic of the right-wing is to accuse the opposing party of the crimes of which they themselves are guilty.

reply

[–] Destinata (3525) 2 years ago

That's rich. The fellow in the White House says Republicans offer no solutions when talking about the southern border. What's hilarious is that Republicans have been saying for the last two years that all that's needed is to enforce the laws that are already in place. Prang! The "solution."

A smart man would have gone through Trump's policies and kept the ones that were working. But it's pretty obvious they wanted to open the southern border while saying they hadn't opened the southern border. They must want fentanyl to be killing more people than Covid ever did.

Not saying Trump was a genius. He kept Fauci, shut down the economy, gave us Operation Warp Speed, and started us down the road of stimulus checks.

reply

[–] xanthas (3215) 2 years ago

The GOP doesn't like the laws in place. The laws are meant to offer asylum. This nation has always offered asylum to those seeking it. We are a nation founded on immigrants. If you don't like it, leave.

tRump didn't have any border policies worth keeping. tRump's policy was to lock kids in cages.

reply

[–] Destinata (3525) 2 years ago

Now you're claiming these people are supposed to follow an orderly system to get into this country? Trump had an agreement with Mexico that the people would be kept on that side of the border until they were processed.

Yes, this is a nation of immigrants, most of whom came through Ellis Island or through immigration in San Francisco. Just walking in is not what's done in a country where laws are established.

Where are the kids kept now? There is ONE reporter with a news crew stationed at the border, and his name is Bill Melugin. It's been cold in Texas border towns, and the people are having to sleep on the streets. You wouldn't know that because the MSM knows you won't do your own research, and that if they don't cover it, so far as people like you are concerned, IT DOESN'T EXIST or HASN'T HAPPENED.

Here. Get educated: https://twitter.com/BillFOXLA

reply

[–] Joogle83 (4521) 2 years ago

you and your party are holding society your against progress but sure blame us "communist Democrats"

reply

[–] BourbonKing (5782) 2 years ago

You and Rorikon suffer from Woke Derangement Syndrome

reply

[–] xanthas (3215) 2 years ago

And they probably live in their parents' basements and rarely encounter actual minorities or wokeness of any kind.

reply

[–] Destinata (3525) 2 years ago

More, probably, lately, now that Elon Musk bought Twitter and has let people have free speech. A lot of the "woke" have fled to Mastodon, but it looks like a lot of them landed here.

reply

[–] Ranb (10318) 2 years ago

If there is free speech in twitter now, why are bans still taking place? https://www.nickiswift.com/1091935/celebs-whove-been-banned-from-twitter-since-elon-musk-took-over/

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

Becasue they impersonated someone else. It said right in your link.

Question: Do you support Free Speech?

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Not all that were banned impersonated him. Also yep I do believe in free speech which is why Colin Kaepernick should be allowed to kneel during the national anthem.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

Did anyone say anYthing about the impersonations being HIM?

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Yes in the article it points to some impersonating Trump. Not all who got banned impersonated someone.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

And how is that relevant to anything anyone here said?

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

It was a response to what you said about the article. You claim to support free speech. Which means you support Kaepernick having the freedom to kneel correct?

reply

[–] Bubbathegut (18147) 2 years ago

Free speech doesn't apply to employees of a company.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

But, my point was NOT that they impersonated Musk, so your counter point made no sense.

So, why did you say it? Did you misunderstand my point?

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Okay perhaps I misunderstood it then. However the point stands if you believe in free speech Kaepernick should have the right to kneel.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

Try to pay more attention to what people actually say, instead of ANTICIPATING what you think they are going to say, or what you imagine they must actually mean.

As to Kaerpernick, what he is allowed to do during work hours, is more a call for his bosses. NOW that he is not being paid, he can kneel as much as he wants, when he wants, as far as I am concerned.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Alright I will do that. You also need to understand someone can be intelligent while disagreeing with your political stance. Someone is also not necessarily some raging leftist because they do not support Trump like you do.

Funny your glorious leader at the time wanted him to be removed and fired. Isn't that overstepping his bounds? That is the NFL's call to make not yours, his or mine.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

1. Good.

2. I've never said that all lefties are stupid.

3. I'm well aware that non leftards can and do "not support" President Trump.

4. Nope. Trump was well within "his bounds" to voice his opinion that the asshole should be fired. In fact I completely agree. Kaepernick should have been fired. He was on hte clock insulting his employers custormers.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

You implied that all leftists are stupid.

Then why were you so quick to label me as a leftist once you saw I did not support Trump.

Nope he was out of line. I am glad you idiots did not get your way. The NFL made the right call choke on it.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

1. Did I? Possibly. Or did you just assume incorrectly based on ANTICIPATING, my words or meaning?

2. I don't recall. And really, who cares? Do you consider lefties to be such sub human, that being called one is an actual INSULT?

3. America has had a bi-partisan consensus on equality for blacks since before Kaepernic was born. He is an asshole and should have been fired.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

I am going with my gut feeling that you did imply that based on your words.

Why label me that? It was a way to dismiss me and belittle me as a person. Notice I did not label you as a stupid right wing conservative. Had I done that you would not have liked it.

The NFL makes that call not you. You did not get your way choke on it.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

1. Unlikely. I do not beleive that all lefties are stupid.

2. I do not dismiss people without massive cause. And never belittle them unless they are assholes to me first. So, no, it was not either of those.

3. You have labeled me wacist. And you have done that in order to belittle or dismiss me and/or my words. Such behavior is common with leftard assholes.

4. Nothing I said implied that the nfl was not in charge of that. We were discussing YOUR claim that TRump was out of line calling for htem to fire him. If I was a complete asshole, I would pretend that your lack of addressing that, was a concession on your part.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

That is not what you implied. Otherwise why use the label leftist as an insult?

You dismissed me when I brought up the Catwoman casting. I did not insult you about that but you did dismiss me. You said nothing about the whitewashing of Tiger Lily in the film Pan. Isn't it funny how you only notice race swaps against whites? I wonder why that is?

Who claimed racism first? That was you about Black Panther. So nope take that rhetoric and shove it! Funny I like how you are allowed to call what you feel is racist against whites but others can't do the same if they feel racism is done elsewhere. You are a hypocrite.

Therefore your words mean nothing. The NFL made the right call deal with it.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

1. Because being a leftist is a bad thing. And I generally don't use that word as an insult. That is more what I use leftard for. Leftist is more just for keeping it real.

2. I doubt that I dismissed you. I might have dismissed a stupid point you made. Because you talk a lot of shit.

3. Very different to complain about racism in a movie, to labeling a person, especially one you are talking to, as wacist.

4. We were discussing YOUR claim that Trump was out of line. YOUR WORDS. HE was well within his rights and he was correct that Kaepernic should have been fired.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Why is being a leftist a bad thing? Because it is different from your political ideology?

You did dismiss me I have the messages saved.

Not when I see you ignore it elsewhere. This to me shows your behavior outside of talking about movies.

Nope in my book he was out of line saying that. You can disagree but to try and claim what owners should do is not part of the deal. If you believe in free speech he has the right to do what he did. Trump wanted him to not have the right to do it. If no law was broken or no person was harmed you are within your rights to do something. Feelings do not trump rights.

reply

[–] r1zz (137) 2 years ago

So if a player brought out a lgbtq flag every game and made a gesture of wiping his ass with it, you'd say "well, nothing should happen to him because he has freedom of speech. There's nothing the owners can do." ? Of course not. If a player even did that in his own free time he would be, at minimum, suspended. So the question is is kneeling during the anthem egregious enough to warrant kicking him off the team? Trump thought it was. This has nothing to do with his freedom of speech.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

I'm cool with it both ways. Thing is you and your people want to silence people when they don't share your views. You couldn't stop at I disagree with him doing it. You wanted him banned for doing so. You know kind of like Trump being removed from Twitter. I'm all about freedom of speech and not censoring people so long as it works both ways.

reply

[–] r1zz (137) 2 years ago

So you think any player can say and do anything they want before or during a game as long as it's legal speech and the owners should have no say, no matter how bad it makes them look. Racist rants, wearing a swastika etc etc. All should be allowed, during an nfl game, and the people who pays their salary should have no say? Well, at least to me that seems ridiculous.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Him kneeling was not about disrespecting the flag. No matter how much you want to paint it that way it isn't. It's a peaceful protest.

reply

[–] r1zz (137) 2 years ago

Try to stay on topic. We weren't talking about if it was disrespectful or not. That's a different subject.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

It's the nfl's call to make. It's not yours, mine or the president's decision. Period.

reply

[–] r1zz (137) 2 years ago

Ok, so now we agree: the nfl CAN make that call. So if the nfl can make that call, then I or you or the president can have an opinion if they SHOULD make that call or not. So how is he out of line saying his opinion that they should kick him off the team?

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

You can have an opinion. However when you think they should cave to your opinion it's another story. What if I said Twitter has the right to ban Trump? Would you agree? I doubt you would. So if the NFL has the right to ban Kaepernick then why did your group complain about twitter banning Trump? Their call to make right?

reply

[–] r1zz (137) 2 years ago

A company whose sole purpose is to allow people across the world to speak to each other is different from a company whose sole purpose is to play football. That would be taking away someone's right to free speech. I also don't think twitter should be able to ban Kaepernick for anything he says that is legal.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Both are private platforms. Therefore they can ban who they want for whatever reason they choose. See how this works?

reply

[–] r1zz (137) 2 years ago

I think a football team and a service used for public discussion are two completely different things. If public discussion is censored, you no longer have free speech. I also don't think at&t could anytime someone was talking negative about Trump intercept the call and say "this has been deemed hate speech, the call will now be disconnected".

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Okay but either way it was a peaceful protest. I love how people say I just wish they would protest by peaceful methods without rioting, or violence or law breaking. Yet that gets done and it is still an issue.

Regardless I think Trump is a piece of garbage and an awful example of a president. Just to be clear I do not support censorship in fact I actively hate it! I just can't stand Trump or the hypocrisy from the right. It is annoying.

reply

[–] r1zz (137) 2 years ago

Ok, well let's just leave it at that. Good discussion. Fist bump?

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Agreed. Sorry I hope I didn't offend have a good one

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

Moveifanatic never stays on topic, especially when he starts to lose. Which is all the time.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Lol right. Coming from the clown who called Candace Owens brilliant. Also tell everyone how side stepping is your specialty.

reply

[–] tvfan (13756) 2 years ago

I agree with him, Candace is smart, intelligent, and an independent thinker.
She is certainly not a comatose brainwashed sheep in denial.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Candace Owens is an uncle Tom shill. People of your group like her because she will defend conservatives any chance she gets.

She is intelligent? Please tell me that is a joke. Did you see her interview about climate change with Joe Rogan? You know she defends Kanye West also? You seen the comments he has made recently? Why suddenly does she not back Trump anymore? Oh yeah because he was rude to her. She is a joke and I can't stand her.

You also know she sued the school she went to for racism correct? She collected the lawsuit money, you can look that up. Yet she claims she has never experienced racism. If that is true what did she sue her school for?

reply

[–] tvfan (13756) 2 years ago

Nothing you mentioned makes her any less, smart, intelligent, or an independent thinker.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Lol yeah as expected no retorts. Tell me do you think it is stupid to believe in something or have an opinion on something you know nothing about? How is she independent? She simps for the right no matter what occurs.

reply

[–] tvfan (13756) 2 years ago

It is impossible to have retorts or debates with any comatose brainwashed sheep living in denial.

You chose to turn your back on the "facts" and the "truth" and embraced the "lies" and "deceptions".

I recently provided you with historical facts that are impossible to refute and yet you denied them; therefore; there is no point in providing you with any more of them.

You will always have nothing more than "opinions" regardless of "the truth and facts".

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Um she did have an interview with Joe Rogan. This is a fact, you choose to ignore it because it undercuts your narrative. She also did sue her school for racism, again you ignore it because it does not support your worldview.

What facts have I turned my back on? Go ahead enlighten me.

No I just did not buy into your bs claim that everything about socialism is bad. It is a scareword your side uses. They do it thinking simply saying socialism makes your point for you.

I posted facts about Candace Owens, not opinions facts. Try it sometime.

reply

[–] tvfan (13756) 2 years ago

I support her choices and it makes her no less smart or intelligent.

You are nickpicking because of your dislike and disdain for her; seriously? Is that the best you can do against conservatives?

You obviously know nothing about Socialism and you certainly did not live it; so no, there is nothing good about it.

If you were born and raised in a Socialist government than you should know better.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

What choices do you support? You are being purposefully vague. If someone makes bad choices it has no bearing on their intelligence? Wow bad logic.

No I am calling her out for bad behavior. I do not have to nit pick when there are facts laid out of her bad behavior or beliefs.

So then no socialist modern program benefits people in any way shape or form? Care to double down on that?

Capitalism gets exploited constantly yet you say nothing. You are a boot licker.

reply

[–] tvfan (13756) 2 years ago

You must have missed the part from the other thread where I clearly mentioned that capitalism does require balance since it can be corrupted and exploited or did you miss that part...again. This is why it is impossible to debate with deniers and even worse; with those who turn their back on "facts and truth".

She is not behaving bad in any way. You are confused as to what bad behavior is. This is partly what happens when people turn their back on truth and facts...bad is good and good is bad...down is up, and up is down.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

You then claim nothing good has come out of socialism. That was an ignorant claim. That would be me like me saying nothing good has come out of capitalism. You gave some leeway there only because I called you on it.

Lol she is not behaving bad in any way? Right so her suing her school for racism was not bad behavior? Her lying about that is not bad behavior?

reply

[–] tvfan (13756) 2 years ago

Ignorant of "YOU"; yes, absolutely since you believe that it was a good thing without knowing "anything" about socialism except the two lines that you read on the internet.

No it was not bad behavior and no she did not lie...once again, you are confused and your version of the truth is distorted.

You do not like her and you are already bias against truth and facts; therefore, any attempt to elaborate or debate is futile.

When your leftist-liberals sue for racism, then it is good behavior, however, if/when the right-side does it, it is bad behavior...the hypocrisy from the left-mentality never ceases to amaze me.

reply

[–] Bubbathegut (18147) 2 years ago

Epic. lol

reply

[–] tvfan (13756) 2 years ago

Why is being a leftist a bad thing? Because it is different from your political ideology?

This is what you and the entire socialist-leftist propose with that question.

-Why is being a fascist a bad thing?
-Why is being a communist a bad thing?
-Why is being a degenerate who grooms and brainwashes children a bad thing?
-Why is WW3 and a nuclear war a bad thing?
-Why is a little radiation poisoning that slowly kills you in the most horrible way a bad thing?
-Why is it that defending all the above by SJWs a bad thing?

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Nice generalization. So by being a liberal or leftist that means you agree with all that stuff by default?

Just like how I don't believe every right wing person is a white supremacist fascist. It's a dumb generalization.

reply

[–] tvfan (13756) 2 years ago

Once again...for the uninformed, the oblivious, or those pretending.

Fascism originated from the left.
Socialism is on the left of the spectrum.

Fascism was invented by Benito Mussolini who was a socialist and his father was also a socialist.

Socialism = Fascism and Communism

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Also to the uninformed socialism is used as a scare word.

Socialism is a scare word they have hurled at every advance the people have made in the last 20 years.

Socialism is what they called public power. Socialism is what they called social security.

Socialism is what they called farm price supports.

Socialism is what they called bank deposit insurance.

Socialism is what they called the growth of free and independent labor organizations.

Socialism is their name for almost anything that helps all the people.

When the Republican candidate inscribes the slogan "Down With Socialism" on the banner of his "great crusade," that is really not what he means at all.

What he really means is "Down with Progress--down with Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal," and "down with Harry Truman's fair Deal." That's all he means.

https://historyhub.history.gov/thread/8516

reply

[–] tvfan (13756) 2 years ago

None of those subjective rants refutes my statement or the facts.

You forgot the most important one:
Socialism was the biggest deception and lie ever created.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

All of them do which is why all you can do is deny and not address the points. We use socialist programs today that help people. The key is you need balance. Total capitalism isn't a good system to completely rely on either.

reply

[–] tvfan (13756) 2 years ago

No they do not, they are made to appear to help people, but it is a hypocritical deceptive lie. Look further into those so called "socialist programs" and you will find this to be true.

There is no balance when it comes to socialism or any of it's branches/aspects; it is an impossible and impractical Utopian dream/fantasy created by the likes of Marx/Engels and the French Revolution before them.

Capitalism on the other hand does require some balance to a certain degree since it is corruptible and exploitable.

There is no balance with fascism and communism; I know this firsthand.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Yes they do. Capitalism gets exploited time and time again yet your side says nothing. Anyways I'm bored with this conversation. Keep believing in the scare word the right has told you to believe. I'm too old and educated to fall for that. I used to think that way but my eyes have been opened. Have a good one bud.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

1. No, it's more the way they are today violent fascist and hateful thugs.

2. I did not dismiss when I labeled you, that came later after you gave me massive cause. Once again you fail to pay any attention to context. Dumbass.

3. Your post was moot shit. It is very different to about racism in a movie, to labeling a person, especially one you are talking to, as wacist.

4. "in your book" is meaningless garbage. Trump had the view that Kaerpernick should have been fired and was well within his rights to share that view publicly. NOthing you have said has come close to explaining why he did not have that right.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Your generalization is dismissed. If you can generalize I'm free to as well. Right wingers are boot licking violent criminals. Look what happened on January 6th. Also how about how right wingers defend cops even if they are blatantly in the wrong? It is disgusting.

Nope bullshit! Your label was a means of dismissal. You aren't fooling anyone you bigot.

I already showed how you have racist behavior. Guaranteed you only talk this trash behind a computer. You wouldn't say the crap you say in person. Shut your wimpy weasel ass up.

Nope he had no right and I'm glad the NFL didn't cave to that thug. I'm glad Twitter banned him he deserved it.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

1. Except my generatlization is true and yours is false. You just talk shit.

2. You are incorrect about how I use labelling. I am not you. You are a fool.

3. You made idiotic assertions with, at best, shit logic as supporting arguments. There is nothing wrong with my complaints about the racism in Black Panther. It is wrong of you to call me wacist, as a form of dismissal. You are an asshole.

4. He had every right to voice his opinion. That you think otherwise is you being against human rights.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

No it is not. Plenty of left leaning people do not support what you claim. Oh so the January 6th riot did not happen? You don't have people who defend Trump no matter what he does? Yeah very funny buddy. Also for Pete's sake spell your words right! It is generalization not generatlization. Wow you truly are an idiot!

Nope I am correct about this. No amount of deceit is going to sway anyone. Anyone with a brain can see what you are doing.

Oh there is so much wrong with your points about Black Panther. You said because it showed the villain ridiculing the museum lady that it was validating racism against whites. Because you know villains never ridicule people for asshole reasons. Also Tchalla did not have the same ideology of Killmonger. If they were the same then what are they fighting for? You could not refute this stuff.

Nope he did not. Which is why I am glad he is not president anymore. Get that orange son of a bitch out of the whitehouse he is fired! Nothing brings me more joy than not seeing his smug face in the whitehouse! I hope you enjoyed him when he was in, his reign of terror is over.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

1. YOur pretense of being too dumb to understand how generalizations work, is dismissed.

2. You are throwing unsupported assertions/shit like a retarded monkey.

3. And again you pretend to be too stupid to follow a simple point. My point was not to disccus the movie but that me simply having the complaint, is not racist, as you claim. You complete asshole.

4. He does not have the right to voice an opinion? LOL. You are talking shit. You are a lying asshole.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Nope a generalization is not iron clad nor fact. You need to get this through your thick skull.

Your deceit is dismissed.

The fact that you only call racism against whites raises suspicion. I am going to generalize like you now. Generally people only upset about racism against them is racist against others.

Nope not when it oversteps his bounds. He has no right to tell the NFL what to do.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

1. You pretending to be too dumb to understand how generalizations work, is pathetic.

2. Said the shit throwing monkey.

3. Being more upset about attacks against you and yours does not indicate hostility to anyone. You claim otherwise, makes no sense.

4. President Trump has/had the right of Free Speech. You are stonewalling against his human rights, becuase your position on the Kneeling is so stupid that even you want to avoid it.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

I understand how generalizations work better than you do.

Keep on throwing out that insult. I will keep stating the truth.

Not in my experience. In my experience that is generally the case.

He can say whatever he wants but in the end it is not his call to make. Glad the NFL did not listen to that clown.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

1. Your "rebuttal" to my general statement about liberals, demonstrated that you do not.

2. Said the shit throwing monkey.

3. Based on your experiance? You mean, you assumed shit about people before, and now you are using that as data to justify doing the same again? LIke I said, you are nothing but a shit throwing monkey.

4. It is nice that you now concede to him the human right of Freedom of Speech, after I ridiculed you mercilessly for days. You are the clown here, not Trump. What he said was completely correct.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

My rebuttal showcases your ignorance. Generalizations are not facts and they also can be wrong as well.

Keep on with the insults. It shows your maturity level.

If you can make assumptions, and generalizations I am free to do the same.

I never claimed he did not have the right to free speech. He stepped overboard by saying he shouldn't be allowed to do it. If he is allowed free speech then Kaepernick is allowed to kneel. If Kapernick is not allowed to kneel then Trump is not allowed to voice his opinion. You can't have i both ways.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

1. Generalizations can be correct. If mine is wrong, you have to explain how it is wrong to do a rebuttal. Just calling it a generalization and thinking that is it, is YOU showing YOUR ignorance.

2. Said the troll asshole.

3. Except in my rebuttal, I explained how your assumption and generalization was wrong. And all you had was the unsupported asserting that "in your experience". Which would be what is known as anecdotal evidence. You rude dumbass.

4. I said he had the right to voice his opinon and you said he did not. That is you being anti-human rights, and now you are just talking shit.

reply

[–] moviefanatic505 (6227) 2 years ago

Nope the one making the generalization has the burden of proof. A generalization can be correct but it can also be wrong as well. You making a generalization and walking away is not stating a fact. You show me a hateful leftist and I can show you a reasonable one. Same goes for right wingers.

Keep on getting creative I love it.

Your statement was also anecdotal. Comical irony alert. I can prove your generalization wrong as well yet you stone wall. Fact not every leftist is a thug boom I proved it.

So then that means Kaepernick is allowed to kneel I am glad we all agree. If Kaepernick is not allowed to kneel then Trump is not allowed to voice his opinion. Pick one you do not get to have it both ways.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

1. Sure, you might be able to find a reasonable lefty here or there, but in general, they have been violent or supportive of violence. That is why it is a good generalization.

2. No need for creativity. Your troll behavior has been consistent.

3. A generalization is not disproved by one or two exceptions. That you pretend to not know that, is incredible. Do you realize how retarded you are looking?

4. Your position makes no sense. Trump has the right to Free Speech, despite your denial of that, but Kaerpernic has no right to have a job, after disrespecting the nation and his fans.

reply

[–] Gd5150 (11851) 2 years ago

RanB has his ass handed to him again.

reply

[–] Ranb (10318) 2 years ago

So free speech means there are still restrictions? It is either free or it is not free.

I support the 1st Amendment; the government is not allowed to restrict speech. Private companies like Twitter are completely free to do so in any manner they wish. Part of living in a free country? Get used to it

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

The currect debate has two basic sides. ONe side has violent mobs that will attack you if you say something they don't like, virtual mobs that will destroy your life, if htey can, abuse any power or authority they have to suppress or even arrest you, and support the violent and virtual mobs and all work together to control or suppress infomation that they don't like.

The other, will do shit like ban you from a private company, if you pretend to be someone else, without labelling it as satire.

I'm pretty comfortable about which side I'm on.

reply

[–] JoWilli (20952) 2 years ago

thats just how being a democrat works.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

Yep. And how can anyone read that, and doubt which side is the right side?

reply

[–] JoWilli (20952) 2 years ago

I assume they are all brainwashed at school or college.

reply

[–] Corbell (10995) 2 years ago

Agreed.

reply

[–] Destinata (3525) 2 years ago

Because some celebs and others insist on violating the TOS. If someone has a "Musk" account, they have to label it clearly as a parody. Giving the whereabouts of people in real time is against the TOS. Musk made the rules clear as crystal, but there are always people who want to push it. As the older, cleaner version of the saying goes, Fool around and find out. They insisted on fooling around. They found out.

reply

[–] Ranb (10318) 2 years ago

Freedom of speech with strings attached means not free. Twitter is free to do as they please, just don't call it freedom of speech.

reply

[–] Destinata (3525) 2 years ago

You've NEVER been able to say just any old thing you please any where you please in America, despite the 1A. You can't yell "FIRE!" in a crowded theater, for example. You just have a different definition of "freedom of speech" than we do, here, in America.

On Twitter you're not allowed to impersonate people or endanger anyone's life. IRL, you're free to walk down the street swinging your arms around wildly, because you have that freedom of expression. But your freedom ends at the tip of anyone's nose. On Twitter there are also the most minimal restrictions on how you sling your words. Here, people who have poor verbal skills can curse. On Twitter, people can similarly display their poor verbal skills. Of course, others can laugh at them. If they get their widdle feelings hurt they can just block the people who make fun of them for not being able to finish a sentence without throwing in an F-bomb.

Life in the real world, Ranb. 🤷🏼‍♀️

reply

[–] Ranb (10318) 2 years ago

I agree with everything you're saying. I'm certain almost everyone is familiar with what you posted.

reply

[–] Destinata (3525) 2 years ago

Okay. Then freedom of speech with strings attached is still free speech. You're just not free to cause harm to someone's reputation by impersonating them or cause bodily harm by doxxing them in real time. This doesn't fit your definition of freedom of speech, but it fits most people's definition of freedom of speech.

The difference between Twitter before Musk and Twitter after Musk is like a breath of fresh air. Rob Reiner is allowed to say anything he wants. He's just got a long line of people telling him Archie was right once he's said it.

reply

[–] Gd5150 (11851) 2 years ago

Sheep are gonna sheep.

reply

[–] xanthas (3215) 2 years ago

Yes, you are

reply

[–] Destinata (3525) 2 years ago

Such a clever "I'm rubber and you're glue!" response! 😉

reply

[–] Bubbathegut (18147) 2 years ago

TDS

reply

[–] JoWilli (20952) 2 years ago

TDS continues.

reply

[–] SamNoyoun (5933) 2 years ago

Yes it does, you bozos who are constantly resurrecting these old threads are obviously incurably afflicted with it!

reply

[–] JoWilli (20952) 2 years ago

TDS is incurable. sorry for that...

reply